When a person lobs up something like this, you have to expect others to smash it back at you! I just have to get in.

Eugene, I can prove that all rods with an ERN of 5 are less powerful than rods with an ERN of 6. Now please tell me, is a rod just labeled as a 5 weight always less powerful than a rod labeled as 6 weight rod?

How long is a rod of medium length?

How fast is a fast action rod?

Without using numbers, how much does a Sage 5-weight rod weigh?

So on and so on. No offense but your argument makes no sense. The attributes you mention have no meaning until you can compare them and you can't do that until you can tell me how fast is fast, or how long is long, or how heavy is heavy. Can you do that? I don't think you can do it without a set of relative numbers. As Dr. Hanneman quoted in his original article from Lord Kelvin, "If you cannot measure it, if you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meager and unsatisfactory kind."

I find it interesting and will be of great value. I wont be buying blanks without the CCS information listed.
Thanks for sharing Dr Bill.

One thing does strike me. When I compared to a different type of blank I was told those ratings were more relative. Perhaps those that make fly rods have done themself's a dis-service?

What is the point is saying "my" 2-4 ounce (rated) surf casting blank will outcast your's if the angler puts a six ounce sinker on? To me an X weight fly rod should cast X weight line within the ranges that the "average" angler can cast. Most guys casting WF7F'S and under aren't casting into the backing. Might be better to say pick this 5 weight for casting between 40 and 70 feet....pick this one for 60-90 feet....and this one for 80-120 feet. Otherwise they are basically calling a 6 or 7 or 8 weight a 5 weight.

Russ in Hollywood, FL.

Russ,

Now you're on to something. Read this particular brief article for a better explanation:

[www.common-cents.info]

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

Russ,

How far a rod can cast is a function of its power (ERN), length, and frequency, not to mention how much effort the angler puts into the cast or the wind resistance of one's lure.

Any competent fly caster can cast the full length (e.g., 90 feet) of any fly line, so, as you say, calling a rod a 5, 6, 7, or 8 is actually meaningless. That is why the CCS does not use that term.

The astute angler wants to know how to match the strength of his rod, the weight of his line, the distance he wishes to cast, and the size of the fish he is targeting. The CCS can help tell him how any combination of rod, line, and distance he might choose will feel.

Perhaps

If more builders when asking about blanks ask -- Are There Numbers On It
This way the more that ask maybe suppliers or blank makers will measure more of them ???
And - At How Many Feet Past The Tip The standard should be 30 feet But who knows

Or should I say Demand Numbers

Bill - willierods.com



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/31/2012 09:27AM by bill boettcher.

I'm going to give you the perspective on CCS from a complete nub. I built a five weight rod last fall, it would not cast like I wanted, so I researched the CCS stuff and tested it. It was a 5wt but barely, I then built a 6wt from a Co. that supplies the CCS and borrowed a big name 6wt and a 6wt line. Did a whole lot of testing found out the CCS on the rod I bought was accurate found out the borrowed rod was accurate. Now to casting, I really like the fast action rod I built, lots of power, the big name not as much jam but very smooth to cast, both these rods cast the 6 and 5 wt, but the five weight I need a lot of line out to feel the rods work. I bought a 4wt line and guess what, that under power 5wt now feels like a champ, very smooth delivery. So long story short I've learned a lot about rods in a very short time and having the CCS available made it all make sense in a short amount of time. I recently ordered another blank a 4wt from a Co. that does CCS and feel confident that it will fit where I expect it to. If I ordered from a non CCS manufacturer I would have all sorts of doubts as to where I would end up at. Denis

Well,

Personally my biggest problem with blank selection today is the fact that there is no standard to the system. One action or power is different to another in the industry. Without actually having the blank present, it's virtually impossible to to tell what you have until you have purchased the blank. If you have built it before then of course you already know what you have. After reading up on the CCS system I can not understand why a standard has not been placed into the industry? I would assume its just an argument on who's measurement system would be used and get the credit. To me its like measuring your foot wear! We have a standard for it and we use it, there needs to be a consensus with the industry of blank makers to follow and make the selection process much easier for the customer to make a selection.

Common Sense Says; If I know what I want ...and you have what I want .....I will BUY IT! Which part of the equation would you want to confuse the customer on ? For me I would love to just get on the phone with said blank supplier and give the numbers and get the blank I need for the customer! Unfortunately I have to spend my time on the phone or actually go to that supplier and look at those blanks in person. If there was a standard in place those bins with all those blanks sitting around doing nothing would actually get sold because we the builder would know what you really have! Thats just my opinion here on what this thread is about and what I think needs to be done here. I would hope that our sponsors are listening and would consider pushing a standard instead of looking for the glory of "Who's" standard. I think as a whole the industry would benefit. Then we could spend time on debating who makes the best blank! LOL because we have a standard to select one with! Thats all I have time for folks good day and feel good about what you build today!

Rick H.

rwheil@msn.com

Website
[www.facebook.com]
[home.comcast.net]

There is no across the board standard for action, power or speed, other than the CCS. Everything else is either unique to each respective manufacturer, or a host of subjective terms that really don't mean much of anything.

..........

There is a standard but those that make blanks have decided to violate it in a game of one-upmanship....all in the name of increased casting distance bragging rights.

Now I can see the need to go beyond the rating for an 8 weight and up blank....especially a saltwater series. Often those blanks are being asked to cast longer distances in tougher conditions....maybe with shooting heads and such. I'm having a very hard time buying that most who buy a 5 weight are looking to cast 90 plus feet on average.

I'm in the same boat as Denis. In my case the blanks were closeouts/older stock and may even have been prototypes. Still I was a little surprised to have a 6 weight CCS at 8.64. It isn't just about casting distance. It is also about power, relative to what I thought I was buying, and the fish it was bought to catch. I'm just glad I learned all of this before I had spent the big bucks. I wouldn't be any happier with a 6 weight that tests as a 8 weight than a 15-30 spin blank that is best suited to fishing 40# class.

And yes, I get the concept that X weight blank will cast any weight line a certain distance and a rating really means nothing. I just think it should and that one has a right to expect to get what they think they are buying.

Russ in Hollywood, FL.

Just remember - it doesn't "test" as an "8-weight." There is no such thing as an "8-weight." What you have, is a rod that will be perfect for casting a 6-weight line at very long distances.

But as you point out, the important thing is to be able to acquire some idea of how much power it possesses. The CCS does that for you.

..........

Are there really any differences?

Fly rods are rated to throw line - casting/spinning rods are rated to throw a lure weight attached to the line

I am wrestling with the business side of the CCS issue.

A production company builds rods

Many are proud of their output -

Market establishes the level of perfformance and the price point of each based upon performance - some are actually better than others.

Success of the company is based upon the rods meeting customer need.

Why on earth would the rod company that has the ability to claim the dominant market share at the high end expose all his "secrets"?

Is it possible to build a blank with equivalent CCS numerical data using different materials? (would all rods with identical numbers be the same)

If you walk in a store and find two finished rods blanks one priced at $379.00 and the other at $69.95 with the same CCS numbers what would you do?

How would a "durability" anacronym apply?

The business side of this issue could be quite important.

Bil,

Fly rods throw weight. Casting and spinning rods throw weight. What form the weight takes is of no consequence to the rod. It doesn't possess a brain.

Yes, you can build a rod with identical action and power from different materials. Action and power are independent of material used.

It is not necessarily possible, however, to achieve the above and have the rod exhibit the same physical weight or speed (response).

The CCS doesn't measure durability. Durability is a result of the material and specific structure used.

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

As usual Bill asks some thought provoking questions. A new post might be a good idea. If two were indeed identical in action, power, speed, and weight at vastly different price points I suppose that could cause a problem for a company that has fought hard to establish itself as a leader in cutting edge design.

Historically it seems we have had three different camps somewhat decided by location, The west coast, east coast, and middle of the country. lot of the west was either tuna or salmon/steelhead. East coast often seemed to dominate surf casting, bottom fishing, and top water trolling for dolphin and sails.

Many of the leading designers have been lured away over the years and/or started their own company. So you have a lot of stuff from different names that is alike. Perhaps more true with the west coast offshore stuff.

For many years we just wanted lighter, stiffer, and faster. Now with braid we are starting to look more at blending to keep fish on the hook. I think the customer sees the word "blend" and often thinks it is an inferior good, or at least should cost less than an all high modulus blank.

To me Loomis has always been a little different with a smaller diameter, thicker walled approach. I don't think anyone has copied his work to the degree that other blanks have been cloned.

Russ in Hollywood, FL.

Well,

I am just a Custom Rod Builder who takes allot of time to listen to his own customers and even listen to my suppliers issues and needs. Bill S. brought up some good points from a business stand point. In my experience of some of his questions I would like to comment on some of those. Perhaps give a perspective of how one might be looking at this from out side his box and others. First is the industries secretes, I have run across this many times at the Expo each year in Oregon. If you know the industry then you know who attends them so I wont mention names. The point here is just what Tom K has pointed out, CCS is a just a way to measure. Now I have walked from vendor to vendor and grabbed a rod with the similar so called medium action, length the same species same. Action, power, speed however were a whole different ball game. This I feel is were the secretes come into play, on how these blanks were designed and made. I do not feel that CCS will have an effect on what blank or rod I am going to purchase. I see many people walk and compare from vendor to vendor and after they have found the action,speed, and in hopes that the power rating will hold up to the species there after! They then are looking at durability and construction and last but not least price and warranty! My point, each vendors secretes are always in tact and safe because each blank design and rod build is different. Searching from vendor to vendor for those simple numbers would be so much easier not only for the customer but even for the vendor as well. He can then go straight to what the customer is wanting on the rack and say look at this! What I hear allot; Its to flexible, its not stiff enough, its heavy, would this land a Salmon, the but is to fat, seems flimsy. I am sure we have all heard most of them. Would be nice to get rid of those words and make them numbers to me.

As far as the comparison of the $379.00 vs $69.95 its been discussed here before in other topics and what it comes down to is the customer and what he wants. If he wants the best of what the industry has to offer in a blank or a rod then he is willing to pay the price for what that product claims to have accomplished with said blank or rod. May it be in construction, durability, power, action, speed, weight its all in what the designer has claimed in the performance and the price they put on it. I for one would not detour a customer to a lower end blank with equivalent numbers if he is wanting the best in those aspects.

I think if anything a standard in measuring would be an overall constructive move in this industry by far! I also think that when it dose happen its going to make building and selling rods on both ends of the industry even more productive. Jut my thots for the day folks have a great day!

Rick H.

rwheil@msn.com

Website
[www.facebook.com]
[home.comcast.net]

Well said, Rick. I think the high end purchaser will always want the brand with the name recognition. Along with the numbers is weight of the blank which doesn't come cheap. The high end will benefit as well.