I'm thinking about building a 7 foot rod on a medium blank. Its going to be a split grip with no forgrip.

some questions I have are what are the advantages in having cork for grips and eva grips. Also how do you shape eva grips? I would think that they would tear off if I try to sand them.

Another question I have is, what are the advantages of having micro guides? Is it just for having a lighter rod? or is there an advantage to having these guides.

thank you and have a nice day.

Cork vs eva - personal preference really. Weight is about the same. EVA probably lasts longer. Good quality cork is expensive, while eva is MUCH more price conscious.

EVA shapes just as easy as cork. I shape it on a lathe, but you can do it by hand or on a drill. I'd recommend shaping it first then putting it on the rod - don't have to cut it off if you mess it up.

The drywall screen sandpaper does great sanding EVA because the particles pass through. Regular sandpaper gets clogged but I do use that for finishing up. I go to 400 grit and that's a nice finish, but if you have some 1500 - now that is smooth stuff!

I've been working with micros since late 2007/early 2008. All my bass and inshore (redfish/trout) builds are only these now. Advantages to micro guides:

- weight savings - especially key because you are losing weight towards the tip of the rod

- better line control so I see longer casts

- less tangles on deck and in the rod locker

- goes in rod locker easier

- less guide to bend, so better durability (think bend a 6" piece of metal vs 3" - which bends easier?)

Hope this helps. Feel free to drop me a line anytime.

To add to what cidgrad said, a lighter rod is a more sensitive rod. If you can save weight in the most important place, which is the last 2/3 of the blank toward the tip, then the rod is just going to perform better.

Just make sure you test cast with any knots or leaders that will need to pass through the guides prior to wrapping. I am able to pass a 20 turn arbor knot using 30 lb power pro to 17 lb XT through Fuji BLAG 4Js on a spiral wrap with no issues

Eric

Cork vs. EVA - depends on the application and use. All things being equal/negligible, well, IMHO, comes down to preference.

Cork offers more of a traditional look and feel that most folks are use to. It is also much liter and easier to shape. However, good quality cork - without a lot of defect - is expensive and getting harder to find. Cork gets slippery when wet.

EVA is a whole lot less expensive, has more options for a true custom look and to me is actually easier to shape. EVA is more dense so its heavier and can alter the sensitivity, but, this is typically negligible. Unlike cork, when EVA gets wet its actually easier to hold.

Once again though, IMHO, have to look at application. When working with folks to build a rod the grip material is an important consideration. For fly rods and ultralites a good quality cork is hard to beat (except for foam but some can't get past the look of cork). For surf and boat rods its EVA. Outside of these it is all user preference - weight, look, feel, etc.

A good option, and I use it on about 80% of my fresh water builds (non fly) is burl cork. You get the benefits for both cork and EVA in one material. The cost is reasonable, quality is consistent, easy to shape/work, lots of color and design choices, and easy to hold when wet. The down side is that is heavier than cork - closer to EVA - and very dense.

For shaping EVA, I use an inverted belt sander in a jig with 120 grit paper. Just seems to shape better with a lateral motion than circular. I then smooth up by hand working my way up to 600 grit. I love working with grained EVA. Cutting split grips with/without a foregrip, shaping then matching up gives a rod a unique one of a kind look - picture attached below.

Microguides, no question saves weight and adds to the function of the rod by allowing the line to more closely follow the action and curvature of the blank. But, once again, comes down to application and usage - including the line weight. If you will NEVER be using a leader and/or passing knots, micros are an advantage. However, if will be using leaders, or the blank has a very slow action, or a thick line, micros could work against you. Test casting will tell you how it will perform.

Also, keep in mind that for micros to be REALLY effective you have to use more. The "rules" of thumb don't necessarily apply, need to tape up (tubing is easier though), stress test and get the line to follow the blank. The old adage about number of guides = len + one does not apply. It typically goes len + a min of three. The blank will dictate how many are needed.

Eddie

I agree with ej 100% on the EVA vs Cork question.  His answer is spot on, enough to warrant a "sticky" on the subject.

 For me, spiral wrapping micro guides, always, result in "less" guides being used, when compared to a rod with traditional guides/placement. I dislike a simple spiral, so I save a single guide in the transition of the line to the bottom of the blank. I've also used micro guides on rod actions from light to heavy, with no negative impact on performance.  Albeit slower action rods require a lot more test casting than say a m/h stick.

 I typically prefer cork/burl, but for me EVA is much easier to shape and work with and the weight difference is negligible.

Also, keep in mind that for micros to be REALLY effective you have to use more. The "rules" of thumb don't necessarily apply, need to tape up (tubing is easier though), stress test and get the line to follow the blank. The old adage about number of guides = len + one does not apply. It typically goes len + a min of three. The blank will dictate how many are needed.

I disagree. I don't use +3 more micros and I can promise the performance (casting and fish fighting) is outstanding with an on top build. Example - a 7'9" rod - Following "traditional" rules of thumb, you'd use 9 guides... I use 10 with micros. A 7' rod I may use 9 guides, but that is only 1 more than "traditional". This is regarding a  casting build, not a spin rod.

I highly recommend reading the series of M&M posts on rodbuilding.org prior to starting with micros. I drafted a volume specifically regarding the spacing of micros - http://rodbuilding.org/read.php?2,285706,285752#msg-285752. Lots of good information in there from several experienced builders.

Leaders can cause trouble going through some of the smallest micros. Before you scrap the micros, I'd also suggest trying to tie your leader on at the spool... yes you may have a 7'+ leader... but see how that casts using the micros. You may notice a difference in having them pass through all the guides as opposed to starting in the middle of the set up.

You can also lighten EVA by reaming it. Just because it stretches doesn't mean you can't ream it.

- Alex

Alex,

Is the guide count you are referring to above, with a traditional set up vs. micro's beginning at 30"  +/-  as you mentioned in the article?  

michaelkim_9582, whether you build with 2 extra micros or 3 (a difference of one guide and grams of weight), bottom line, order a couple extra AND as originally stated:

The blank will dictate how many are needed.

The point to my statement is to order extra.  if you order 9 and then determine you really need 10 (or 11, 12, etc.), well your shipping could cost more than the guide(s) and your build will be delayed - been there and done that.

Once again, the blank will dictate how many are needed during stress and cast testing - following the curvature of the blank under stress (stress distribution) and straightest line during casting.

Good luck and let us know how it goes.

Eddie

Flech - good point! I've built so little lately on a traditional set up - all "full sized" guides" - I forget sometimes to give a true comparison. I've been building with micros since the beginning of last year and haven't looked back. I don't even stock enough "full sized" guides to build a rod!

If I did space out "full size" guides with a longer distance between reel and butt guides, it would change the picture and I would probably need more micros in comparison.

Using length +1, if you're going 30" to the butt guide, 8 guides is probably too many even with full size guides IMO. (Saying this without testing!) I bet you could probably loose a guide from the length +1 depending on size, etc.

I guess most folks I've talked to never want/think to go more than the roughly 19"- 22" with the butt guide because that's the "traditional" set up that basically uses the length+1 for determining number of guides. (Thinking Fuji Concept type spacing here)

Side note: One thing I never see anyone mention either - spacing charts from the manufacturers often have you use more guides... why would they have you use fewer? It helps them sell more guides!!!

Alex

If I did space out "full size" guides with a longer distance between reel and butt guides, it would change the picture and I would probably need more micros in comparison.

That was what I was thinking... just wanted to be sure I understood what you were comparing.

I guess most folks I've talked to never want/think to go more than the roughly 19"- 22" with the butt guide because that's the "traditional" set up

I don't think it's based on tradition... as it depends on the height of the guide used and the line dropping below blank level under a full load. At least that's what I go by. If I end up at 19" or I end up at 24"+ it's because the that's as far as I could go with the reel and guides to be used on that particular blank.

Just using "traditional" as a term - call it whatever you want. Maybe "concept" spacing is the right term. But you are using a totally different set of guides - therefore different need for spacing then the concept charts.

I don't use that spacing. Each builder has their own way and that's what makes us unique and provides different results. I know the feedback I get - so it works. I don't use high framed guides if possible (casting only - spinning different story) but have had ones where I had no choice but to use at least one.

I do the same - Blank under full load and space so the line is not dropping below the top of the blank. I then go a step further to make sure the line won't drop below once torque is added.

I talk with a few other builders using only size 3.5 LSGs and they use the same number of guides I do. I've casted their rods and they work phenomenally well. They too are looking at 30" out for butt guides. Maybe some of it is the difference in blanks. Dunno.

Lots of good information here. I'm of a similiar situation Alex, I can't recall the last time I ordered traditional guides. I typically order my micros in bulk, so specific estimations aren't important to me. I'm in the processing of completing 5 builds, 1 H, 3 M/H, and 1 ML, all 7ft sticks. All RX7/RX8 and XP3 blanks.

I've been playing with the above builds and have tried to get my butt guide out past 24 inches +/-, with little success, when using a 3-5mm guide for my butt. If I migrate towards a larger, often two foot guide on the heavier action blanks, I've actually gotten out to 30 inches.

So far in my test casting I can't see any benefit in the prolonged placement other than potential shaving a guide off. I'd be real interested to hear what pro's you may have found. I'm always looking for ways to improve!

dick - could be the difference in blanks that allows me to space out that far? - but I've also used 3 different brands with the same results. Personally I use a 6, 4, 3s set up on pretty much 98% of my rods. I don't use any DFs. 30" is a generalization. Some rods are at 27" and some work on up to 30", but the majority is closer to the 30" mark. Every blank is a little different.

In test casting and builds, I've seen measureable improvements in casting distance with this set up on top. To space the butt guide, I don't go from the tip down. I load the rod and space the butt guide first - exactly like I would any other guide with the line just above the blank from the reel to the butt guide - maybe a hair away from touching the blank. Then I go back and start from the tip and work down making adjustments as needed. Some times I can slide the butt guide closer to the reel. Here's a big catch (and improvement in my mind)... I then UNLOAD the rod and look at the line path. I don't like the line to come off the reel and then have a large change in angle once it hits the butt guide. With larger guides you can get by with the butt guide closer. Smaller guides need to be further away to minimize this angle.

New can of worms with DF vs. SF! That's another thread.

I've got 60+ rods out there this year with this set up and it seems to be making folks really happy so I go off the feedback!

I'm open to ideas too. Always looking for the next big step forward in performance.

Cool! Thanks for the response! I don't do "many" on-top builds anymore, but I'm certainly going to play around with extending the butt guide. I typically go as far as the blank allows, which seems to be the norm, but I never really get out past 24 inches or so.  If your end users are happy, you must be doing something right!

Thanks!

After you play with it a while, let me know what you think. Maybe you can find something better we can all benefit from.

Just try that spacing in "reverse" for the butt guide. It's a different way to look at it.

thanks guys I can't wait to build my first rod. I'm going to build it slowly and carefully and I'll make sure to post some pics to show what I've built from help from you guys.