I feel like the choice between single-foot wire guides and double-foot snakes is largely personal preference. Super-ceramic solid titanium frame single foot
guides are a different animal altogether that I'm not gonna touch.
The case has been made, over and again, that single-foot wire guides have to be lighter because they're half as long and use half the thread/finish. This might be almost true in some cases, but most single-foot wire guides are the same length of wire folded over and soldered, holding a guide supported by only one foot from one direction on the rod takes a longer foot, therefore more thread and finish per foot (double-foot snakes can be shortened quite a bit and are routinely shortened severely for minimal wraps with no ill effects by the top builders), and single-foot wire guides are usually larger in diameter than equivalent double-foot snakes, so the guides are bigger, rather than smaller, in most cases. Obviously, a builder can alter single-foot wire guides, use minimal wraps, and use the smallest ring sizes, but I haven't seen it done often. My point--the weight issue is probably pretty much a wash on quality rods. I've heard (but don't know, since it's not my milieu), that tournament casters prefer double-foot snakes over other types. If this is true, the friction issue is probably a wash, too, or possibly even advantage snakes. I use double-foot snakes because I like the look and I know they are tough (important for bushwhacking and boat fishing). I routinely use the smallest snakes that make sense, shorten the feet, wrap only one turn before mounting the foot, and my finishes are as thin as possible--so I'm not convinced my guides are heavier than any other type. If you're comparing budget level rods, where the guides aren't properly prepped, the wraps extend at least a quarter inch past the ends of the guide feet, and thick epoxy is slavered all over the whole thing, you'll definitely find single-foot guides to be lighter. May I hasten to point out that those budget rods (of either type guide) cast remarkably well and catch lots of fish?
-CC
The case has been made, over and again, that single-foot wire guides have to be lighter because they're half as long and use half the thread/finish. This might be almost true in some cases, but most single-foot wire guides are the same length of wire folded over and soldered, holding a guide supported by only one foot from one direction on the rod takes a longer foot, therefore more thread and finish per foot (double-foot snakes can be shortened quite a bit and are routinely shortened severely for minimal wraps with no ill effects by the top builders), and single-foot wire guides are usually larger in diameter than equivalent double-foot snakes, so the guides are bigger, rather than smaller, in most cases. Obviously, a builder can alter single-foot wire guides, use minimal wraps, and use the smallest ring sizes, but I haven't seen it done often. My point--the weight issue is probably pretty much a wash on quality rods. I've heard (but don't know, since it's not my milieu), that tournament casters prefer double-foot snakes over other types. If this is true, the friction issue is probably a wash, too, or possibly even advantage snakes. I use double-foot snakes because I like the look and I know they are tough (important for bushwhacking and boat fishing). I routinely use the smallest snakes that make sense, shorten the feet, wrap only one turn before mounting the foot, and my finishes are as thin as possible--so I'm not convinced my guides are heavier than any other type. If you're comparing budget level rods, where the guides aren't properly prepped, the wraps extend at least a quarter inch past the ends of the guide feet, and thick epoxy is slavered all over the whole thing, you'll definitely find single-foot guides to be lighter. May I hasten to point out that those budget rods (of either type guide) cast remarkably well and catch lots of fish?
-CC
!!! Those wraps (and pictures) are drop-dead gorgeous, no
matter which thread you use. Thanks for "raising the bar" again.
