I have at last made time to set up my CCS test rig, and have been testing all blanks I have on hand. And, have tested several finished rods; both factory rods and my own builds. Some interesting, and some intriguing results so far.

After purchasing, and reading, and re-reading, the back issue of Rodmaker, which details tip power measurement; I have a couple of questions regarding the chart comparing IP, TP and RP with lure weight ratings. It makes sense to me to use tip power to determine the lower end of the lure weight range. Should I use IP or RP for the upper end. I believe I could make an argument for either. As you would suspect, there are indeed discrepancies between factory rod lure weight ratings and CCS measurement results, thus leading to this question.

And now I get into what most would call the problem area. Before going on, I should say that I do understand the numbers produced by CCS measurements are subjective. In and of themselves they have no real meaning, but are meant to be used as a basis for comparison between blanks. Having acknowledged that, Are there charts relating IP to our old terms; like light, medium, heavy; and AA to the terms slow, moderate and fast?

I ask these questions following a recent conversation with a potential customer. He started by stating he was looking for a heavy action rod. I suspect you know what followed. When I got past explaining the difference between action and power, I tried to introduce the concepts of the CCS system. I may as well have been speaking Sanskrit. The conversation did not end as well as it should have.

For example, I measured the Artico blank I won at the last ICRBE. IP = 520g, and AA = 60°. I would call that a moderate, maybe even slow action. Would I call that a medium heavy power?

All opinions would be appreciated.

Gary,
Don't confuse the difference between the speed of a blank - or the location where the blank begins to bend, compared to the power of the blank which is defined by a term like medium heavy power.



Moderate and slow refers to the location of the initial bending and of the shape of the blank as it is loaded up.

The terms like extra light, light, medium light, medium, medium heavy, heavy all refer to the power of the blank, or the lifting ability of the blank.

Here is a decent white paper with good explanations of the difference in rods with respect to the action of a rod and the power of a rod.

[www.tacklewarehouse.com]

Incorrect - the numbers produced by the CCS are purely objective and relative, just like those produced by a tape measure or a bathroom scale. The whole concept behind the CCS was to replace subjective terms like fast, medium, slow, heavy, soft, etc., with numbers just like those used to describe blank length and physical weight. Trying to match them to former subjective terms would like trying to match, say, an 84 inch long rod blank to terms like "long, medium or short." What you consider a long rod blank might be a short rod blank to somebody else. But 84 inches is 84 inches.

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

Hello Tom.

I think Gary had a few questions that he did not know how to ask; Gary Said "It makes sense to me to use tip power to determine the lower end of the lure weight range. Should I use IP or RP for the upper end. I believe I could make an argument for either"
It seems to me that he is asking "How to use CCS to define upper and lower lure weight ranges for a blank".

Let me know if I'm wrong.

Thanks.


Tight Wraps & Tighter Lines.

I was responding to this statement:

"Before going on, I should say that I do understand the numbers produced by CCS measurements are subjective. In and of themselves they have no real meaning..."

Consider that "5 inches" has no meaning until you compare it against a lower or higher number of inches, where it will be found to either shorter or longer than the number you are comparing against. But even in and of itself, nobody is born knowing what 5 inches represents in length - it's something you learn as you go along. A rod with an ERN of 6 and an AA of 75 will possess a definite amount of power and flex in a definite way. But you have to use the numbers a bit before you understand what amount and flex that is. In the meantime, you do know how it compares to higher and lower CCS figures.

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

Hello Tom.

Thanks.

I suppose I don't understand what question Gary is asking then.


Tight Wraps & Tighter Lines.

Bob,

New Bern, NC.

There is a formula to determine lure weight ranges in the Common Cents info in the left hand column. But in order to use it, you must go through the process of actually using and counting pennies. It is located on page 8 of part 1, The Common Cents System. It's not in the text of the article, it's in a box of its own. You may find it to be surprisingly accurate for some blanks or rods, and not accurate at all for other blanks or rods. The reason for that is .... not every manufacturer determines lure weight ratings in the same manner.

The same goes for named powers. One rod or blanks companies medium heavy power may not be the same as another's medium heavy power. For instance, in the Rainshadow Immortal and the new Testament series of blanks and medium heavy power blank has a lure weight rating of 3/8 - 1 oz. That would be called a heavy power in any other rod or blank manufacturer's line of blanks. Named powers don't mean a thing .... it's the specs of the blank that counts. As Tom said, the CCS gives objective results.


What you're thinking is subjective stems from everyone not following the same system. It's like Tom says ......... 84" is 7' .......... to someone that has used nothing but 5 1/2' fishing rods, 7' is long. To someone that uses 10' surf casting rods, a 7' rod would be short. You can call it whatever you want, but the numbers will always be the numbers.

Very good explanation, Tom. I was struggling how to answer, waited a little , didn't have to. I'll bet you've done it before. Thanks

Robert A. Guist Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hello Tom.
>
> Thanks.
>
> I suppose I don't understand what question Gary is
> asking then.
>
>
> Tight Wraps & Tighter Lines.


Thank you, Bob. That was indeed my first question. I had in my mind the idea that the CCS would give us a way to determine lure weight ranges in a rational and repeatable manner, and not just blindly accept what the manufacturer states about any particular blank, particularly when we have no idea what criteria they use to arrive at their ratings. Perhaps I was hoping for too much.

Roger, I always read all of your posts. I find your input into these conversations to be on point, and always worth reading. But, what in my post made you conclude that I do not know the difference between power and action. I believe I stated that I had to explain the difference to that potential customer. OOPS That sounds almost smart alec. I do not intend it be so. Been trying to word that so it doesn’t sound so condescending, but have had no luck.

Tom, i agree that the numbers are relative. Maybe I should have used the terms absolute and relative instead of objective and subjective. I do not wish to argue semantics.

I have been using the procedures and counting the dad-blasted pennies. And I do understand the point of it all. The CCS system is the way to obtain repeatable results which can then be used to make valid comparisons between any blanks. I GET IT.

The point of my question was simple. I do not build rods for rod builders. I build rods for fishermen. To do so, I need to speak to them. To speak to them, I need to speak in terms they understand. While talking to the potential customer mentioned in my first post, I had no problem explaining the difference between power and action, and then went into the CCS to give him an idea of a better way to describe these things. He asked, well then, what is a heavy power rod in your CCS system. I said I don’t know. The conversation went downhill from there. He is no longer a potential customer.

I withdraw the question.

There is no such thing as a "heavy power" in any nomenclature. It's a contradiction in terms.

The way to approach such a thing is to have him bring in a rod he likes and knows well. Run the CCS numbers on that rod so he has something to relate to and then go from there. More power? A faster action? More or less speed? You, and he, need a place to start from.

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

I guess I just don't see the dilemma you're having. Every bare blank I have ever purchased has the listed lure weight range, as well as the named power that was given to it by the manufacturer. Why wouldn't you just tell the customer what the rod blank manufacturer calls it?

If the potential customer questions you, it would be just as simple to have a list of lure weight ranges and the named powers of various factory rods, and show them to him.

If you're going to start talking IP numbers with a potential customer I would think you'd need to be prepared with actual numbers of various factory rods that you've tested. You can't talk about something a customer doesn't understand unless you give them something to correlate them with.

Exactly - you need to establish a baseline to work from. We had an excellent article in RodMaker a few years back showing how to use the CCS to do this and subsequently dial right in on what the customer wants.

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

David, it would be helpful to use CCS for lure weight if one buys a bunch of unlabeled blanks. Or even one.

Thank you, Tom, for clearing up the difference between "objective" and "subjective". Apparently these terms are commonly misunderstood.

Michael, agreed, but that isn't the problem the OP is having. He's not trying to identify a mystery blank .... he's giving or gave a potential customer IP numbers without correlating them to something the potential customer, or even the OP himself, is familiar with. That's like speaking a foreign language that you can't speak, to someone who even if you were speaking it properly, wouldn't understand it.

Actually, one of things I am doing is testing a “mystery” blank. At the last ICRBE, I won a blank at the Rodmaker reception. It is from an Italian manufacturer, Artico. It is a one of a kind prototype. The only info on it is a hand written note at the butt. It says Bass Light. That is the sum total of the information on this blank. They had another prototype, labelled Bass Strong. It was considerable stouter than the one I have. In speaking to Antonio Artico, this is their first venture into the bass fishing market. And, these two blanks are a guesstimate as to what a blank suitable for bass fishing might be.

While I was testing for tip power, I realized I had lined up the wrong place on the chart to measure IP. A 7’ blank should be deflected 28”. I only went to 26” the first time. After hitting the correct deflection point, I had an IP of 615g(246 pennies). I had three bucks worth of pennies(750g) and that did not get me anywhere near 50% deflection. Need to get more pennies before doing RP test again.

For tip power testing, I started at 12”, and repeated at three inch intervals. Made it to 21” before having to go home. The weight required to deflect the tip section was going still going down at that point, but if memory serves, it was around 350g(140 pennies)

At this point I realized this is no “light” blank, despite what the label says. Thus, I was very interested in determining the lure weight range. I finally found it in the article. Use the reserve power measurement for the upper end of the lure weight range. It did not specifically state that, but a provided example revealed the info.

As for using the CCS for determining lure weight range instead of using the manufacturer’s data, why not? We are not content with using the supplied data for power and action, and have adopted CCS for this purpose. Why not use the rest of it? At least it is a consistent method of measurement, and would give repeatable results. I have no idea how manufacturers determine lure weight ratings, and unless you one of them, you don’t either. And, I find it very hard to believe they would all use the same method. So, again, why not have a consistent, repeatable basis of comparison for this critical data. A large enough base of data, would either prove it’s worth, or provide data to refine it. What’s wrong with that?

To go a step further, I attempted to perform the frequency test. My eyes are not good enough to do that. If yours are , consider me impressed with your visual acuity! I recorded a test on my iPad, with a view of the tip section and a countdown clock on the iPhone. I found it beyond tedious to go through the vid frame by frame to get the correct number, and am not convinced I did arrive at the correct number. So, I acquired a tiny retro-reflective photo switch and a capacitive proximity switch. Wired both up to a small PLC and am working on a program to automate this test. At this point all I have accomplished is establishing that the photo switch is going to work better, as long as I use a shiny tip top.

And, thanks for all the input.

The problem with lure weight ratings is that unlike Power, Action and Speed which are inherent characteristics of the blank, they are affected by angler input. The same blank that casts 1/2 ounce optimally with a given amount of angler input will also cast 3/8th or 5/8th ounce optimally with less or more angler input. Most of what you see listed for lure weight ratings in the mfg catalogs are arrive at by pure trial and error, not any sort of measurement system. This is also why there is a range of given lure weights - the optimum will depend on particular angler input.

The lure weight recommendation in the CCS was not actually part of the inventor's system but rather something I added at the request of builders who wanted some place to start in making those determinations.

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

Well Tom, that is all I expected out of trying to determine lure weight range: a starting point. That is what I consider manufacturer ratings to be: a starting point. I know what my current quiver of rods are all good for, and I intend to continue taking measurements on those, as well as any new blanks come my way. I will be creating my own database of lure weight rating and comparing them to both measured values, and my own evaluations of rods in actual use. I have around fifty rods of my own to start the database, and will continue to add to it as time goes by. At some point I will have enough data to either verify the lure weight values in the chart on page 19, volume 10, issue 4; or I will be able to tweak them to suit myself. ‘I will end up with something I can use, even if it has no value for anybody else.

I did finish testing the Artico blank for TP and RP. Using the above mentioned chart, my starting points for lure weight will be around 1oz on the bottom end, and somewhere between 3 and 4oz on the top. Based a search of Tackle Warehouse, this would be called an Extra heavy or an XXH blank. An AA of 60° makes it a moderate action blank. Maybe even a mod-slow, if there is such a thing. In any event, I have a place to start, and if the ratings are in the ballpark, I will have finished rod for which I will have very little use. I fish for bass, trout, walleye and crappie. Occasionally for other species when away from home, but not on a regular basis. I seldom use anything over about 3/4 oz total weight, and most of time under 1/2oz. Maybe it’s time to buy some swimbaits?

Once again, thanks to all for their input.

your rods will work for building a data base,
but your results will be slightly off.

Do to the fact that your rods have components on them.
The handles and seats will stiffen up the butt sections some, that may not be as important as the guide effect.
Due to the fact there is not much flex in the butt section, but on lighter rods could have a greater effect

your guides and epoxy will have added weight to the blanks before you start.
Additionally blanks with double foot guides will stiffen up a little

Banks with double foot guides will actually soften, noticeably. The added weight has a greater effect than the very, very short splint effect of the guide itself. If you run the numbers you'll find the power and speed to be slightly less, with the action being the same.

You can run the numbers on the blank and then on the finished rod to see how many anything has changed. At some point, most builders can look at the numbers on a blank and know how much things will change once they craft a rod on the blank. Sort of like buying a 7 foot blank and knowing that if they take 6 inches off of it, it's going to be a 6'6" blank.

..........