SPONSORS
![]()
2019 EXPO |
Re: Point Blank vs NFC X-ray
Posted by:
David Miller
(---.triad.res.rr.com)
Date: February 10, 2019 10:40PM Weird Norm,
Mine has is but it looks adhered but my blank sure wasn’t trimmed off nice and straight. Looks like your blank wasn’t a clean cut too. Another thing is I tried to slip on a 4.5 tube tip top and it wouldn’t go at all even when rodhouse.fr has the specs for the 732 as 4.2 with a verified 4.5 tip top. Looks like mine is 5.0. Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/10/2019 10:53PM by David Miller. Re: Point Blank vs NFC X-ray
Posted by:
Norman Miller
(---.lightspeed.jcsnms.sbcglobal.net)
Date: February 10, 2019 11:23PM I have had several NFC HM blanks where tip size was at least 1 size lager than the listed specs. Another quality control problem?
Norm Re: Point Blank vs NFC X-ray
Posted by:
David Miller
(---.triad.res.rr.com)
Date: February 11, 2019 06:32AM With my blank 1/2 inch short makes me wonder if it was trimmed too much on both ends because the measurements are both off. With a low modulus carbon or fiberglass blank it wouldn’t be much issue but being high modulus I think it would change the power, action and casting weight considerably.
Most blanks I have built the tip sizing has been spot on and butt measurements very close. Re: Point Blank vs NFC X-ray
Posted by:
David Baylor
(---.neo.res.rr.com)
Date: February 11, 2019 08:41AM To be honest, I've never measured any of the blanks I've built on to check them for how accurately they match their published dimensions. The only published dimension I've really been concerned with, is that of the tip of the blank. With the exception of the X ray blanks, I've ordered a tip top based on the published size, and it has either fit perfectly, or I've needed to sand the tip just a bit. The blanks that I've had to sand just a bit were painted blanks, and I attributed the need for slight sanding, to the paint on the blank.
When I ordered components for my first X ray build, I ordered 2 tip tops. I did this for a couple of reasons. Reason one, the published tip dimension for the MB736 X ray blank is 1.7 (I assumed mm) converting that to 64ths gives a dimension of 4.3. They don't sell 4.3 tube tip tops. And secondly, I wasn't sure if I would like the unsanded finish of the blank, so I also ordered a 4.0 tube tip top with the thought that I would need it if I decided to sand the blank. I ended up sanding the blank, but I still needed to use the 4.5 tube tip top. So that is definitely one discrepancy I found with the numbers published on the North Fork web site. The second discrepancy with the dimensions published on NFC's website are that of the diameter of the butt of the blank. As I mentioned earlier in this thread, I attributed that (and I think rightly so) discrepancy to a misprint on the web site. And that is certainly not the only misprint I have found on a manufacturers or a suppliers web site. A QC issue? In the strictest sense of the term, yes, published data should be checked for accuracy, but I don't see it as a quality issue with the blank itself. A third discrepancy with the actual blank dimensions, and those published on the NFC web site, are the length of the blank. After reading David's post concerning the length of the blank, I measured the blanks I have. They are all 86 1/2" long. 1/2" short of their published length. I don't have the same concerns that David expressed above, but .... 1/2" in length is a little different than a few 1/1000 ths in other places. I don't know if that's considered nit picking, but if I went to a lumber yard and bought an 8' 2x4, I'd expect it to be at least 8' long. As far as the waviness in blank surface that others have mentioned goes, without knowing the severity of the waviness, I can only say that I personally attribute it to the unsanded nature of the blank. I've never visited a blank manufacturers facility. I've never seen the process a blank goes through once the tape or cellophane, or whatever is taken off the blank. I have two completed builds on NFC blanks from their IM series. Those blanks are absolutely gorgeous, I'd go so far as to say they are flawless. I'm not saying there isn't some kind of QC issue going on at North Fork, with the X ray blanks ... I'm just wondering if there would be the same issues if the X ray blanks went through the same process as any of the NFC blanks that get sanded? The reason I question that is, as I have mentioned before, I lightly sanded the entire blank (sans about 1/2" of the butt) of the 2 intact X ray blanks that I have. They both have a little waviness at various places on the blank. And when I say "a little", I mean that I am almost certain that if I sanded them a little bit more, the waviness would disappear. Other than that slight waviness, the blanks are beautiful. I want to make it clear that I am not doubting nor am I trying to diminish what others are saying. From the pictures posted here, there are clearly issues that are slipping through NFC's quality control. I'm merely saying that some of these issues may not be present if the blanks went through the same processes a normally finished blank, goes through. I will definitely concede and agree with the thought that the X ray blanks, being the top tier blank from the company associated with one of, if not the most legendary name in the industry, should not be having some of the issues they are having. The issues people have had with shipping times, customer service, and the QC issues being addressed here are more than disheartening, and I have no doubts that it is costing them business. My guess is that it's too many irons in the fire. Whatever it is, I hope they can get a handle on it, because I absolutely love all of the NFC blanks I've built on, and am in the process of building on. Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/11/2019 08:46AM by David Baylor. Re: Point Blank vs NFC X-ray
Posted by:
ben belote
(---.zoominternet.net)
Date: February 11, 2019 11:24AM hi Norm..when you see a tip size off by that much, what does it tell you about their machinery..maybe it,s old tech.. Re: Point Blank vs NFC X-ray
Posted by:
Norman Miller
(---.lightspeed.jcsnms.sbcglobal.net)
Date: February 11, 2019 12:40PM Ben, I have no idea what it means about their machinery. Other blanks of the same model are on spec, could be the way they trim the blank, but it’s certainly is quality control issue. Just like the waviness, and mesh in the butt, they are all quality control issues. These flaws are mostly cosmetic, and probably won’t affect performance, but they should be labeled as seconds, and not sold as first quality. That’s the reason I wondered if seconds are thrown into the mix for the sale blanks. So it becomes a craps shoot on the blank you get.
Norm Re: Point Blank vs NFC X-ray
Posted by:
David Miller
(---.sub-174-194-20.myvzw.com)
Date: February 14, 2019 02:17PM I am communicating with Alex of NFC about my X Ray blank issue. Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 02/14/2019 05:18PM by David Miller. Re: Point Blank vs NFC X-ray
Posted by:
David Miller
(---.triad.res.rr.com)
Date: February 16, 2019 12:41PM I received a partial refund through PayPal , thought it was better going that route than paying for return shipping to get another blank or full refund.I am going to put a light coat of Permagloss to protect the carbon fibers at the area that has the scrapes. Luckily this for a personal build and I am not like many others that builds for customers that requires a 1st quality blank.
I hope North Fork Composites quality control issues gets handled.There are not many USA made rod blank manufacturers which I prefer to buy from when possible. Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/17/2019 08:35PM by David Miller. Re: Point Blank vs NFC X-ray
Posted by:
David Miller
(---.triad.res.rr.com)
Date: February 17, 2019 10:47PM Did a CCS measurement of my SJ 732 blank.
IP 465 grams AA around 72 Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
|