single foot eyes on casting rods

Bait O' Eggs · 12-16-2002, 07:51 AM

I first noticed it on a Rouge rod a while back and this weekend while looking at rods with Gus Orviston I now see it on several Lami rods. (Maybe I just didnt look close enough before and they have been doing it for a long time) The top 5 or 6 eyes are all single foot eyes like you would typically see on a spinning rod now on their casting rods.

Do you think this is an improvement by getting rid of some weight, or do you think they are cutting corners trying to save some money by buying a cheaper eye and spending less time wrapping thread?

The eyes I saw on both manufactures are a very low profile eye with the ring almost on the blank. I would think the line would rub the blank when the rod is bent with the extreme low profile eye. I should have spent some time bending the rods and looking a little closer.

I dont like it right off but havent fished with one. Any thoughts?

skrimmy · 12-16-2002, 07:59 AM

BOE, I see it as cost cutting. A decent quality rod is light enough already without the few grams they're cutting in weight. Seems there's more dollar savings to them than weight savings to us. It may be strong enough for most applications, but with the abuse that rods are so often subject to, I'd rather have a stronger "two footed" eye. I'm probably harder on the rod than a fish will be and I need all the protection from myself I can find!

Straydog · 12-16-2002, 08:11 AM

Besides the weight factor, very little indeed, there is less of a 'dead spot' in the bend of the rod.

A double ft. guide results in basicaly no bend between the two feet.

My bet is that there is minimal cost difference at best.

skrimmy · 12-16-2002, 08:19 AM

Straydog, that theory almost flies. If I have THAT MUCH of a bend in my rod that I'm worried about the "bend" in a one inch section of rod where a two footed eye is wrapped, I'd be in trouble with that one footed eye, wouldn't I! I think if there's that much pressure on the rod, a single footed eye would fail.

Mojo · 12-16-2002, 08:21 AM

I have never been a big fan of single foot guides. They are less sturdy and more easlily bent, or worse yet pulled from beneath the thread wraps.

A well designed rod accounts for the added stiffness provided by the added thread wraps and guides.

I agree with BOE...

drift fishing fool · 12-16-2002, 08:22 AM

i have a str1024c gl3. it has what i believe are the fuji concept guides. this guide set has double foot guides near the but and singles towards the top. i think as far as the guides go, as long as you arent too rough with your rod it should be fine. i think the only reason the singles are on this rod is because fuji claimed it to be the new great thing, so the rod manufactures kinda have to go with the trend or be left behind

skrimmy · 12-16-2002, 08:32 AM

Drift Fishing Fool, I still ain't buying it! Did Fuji ask fishermen about this? Gee, I seem to remember a company in Eufala, Alabama (Humminbird) that was about to go under because they thought THEY knew best what fishermen wanted in a fish finder. They finally did something right and asked the fishermen. They re-captured the lions share of the market in no time after that. That was quite a few years back though, I don't think they enjoy that market share these days. But the point is, Fuji might think it's a good idea, but I'm not buying a rod that's made that way.

Gus Orviston · 12-16-2002, 08:46 AM

straydog,
I am sure the cost delta is minimal, in fact since the volumes are low for a single foot guide of this profile I would even think the cost might be higher...However, it takes time to wrap guides and time is money.

we also looked at the high end lami's and I can't say they looked all that sturdy. Just putting a little thumb pressue on them seemed like it could easily crack the varnish under the ceramic. (thus allowing moisture under the thread...)

probably just a new trend for us fisherman to chase :whazzup:

Firedog · 12-16-2002, 08:47 AM

Roy I agree with you,I don't like single foot guides. I use them on spinning rods because that is about all you can get now. They are to fragile and like has been said before they bend easy. As far as weight goes it would be negligable I believe.

another benefit to building my own rods I get to use what I want. :smile:

[ 12-16-2002, 03:53 PM: Message edited by: firedog ]

Red · 12-16-2002, 09:01 AM

A two- footed guide for me. Especially for salmon/ steelhead. Lets face it, no
one purposely [img]graemlins/stupid.gif[/img] mistreats their rods, but they do take some abuse on the river, in a boat or car. I'm for function on this one.

ultralight · 12-16-2002, 02:41 PM

I love the single foot guides, both on my spinning and casting rods. They substantially reduce weight and thus affecting the balance on rods, especially the long rods. They have proven to be durable as well.

BigWaterBigFish · 12-16-2002, 03:10 PM

I do not too too much casting except for drift fishing for steelhead (both rods are older Berkley with double footed guides) but all of my boat rods are double footed. I rebuild some of my stuff and have made a few from scrap (salvaged rods from estate sales and the like), the double footed guides are becoming harder and harder to find. I think you would have to be a purist to really note the difference in weight and balance that double footed guides would have vs. single footed guides, and on long rods, would the flexiblity really matter.
I agree with previous writers, it's all about cost and reduction of such to bring a product to market. Take a look at the quality of the taping over the guide feet these days, even on the more costly rods. A full season of coho and chinook fishing of the coast and in the Columbia will sorely test some of these product. in some cases, looks like mere shrinkwrap with some epoxy base. I recently went to work reworking an older rod, had to search quite a bit to find some guides in descending size. I always use double footed for the strength and confidence it gives.

Gus Orviston · 12-16-2002, 03:23 PM

I found the Northrivers have tape to hold the guides down, or shrink wrap on them... the stuff lets go and allows the guide to spin. Looks like I got to take them back.

As for the single footed guides push down on the guide and I bet you hear a crack when the varnish separates from the rod underneath the guide. It doesn't take much, and if you are scared to try it?...well that's the point you shouldn't be.

This is where moisture is going to get into the wrapped area. Once you bumped several of your guides and water gets inside you will be having to plead with Lami or Loomis to fix your rod is my guess ?

I would like to hear more positive stories wrt to single footed guides and their wear and tear, I think they look trick and wouldn't mind building one, if they hold up?

gus

[ 12-16-2002, 04:25 PM: Message edited by: Gus Orviston ]

nerta · 12-16-2002, 03:35 PM

Most things have two or more feet for a good foundation. I like the two feet style. :grin:

tailchaser · 12-16-2002, 03:42 PM

I agree that it's a cost cutting thing. Merely a couple of bucks to us, but to a company getting two more bucks per rod makes a big difference. It basically makes the eyes easier to bend and won't make the rod as stiff from both of the feet and eye raps. But even that kind of thing is pretty minimal. Sad to hear they're doing this. My dad and I have made our own rods since I was young so I'm not up to date on quality rods as much as blanks.

There's basically no real advantage to them on a casting rod that I can see.

tc

Fishalot · 12-16-2002, 03:45 PM

Of the rods I have built only one had the upper half with one foot eyes, I soon replaced them because they got bent to often. As you know BOE the two foot eyes take a little longer to tie, but the out come is a rod that will last longer due to less brake down. There may be some eyes that are made better in the one foot then I used.

Fishalot

metalhead madness · 12-16-2002, 03:57 PM

I was @ fishermans yesterday. and noticed this on the loomis rods as well. I'm currently building a hrs930c and was gonig nto call AW and see if I could exchange my double for the single. After reading this thread I will stick with the double footed guides. This is the first rod I have built so I want to make it last. I have many trout rods that have bent or broken single footed guides. I feel that the companys are trying to save on labor and or materials. But it does look cool. :grin:

KillerDave · 12-16-2002, 04:09 PM

Probably the number one request rod makers recieve to make a lighter, more sensitive rod.

On longer & lighter rods like an 1141 for instance, the single foot low profile guides reduce weight enough to significantly increase sensitivity. The single foot guide weights less plus there is less thread and epoxy finish on rods tip section. Lighter weight=faster response=greater sensitivity.

I don't think there's any cost cutting conspiracy with quality low profile single foot guides. I like them!

However, those guides with the silver & gold colored inserts just don't look right to me. Now those have the cost cutting look!

Snapset · 12-16-2002, 04:43 PM

I put single foot guides all the way down on my 1024c GL3. I did it for weight and to eliminate the accumulated dead spot. I like the action of the rod, but I fish it hard and I replace guides fairly regularly. If you are going with single foot guides, rough up the blank so the wrap/epoxy doesn't come loose. If I wasn't confident replacing guides, I wouldn't recommend it.

Great White Sturgeon Hunter · 12-16-2002, 06:35 PM

I checked for a standard size #12 their is 13 cents differance. I've built rods for years and part of the complaint from fishermen was that they like light action rods. Double footed guides take action away from the upper end of the rod. It's always been known that double footed guides stiffen a rods action just a little. So most of your rod companies have gone to the single footed guides on the upper end to allow more of a full action from the rod. wieght is not really the factor in this.

[ 12-16-2002, 07:37 PM: Message edited by: Great White Sturgeon Hunter ]

byteme · 12-16-2002, 09:26 PM

I built a rainshadow 1143 a couple months ago. I put on a rosewood trigger seat. I wanted to keep the tip light so I went with Fuji concept Alconite guides, single foot on the top 1/2 and did put a small amount of weight in the butt cap. What a sweet rod. It feels way better in hand than my loomis 1083 and casts a mile. It's a cast all day rod. Yes the single footed guides are more fragile, but you will never break them or bend them fighting fish. You will bend them and break them throwing them into your truck or boat. I treat my rods like my tools(yes I work construction), treat them with respect and they will perform flawlessly, abuse them and you will be sorry. Personally I would like to see rod Mfg's go to defect warranty only, prices would be half what they are now and maybe fishermen would take care of their tools....JMHO :shocked:

Fish Finder · 12-16-2002, 11:35 PM

Fugi's concept system is to get more guides on a rod to maximized the full potential of the rod. Whether it may be fighing fish or casting. By putting more guides toward the tip, this in theory will reduce the spiral twisting of a spincast reel. Hence improving casting distance. On a baitcast rod, it's suppose to straighten the line as it in the process of leaving the rod, thus reducing drag and you get a longer casting distance. Now to the fighting part, With more and lower profile guides on baitcaster you'll be utilizing the full taper on the rod and also there will be less side torque. This in theory, keep the rod from twisting to the side. Guys this is my understanding of Fugi's concept guides system, It's not my theory. From what I've heard Fugi spent a great deal of time to do this research.

bait boy · 12-17-2002, 02:48 AM

So all this talk of guides and sturdyness has anyone ever fished an acid wrapped rod?

and if you did how was it compared to a normal rod. for those that have no clue what I'm talking about. When you hook a really big fish on bottom and the rod wants to "turn over" in your hands, this is what the spiral wrapped rods eliminate. No torque means more leverage to fight that fish!!
...hope this gives folks a clearer picture of what a spiral wrap is all about!

Gus Orviston · 12-17-2002, 09:17 AM

Hey, that's a Tillamook Twirl.....I wish I would have tied my plug rods that way.

gus

Bait O' Eggs · 12-17-2002, 09:40 AM

Rick
I have a rod that is spiral wrapped, though I wrapped it the other way so the eyes were on the same side as the handle on the reel.

have not fished it yet, but I think it will be my favorite drift fishing rod once the rivers clean up.

[ 12-17-2002, 10:41 AM: Message edited by: Bait O' Eggs ]

wetaline · 12-17-2002, 09:50 AM

I hadn't even paid attention... sure enough went out to the garage and my loomis 1024c and 1025c are both wrapped w/ singles and the top and doubles at the bottom.... the hsr's are doubles top to bottom though.

bait boy · 12-17-2002, 09:52 AM

I might look into having a deep sea rod wrapped this way as cranking in 600Ft of line with a ticked off halibut is hard enough, but to try and control the wobble of your reel while hoisting the beast is double work and hurts me ...