I just measured my Rainshadow 9' 6wt 2-piece rod using the Common Cents system. I got the following results with this rod: ERN 4.45 (thirty-seven cents), and an AA of 58. Now, I just checked the SuperBob site, and I see another builder has entered data on the same blank (my rod is completed using single foot guides), but he received an ERN of 6.62 and an AA of 68. Could there be that much difference between a completed rod and a rod blank?

The blank was actually given to me as a present, and it was purchased as a Hook & Hackle rod blank about two years ago. I built the rod using saltwater components after I heard author and lecturer Ed Mitchell describe his "salty six weight". Anyway, the sticker that came with the blank said Rainshadow IF906-2, so unless they put the wrong sticker on the wrong blank, my supposed 6 weight is coming in as a 4 weight.

I checked, and then double checked my set-up to make sure that my centerline of the blank was level, that my height was 57 7/8" off of the ground, and that my chart with a horizontal line and angle markings was 21 7/8" off of the ground and level. I first put forty cents in the bag, and that dragged the tip past my mark. At that point I checked everything again, added the bag onto the tip of my rod, and the tip dropped below the line again. I took out three cents until the tip was right at the horizontal line. My dry piece of spaghetti then measured in at an angle of about 58 degrees. This was measured with the guides facing up. I then switched the guide orientation, so that they were pointing down, and tried everything again. This time I came in with 35 cents, and an AA of about 56.

Do I really have a 4 weight with saltwater components on it?

Joe - There may be a lot about the CCS that I don't know yet.

But, ... If you load down your rod tip to an Action Angle (AA) of ~ 68 degrees like the other guy, won't you / do you also get an Effective Rod Number (ERN) of ~ 6.62?

Or if you load the weight bag with enough pennies to match an ERN of 6.62, then what is the AA that you measure on your rod and equipment?

If your secondary tests are close to his, then maybe something else in the standardization of technique is amiss, and not the concern that the rod, if classified as a 6-wt, is over-rated.

Good Luck, -Cliff Hall+++, Gainesville, FL-USA

Looks to me like someone mis-bagged a 4 wt. Look at the 9 ft 4 wt specs on the CC data site. It happens.

Joe: looks to me like you've done everything correctly. Seems like a mis-labeled rod ? Maybe you can use this for schoolie stripers or small bone/redfish.....

Tony Mortimer

Hi Joe,

From your description, it appears that you have done every thing correctly. When I use the CCS, I typically mark my chart where the tip is initially and then take one-third of the rod length and mark that position on my chart as well. I then add pennies until the tip reaches my second point. At least for me, I think I make less errors this way.

I'm guessing that Spencer and Tony are right that the blank was marked incorrectly. However, I would also try casting with a six weight and a four weight line and see how the rod behaves. Experiment always dictates.

Mike Blomme

Take Mike's advice and try it both ways. Your Rainshadow must be a RX7 given the AA and may not be labeled correctly. Looking through the site shows most blanks measuring fairly close to the manufactuers label all though there will always be some variance as a result of the manufacturing process.

Stan Grace
Helena, MT
"Our best is none too good"

Guys, thank you for all of your replies. It looks like my blank was mislabeled. It happens. At least now I have a valid excuse to give my wife when I buy another blank and components to build my true "salty six weight".