I haven't had the chance to fish a spiral wrap rod yet, but in theory it seems like the way to go. If for nothing but avoiding braid wrapping around tip top, but also for the comfort in the fight eliminating the torque,  and even more so the "pop" from left to right at awkward angle loads. 

 

Anybody collect any actual data on performance? Some people say they cast better... data? 

 

MANY PEOPLE say you can use at least 1 less guide vs conventional... you folks here agree?

 

Found this

https://www.bassresource.com/bass-fishing-forums/topic/261817-what-is-your-favorite-rod-you-built/#findComment-3163218

 

@FloridaFishinFool wouldn't this affectively shorten the potential spread of the load? With the first guides so far out it wouldn't really load past the first guide to distribute further into the beef of the blank no?

 

What are the steps for this process? 

 

Have any better pictures of rods with different characteristics to compare? Hravy Xf vs medium moderate type contrast? 

 

Anybody else have any thoughts on all this? Would really love to hear from the experienced builders here to learn and grow

 

Just thought- what about an acid wrapped fly rod?

Spiral wrapped rods are indeed a great pleasure to use when built right. I spent more than 25 years perfecting a process that adapts to each rod's natural bend.

 

All other spiral wrap processes impose external ideas on a static rod. What I came up with is the only process that puts guides on a rod based on how it bends.

 

I learned imposing external ideas on a static rod leads to increasing angles of line flow through the guides under load. And most leave it that way. I was not satisfied with those results so I began working towards perfectly straight line flow from the reel into the natural bend area of a blank.

 

Another idea I had to toss out was the old idea of get around the blank as soon as the line leaves the reel. So all other ideas of spiral wrapped rods were doing this. Spiral wrapping around the thickest part of a blank. When I began listening to what the materials were telling me is when things began to change.

 

I am not an artist, so forgive my shaky hand drawing but this kind of explains what the difference is between standard spiral guide designs and what I came up with. Basically other methods do a longer wider spiral around the thickest part of a blank. I learned to shoot the line straight past the thickest part of a blank and use the blanks natural taper to get out of the way of the line flow further straightening it out like this poor drawing shows:

 

 

You said: "Anybody collect any actual data on performance? Some people say they cast better... data?"

 

I know of no such data. And they cannot possible cast better. If anything they can equal casting distances on standard topside guide rods.

 

You said: "MANY PEOPLE say you can use at least 1 less guide vs conventional... you folks here agree?"

 

On my CHW rods I did eliminate at least one popular guide found on most spiral wrapped rods made on static rods.

 

There is a common idea or thought that a person must eliminate any rod blank touching of the line. This is a complete fallacy yet it leads to many rod builders insisting on installing a 90 degree side guide to lift the line off the blank supposedly correcting a problem they believe exists.

 

I say it does not exist because if you take a standard rod with guides on top and load it up with a large fish, when the rod bends the line is brought into direct contact with the rod blank in between every single guide on the bend section like this:

 

 

And quite often the line flow under load runs along beside the blank and often even down below the blank creating 2 places of touching between each guide increasing line flow friction. And it has worked fine for more than a century of common use. The spiral wrapped rods eliminate this for the most part and some go to the extreme to use a 90 degree side guide to further lift line off the blank where it passes the blank only one time! Just once where X marks the cross the blank spot.

 

So what I learned to do by listening to the materials was to use the guides one before and one after the X marks the spot where line crosses the blank so on my rods I did eliminate that one guide.

 

You said: "wouldn't this affectively shorten the potential spread of the load? With the first guides so far out it wouldn't really load past the first guide to distribute further into the beef of the blank no?"

 

Hmmmm... only one guide experiences full weight load and that would be the tip. The other guides do not experience that much of a load at all. You can test this by loading up a spiral wrapped rod- or a spinning rod- mounted and use your finger to try and lift the line off the tip guide and see how much pressure it takes if you can do so. Then move back one guide from tip and try it under same load and you should be able to easily lift the line under load off the guide.

 

So there is really no change in what a rod experiences as far as loading goes.

 

What the spiral wrap accomplishes are eliminating the rod twisting or torque caused by top side guides acting like a lever twisting rod blank under load. All eliminated. And, with my process of straightening line flow under load I reduce the amount of friction it takes to reel in a fish to its absolute minimum with limitations of materials at hand. It makes reeling in a fish easier and less of a battle for the fisher person. It reduces having to use muscles to prevent blank torque while fighting a fish, and it gives the fisher person less friction to reel in a fish again reducing the amount of muscle power and energy needed to accomplish the job.

 

Those are the primary reasons I do it. Torque elimination and friction reduction to line flow under load.

 

Once I got the process I came up with as far as I could take it I wrote the article for RodMaker magazine in December of 2020 issue.

 

The only XF rod I have is a MudHole MHX Gen1 MH XF rod. It shows how the Cagey Hook Wrap process I came up with follows each rod's unique bend to achieve the spiral wrap results. This is as close to meeting your request that I can get. Line flow is ruler straight with ZERO angle of bends through transition guides and no side loading following the rules of custom rod building as published in a book I read. My bad drawing above showing how I use the rod blank's taper to shoot line past blank is on full display here. I do not spiral wrap around the thickest part of the blank. Rods built this way are fabulous to use if I do say so myself. Its why I spent decades perfecting it slowly step by step.

 

 

Everyone who has tried it loves it. Here are a couple of comments about it:

 

Cagey Hook Wrap Method

Posted by: Jeffrey D Rennert (---)

Date: January 27, 2021 01:25PM

 

I haven't read the article from Rod Maker Mag. yet ( I let my subscription expire, I have renewed), But after seeing the article i decided to share my experience. Kent and I started a friendship @2 months ago. This spawned from our passion to make everything perfect. He came to my house with a rod wrapped to his specs. I showed him my 6-8 versions. I started this acid wrap after reading this forum. I did a Tom K. version 0* to 180*, I did another version, Donald LaMar's -.5*/90*/180*, Then Norm's (thank you Norm for all you do here), 0/60*/120*180*. I had zero faith in Tom K.'s method, only to be shocked at it's smooth casting. The others casted well also. I decided on Norm's method, Now, with casting not an issue, why tinker with it? I've fished plastic worms for bass so long I've developed a twitch being so slow. But the one thing I had become accustom too was the torque generated when setting the hook, and these were serious try to remove their jaw hook sets, no braid then. The absolute second I set the hook with Kent's spiraled rod, I was in shock. Where was the twist, where was the reposition the reel in my hand moment? Kent is not paying me enough to embellish on the moment of truth hook set, I'm just sharing my experience. I've since caught bass on crank baits and experienced the same very smooth transition from fish to landing. I've since stripped two rods and plan on more. Forgive me if I was as long winded as Kent, haha.

 

 

Re: BFS build

Posted by: Kendall Cikanek (---)

Date: March 18, 2024 09:00PM

 

Every freshwater baitcasting rod I’ve built for about three years has started with an RV6. I especially like them on BFS rods. I’ve got enough casts with various guides and have packed enough rods around to feel like these just work better and are very durable. My next build will be a Cagey Hook spiral wrap, though. While I’m happy using my tried and true formula, it really appears that Kent worked out something fairly revolutionary with this system. I’m not sure if the RV6’s high frame will be right for that until I get further into it. I’ll start that rod with the LRV if a lower guide is a better fit for the method.

1 hour ago, Banned User said:

Just thought- what about an acid wrapped fly rod?

 

Technically it can be applied to any rod blank.

 

I've never tried a fly rod but due to how whippy those usually are would be in my book a slow blank. Extremely slow blank as bends tend to go deep in many cases all the way to the reel.

 

So applying my process would then amount to about the same thing as an acid wrap or Robert's wrap or other methods. My process would also pull the transition back closer to the reel and basically spiral around the thickest part of the blank just because of the bend of those rods.

 

I am not sure how it would perform since I don't fly fish. It would be interesting to hear if others did make spiral wrapped fly rods and how they perform.

 

My Cagey Hook Wrap process is not the same as an acid wrap at all. That is a west coast California method used primarily on short jigging rods used for almost straight down fishing with little to no casting.

 

My idea was developed on bass fishing casting rods.

 

This particular rod shows about the best application of my process to date. Others may be slightly less well done as this is a learning process, but this one rod came out very well and fit the custom rod rules in the book to a T.

 

Observe line flow under a chosen 90 degree rod blank load. It goes through the transition guides ruler straight with zero side loading and line flows in either top center or bottom center of the transition guides. I cannot make it any better than this using a rod and reel.

 

Rods built like this are a pure joy to use which is why I took the time, effort and trouble to come up with this idea. I have constructed a dozen of them in the last few months and still finishing up 4 more right now. I have close to 100 spiral wrapped rods including those made by others for comparisons including the very first custom spiral wrapped rod I purchased at a garage sale decades ago that started this madness for me.

 

I even have 2 Moby rods on Loomis blanks I use as examples of what works and what does not work as well. One Moby is as they built it, and the other Moby I stripped off the guides and constructed it my way using micro guides just so people can see the extreme differences on identical blanks.

 

Both works. All of them work. It is just that some are more ideal and some are less ideal. No right or wrong way. Just ideal or less ideal.

 

Presently I am working with a number of custom rod builders across the country who are trying to learn it and build their own CHW rods.

 

 

I can tell you this... to build a rod like the one shown above, it takes a lot of time, trial, and effort to get those guides in the most ideal locations and angles.

 

My process dials in the spiral wrap custom to each rod when done correctly.

 

And the builder can choose the degree of loading they wish to use to further dial in their custom rod just for the fish species they choose and size of the fish as well.

 

So when building a CHW rod, you can choose any degree of blank loading you want or need. You can adapt it to a 65 degree bend or a 120 degree bend or any variation you choose for almost any blank.

 

When I build my bass fishing rods I tend to dial it in for a 90 degree bend has been my choice, and my photos all show that same degree of bend as well.

49 minutes ago, FloridaFishinFool said:

...

And, with my process of straightening line flow under load I reduce the amount of friction it takes to reel in a fish ...

Cagey...are your comparing this to regular acid wrap/ Roberts wrap? I dont see how it would reduce friction vs conventional guides on top.

I have few of the Kastking Spirale rods. They fish pretty well. 

https://kastking.com/products/kastking-cliff-crochet-spirale-series-bass-rods?

10 minutes ago, Chris Catignani said:

Cagey...are your comparing this to regular acid wrap/ Roberts wrap? I dont see how it would reduce friction vs conventional guides on top.

 

The amount of friction line experiences flowing through the guides on a rod is accumulative.

 

So with guides on top, when under load you have angular bends of the line flow through each guide adding increased friction, and then as line touches blank and often flows down alongside the blank you have to add in that friction as well.

 

My  CHW process eliminates most of 2 out of 3 accumulations of line flow friction under load. One, the line flowing on blank or beside it is eliminated. And 2, the line flow friction through transition guides that is straightened out has no angular bends through those guides so that friction is almost eliminated as well. While on a conventional rod, these same locations would show some angular bends to line flow under load sometimes. My line shoots straight past those areas. It does make a difference! I believe it.

 

If you look at this photo, the only angular bends in line flow under load exists only way out closer to the tip as rod begins to bend into the load. If the transition guides were all on top and those in the bend as a conventional rod, you would see angular bends coming back towards the reel in most of those guides. And lots of line touching the blank along most of it, and way out there in the bend line flowing down beside the blank between each guide often touching twice in between each one.

 

Those friction increases are gone on this rod. Do not exist. Friction has to be reduced because of this.

 

7 minutes ago, FloridaFishinFool said:

...

So with guides on top, when under load you have angular bends of the line flow through each guide adding increased friction,

...

You have the same angular flow with guides on the bottom too.
I dont think I have one rod where the line touches the blank under load.

I can see where it might make a difference with larger fish though...

Only in the bend area do you see angular bends. Not through the transition guides.

 

I will take the same rod shown above which was also published in the article and turn it upside down and demonstrate the accumulation of increased line flow resistance to compare with the CHW version.

 

You can't eliminate all of them. Rods and reels and line have limitations. I think I reached that limitation with what I do.

 

I hit the wall and could go no further. It works. Give it a try on your next custom rod. They really are amazing to use.

18 minutes ago, FloridaFishinFool said:

Give it a try on your next custom rod. They really are amazing to use.

I have a couple rods I regularly use like this.

I pretty much went back old school because of the way they lay on the deck of the boat.

1 hour ago, Chris Catignani said:

I pretty much went back old school because of the way they lay on the deck of the boat.

 

I've heard this before. I am one of those who do not care how a rod lays on the deck. I care only about how it fishes. My rods are built for fishing not how they lay on a deck. Not even a consideration to me Chris.

 

I just took the same rod published in the article and mounted it upside down so now the guides are on top same as a conventional rod we humans have used successfully for more than a century. But just look at the results! I used the same 90 degree for these images.

 

In these images taken just minutes ago, I know they are not the clearest, but you can see how the line flows under a 90 degree load. It is clearly running down beside the blank in between each guide in the bend section touching the blank for approximately 50% of the blank length in between each of those guides.

 

This is added or increased accumulated line flow friction under load spiral wrapped rods eliminate all together. And I had trouble taking these photos because even these short micro guides were torqueing the rod over sideways in the mount.

 

When you add up all the places along the blank the line touches under load it has got to add this friction to the overall accumulation of friction line flow experiences under load. Eliminate this and line flow friction has to be reduced in my opinion.

 

And what is funny is some custom rod builders are so worried about line touching the blank in a spiral wrapped rod they go to extremes to prevent it while rods that did this naturally for over 100 years you don't see them putting extra guides on them to lift line off the blank! Why is it only on a spiral wrap the one tiny little spot where line crosses the blank is such an issue they have to toss in another guide to solve a problem that does not exist.

 

 

 

These next two images are of the middle of the blank moving back towards the reel. It shows the line flow under 90 degree load is also running down along side the blank for approximately 50% of blank length between each guide.

 

This is not how I want my rods to behave or function. This is less ideal.

 

 

 

All of the above accumulation of friction increases and rod torqueing over are completely eliminated on all of my CHW rods.

 

This is the exact same rod but now a CHW spiral wrapped rod eliminating what you see above. Line flow friction under load is decreased significantly in my opinion.

 

There is only one possible place where the line could possibly touch this blank now under load. Where X marks the blank crossover spot. Like I said a lot of rod builders think this is an issue and they include an additional 90 degree side guide to lift line off the blank but they are adding friction here by forcing line to flow out sideways causing increased angular bends through transition guides.

 

I learned to eliminate that guide and just use the one before and after X marks the spot as the lift guides. Works like a charm!

 

 

 

2 hours ago, FloridaFishinFool said:

...

When you add up all the places along the blank the line touches under load it has got to add this friction to the overall accumulation of friction line flow experiences under load.

...

 

Come on Kent...How many guides are on that rod? Looks like your missing a few.

How long is the rod? How many guides?

2 hours ago, FloridaFishinFool said:

 

I've heard this before. I am one of those who do not care how a rod lays on the deck. I care only about how it fishes. My rods are built for fishing not how they lay on a deck. Not even a consideration to me Chris.

So here the thing about the deck.
For a spiral wrap...I would have it spiraling on the side of the reel handle. This could help it lay flat on the deck, but it doesn't always end up that way for various reasons. 
Usually there are about four of five other rods there. They get strapped at the reel and also get strapped near the tip. If the spiral rod is laying on the guide side, it will have a bow in rod. If anything gets laid on the rod (or stepped on) you got a bent guide. Believe me I been through this and put some thought into it.

3 hours ago, Chris Catignani said:

Come on Kent...How many guides are on that rod? Looks like your missing a few.

How long is the rod? How many guides?

 

See! I get to use fewer guides on a spiral wrapped rod! Same as a spinning rod for same length of blank! This rod has 10 guides plus tip and is 7' MH F.

7 hours ago, Banned User said:

I haven't had the chance to fish a spiral wrap rod yet, but in theory it seems like the way to go. If for nothing but avoiding braid wrapping around tip top, but also for the comfort in the fight eliminating the torque,  and even more so the "pop" from left to right at awkward angle loads. 

 

Anybody collect any actual data on performance? Some people say they cast better... data? 

 

MANY PEOPLE say you can use at least 1 less guide vs conventional... you folks here agree?

 

Found this

https://www.bassresource.com/bass-fishing-forums/topic/261817-what-is-your-favorite-rod-you-built/#findComment-3163218

 

@FloridaFishinFool wouldn't this affectively shorten the potential spread of the load? With the first guides so far out it wouldn't really load past the first guide to distribute further into the beef of the blank no?

 

What are the steps for this process? 

 

Have any better pictures of rods with different characteristics to compare? Hravy Xf vs medium moderate type contrast? 

 

Anybody else have any thoughts on all this? Would really love to hear from the experienced builders here to learn and grow

 

 

 

I've built a bunch of them and have at least 3 downstairs still (2x 6'6", one ML/MF and one M/M, plus a 9' steelhead float rod).  I couldn't tell you how many I built and sold as it was ~20-25 years ago that I was doing it.

 

I did a 3-guide twist.  Somewhere around 20-30 degrees for the top guide, then two wrapping around before the 4th guide was 180 degrees off the reel seat.  I liked a little higher guide for the first one so that it gave a little more flexibility in where it went up the rod.  The extra height let it set off the blank just a little so that when the first guide was offset 20 degrees there was a straight line path to the 180 guide.  The 180 and beyond were micro guides (or as small as I could get away with). The 2 in between guides would be whatever worked for that rod.

 

You can get away with 1 fewer guide since the line is under the rod.  In some cases 2 for a longer rod.

 

is there a big performance benefit?  I'd argue not for a bass rod.  Sure they are more stable when under load, especially if you're trying to horse a fish up out of the deep.  But I also have no issues with standard rods in that same scenario.  One fewer guide sure seems like a benefit for crispness, but when you're talking about a #4 single foot guide there is a negligible difference.  There isn't a casting benefit and I'd argue that there might be a detriment since the line doesn't have a straight path from reel to tip top when a lure is flinging through the air.  It might help with braid wrapping a tip top, but I think the advantage is slight if any.  All in, it might have a tiny advantage in stability with basically no downsides otherwise.  If I was building a rod now I would probably do it, but only because there is no downside to it.

 

Now if I was building a 50# class boat rod then that's a totally different story.

 

And @Chris Catignani- the spiral ALWAYS goes on the side of the reel handle.  😉

8 hours ago, FloridaFishinFool said:

drawing shows

That you missed your calling haha, I can barely draw a straight line either bro haha

 

And how do you determine exactly where your first guide goes? Next guide?

 

What about guide size?

1 hour ago, casts_by_fly said:

).

I appreciate you sharing your thoughts, seems like only upsides for me since I have no boat deck haha. Just gotta find the time to get a build in 

3 hours ago, casts_by_fly said:

....I'd argue not for a bass rod. 

...

And @Chris Catignani- the spiral ALWAYS goes on the side of the reel handle.  😉

I agree.

 

Do we always know what side the reel handle is on?

A spiral rod has been around for over 100 years, I first read about it in an old book printed in 1908 if I remember right. The spiral is doing nothing the rod doesn't want to do on its own when you load it. If a spinning rod isn't blowing up due to lack of guides or increased guide spacing the spiral won't either. If you play with your spiral wrapped rod, looking at flex, loading, etc. you'll see there is very little real difference in line path, guides on top follows a longer arc path. A lighter tip due to the number of guides responds and straightens faster with decreased oscillations to mess with the line path during the cast. If you put the spiral on the handle side the reel will protect the guides better, because of the handle it rolls less in that direction and it rises off the deck protecting the guides if it does.

2 hours ago, Banned User said:

That you missed your calling haha, I can barely draw a straight line either bro haha

 

And how do you determine exactly where your first guide goes? Next guide?

 

What about guide size?

I appreciate you sharing your thoughts, seems like only upsides for me since I have no boat deck haha. Just gotta find the time to get a build in 

 

You can choose any guides you want to. The taller the guide the more angular bends in line flow you will see on your rod. I use micro guides on most rods and run my line closer to the blank. Just a preference.

 

I start at the tip and I work back to the reel. Not towards the tip. The reason for this is because the 180's and tip guide are kind of set in stone as to where they go. So install those first and put a reel on the rod with line under load and follow the line back to reel under load to show you where those guides go by letting the rod and reel show you where they go based on your chosen degree of rod load bend.

 

As for the bend section of the rod you can use any standard placement guide. I've used this one and others.

 

59 minutes ago, spoonplugger1 said:

A spiral rod has been around for over 100 years, I first read about it in an old book printed in 1908 if I remember right. The spiral is doing nothing the rod doesn't want to do on its own when you load it. If a spinning rod isn't blowing up due to lack of guides or increased guide spacing the spiral won't either.

 

Very true! I said basically the same thing.

 

John Scanlan patented the first idea of a spiral wrapped rod in 1909. 116 years ago! Here is the image from his original patent. He shows specific degrees of guide placement for ALL rods!

 

And you may notice how he does what many others do in trying to spiral wrap the thickest part of the blank closest to the reel. He also has a very peculiar tip on this rod. I'd like to see the detail drawing on that one.

 

 

 

When you are doing guide spacing, no matter the rod or type, load the rod with one line that is attached to the tip top that puts your permanent bend in the rod. now string your guides on the reel line and thread the line thru the tip top. This lets you set your guides with no real load on them as you only put enough weight or load on the line to keep it straight while you mess around with the guides, I use something like a 1/2 oz. weight. One thing not brought up yet, take any rod you have and place the tip on the ceiling, wall, floor, etc. and flex it, notice how the very tip of the rod doesn't bend no matter what you do? If that part of the rod isn't bending just what advantage is it to put a guide in that area? No bend, no real load. I see a lot of guides 3 inches or so from the tip, they aren't there to support the blank's load and put weight where you least want it.

1 hour ago, Chris Catignani said:

I agree.

 

Do we always know what side the reel handle is on?

It’s a custom rod for a customer.  You better know.  

I think some rod manufacturers refer to it as line control guides or line management guides more or less. Guides to keep line in line!

 

I have never considered doing it how you suggest by using a secondary line to hold rod in place loaded and then thread reel line through guides to adjust them that way. I wonder if it would be the same or different? I will have to try your method and compare.

 

Thanks for suggesting that.

I built one of my flipping rods with a basic spiral guide train.  It's neat and I get comments on it, I generally use it more of an example to people if they ask about it since when you talk custom rods, the topic comes up occasionally.  At this point, I don't plan on building any more personal rods with a spiral...Nothing wrong with it, just not worth the special attention to me.  

I love them for high "drag/torque" baits or techniques.  Dragging a 1 ounce carolina rig for 8-10 hours on the St Lawrence I found the wrap kept the reel from wanting to twist out of my hand.

I prefer left handed handle reels, I want to have control of the rod as soon as the lure hits the water, I have many times had something nail my offering before it even sinks all the way especially in shallow water. Switching hands than is not my favorite move, and my right hand is stronger, and through repeated use my most reactive hand. Reels were built right handed in the early days because they were direct drive or had a very slow multiplier system so the 6% average speed increase using your dominant hand was an obvious advantage, I don't think it matters much anymore with the reels of today. The only caveat I can think of is flipping sticks, I don't want my handle on the same side as my presentation due to handle interference issues with the line in my hand. I also like flipping switch reels for that, I think they may be harder to find now, the last I found was a KVD reel some years ago.

Bulldog posted elsewhere that Lew's is selling one.