How about by putting one in your hand and fishing with it rather than sitting around theorizing with facts and formulas about it?


Andy

"How about by putting one in your hand and fishing with it " With my lacking knowledge of blank construction unfortunately that is the only way I'm going to find out. However, I don't care if they have to sandwich newspaper in there if it helps get the job done. So all the technical info is good but doesn't help me. If I had to buy a bunch (I'm guessing) to become a reseller/distributor, I'd be promoting them too. Especially if they were good. So Mr. Dear's comments aren't snowing anyone here, at least not me, and I'm looking forward to checking them out. Since I've started this thread I've even been emailed by other sponsors telling me they have what I want, and I'm looking into that too. In fact, the only comments I've seen so far that were controversial, and again I can't question anything technical, were the ones about the Loomis and Rainshadow being nearly identical, and the one about not recommending a HotShot when manufacturers, not just Andy recommend this rod to the general public for this exact purpose. This is a sponsors forum. As always, just my opinion.

I can tell you that Andy wouldn't bother trying to "snow" anyone. He's a fisherman first and foremost and he wouldn't steer you towards anything that wouldn't work extremely well.

I've only owned one CTS blank, so far (I have more on the way). It's a beautiful blank and is along the lines of a Hot Shot type action. It's straight, crisp and beautifully finished.

I'm assuming that it's made with similar lay-up to the Graphite USA models. I may be mistaken. I have found the GUSA blanks to be a bit heavier for the same stiffness as say, those from Loomis or Shikari and this is to be expected for the exact reason that Emory mentions in his earlier post about blank construction. I've also found them (GUSA) to be a bit more durable in some situations.

The thing is, on blanks with very fast actions, any slight additional weight increase isn't noticed much because of where most of that additional weight falls - back towards the mid and butt areas. At any rate, the CTS isn't at all a heavy blank by any means - it's powerful yet crisp and reasonably light compared to most other similar blank powers and actions from other makers. I would certainly consider it a high performance blank, although I can't tell you for certain that it offers as high a stiffness to weight ratio as some others might. But in the hand it sure feels nice and overall I can't imagine many that I've liked better.

On the subject of Hot Shot blanks and what they might be good for - the first ones I ever used were to build a couple of rods for a guy casting for school tuna off the back of a boat. He wanted 9' rods that could throw light 1/2 ounce plastics to the fish at great distances. He needed a light tip but massive power in the butt. He had talked to other builders but none could find a blank that would allow him to get the distance with the light lures and have enough power to do battle with these large school tuna. My suggestion was a Hot Shot blank, but none could be found in the length he wanted. So, I bought a couple of Loomis (932's I think) and extended them. The end result was a pair of rods that he could fire nearly 90 to 100 yards and take fish in the 100lb range. His largest that first season was 117lbs. The rods held up fine. As far as I know, they're still in service some 15 years later.

Hot Shot blanks have a wide variety of applications. Obviously, some measure of common sense has to be employed by the rod bulider in determining what specific areas they're best suited for.

............

Andy,
That is generous of you but frankly my hands are not that calibrated nor do I think yours or anyone elses are, so I am not sure that putting one in my hands to fish with will really prove anything about the advantages or disadvantages of the CTS helical and multi-modulus construction.
However, I could make CCS measurements on one of the CTS blanks and then find a blank from Rainshadow or Lamiglass that has CCS measurements that are very close. I have a lot of each of those and ready access to ones that I do not have. I could then measure the resonant frequency, the weight and weight distribution of both blanks. It would not be conclusive proof because we do not know exactly what the percentage of graphite, glass and resin is in each blank but I think that it is resonable to assume that the ratios in comparable blanks are roughly the same. Unless I am very wrong the CTS blank is going to be heavier and have a lower resonant frequency then a blank with comparable CCS measurements from either Rainshadow or Lamiglass.
I could also test each blank for toughness by loading them to the point that they broke but I am not sure that I want to destructively test the blanks and I would guess that you do not want to either.
You might want to think about this a little though because I will post the results here of the measurements that I make regardless of which one of us it embarrasses.

Andy, I still haven't built on my CTS blank nor have I fished with one. I've built one for my old tournament partner (he has a boatload of GLX Loomis factory rods). He says the CTS is his "holder" rod, now, and caught one walleye over 14# in Saskatchewan this fall on it. This was his first year using this blank and he fished at least 5 walleye tournaments with it.

I don't know, Emory, my hands can certainly tell a lot of difference in blanks when fishing. Yeah, when the walleyes are on the bite, I could catch 'em on a pool cue wrapped with guides on it. But 95% of the time, walleyes are really finicky and it takes a decently-sensitive blank AND a good hand to catch them consistently. Some people fish a lot and still can't do well in the walleyes' off-mood bite times. This combination is a guide's worst nightmare; a client with 'hands of stone' and finicky walleyes. I do remember that from guiding many years ago...

Putter
Williston, ND

Tom,
I know that you know as well as I do that all other things being equal faster action rods are easier to break than slower action rods. The faster the blanks action the shorter the distance over which the load and therefore the stress and strain on the rod is concentrated therefore the more subject it is to being broken. Hot Shot rods are very, very fast actions and are very easy to break. They will break with less load on them then will a slower action rod of comparable power.

The CTS blanks may be beautiful blanks but frankly I think that the helical construction is a marketing ploy because it seems to me that the advantages that it offers could be achieved several other ways with less disadvantages and as far as the multi-modulus construction is concerned there is nothing proprietary about that. There are a number of blank manufacturers using several different modulus graphite in their blank construction.

Wow! That's some really good information. I understood it too. Mr. Kirkman, I might try a lighter than normal GUSA to try to stay a little under to compensate for them being a little stiffer. My problem is really similar to the one you describe also. If I am catching reds using 1/16 spoons, I really need a light rod and don't possess the skills to "extend" a rod. I've fished with these and I get much greater distance and control. As far as breakage goes, I guess that may be the cost of doing business until as Emory says they achieve this in other ways with less disadvantages. But I still haven't broke my Gloomis GWR9000 (although this was about price) and my Seeker does well with a couple of "disadvantages" comparing the two, and I haven't tried the CTS, GUSA, or St. Croix (I can put my hands on one of those tommorrow). I know if I add $100 to these blanks I open up alot more choices. I guess my main question is, outside of blank weight, and I can live with a little less sensitivity, do you really have to.

Tom you said "I'm assuming that it's made with similar lay-up to the Graphite USA models. I may be mistaken. I have found the GUSA blanks to be a bit heavier for the same stiffness as say, those from Loomis or Shikari and this is to be expected for the exact reason that Emory mentions in his earlier post about blank construction. I've also found them (GUSA) to be a bit more durable in some situations. "

Yes...it's similiar but not the same. GUSA process does make the blank heavier, and Stephen and I have had long talks about that very thing. The GUSA Dual Helix process is also overkill for what they are trying to achieve in durability, and Stephen should know as he had much interaction over the course of several years with Dick Kantners partners at CDI in New Zealand. The CTS process of a helical wind is similiar but not the same as the GUSA, and does indeed eliminate any excess weight from the shaft itself, which may be as a result of the helical wind, while maintaining the added benefit of increased durablilty.


ANdy

Robert,

Actually, they're not stiffer, but rather heavier for the same stiffness (GUSA). We're not talking about a lot of weight, but I can tell the difference in my hand and the CCS figures easily spot the difference. But I can't take anything way from the GUSA models - they're fantastic blanks!

You can find the information to allow you to competently extend blanks in a RodMaker back issue (V6 #3) and with it you open up a new world in terms of achieving action and powers that you can't get in unmodified factory rod blanks. I rarely build any rods these days that aren't extended.

....................


Emory,

I would agree that fast action blanks are easier to break if high sticked, but if used properly, the tip won't be in the equation when the blank is heavily loaded so they wouldn't be any more prone to breakage than any other blank in that regard. Granted, not every fishermen knows how to properly apply pressure with his rod, but I would hope that most of the builders on this site do. Wishful thinking? Perhaps, but they should know how to use such rods and hopefully will educate their customers on how to use theirs.

...................

Robert,
I agree with Tom and I also extend many blanks. Being able to extend or shorten a blank essentially gives the custom rod builder a wider range of blanks to choose from and allows him to better tailor rods to unique applications. However, you should keep in mind that extending a blank does result in it becoming a faster action blank just as shortening a blank from the butt will result in it becoming a slower action blank. If you decide to modify your blank I would sure recommend that you set up a board that allows you to measure the CCS variables of power and action angle. This will allow you to quantify the results.

Andy,
Neither CTS nor anyone else can spiral the fibers up a blank, as opposed to running them straight up the blank, without it resulting in higher weight for a given stiffness unless they have rewritten the laws of physics that I am familiar with.

Tom,
I think that we agree.

From De Bayou! This thread has caused me some pain and I am presently considering what action to take. I could not sleep and went to my shop last night to fondle some of the 50 popping rods I have on the shelf and try to figure out what course of action to take for future acquisitions.

1. I unnerstan strate - when you look down the thing it has only one curve - I hope!

2. I unnerstan good finish - you ain't ashamed to show it to a customer in the sunlight!

3. I unnerstan uniformity - all approximately same length and wiggle the same way!

4. Now this thing called "crispness" is really causing me a world of hurt -

I bit one of the new Lamiglas 843s about in the middle to check it out and broke two teeth!

Have a nice day!

Gon

There's no doubt that such construction will require more material to achieve the same stiffness as you'd get with similar fibers in an all linear lay-up, but I can see where using opposing flags at such angles would indeed result in a blank that was more durable and less likely to "blow-out" and/or collapse from extreme loading. Granted, the scrim should play that role but if you can get the main fibers themselves to do it and perhaps rid yourself of the necessity for scrim, well... it would take some thought and "bean counting" but you might very well obtain one objective without penalizing yourself too much on the other end. I can't envision being able to come out ahead on this type construction, but I may be overlooking something.

CTS will be in Charlotte this year for the big show. I'm sure Stephen will be happy to discuss his blank making philosophy with anyone interested. Plus, he'll have blanks on hand for people to try - the proof is in the pudding.

................

I guess I gotta break down and learn some more so I "unnerstan" this stuff. Having spent quite a bit of time in cajun country, I got a kick out of that. Anyway, I'm going to do some searches on CCS, and set up a board as Emory suggests, if I'm able. Thanks again everyone.