i test cast this rod this morning after finishing tip. used a rio grand 4wt line. not dialed into the rod and this was in my front yard so no water load. popped out 60 feet with no problem. not going for distance. then put on another reel with a 168gn sinking shooting head and amnesia running line. one backcast, shoot and i hit 77 feet with no effort. i am not a great caster. a competant caster could aerialize a TON of line with this rod. at 20 ft it cast very well also. i was really concerned that this rod was going to be a broomstick. not so. its different all right, but i think this would make a great float tube or still water rod. don't be concerned about the CC measurements that have been posted. they just don't apply to this rod.

Larry,

Thanks so much for your input on the FT904-4! I too have found that this model in the series works well with the right matching line although it can handle the extra weight of heavier lines.
I would like to mention though that I think the CCS can and does apply on these blanks but as we have mentioned before, the CCS is not just AA and ERN! I think if that is all people are looking at with the system when purchasing a blank, they may not end up with what they expected.
The FT blanks are extremely powerful and I believe that is evident in the CCS data.
Thanks,

Dan Craft
Dan Craft Enterprises

Dan--thanks for posting that...I think you've said it well. Most here know me as a big fan of the CCS, in fact we inscribe all our G&L FlyCraft rods with the AA and Line Weight to Load in grains. But the CC numbers (specifically the ERN's) on the FT's make you think they're dramatically under-rated. What I found both interesting and somewhat astonishing was when we received our first shipment of FT's we CC'd them, discovered they were all "10+wts", then took a bunch of them, mocked them up, and went outside to test cast them. We took reels with every line weight from 4wt to 10wt, TAPED THE INSCRIPTION ON THE ROD, and tried the different reels/lines on each blank to see what combo's we thought cast/fished the nicest. You know what? WE PICKED THE INSCRIBED (i.e. Dan Craft rated) LINE WT EVERY TIME!!! Yes, these blanks all cast a WIDE range of line weights effectively and actually very nicely...but I'd recommend buying a FT904-4 if you're looking for a 9' 4wt tip action rod, etc.

I don't exactly know what to do with the CC numbers other than to say what you've said--there's a whopping lot of power in these blanks, and obviously a fair bit of it is in the top third or the numbers wouldn't come in where they do! But I think we're seeing the arbitrary "1/3 length" rule conflicting with the progressive design of these blanks where the primary casting load happens in the top 1/4 or so.

Anyway, all this having been said, I sure agree with Larry's observations. Nice stick, Dan--thanks for making them possible and available! :)

Warmly,

I would be interested in seeing what distances you were working with, John. I am not 100% sure of course but would venture to guess you're not making a lot of 'small stream' casts in your tests-- the 15'-30' around the boulder, under the tree, across six current lanes type.

I don't doubt that the 904-4FT would perform great at 70' with a 4 weight line; or even between 30-60'. However, there's no way you could convince me to take one of them to a spring creek in Minnesota or to some of the mountain streams around Maryland...a 902-4 FT, maybe, especially if I could drop the butt section (dang brush and such). I ended up selling the best trout rod I ever built (Scott STS 904-4) as it was simply not a 4 weight small stream rod in everyday use. Great for punching out the 30-60' casts...but not for rollcasting a small nymph in tight quarters.

I think the issue here is not as much how rods are rated with CC or by the manufacturer; but rather knowing what YOU or the customer want a rod to do. I have a fellow out here who's looking at small stream rods for use in Maryland; I'm planning on bringing several to show him. I will bring a 904-4FT but feel that it would be WAY too much rod for the 4-weight fishing he's wanting to do. A better match will probably be an 844-3V or a 803-5III with a 4wt line. In the past, a 4 weight was considered an ultralight rod for small streams and brooks. Now it seems that a 4 weight is the default Western-style rod for streamers, big dries, heavy nymphs, etc. Not that there's anything wrong with it, but a 9' 4 weight from the early 1980's (think Fenwick) and Dan's 904-4FT are very, very different rods.

Like John and Larry said, "I'd recommend buying a FT904-4 if you're looking for a 9' 4wt tip action rod" or "a great float tube or still water rod".