Hmmm,
maybe the next blank I buy will be a fast one.
The blank I have here is a 8 wt, therefore I decided to use the traditional snake guides, like most recommended.
I was asking this question because I thaught, that a line which is 'connected' on different points of the rod might influence the loading of the rod. If I use more guides - and therefore the line would have build a smaller angeles with the rod - this might bend the rod different, at least on the backcast.
Probably I should make a test, thread the line through all guides of a rod and use only the tip guide. Let's see if the rod is differently bend.
Rene




Martin Westbeek wrote:

Rix,
This G.Loomis IMX is the rod I'm building right now, and it's very fast indeed. Mike, a friend who teaches me to build it, and I talked about single-foot vs traditional snakes. Like you, he says that traditional snakes will result in increased stiffnes. But on a rod building site I read the opposite: there they said that double-footers are heavier, and will soften the blank. According to them the extra weight influences the action more than the larger rigid spots between the double-footers.
I wonder who's right...
Martin


Rix Benson wrote:

Another thing you can do, Rene, is make sure that you
use double-foot snake guides, instead of the single
foot variety. Like everyone else has said, this won't
make much of a difference, but it will stiffen up the
action of the rod a bit. Also, something that we've all touched on but no-one
has really mentioned outright...all of these
suggestions (with the exception of actually cutting
the blank) will result in varying degrees of added
weight to the finished product. Aside from making the
darn thing heavy and difficult to cast, too much
weight towards the tip can change the balance point of
the rod and may well throw the action WAY off-kilter
if you're not careful. In short, I agree with everyone else...buy the
stiffest blank you can find. A G. Loomis IMX (Slate)
blank comes immediately to mind...


Just my humble 2 cents...
Rix
-------- snip ---->>





Reply via email to