I built a fly rod that was given to me by a friend who lost all information on it. I assumed it was an 8wt because it was labeled 908. that was the only tag on it. I've had it for a while now and no reel. I wanted to make sure it was what I thought so I attempted to use common cents which until now I never have used. I don't quite understand what I'm looking for. My ERN is 5.20 and AA is 45. I get it is a slow action but not sure what the other numbers are for
Help please lol

A lot of the older bamboo and glass rods will measure this way, there is no recognized specs for rods, it's all in the eyes of the manufacturer as to what to designate a rod as. You in turn can change the specs to anything you think it should be.

If you have an ERN of 5.20, then it will be more powerful than rods with ERN's of less than 5.20 and less powerful than rods with ERN's of more than 5.20.

If the AA is 45, it has a faster action than rods with AA's of less than 45, and slower actioned than rods with AA's of greater than 45.

Works just like a tape measure or bathroom scale. Relative numbers denoting action and power. Thank of it in terms of length measurements. If your rod is 9 feet long, it'll be longer than rods that measure less than 9 feet and shorter than rods that measure more than 9 feet. That's all there is to it.

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

Tom, is there math to show if it is indeed an 8wt

There is no such thing as an "8-weight" rod. Any rod will cast any line at some distance. Lines are rated according to AFTMA standards (mostly) but rods are simply labeled as to what the manufacturer believes they are going to be used for.

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

The most common mistake when doing a CCS analysis is not securely anchoring the very end of the butt of the rod. Make sure the rod butt does not pivot when weight is added to the tip. If it does than the IP will be lower and the AA will change. I discovered that I made this mistake and most of my initial reading where lower than they should have been, based on known IP numbers. Securely anchor your butt section so it does not pivot and remeasure. If you get the same number you have a nice 5 wgt. Good results require good technique.

Norm

Thanks guys. Norman, I did think about that and did a check and re check to verify. Mainly because I wasnt sure. Next question, can I use a reel specified for 7/8 with a 5wt line. I have a friend willing to give me one but I was under the impression I had a rod for 8wt. Smh. This fly stuff is so different to me. Know one to learn from around my home

Sure, if you want to you can add some more backing to fill the spool completely, but not required. The slower action will make it a little easier for you to cast with a nice relaxed casting motion. The slower action is more forgiving of casting technique. A 5 wgt will cast most flies used for trout or panfish, it will not do well with large bulky, and/or heavy flies. You should have fun with it.
Norm

From ccs part 3 "The ERN of this rod is 6.5 (mid-range 6-weight). . ." implying that ERN is a "sort of" rod weight designation. Which means your rod is about a low 5 weight rod. As mentioned, lines are not all compliant with the AFTMA, but one would expect the best place to start would be with a line labeled 5 weight.

It is very easy to weigh the first 30 feet of a line to determine where it is in the spectrum of line weights. The ccs literature has a very complex way of doing it, but it can be done much simpler, yet still accurate.

I distrust advertising hacks, including those for fish poles. Manufacturers give lip-service to antiquated (1961), long defunct AFTMA line and rod matches, but their ads ignore or corrupt those standards to sell their products. We read: "Most powerful 7 weight rod made!" That's because you must aerialize 40 feet of line and/or have the double-haul of a gorilla to get the rod to perform well with a 7wt. line, because the rod performs best with a 9wt. line for most people. This vague and often misleading standard applied to what were exclusively fiberglass (NOT GRAPHITE) blanks in 1961. Of course the best weight line for any rod depends heavily upon the ability of the caster using it, but if we continue to use the line weight - a measurable quality - shouldn't we use a measurable quality for the rod?

Ive got a ccs question related to this topic.. I understand how to get the numbers, and underdtand what they mean, but for a spinning rod for example, getting the lure weight based on the lifting power should give you a idea of what line weight to use correct? I understand thats all subjectable.. But there should be a general idea.. Or range base... Like obviously you shoulnt try casting a 4oz weight with 1 lb test mono.. Thats just common sense.. Is there a way using the ccs to give a reletive line weight for spin rods? Or does anyone know a general example of fly line wt. To mono equivelent? Obtaining the ERN works for matching fly line well, but thats aboit as far as it goes i feel...

Also...

If you need help with understanding fly fishing stuff, like gear, what flies to use where, what flies are what, etc. Shoot me an email... I was in the same boat as you when it came to me learning fly fishing.. I can help you over that hurtle

Conflating line weight for spin rods and line weight for fly rods is like comparing dead-lifts to frisbee tosses.

Im aware of that... But the ccs system can be used to calculate pretty much everything on a blank... When i first started using the ccs i was under the idea it was for fly rods only.. Mainly by the way its worded... Its not.. For the most part

Line weight on spinning or casting rods is arbitrary. Other than maximum deadlift capability, line weight or test is not an inherent characteristic that can be measured.

...........

As Tom indicates above for spinning and casting lines, it is NOT line weight, it is line test. The test is very often determined by the type and size of fish sought. The CCS system will not help you with line test!

Anthony Unger Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Im aware of that... But the ccs system can be used
> to calculate pretty much everything on a blank...
> When i first started using the ccs i was under the
> idea it was for fly rods only.. Mainly by the way
> its worded... Its not.. For the most part

You can use CCS to compare two identical length & rated rods so you happen to be correct Anthony .