Fellow builders,

I just added this to the CCS database but I know a lot of you will be curious about this blank because of its specs and price. So, figured I'd post it here too. I haven't built it yet since I just got it yesterday.

2005 Forecast RX6 F662-4 6' 6" 2wt. 4pc. ERN = 2.67 AA = 60 Retail price $20

I'll be posting data for a Steffen Brothers S-glass 7' 3/4wt. 3pc. blank next week for you small stream anglers out there.

By the way, I'll just mention this since I get a lot of e-mail on the subject. I get a lot of inquiries about blanks that folks wonder if I might have tested. Trust me, if I have had my hands on it since the CCS has come out, then I have tested and posted it. The only exception is blanks that are prototypes or not sold as factory firsts (the reason should be obvious). If you have something you want tested and either don't know how or don't want to do it yourself, feel free to send it to me and I'll do it for you. Of course, you have to cover shipping in both directions but I won't charge anything to do the testing. This is an offer for hobby builders basically. Anyone who is in the business of making or selling blanks or a pro rodbuilder ought to (and should) do this for himself and his customers. For those folks, I'll do this in trade for blanks (I get to keep 1 for every 6 tested).

Steve

Hey Steve,

The new forecast seems like it should very closely resemble the Pac Bay tradition with the same specs. I don't remeber measuring it now, but I seem to remember it had very similar specs. Soft, slow blank, but very smooth and felt really good. Have you cast the Rainshadow model of the same? I have one and it feels more like a 3.0/57 than a 2.5/60.

Thanks,
Rick

I had a Rainshadow IF662 and mine CC'd at just under 2.0. I test cast it with a 2, 3, and 4 and it worked well with all but of course different feel with each line. I think when you get down to such delicate, thin diameter blanks a little bit of sanding in the blank finishing process can make a significant difference in power and action so we tend to see more variation on the lighter blanks. Just a theory based on what I have observed so far. I could be full of it but I'm sure my numbers were right and can't find another good explanation.

I agree, this F662-4 should be a fun little rod. With it's standard graphite make-up, sort of makes a $345 Orvis Superfine seem a bit overpriced, don't you think? But, would probably would be adored by the same folks who love the Superfines. And you can buy the CFO reel at full retail and still come out ahead on money spent.

Rick, I may be wrong about my IF662. I think I owned that before CCS and never tested it. I believe I am thinking about the TRF662 from PacBay. Whatever the CCS database has is what I have owned and tested since it came out. They all run together in my head - good thing we have the database to correct our memories.

Steve

Steve,
You may very well be right about the sanding process. But it seems to me that if the sanding is done properly all that is being removed during sanding is excess epoxy on the surface. How much of this excess epoxy is sanded off will change the weight a little but should not have a significant effect on the power or the action of a blank. I would guess, and I am guessing, that the variation in blanks is more likely to be a function of other variations in the manufacturing process. For example, very small differences in blank diameter or wall thickness could make a significant difference.

Emory, what you say makes sense and you definitely have a better understanding of blank design and manufacturing than I do. As long as only epoxy is removed in sanding, and the wall thickness is not reduced then power should be just about identical between sanded and unsanded blanks. It would take a whole lot of epoxy ridges to make up a 1 or 2 penny difference in ERN. I was thinking that sanding such a small diameter blank required a pretty careful touch and even with attention to detail, a bit of oversanding must occur sometimes.

Steve,
I think that you are right about the effect of sanding being more pronounced on a lighter blank and I think that you are also probably correct that it is more difficult for blank manufacturers to sand the smaller, lighter blanks. I just think that sanding is probaly not what causes the variation in blanks.