MickD

But they have an easily accessible thumb control that free spools the reel and allows one to give a little line. Unlike a spin reel. Two different animals. Because casters don't have a switch is irrelevant IMO.

Tried to tie the GT with 10 pound Suffix FC leader material today and couldn't get 10 pound braid through the openings in the figure 8. Looks like a good knot for heavy leaders, but not for light leaders. The heavier the leader the bigger the opening in the figure 8.

Read the process, it's not just putting a new tiptop on. That will result in an unusable rod. This fix is nothing like that. I don't think you read it before your "little shorter" comment. It won't be a little shorter.

You will most likely find it here: https://www.rodbuilding.org/library/rodusage.pdf Most likely high sticking or high reaching.

If warranty doesn't cover it, it can be fixed. It will lose very little of its characteristics, will get slightly heavier and therefore a little slower reacting, but it will be very fishable. Some will argue that the fixed rod will be awful, but if the repair is done right, the rod will fish very well. https://www.rodbuilding.org/library/repair-oquinn.html

Actually there are thousands of ways to tie the FG, (not in the sense of different wrap diagrams, but variations in the process) so there will be much variation in test results. Tied right, it's a real winner, obviously the smallest. When I've gotten them right, I have had no problems with the FC breaking. Regarding size, the size is only important if using really small guides or really heavy leaders, like in salt. Whatever the size of your knot, if it goes through the guides OK, it's small enough. I've found, however, that how the tag end comes out and whether it is cut short enough has a lot to do with how the knot goes through the guides. Obviously, the heavier the leader the more this influences passage of the knot, especially on reeling in. I will report on the GT going through the Fuji size 4 KB's/KT's when I get experience. Going tomorrow, but have my rigs all in the boat and under the cover so will not initially fish the GT. Will use it if I retie.

I just went out and tied a few GT's. It has some very positive characteristics, IMO. It in fact does not look much bigger than an Alberto; I'll measure a few of each when I get to it. Of course it doesn't matter if it is bigger if it clears the guides one is using cleanly. It is obviously easy to tie and from tying a few, I think it would be hard for me to screw it up. The tying process is very clear cut. I expect it won't matter much whether the line is coated or not, which can be a factor in FG reliability. The fact that the leader tag comes out of the knot at 90 degrees means that the tag will not directly engage a guide on the way in or out. The guides are presented with no sharp edges of leader. Finally, the fact that the leader is not as sharply kinked in the GT as in the Alberto may mean that the fragile FC's will not fail at that point. All the bends of the leader in the GT are gentle compared to the Alberto. Will try it on the water, looks like a good one.

Yes, they often do. It's a good discussion. I've never heard of some of the purported characteristics of mag and graphite. As I said, we didn't really define strength, and we've not defined "graphite." There are many different types of reinforced plastic with specs that range all over the place. All metals used in almost every product on earth are alloys of some sort because alloying allows tuning of all the different characteristics, like cost, corrosion resistance, density, all the different strengths, conductivity, etc etc etc. Most on this forum think there is glass, graphite for reels (they understand different moduli for rods for the most part), steel, stainless steel, magnesium, titanium and aluminum. And each is defined by its common name. Which is very far from the truth. Since it is so complex, I don't even try to get really specific. I just know what I like and what I don't. My answer to the original post is that you can find fine reels made of both types of materials, magnesium and graphite. But to me the most reliable, rigid, reels are made of aluminum (alloy) or magnesium (alloy).

I had a pike show me why my Mag Plus's lack of instant anti reverse was a problem. With the quality of many $100 or less new reels today, it's hard for me to even consider buying an old used reel.

One of the reasons for the FG is that it is so small, good for small guides. The GT is much larger, with three thicknesses of leader. It's almost as large as a double uni. It obviously is easier to tie without screwing it up, which is the weakness of the FG. But when one wants an easy to tie smaller, reliable, knot, the Alberto is my choice. For a while I was screwing up the Alberto by not taking the tag end out the right way, but once I got that figured out and corrected, it's a piece of cake and I've had no failures using 20 pound braid and 15 pound FC leaders. I'll stick with it because all my rods have micros, usually Fuji KT 4's.

Strength is the only characteristic the original poster asked about.

You are the only one besides myself that I have heard of who does this. Works great, weighs almost nothing, can be painted any color, look really sharp with wrap epoxy on them, never had a problem other than the fact that they are fragile until finished. You can also make that ramp a separate piece. Right on about slow and easy as they do "machine" (sandpaper) very easily and fast. Easy to go too far.

Lots of opinions, no data. In MY opinion, the best material for reel frames is Cargonite (no, not Carbonite). It is the strongest material known to man. Just don't expose it to Kriptonite. This whole discussion doesn't define "strength." Yield strength? Ultimate strength? Modulus of elasticity? Any of these divided by density? A couple pretty good attempts, but no agreement on the definition of strength. Yes Hagane is a wonder material (or philosophy) of some undefined sort, kind of like Cargonite. (Only not as strong) :-)

Arbors are the best, light, and strong enough. But tape does work fine. It most likely is tougher than the foam shims when wrapped tightly onto the blank. The only issue is that it might be damaged by water, BUT, this is reliably solved by totally encapsulating the tape shims with epoxy as you mount the seat. Then no water can get to it. Will last forever.

The test at Anglersresource.net is the method I'm advocating. I've tried the dental bands, which should work well, but they didn't for me. I think I may have not gotten the right sizes. But it doesn't seem like an 1/8 band will hold a micro on a tip that's way less than 1/8 in diameter. Will try again. Dental bands would have the advantage of not having the tag ends of the stretch thread get in the way of wrapping, which sometimes happens.

I've been frustrated by how to handle and fasten micros to the blank for stress testing and ultimately for wrapping. Here's where I am. Not my original idea, but use the stretchable thread available at sewing shops, use about a 10 inch length of it, and put it around the blank about where your guide will go and do a square knot tight to the blank. Pull on the tags to make a little clearance to the blank. Using fly tying hackle clamps to pick up the micro by the ring, slide the foot of the guide under the clearance you've created. Now the guide foot is somewhat restrained. Now clip off the tags to about 1/2 inch. Do this for all the micros in the approx position they will be in. Now, using a two line stress test (see AnglersResource.com), do the final location of the guides. You have to be careful so as to not lose a guide. I keep the line through the guides at this time to make sure if one falls off, it is captured on the line. This is the line that will be through the rings and will not have much tension on it with the two line method. The other line tied to the tiptop will stress the rod. Since the line through the guides is not taking the stress test load, they can be easily moved along the blank to their proper positions. And they are retained for wrapping. Not a piece of cake, but better than anything else I've found for putting the micros onto the blank, holding them adequately, moving them under the stress test, and ultimately wrapping them. Let me know if this is not clear. Bottom line is that if you think the two line method is too complicated, you are not appreciating its advantage in allowing the guides to be moved without unloading the blank. When you understand its advantage, and use it, you will find it much easier than the one line method.

4's are pretty darned small, no need for smaller. Especially on a pitching rod. The reason for small is to get sensitivity and maybe longer casts, but neither is an issue on a pitching rod. I would go bigger to get free clearance of anything that might foul the guides.

Using all mono or FC will put a lot more stretch in the system and will significantly reduce the shock on the knot.

Sounds to me like your problem is with the knot and not the FC material. BUT, mono is much less temperamental than FC, so a good move would be to move to mono. But if you want to stay with FC, then look closely at your knot technique. I use both mono and FC, all FC fly tippet material , 15 pound test, this year and no problems with the simple improved clinch knot. I only change it when it gets too short. I don't retie on any regular basis. You are not getting pike bite-offs, are you?

I would clean the OD of the bearing and the ID of the housing of any oil or grease, then carefully, with just a little Loctite on the OD, slip the bearing back in. You don't want the Loctite to get into anything else. After it's cured any oiling of the bearing will not affect the retention of the bearing.

I've built numerous St Croix and Point Blanks, never an Elite X or K2. The Point Blanks are clearly my preference for sensitivity, weight, and feel. And a dumb accident recently taught me that the Point Blank I was using was incredibly tough. Never expected it to survive, but it did. SCV is very good, but I prefer the Point Blanks.

You're talking about the ring diameter. Others and I thought you were talking about the tube diameter. It will work, just not as well as a smaller one. Extra weight out there slows the recovery of the rod. Might not be noticeable depending on the rod. It certainly will work.

For $100 you can get the Pflueger Supreme, very light weight, very smooth, a reel deal. I know I'm not the first to use that pun. Pflueger has been making some very affordable high quality spin reels for quite a while now. Size 30, probably.

I see no reason why it would not work. When the knot is buried quite a ways I use the double uni because I have had trouble with the alberto in the past, but I've solved my alberto problems and like that it's much smaller than the double uni. I don't think that line diameter is relevant to the alberto like it is to some knots.

Never had a problem. Mine are stored in moderate temperature (cold in winter, though) in the shade. I suspect there is some contamination of some sort getting in.