Re: Torzite guides/Titan scrim?/Censoring Moderator

This board is for discussing the repair and restoration of bamboo fly rods, makers discussion and construction techniques relating to same. Examples would be different techniques or methods used by restorationists and makers.

Moderator: Titelines

User avatar
Tom Smithwick
Master Guide
Posts: 662
Joined: 10/27/03 19:00

Re: Re: Torzite guides/Titan scrim?/Censoring Moderator

#101

Post by Tom Smithwick »

Mike - Both Fuji and Proof's tip tops are the braced type. Their use may be because the titanium is not as bend resistant in the tip top guide, but I can't say that for sure. In any case, their use on fly rods is not unprecedented. While I am not the historian that others are around here, it seems to me the British have used them, especially on spey type rods. In any case, I have used them from both sources, they work great, and you would have to look pretty hard at them to be offended. It took me a bit longer to get used to the single foots, but now I like the way they look. This from a guy who would have told you 2 1/2 years ago that the only thing that looks right on a cane rod is a bronze finish snake guide. You could also do as Samsonboi suggests above for the tip top if you can't get by the braces.

User avatar
Gnome
Bamboo Fanatic
Posts: 3817
Joined: 12/23/04 19:00

Re: Re: Torzite guides/Titan scrim?/Censoring Moderator

#102

Post by Gnome »

Proofflyfishing wrote:
06/28/20 09:08
Very interesting discussion. I carry the SN tip tops, guides, and stripping guides. If anyone wants to try them out just to see how you like them I would be willing to work with you on a special "first time" guide set price. Just send me a quick PM or you can contact me through the link in my signature below.
Here is an opportunity to see for yourselves how these guides perform and at a discount to boot! No one should ever complain they are too expensive! Thanks, Matt!

User avatar
henkverhaar
Master Guide
Posts: 578
Joined: 07/02/16 15:37

Re: Re: Torzite guides/Titan scrim?/Censoring Moderator

#103

Post by henkverhaar »

Dang - just after I ordered a set ;-)

User avatar
Gnome
Bamboo Fanatic
Posts: 3817
Joined: 12/23/04 19:00

Re: Re: Torzite guides/Titan scrim?/Censoring Moderator

#104

Post by Gnome »

I feel your pain! I don't think I qualify for the discount because it is not my first rodeo with them.

I am excited to hear about what you find with them!!

Jeff

User avatar
henkverhaar
Master Guide
Posts: 578
Joined: 07/02/16 15:37

Re: Re: Torzite guides/Titan scrim?/Censoring Moderator

#105

Post by henkverhaar »

WIll tell you as soon as they arrive. The rest of the rod is ready to receive them ;-) This is going to be not only a fishing rod (3 pc 7 ft 4-wt, own taper) but also a 'show piece' to 'advertise' ;-)

User avatar
mer
Bamboo Fanatic
Posts: 2523
Joined: 03/22/04 19:00
Location: NH

Re: Re: Torzite guides/Titan scrim?/Censoring Moderator

#106

Post by mer »

Tiptops: I was looking through Jeff's "RodCrafting" and pg 173, the Herbert Hatton fly rod, close up shows the agate tip top with braces/legs on it. Very much like the Torzite or SiC tip tops. So, yes, historical precedent.

User avatar
Gnome
Bamboo Fanatic
Posts: 3817
Joined: 12/23/04 19:00

Re: Re: Torzite guides/Titan scrim?/Censoring Moderator

#107

Post by Gnome »

The Hattons when making rods have always had little fear of pushing the envelope. The braced tip-top is a very traditional tip-top and has been used by more than a few makers over the last 100 years, Hardy included as well. Funny and Sad how it boils down to looks over performance and durability. And how that drives the view of a fly rod.

User avatar
canerodscom
Bamboo Fanatic
Posts: 2687
Joined: 02/01/04 19:00

Re: Re: Torzite guides/Titan scrim?/Censoring Moderator

#108

Post by canerodscom »

I wonder if we might quantify this a little bit? Where do these guides shine and by how much? I'm really curious here, and not just playing devil's advocate...

As I read above, there are two chief advantages to these guides when casting. First they are lighter weight. That allows more of the caster's strength to be devoted to moving the line rather than moving the weight of the rod. I'm not sure what math one might use to determine what kinds of improvements this reduced weight might make in the cast. Let's assume, rather generously I think, that with the same amount of effort a caster can now expect an easier cast at normal distances and a longer maximum length of cast of perhaps 2 percent. These numbers are certainly not correct. I'm just trying to quantify. So for the sake of this example the reduced weight may possibly add 2% to his maximum cast.

The second big advantage I see being discussed is reduced friction when shooting line. Again, I'd like some help trying to quantify how much of an advantage that really is. Let's suppose that the caster is very good. Not an elite, competitive caster, but very good. Let's also suppose that we are discussing an 8 foot 5 weight rod. For this caster and rod, a maximum cast is an honest 100 feet. I know some of the folks discussing this can cast that well at least. Let's suppose also that this good caster is reaching out to his maxiumum potential to attempt that big fish on the other bank. He's false casting about 60 feet of line and 10 feet of leader, and plans to shoot another 30 feet of line to reach that cruising fish near the far bank. Now, how much additional line can he shoot through the guides? Five percent? Ten percent? Maybe even 20 percent?

We know that from the decreased weight he can cast 2% farther. That means he can add 2% to his carry of 60 feet of line, or 1.2 feet extra. If he can now shoot an additional five percent of line that shoot of 30 feet becomes 31.5 feet, ten percent becomes 33 feet, twenty percent becomes 36 feet.

So let's use these admittedly dreamed up numbers and do a little math. That maximum cast of 100 feet is lengthened by 2%, or 1.2 feet due to reduced weight. Reduced friction may add as much as 20% of distance to the maximum of his ability to shoot line, or six more feet. So at the very extreme limits of this good caster's abilities we may see an increase in maximum cast of:

1.2 feet + 6 feet = 7.2 feet

Do those of you who are proponents of these super-guides think these numbers are anywhere near in line with reality? If not, high or low? And where might I adjust these numbers to make them closer to reality? Once we quantify we can begin to ask other questions about expectations, aesthetics, and so on.

Thanks for reading.
Harry

User avatar
Pentalux
Master Guide
Posts: 593
Joined: 03/04/06 19:00
Location: Northern NJ
Contact:

Re: Torzite guides/Titan scrim?/Censoring Moderator

#109

Post by Pentalux »

Sounds like devils advocate to me but to note, believe your final math is incorrect. 2% of 100 feet would be 2 feet and an additional 20% on that cast would be an additional 20 feet (arguably 20.4 ft but) thus yielding a 122 ft cast verses 100 feet. Never bothered to try and quantify as the results when tried are dramatic and would say 22% might be a bit much for an average caster but 15 -18% is probably pretty accurate. On a saltwater or salmon rod that could be the difference between reaching fish and not.

User avatar
canerodscom
Bamboo Fanatic
Posts: 2687
Joined: 02/01/04 19:00

Re: Torzite guides/Titan scrim?/Censoring Moderator

#110

Post by canerodscom »

Thanks Rob

As far as math I was breaking the cast down into two components; carry and shoot. Reduced friction should allow us to shoot more line but won’t help us carry more line. So the distance increases from reduced friction only involve the amount of line we can shoot. If we can shoot 30 feet with snake guides, how much can we shoot with reduced friction guides? 20% more? 50% more? Seriously, I’d like to know.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

User avatar
mer
Bamboo Fanatic
Posts: 2523
Joined: 03/22/04 19:00
Location: NH

Re: Re: Torzite guides/Titan scrim?/Censoring Moderator

#111

Post by mer »

I'm going to drop my engineer hat because long weekend and I really don't feel like doing math today (but I with Pentalux that 20% of 100 ft is 20 ft. If you use 60ft cast as a base, 2% is 1.2 ft, 20% of 60 12ft, so you have combined 13.2ft extra on a 60ft cast or a 60ft cast made with the effort of about a 50ft cast)

I'm also not a great caster; I'm good out to typical trout distances (say 50 ft casts), I'm not a huge hauler (more of a tug on the backcast, maybe a little tug on the forward).

My direct experience on my rod, that I have used quite a bit, that Jeff upgraded from SiC to Torzite is: I was able to tell a difference compared to the SiC guides, simply when extending line false casting. The line I used (always have used on this rod) Cortland 333 DT4F, spooled up on a Battenkill II (one of 2 reels that I've always used with this rod).
Whole false casting felt smoother, I was carrying more line in the air, casting stroke felt a bit crisper (more cast for less effort).

Fishing it next day (bluegills for fun):
Casting was definitely easier than it used to be, more than once shooting line on the forward cast it took all the slack I had and wanted more. That was a surprise to me, never had that happen before on any of my rods.
Roll casting was also better; again I don't usually shoot line or very much and it wanted to pull more slack from me.
Playing fish was also different/easier. Line in and out felt smoother, not hanging up on anything (yes, I keep my lines and rods clean).


Putting a number on it? Not a chance I'm doing that. I do know that it is an improvement over the SiC guides and the SiC guides are an improvement over snake guides.

NOTE: this is all my opinion based on my direct experience with a rod that I own.

I know the looks aren't for everyone; that's fine. But looking back through books, guides with agates including the tip top are historically "accurate". On a GRW mortised rod, SiCs/Torzites look accurate to the period of the rod.
I know that to a lot of folks a bamboo fly rod does not look "right" unless it follows Payne/Garrison/PHY etc with snake guides (left or right twist?), agate stripper and Perfection tip top. That's fine; I like that look too and except for my GRW rods, that's what I have.

I guess what bothers me about some of the discussions about these is there are folks that have basically "peed in the pool" discounting everything positive simply based on "I don't like the way the guides look and don't they they have any place on a fly rod".
Yes, Jeff can be a bit spirited in promoting something he thinks is a benefit to the art/craft of rod making; but he certainly has not deserved the treatment he got from some in the past.


Bottom line (and thank you if you've actually read this far):
I personally believe there is a performance gain by using them, if you don't mind the looks (beauty is in the eye of the beholder), give a set a try. No one is forcing anyone to retrofit a rod with them. But please don't stand on tradition simply because it's tradition. Be open to new/different ideas.

Have a happy and safe 4th of July; I hope Monday you still have the same number of fingers and toes as you do today.

User avatar
canerodscom
Bamboo Fanatic
Posts: 2687
Joined: 02/01/04 19:00

Re: Torzite guides/Titan scrim?/Censoring Moderator

#112

Post by canerodscom »

Thanks mer

Maybe I have “mis-thunk” this whole distance thing. Or perhaps I have not explained myself well. I’ll try a little more. Reduced guide friction should not allow us to carry any more line. It should allow us to shoot more line. So our increased casting differences must come from shooting additional line.

Jeff and I have been friends for a long time. I’ve cast lots of rods he made and enjoyed them all. Whether or not we agree on every area of rod making will not diminish our friendship. No way.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

User avatar
mer
Bamboo Fanatic
Posts: 2523
Joined: 03/22/04 19:00
Location: NH

Re: Re: Torzite guides/Titan scrim?/Censoring Moderator

#113

Post by mer »

Shooting more line:
Fixed effort, say it gives you X feet of shoot.
Reduced friction (say 20%), same effort would give you 1.2X of shoot.
X is 10 feet of shoot, then reduced friction makes that 12 ft of shoot.
If that original 10ft gave you a 60ft cast, then the reduced friction makes it a 62 ft cast.
So from a numbers perspective, maybe it's not much, but I think you need to look at the from the amount of effort used.
Reduced friction means less effort to get that 60ft cast, meaning less wear and tear on you over a day of fishing.

That is what I noticed on my rod: less effort to do the same cast.

Harry, I did not mean to imply anything between you and Jeff, sorry if it came out that way.

samsonboi
Master Guide
Posts: 685
Joined: 09/25/18 08:17

Re: Re: Torzite guides/Titan scrim?/Censoring Moderator

#114

Post by samsonboi »

Also would imply less fly line wear, and since the guides are very hard (Jeff backs them up with his amazing guarantee that he’s never even needed to follow up on) they don’t score.
"Car ce n'est pas assez d'avoir l'esprit bon, mais le principal est de l'appliquer bien.”- Descartes

User avatar
Gnome
Bamboo Fanatic
Posts: 3817
Joined: 12/23/04 19:00

Re: Re: Torzite guides/Titan scrim?/Censoring Moderator

#115

Post by Gnome »

As one of the main proponents of singlefoot guides on fly rods for the last 35 years, I have seen the resentment and push back from makers who believe that the only way a fly rod should be made is with snake guides.

otherwise, it does not "Look right". This simply put means there are a lot of people who are more worried about looks than performance and durability.

I believe Harry's numbers are way low. And I stand by my assessment that you can gain somewhere between 10% and 20% in performance due to the drop in friction. IMHO I believe that is due to 2 things, #1 the extremely slick CiN rings and #2 the single ring has a single contact point where snake guides have 2 contact points due to their design (thus less friction than a snake guide due to a single contact point), and along with that the snake guides propensity to trap knots and break tips if the angler is not extremely careful.

Sorry Harry but We will probably never see eye to eye on this. I hate friction and so in the Gnomes world The King is dead (Snake guides) Long live the new king (Single foot CiN guides).

ANd everyone seems to be hung up on distance when there is another factor to consider and that is the effect of little or no friction when fishing in close and as Mer stated the rod will wear you out less due to the drop in friction and the increase in performance due to that drop.

Here we have a golden opportunity to tear back some of the markets from the Graphite and glass boys and all it takes is using a guide with less friction. So why not? and Tradition is really not the correct answer. 200 years of evolution albeit slowly does show us we can change guides and still call the tool a flyrod.

Don "Gnome" Quixote'

edit; next week I will be making a trip to SCOTT to pick up a blank to finish out with Torzites to show Jim B what they are all about. so the window may be closing quickly because I believe Jim will be shocked and then you just might see a SCOTT series with full single foot guides and if that happens the bamboo loses out on a truly golden opportunity! IMHO

Harry, on the backcast the line is in contact with 2 points per guide and this with the line trying to follow the angle induced by the snake guides design cause friction, the single foot guides have one point of contact on either stroke, front or back and thus automatically have less friction (not counting the slickness of the insert), so extending the line on the backcast is more efficient and so the guides do have an effect on how much line you can carry.

User avatar
canerodscom
Bamboo Fanatic
Posts: 2687
Joined: 02/01/04 19:00

Re: Torzite guides/Titan scrim?/Censoring Moderator

#116

Post by canerodscom »

Many thanks Jeff

HB


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

User avatar
Gnome
Bamboo Fanatic
Posts: 3817
Joined: 12/23/04 19:00

Re: Re: Torzite guides/Titan scrim?/Censoring Moderator

#117

Post by Gnome »

Harry,

Maybe its time to build a blank that matches your favorite rod with snakes and put the CiN guides on it and do a direct comparison of the two. With Matt offering them at a discount, now is the time to do a direct comparison which will quantify the effects for you in a way that no one's words can do! let the guides speak for themselves in a 1 to 1 test. Or take Tom up on his offer to send you the glass rod he built, but doing the 1 to 1 would be a much better test and would show you what we are talking about.

Jeff

User avatar
canerodscom
Bamboo Fanatic
Posts: 2687
Joined: 02/01/04 19:00

Re: Torzite guides/Titan scrim?/Censoring Moderator

#118

Post by canerodscom »

I think it might be easier to buy a couple of graphite blanks and make one up with each kind of guides. When I get a break I might try to do just that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

User avatar
Gnome
Bamboo Fanatic
Posts: 3817
Joined: 12/23/04 19:00

Re: Re: Torzite guides/Titan scrim?/Censoring Moderator

#119

Post by Gnome »

Harry,
It is sad that bamboo does not deserve the test. And in Harry's post #108 it sure seems like an attempt to trivialize or minimize the effects of using these guides.

I would hope that people's interests have been sparked and they are willing to try them with an open mind (especially with Matt offering them at a discount). I know of a few and my hat is off to them. One of the most recent is Marcell Duval and he now sees the light.

User avatar
canerodscom
Bamboo Fanatic
Posts: 2687
Joined: 02/01/04 19:00

Re: Torzite guides/Titan scrim?/Censoring Moderator

#120

Post by canerodscom »

Gnome wrote:Harry,
It is sad that bamboo does not deserve the test. And in Harry's post #108 it sure seems like an attempt to trivialize or minimize the effects of using these guides.

I would hope that people's interests have been sparked and they are willing to try them with an open mind (especially with Matt offering them at a discount). I know of a few and my hat is off to them. One of the most recent is Marcell Duval and he now sees the light.

It’s just quicker and easier to buy a coupla graphite blanks Jeff. That’s all. Why waste a week building test rod blanks when I can buy nice, consistent graphite blanks and be wrapping by this weekend? So for me it’s simply a question of do I spend a week or more building bamboo test rods or a few hours and a few dollars on graphite test rods?

If the guides pass muster on graphite then maybe I’ll jump on the bandwagon.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Post Reply

Return to “Rod making, restoration, repairs and discussion on those related topics concerning bamboo rods.”