I took the time to do some measuring. Some results were expected, others were an eye opener. My methods were to place every blank in the same position, level, measure butt height, tape on tip top and pointer, load to 1/3, measure AA, remove weight to include tip, pointer, and tape, weigh in grams, use North Fork chart to find ERN. I was very methodical and precise in all of my measurements and any surprises got checked a second or third time from scratch. Rig refers to lure or bait in ounces, calculated by the measured ERN, then rounded to the nearest common fraction. Line is the manufacturer's rating. Weight is blank weight in ounces, as weighed by me. WPI is a term I made up for my own use. It stands for Weight to Power index, and is nothing more than the amount of ERN per ounce of blank weight.

Blank Length AA ERN Rig Line Weight WPI

St Croix

3S60LF 6 68 8.1 5/64-3/16 4-8 1.0 8.1


Loomis

SJ720IMX 6 65 13.5 3/16-3/8 4-8 1.2 11.25


Calstar

BT120 5.5 64 11.8 1/8-5/16 2-6 2.0 5.90

BT130 6.5 75 12.8 1/6-3/8 4-12 2.6 4.92

BT607 7 77 22.9 .455-.893 8-15 7.4 3.09

BT195 6 78 34.6 .8-1.55 8-20 5.8 5.96

BTG196 7 79 40 1.03-1.97 10-25 6.5 6.15

BTG270 7 80 50 1.27-2.43 12-30 6.9 7.24

BT270 7 85 57 1.47-2.80 12-30 10.7 5.32


Lamiglass

ISP702 7 74 8.5 5/64-1/5 6-10 1.5 5.66

ISP703 7 73 12.6 1/6-3/8 6-12 1.6 7.87

ISP704 7 70 15.6 1/4-1/2 8-15 2.1 7.42

ISP705 7 62 15.7 1/4-1/2 10-20 2.2 7.13


Batson

SPG781 6.5 67 7.5 1/20-1/6 4-8 1.9 3.94

SPG782 6.5 66 7.8 1/16-1/6 6-12 2.1 3.71

SPG783 6.5 65 12.8 1/6-3/8 8-15 2.8 4.57

SPG784 6.5 60 14.5 1/5-1/2 10-17 3.1 4.67


A few general observations. As most of us know, a good deal of the tips did not match the advertised size. There's room for improvement here. A good number of blanks weighed more than advertised, generally .2-.3 ounces. My measurements show very clearly the vast differences between a salt and freshwater blank with the same line rating. On average, the salt blank has about twice the ERN of the freshwater blank rated for the same line, begging the question of what pound test should actually be used. The formula for calculating rig weight in the CCS came out very close to advertised except in those cases where the ERN was out of the park, and on the upper limit for the salt blanks, demonstrating that it is accurate. I believe the lower ratings on the salt blanks are accurate, but I know the uppers should be higher. In fairness, it wasn't designed for measuring such heavy rods.

There are some diamonds in the rough here. As expected, the SJ720, BT120, and BT195 were stellar. They all share the same heavy and consistent taper all the way from tip to butt. The SJ720 just knocks it out of the ball park, with an ERN higher than three 12 pound blanks and one 15 pound blank. This does beg the question, though, if it's really a 4-8 pound rod or if it will cast very light lures. Since I've not built one yet, I'm curious how well it loads at 1/16 oz. Interesting also is the fact that it's "extra fast" action is actually only moderately fast in AA. It is very stiff, though, so it would be quick in terms of getting the hook set. The BT120 is in no way a 2-6 pound rod either, with a higher ERN than one 8, one 10, and one 12 pound blank. The BT195 is just plain a horse and is very maneuverable, in my opinion about the perfect big catfish rod in addition to it's salt capabilities. The tip is extremely sensitive, even for a freshwater rod.

The St. Croix was no slouch, coming in second in WPI and being the most accurately advertised blank. The only aspect that wasn't dead on is the lower rig range, measuring out to just barely over 1/16.

The Calstar salt rods have enormously fast actions. I don't think a faster action could be attained than 85. Interestingly, the composite 270 came in 7 ERN lower than the eglass 270, both with the same ratings. I don't know if this holds true across the whole series, but the eglass won out here both in strength and in a steady, forgiving action. The BT607 had the lowest WPI, but this is a salmon snooking rod and there is a considerable amount of meat added to keep the action flexible and avoid tearing mouths during hard runs.

All of the Lamiglass fared very well in the weight department. WPIs are high. Note that the lower rig range on the ISP702 matches the St. Croix. Here is another option for a light lure rod that is very light and affordable. The ISP704 is a very strong rod for it's weight, only .1 ERN behind the 705.

The Batson SPG784 had the lowest AA of all and would make an excellent crankbait rod for someone who is after the traditional glass action. The pull is very parabolic and smooth across the whole action. The SPG781 had the lowest ERN and almost made it down to 1/32 ounce, but it does flex all the way to the butt under moderate load. If you gotta have those microscopic lures, this one might get them out there.

I hope you find something useful here. If nothing else, it should make some good food for thought. The Calstar lure ranges and blank weights aren't advertised anywhere, so hopefully those listed here can be a resource.

Jason Cosby
Cos Rods

Any and all CCS measurements will be entirely accurate. It is correct by definition. It will measure "heavy" rods just as well as "light" rods, just as a tape measure will measure both long and short boards - they're all part of the same system of relative and objective measurement.

Keep in mind that the manufacturers line ratings you speak of are completely subjective (The CCS does not measure blanks for "line ratings"). Nor do the manufacturers all use the same system for their respective ratings of any sort. You never want to compare quantifiable measurements against "opinions." They're not likely to match.

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

Right Tom. The above is proof. I don't believe that any blank matched exactly what was advertised, demonstrating the value of the CCS and measuring your own. It would be a nice addition to the CCS, though, to take the existing measurements and figure out the actual line range that should be spooled up. That was kind of the purpose of including the line ranges, to show the discrepancies.

Jason Cosby
Cos Rods

That's partly my point, there is no way to measure the "actual line range" because there is no such thing. When you say, "This does beg the question, though, if it's really a 4-8 pound rod" there is no answer because what constitutes a 4-8 pound rod has never been defined.


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

We're on the same sheet of music, just using different verbiage. Fly lines are guestimated at 20-30 pounds break strength in general. Having a 20 pound break strength on a 2 weight puts the rod in jeopardy if the common practice of setting the drag to 1/3 break strength is used. We don't want the break strength of the line to determine drag in this case, we need the break strength of the rod. So, we tie tippets of a given strength to protect the rod from breakage. But, we need to know where the rod is in jeopardy in order to stay under that. Obviously, 1/3 deflection is a safe amount, but far from maximum. Where do we get into dangerous waters? I'm not saying that we should be able to derive an exact number for breakage, since we'd have to actually break the blank to derive that, but it seems plausible to derive a "danger area" for all blanks.

Ideally, we would tell customers that maximum drag on this blank is X and they would stay within the limits, but we all know that what goes on in the real world doesn't match this. And then there's drag malfunction and high sticking. The only somewhat safe bet is to have the line break before the rod. For those who take care of their equipment, drag is set to a max of 1/3 rod break strength AND the line will still pop before the rod.

Since we use the CCS and get the actual versus advertised strength of the rod, the rod's line strength rating is out the window (non-fly rods), not that it was of much use to begin with. My focus is on the high end of the spectrum, not the minimum. As far as the minimum goes, fish the lightest line possible to accomplish the task. If you get snapped off too many times, increase by one size as long as it doesn't exceed the maximum. The maximum, however, is where we as builders need to be very concerned, so that our customers get accurate information as to how much the rod can safely handle (without high sticking). I'm aware of the inaccuracies present in advertised line break strength, as well, but I test that for myself and remove any doubt. Any thoughts on this, Tom? I know you have a lot of breakage tests in recent memory.

Jason Cosby
Cos Rods

Don't blank manufacturers routinely subject blanks to failure in their QC.
The rod line suggestions should be based on this data with a reasonable safety factor.
Perhaps the only thing missing is that safety factor.
As the rod builders we can place the values on max load at what we deem appropriate for that blank and build execution. I don't feel poorly at creating a light build for a light line application or vice versa.
Failure at lower values should be suspect to angler abuse.

In regards to the thread start the WPI should be a reasonable measure of overall rod efficiency in construction materials and application of taper.
Good job and effort.


Eugene Moore

Fly rods don't come with tippet strength ratings and the CCS doesn't provide such a thing either. The line weight given there, as I'm sure you already know, is not about breaking strength, but about actual weight for casting.

The ERN is more about power than strength - they're not exactly the same thing. About the only way you can determine an upper line rating in terms of not overlining the blank, would be to deadlift several until failure, then select a line for that model that consistently breaks below the deadlift limit of the rod blank. But even then you're talking about a steady pull, not a sudden shock or sudden application of force.

I just don't know that you can derive this sort of information by any means other than by being willing to break a few blanks. Most of the manufacturers do and some once claimed that the upper line rating was indeed a bit less than the deadlift limit of their rod blanks. But even then, keep in mind what "pound test" actually means - the line will break at or above the rating listing. So a line that can deadlift 20 lbs can still be accurately sold as 10 lb test. You'd have to specify "class" lines (breaks at or below the rating listing) for this type of thing to really safeguard the blank.

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

Thanks Tom and Gene. I'm tracking on the pound test concern. I take the time to measure the actual break strength of the line and make sure my customers are armed with that information (I have a large list of tested line). I was hoping for something like 2/3 deflect as a maximum safe range, but I suppose that varies too much to be called safe. I only bring it up because of some of the unexpected power marks above. For the blanks that are so far out of what the manufacturer puts forth for power, I question whether the break strength is also far higher than the upper line limit. I suppose for the moment we've only got the advertised upper limit to go on. I'll probably start breaking some blanks that I consider to be permanent fixtures, unless the manufacturers start giving us the actual break points. I think I'll try asking.

I found a tidbit here:

[www.fieldandstream.com]

Jason Cosby
Cos Rods