Thanks. This is the most thorough demonstration I've seen of finding the spine of a blank. I assume with more sections (3, 4, etc.) you just continue the same process as with the second section.
Hi Dead lift, you will need to replicate the fighting curve of the blank and find the spine there, which will include the tip, mid section and if practical some part of the butt.
its my understanding you put the guides on the stiffer side of the spine, so it balances it out? can anyone elaborate on this more? so opposite to what it says in this video
I have done a good bit of research on this subject and found that most of the rod builders I have looked at (including large manufactures) ignore the spine location and simply align the blank in the way that leaves the rod as straight as possible. what are your thoughts on this practice?
I thought the same thing but im doing some tests to be sure. at work i have access to precision measuring equipment. i have already tested the force needed to bend the blanks on and off the spine and the difference is very small. I want to build a rod both ways and test the reflections and any changes side to side from building on and off the spine. here's the issue, if building on the spine is such a good thing my question is why? fly casting goes both front and back so if the spine helps one direction wouldn't it hurt the other? and the spine is never the straightest part. if anything you would want the spine on one side or the other depending on left or right handed to deflect the slight variation away from the casters head. anyway, im not sure its as simple as saying its just big manufactures trying to save money.
Exclusive Tackle that doesn't make any sense, if a rod built off spine would want to twist your wrist then a rod built on spine would also want to twist your wrist on the back cast as it again tried to find the spine to bend on. the rotational forces are minuscule. I would build straight. that is likely to have an actual impact on distance vs an imaginary impact on action.
Paul Barter here is the beauty of this whole thing. You're young. This idea is much older than you are and has already been argued countless times. You're not going to find anything out we don't already know. The facts are already there. You're not going to crack some secret. Your testing is wrong. It's not about the force it takes to flex the rod bud. It's about the rod falling into it's natural bend. And unless your "equipment" can test load in a 360 degee range all at the same time, it's inadequate. If you want to understand this more, look at trees and how much energy is stored within the grain structure. But honestly, your opinion of that matter is irrelevant. It is what it is. You do you boo boo and let everyone else do their thing. This horse is beat enough.
Thank you, very well explained. Just watched Mud Hole explain it prior to this and did not get it.
Thanks again. 🙏
Thanks. This is the most thorough demonstration I've seen of finding the spine of a blank. I assume with more sections (3, 4, etc.) you just continue the same process as with the second section.
Man this is a great video and great information about the rod blank and the band thank you very much for sharing
Hi Randal, I'm glad you enjoyed it. yes you are correct just repeat the process.
Would it be safe to say, that the spot that bends and hold a bend easiest is the spine?
Hi Dead lift, you will need to replicate the fighting curve of the blank and find the spine there, which will include the tip, mid section and if practical some part of the butt.
Would it be the side that feels "softer" and more forgiving when bent? Or the side that opposes the bend and feels "stiffer"?
You have just earned my subscription
Great VideoSorry, in the fly rod you put the guides inside the curve or outside of the
curve.
thank you very much
👍👍👍💛💛💛
its my understanding you put the guides on the stiffer side of the spine, so it balances it out? can anyone elaborate on this more? so opposite to what it says in this video
You want the rod to bend the easiest towards the fish not opposite.
Just found a video with Gary Loomis and how he does it the opposite way with fast taper or lighter blank's. Very interesting
Wow, saya suka anda me indonesia
I have done a good bit of research on this subject and found that most of the rod builders I have looked at (including large manufactures) ignore the spine location and simply align the blank in the way that leaves the rod as straight as possible.
what are your thoughts on this practice?
Paul Barter
Hi Paul, that's good for aesthetics but you end up with a tod that wants to twist in your hand. Personal preference I guess!
I thought the same thing but im doing some tests to be sure. at work i have access to precision measuring equipment. i have already tested the force needed to bend the blanks on and off the spine and the difference is very small.
I want to build a rod both ways and test the reflections and any changes side to side from building on and off the spine.
here's the issue, if building on the spine is such a good thing my question is why? fly casting goes both front and back so if the spine helps one direction wouldn't it hurt the other? and the spine is never the straightest part.
if anything you would want the spine on one side or the other depending on left or right handed to deflect the slight variation away from the casters head.
anyway, im not sure its as simple as saying its just big manufactures trying to save money.
Exclusive Tackle that doesn't make any sense, if a rod built off spine would want to twist your wrist then a rod built on spine would also want to twist your wrist on the back cast as it again tried to find the spine to bend on. the rotational forces are minuscule. I would build straight. that is likely to have an actual impact on distance vs an imaginary impact on action.
Paul Barter here is the beauty of this whole thing. You're young. This idea is much older than you are and has already been argued countless times. You're not going to find anything out we don't already know. The facts are already there. You're not going to crack some secret.
Your testing is wrong. It's not about the force it takes to flex the rod bud. It's about the rod falling into it's natural bend. And unless your "equipment" can test load in a 360 degee range all at the same time, it's inadequate. If you want to understand this more, look at trees and how much energy is stored within the grain structure. But honestly, your opinion of that matter is irrelevant. It is what it is. You do you boo boo and let everyone else do their thing. This horse is beat enough.
AFORWW I agree it has been discussed adnausium, I still think I reside on the straight side vs the spine side of the debate.