SPONSORS
2024 ICRBE EXPO |
CCS Loomis SJ783 IMX
Posted by:
Wade White
(---.dsl.iowatelecom.net)
Date: February 26, 2010 02:46PM
My best friend is looking for a new rod and loves his Loomis SJ783 IMX blank. Does anyone have CCS data for this blank or built rod? Also, are there any other blanks that have a comparable CCS results? Feel free to email me if you do not wish to post here.
I did look on the CCS Data Site, but didn't find the blank listed. Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 02/26/2010 02:49PM by Wade White. Re: CCS Loomis SJ783 IMX
Posted by:
Todd R. Vivian
(---.se.biz.rr.com)
Date: February 26, 2010 03:38PM
Wade, if your friend loves his SJ783-IMX he will love the SJ783-MHX also.
[www.mudhole.com] Regards, Todd Regards, Todd Vivian Mud Hole Custom Tackle todd@mudhole.com Re: CCS Loomis SJ783 IMX
Posted by:
Scott Sheets
(---.hsd1.il.comcast.net)
Date: February 26, 2010 04:34PM
3S66MHF should put you darn close. Scott Sheets www.smsrods.com Re: CCS Loomis SJ783 IMX
Posted by:
Bob Balcombe
(---.rb.gh.centurytel.net)
Date: February 26, 2010 05:04PM
Each individual blank has its own CCS guide space rating. No 2 rods are the same do to how the rod blank was constructed and by whom, there is no quality control at this point. This quality control is imposable to control. You will have to do your own CCS testing. You can start out with general general spacing and go from there. I would look into where to place the stripper guide first. Do a search on that. If you can not find it send me a email Good Wraps Bob Re: CCS Loomis SJ783 IMX
Posted by:
Tom Kirkman
(Moderator)
Date: February 26, 2010 06:21PM
That's interesting Bob, I had no idea the CCS has its own "guide space ratings." It will probably come as a surprise to Dr. Hanneman as well.
Trying to read between the lines, I think you're trying to say that the CCS numbers won't be the same even for blanks of the same model. That's not really true - they should be reasonably close just as the other specs on the same model should be close. They may not be exact, but unless the quality control was way, way off, they've be very similar. ................ Re: CCS Loomis SJ783 IMX
Posted by:
Spencer Phipps
(---.war.clearwire-wmx.net)
Date: February 26, 2010 06:57PM
Seems it would be easy to get that info by CCing the blank/rod he has. It's very easy to do and takes very little on your or his part to complete the test. Re: CCS Loomis SJ783 IMX
Posted by:
Bob Balcombe
(---.rb.gh.centurytel.net)
Date: February 26, 2010 07:28PM
Tom I agree with that, But you know as well as I do No matter what system you use there is a correction and this is just a starting point. That is like stating for every foot of rod you need to have a guide plus one. Example 8ft rod needs 8 guides plus one more that equals 9 guides. Then you stress test it and adjust and cast an readjust. This also changes on the type of guides you use. Am I right or wrong. In that case is he trying to find a line or lure wt. I must have read his post wrong . Is he trying to find a power/action rating. Are these not also subjective rating Good Wraps Bob Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/26/2010 07:35PM by Bob Balcombe. Re: CCS Loomis SJ783 IMX
Posted by:
Wade White
(---.dsl.iowatelecom.net)
Date: February 26, 2010 08:18PM
First off, THANK YOU to all that have replied.
Let me give a little more background. Right now I'm located about 675 miles (I mapquested it) from the rod in question, otherwise I would have done the CCS calculations myself and then requested opinions for a similar blank. Now that being said, I know that adding guides is going to make the CCS figures different from that of a bare blank. But here is where I'm going to make a slight assumption based on what I know of CCS (which is enough to make me dangerous, but only to myself). I do know that adding guides will give it a slower action and decrease it's ERN (I believe) due to the added weight of the guide and other affects they have on the blank. Soooo, I may not be able to get exactly the same numbers as that of the rod in question, but I should be able to come pretty close. Thus the post for assistance. I hope I didn't open up too big a can of worms.........If I did, let's go FISHING and it'll be all good!!! Re: CCS Loomis SJ783 IMX
Posted by:
Tom Kirkman
(Moderator)
Date: February 26, 2010 08:54PM
No, the action does not change due to the addition of guides. The speed (response and recovery) will change, but not the action. The blank will still initially flex at the same point. The ERN will change by a tiny amount assuming we're not talking about adding very large or very heavy guides.
............. Re: CCS Loomis SJ783 IMX
Posted by:
Wade White
(---.dsl.iowatelecom.net)
Date: February 26, 2010 09:19PM
I knew I should have re-read that article before I said anything. Thanks for the clarrification, because that does make sense. Shortening or lengthening is what will change the action of a rod. (I'm still new at this.) Re: CCS Loomis SJ783 IMX
Posted by:
Bob Balcombe
(---.rb.gh.centurytel.net)
Date: February 26, 2010 09:34PM
Were are you Northern CA, Idaho or any where West of the Great Divide? If so Come to Lamiglas in April. You well meet rod builders from all over I believe there are even going to be a couple from FL. and Texas. There my even be a discussion on CCS Good Wraps Bob Re: CCS Loomis SJ783 IMX
Posted by:
Tom Kirkman
(Moderator)
Date: February 27, 2010 07:58AM
Wade,
You're on the right track now. Pretty good for a beginner I'd say. ............ Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
|