Guides: Effect on a fly rod.

Walter & Group..................

 

Interesting message on an experiment done by Walter Simberski :

 

Gordy - glad to see you back! Hope the season is treating you very well.

 

Here is a little experiment I tried not too long ago.

 

I had heard about a couple of BoG types who had been debating about what the guides

contributed to the cast. They devised an experiment in which they did several false

casts with a fixed length of line and then repeated the activity but this time they tied the line

to the rod tip. After casting with the line attached and unattached to the rod tip the concensus

was that the guides don't actually contribute to the cast.

 

I decided that this may not be a valid test because the guides aren't actually being used

in either scenario. I did one of those van Danniken thought experiments in which I envisioned

casting with only the tip and no other guides on the rod. What came to mind was that this

would be like getting a free haul because the effective length of the rod would shorten during

the casting stroke and then spring to its full length at the stop causing the rod tip to slide

up the line. This is almost identical to hand casting - the line hand holds one end of the line

and the hand which simulates the rod is formed into a ring around the line and then slides

up the line to pull the line forward. We know that we can actually get the fly leg moving at

twice the speed of the "rod" hand depending on the direction of its movement. I also thought

that the tension on the line would keep the line between reel and rod tip fairly taut so

that slack would not be a major issue if I used a longer stroke to compensate for the

effective length of the rod getting shorter at the start of the stroke. Or I could use a haul

with my line hand to keep the slack from being an issue.

 

Now for the actual physical experiment. I happened to be in the process of building a new rod

and had just attached the handle and tip so far. Perfect for this experiment! I strung up the

rod and proceeded to dazzle the casting world with the added distance I was going to get

from the free haul.  :-)

 

What I found out was that the slack between the butt and rod tip was a

major issue. This section of line always formed a bow in itself during the stroke and this slack

would almost always fly forward and wrap around the rod at the stop. After about a half hour

I found that the smoother the cast the less slack that formed. Also by turning the rod so the 

tip was 90 degrees to the casting plane there was a slightly reduced chance of the line

slapping or wrapping around the rod but even the slightest error in my track was guaranteed

to result in the line wrapping around the rod. All in all there were 3 or 4 instances when the cast

went perfectly and I could actually feel the effect of the extra haul action from the rod. Very nice

feeling the few times it actually went right but I think it will take someone with a much better

cast than mine to get this to work consistently and decide if it's worth the effort.

 

So the result of the experiment is that the guides contribute to the cast by keeping the line

close to the rod and reducing slack. By reducing the slack they reduce the slap and wrap issue.

 

Cheers

 

Walter

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

Walter:  Intuitively, I think you are absolutely correct.

 

The guides, in my opinion, add a lot to the cast , especially when you are shooting line !

 

Those interested should read passages on the subject by Don Phillips in his, THE TECHNOLOGY OF FLY RODS (Mandatory reading by MCCI candidates.)  pp 57 & 72-76.

 

Don notes the effect of guides on forces acting on the rod both in casting and fighting fish in detail.

 

He adds the concept of the use of guides to provide a relatively smooth path for the fly line as needed for efficient line speed and loop control while casting.  The idea being that any sudden change in line direction such as with the use of only a tip-top, "guide" introduces inertial forces which must be overcome.  Thus the use of multiple guides helps avoid the inertial effects of any single device (single guide) which provides a sudden change in line direction.  In other words, the use of more guides minimizes the directional change of the line at any single point.  If this were the only consideration, then a flexible tube through which the line travels would seem to be ideal..... unfortunately that is not the case because of the amount of frictional surface which that would provide ... so the multiple guide system seems to be a reasonable compromize.

 

One smart fellow, developed a fly rod with no guides.  The line ran through the hollow center of the blank.  No line slap.  No tangles.  No wrap around problems. No sudden directional changes (except at the tip).    For reasons described above, it didn't work very well.

 

Tom White worked with Loomis for years, then got into building many custom rods and doing all sorts of experiments.  Along with Don Phillips, he feels that using large diameter stripping guides as recommended by Lefty Kreh is not nearly so important as having the first stripper high off the blank.  His experiments showed that you want the line to travel close to the rod ...  but not too close.

 

Don, also, goes in to some of the things which you have described.  So does Dale Clemens in his writings.

 

Gordy

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~