Please forgive my ignorance, but I recently have access to bunches of unknown conventional fiberglass blanks from the 70's and early 80's. These will make awesome crankbait blanks, but i need to figure out just what I can throw on them. I know that I can use the CCS to measure some of the characteristics of these rods, but I'm trying to figure out how I can "best guess" on lure weight ratings and line ratings. If there is a previous thread, please point me in the right direction. I'm not really sure how to even search for it. Thanks in advance.

Nothing on line ratings --- those are just subjective suggestions. The blank will never know what pound test line you've got on it.

Jared,
I have never worried about line or lure rating for a blank.

The only thing that I care about is the power of the blank and the action of the blank.

If the action and the power of the blank is correct for the way that I want to fish, the line and lure rating will be just fine.

i.e. I don't try to toss 3 oz weights and 40 lb line using an ultra light rod, because it just won't work.
The reverse is just as true as well.

Be safe

I thought I saw a formula somewhere that correlated an approximate lure weight rating with a CCS intrinsic power measurement. I'll see if I can't figure out where I saw it. If someone else remembers please chime in.

-The Batson TEAM
BatsonEnterprises.com

[www.rodbuilding.org]

Rig them up side by side with rods/blanks known to be good cranking blanks. Hang equal weights from the tip. Then you can compare action and power and get an idea of what to use them for.

Joe

Take it outside and cast different weight lures or weights from it and see how it performs.

Thank you gentlemen.
James and Roger, I was kinda thinking that, thanks for the reassurance.

Geoff, if it could be located, I'm sure it'll help in the long run with all of these we will be sorting through.

Joe, that's a fantastic idea, but everytime I finish a crankbait rod for myself, I have a friend that offers to take it off my hands...
I do have some labeled blanks as well. I grabbed an old Lamiglas worm rod blank (WR 79 1F), a couple old fenwick glass blanks (A SP-632 and a SP681) and an old Herter's short, light power blank. If you guys know anyone into restoring old stuff or bamboo guys, I've got lots of center ferrules and butt ferrules in brass, nickel and aluminum.

Randy, that's another possibility, but there really is a BUNCH of blanks and I was trying to think of a way to kind of separate and categorize them without actually building all of them.

The problem you have with lure weight ratings is exactly the same as you'd have with fly line weight ratings in that the caster adds input/energy so no formula is going to be able to give you a perfect lure weight range for every angler. Of course, this is why the manufacturers list weight ranges and why some anglers find them on the money and others find them a bit too low or a bit too high. Some cast "harder" than others. The best you'll be able to do is get somewhere in the ballpark.

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

Well I was able to locate the formula I was thinking of. I have pasted a link to the rodbuilding.org string I originally saw it in. However, as you will also see from the string, it is suggested that the URRS (universal rod rating system, an additional component of the CCS) is a better method of determining a lure weight range than the simple formula. I would post a link to that also, but it seems the URRS info is only located in a past Rodmaker Magazine article. I could not find it on the CCS info website.
Tom, is there a quicker way to access the complete URRS info than requesting a back issue, or was that the only place this CCS component was ever published?

-The Batson TEAM
BatsonEnterprises.com

Thanks, Tom. That absolutely makes sense. I was kinda hoping there might be a way to figure at least what "midfield" in the ballpark might be, but I guess that flexing it under different loads with a known blank might be the only way to get me in the neighborhood.

Geoff, thanks for locating that thread, but the link didn't show on your post. That sounds like what I might be looking for. Anyone have any experience with the URRS that could pipe in?

Geoff Staples Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well I was able to locate the formula I was
> thinking of. I have pasted a link to the
> rodbuilding.org string I originally saw it in.
> However, as you will also see from the string, it
> is suggested that the URRS (universal rod rating
> system, an additional component of the CCS) is a
> better method of determining a lure weight range
> than the simple formula. I would post a link to
> that also, but it seems the URRS info is only
> located in a past Rodmaker Magazine article. I
> could not find it on the CCS info website.
> Tom, is there a quicker way to access the complete
> URRS info than requesting a back issue, or was
> that the only place this CCS component was ever
> published?


Geoff,

The CCS and related component articles were only published in RodMaker. I did put up some of those articles on the Common Cents Information Website, but the URRS is not there.

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

Tom, was able to locate a conversion chart according to Hanneman's CCS info. I know that it's not an exact science, but definitely more exact than others I have seen. Does this sound somewhat close?
Upper end weight range (1.5 x number of cents) - 20= weight in grains
lower end weight range (0.8 x number of cents) - 20= weight in grains
then convert grains to ounces 1 grain= 0.002286oz

Sorry Jared,
I have listed the link below, for sure this time. The formula is about 15 posts down (on the first page of posts). As you will notice, folks love to argue about rod/blank measurements. This topic is one of the most interesting on the rod board to follow. I would suggest trying to gain knowledge from only the posts with real substance, valid concerns, and constructive questions regarding the CCS, and just simply appreciate the entertainment value of the ones trying to prove that the world is flat. They're not hard to differentiate between.
The whole process of taking CCS measurements and applying them to blank selection or other things like lure weight ratings is nowhere near as difficult as some of the dialogue would imply.

[rodbuilding.org]

-The Batson TEAM
BatsonEnterprises.com

Thanks again Geoff. I will take the time to look it over, I think that the CCS is one of the most objective ways to look at qualities of a rod without all the manufacturer hype (no offense meant). That is one reason why I started the thread to see if there was a way to quantify the way these rods bend, how much weight it takes to bend them, etc. Thanks for the link. Now to pop a little popcorn and sit down for good read...

Jared,

Those are my equations and factors which I added to the CCS when we published the first article on the system. I have found them to work fairly well in many cases, but keep in mind they were something I knocked out in an afternoon and I haven't gone back and tried them on a wide variety of rods. Unfortunately, rod power alone isn't an accurate way to determine casting lure weight range because a rod's action/taper plays a huge role in the best casting weight range. Dr. Hanneman addressed this with his Tip Power (TP) measurement in the URRS at a later date.

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

Thank you Tom, I'll give it a whirl and see if I can find info on the "Tip power" measurements and try to incorporate it into measuring these blanks. Appreciate the help! The blanks that I'm most interested in so far are a spiral wrapped glass that is hollow and a deep reddish brown color, eyeballing them they seem to be a fast moderate or on the bottom end of moderate-fast. Guessing a medium power tip by the way they flex under my hand loading them, but have quite a bit of power in the butt. They're about 79.5" long with a 5.5 or 6 top and a .59 butt. They're relatively light weight for glass (can't weigh them right now batteries are toast on my scale).

There are plenty of ways to determine the power and action of a rod, but none of them can account for personal taste, or prejudice.

Phil Ewanicki Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> There are plenty of ways to determine the power
> and action of a rod, but none of them can account
> for personal taste, or prejudice.


Well said and duly noted, Phil.