Picked up a blank the other day. Nice and straight, very light and crisp in hand. Very quick recovery from flexing. Put in the test rig and got the following numbers.

6’6” length
IP = 345g
AA = 70°

Any thoughts on possible uses? I didn't have anything in particular in mind when I bought it. One of those bargain impulse buys. It will be a personal rod. Being in the middle of Illinois, saltwater applications are out of the question

Do you have an ERN number?

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

I have a rod that is built on a Rainshadow Eternity2 ETES 610 MXF blank. The IP number I came up with on that rod is 346g, The Eternity blank was designed for fishing a drop shot, so it probably has a lot softer upper half of the blank than the rod you have. The AA on the Eternity blank is 79.

Anyhow, as far as power goes. The rod I am speaking of is woefully under powered for anything but small bass. If you are looking to use the rod you build on it for bass, I would relegate it to use in streams and small rivers where a 15" bass would be considered big. Otherwise IMO it would be something I'd be looking at using for panfish.

Tom Kirkman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Do you have an ERN number?
>
> ............

Between 13 & 14, closer to 13

That should make a fairly stout bass rod. Good power in that length. The length combined with that power should also allow it to be used for various other fishing types. Fast action and good, quick recovery.

Spinnerbaits, large crankbaits, heavy plastic worm fishing.

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

Thanks, Tom. Being new to this CCS thing, I do not have a feeling for, or any kind of understanding of, what the numbers actually mean. My basis for comparison are the the blanks I’ve built, and measurements taken from all my factory rods. A small database of numbers.

A curiosity based question for you. David, in his post mentioned a blank I am very familiar with, having built one for myself, and several for other folks. The AA of 79°, in comparison to my numbers, represents a fast action blank. An AA of 70°, by comparison, would be a moderate fast action stick.

I’m wondering if the comparison is somewhat skewed by the fact that most of my rods are ones targeted at bass fishermen, as are most of my builds. Is the whole action designation based on a demographic. Is a 70° rod fast for inshore guys, mod-fast for walleye guys, and moderate for bass guys?

I know I need to let go of using such terms for action, and use the CCS numbers, but I am not quite there yet.

Gary, if you go by the CCS chart for named actions and their corresponding AA's, you'll see that by CCS standards, anything with an AA higher than 66 is considered as fast action. The CCS is just a standardized system to compare one blank to another. And it's an excellent tool for doing that. But, if I am interpreting your post correctly, you like me, believe it is based on fly rods, and for that reason its' definitions may be different than what the definitions would be in the world of bass fishing. If that is your feelings, then I completely agree.

Comparing a fly rod to a bass rod is like comparing a Pro Stock car to a Funny car. What is fast for a Pro Stock car, is not fast for a Funny car.

Personally, all of my rods are built with bass fishing in mind. Therefore, all of my opinions of a rods power, or its' action, are based on how it fishes. Since you are familiar with the Eternity blank I mentioned, I'd be interested if first, .... have you done any CCS testing on it, and if so, what are your findings? And secondly .... what is your feelings on its' power based on how it fishes?

As I said in my initial post. I feel it is woefully under powered. I actually built it to replace a drop shot rod that I built on an NFC DS6107 IM blank. I had no CCS numbers for the Eternity blank, so I went strictly off its published specs. The lure weight and the line size ratings for the Eternity were higher than the NFC blank, so I figured it would feel and fish more powerfully than the rod I built on the NFC blank. Just the opposite is true. The rod built on the 6107 fishes more powerfully. Not by much, but it's enough that one can feel it.

I can say I have never been so disappointed. And I say that based strictly on the Eternity blank's power. Other than it's power it is an outstanding blank.

Anyhow .... I have done CCS measurements on every rod that I've built, as well as some of the factory rods I still own. It is based on those measurements that I say that a rod with an IP of 345 is in no way, a fairly stout rod. That's a light power rod, all day, every day.

AA readings are not meant to be interpreted as "fast" "moderate" etc., any more than length measurements are meant to indicate if a blank is "long" "short" etc. They are simply relative numbers.

AA numbers are meant to replace terms like fast, medium and slow altogether. If you have a blank with an AA of 79, against another blank with an AA of 70, rest assured that the one rated at 79 is fastER than the one with an AA of 70.

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

Unfortunately, most blank manufacturers don’t describe their blanks based on CSS intrinsic power (IP) or action angle (AA). Therefore, based on our experience, we are forced to try and relate our precise objective CSS numbers to the general subjective descriptions used by various manufacturers concerning power and action. So in my experience, an IP of 345 grams would be in the realm of light to ML freshwater blanks, and an AA of 70 would be what many manufacturers would consider to be F to MF. To muddy the waters even more, a light blank from one manufacturer may be more powerful than a similar-use blank by other manufacturer labeled as M. In addition, between different lines of blanks from the same manufacturer with the same power rating can very quite a bit in their actual IP numbers. For example, a light freshwater trout rod, is quite different from a light inshore blank. I wish more blank manufacturers would list CCS data for their products, but they don’t so we try our best to compensate.
Norm

Norman, you have stated my quandary better than I did. Just trying to place the numbers into some sort of perspective. I know I will eventually get to the point where the numbers have some relevance for me. Being an old fart, I hope I live long enough.LOL

The difference in perspective is interesting. Tom says this blank will make a fairly stout bass rod. With the blank in hand, I have to agree. To Norman and David; I’ve read enough from both of you to respect your opinions. Sincerely. But, I am going to have to disagree with you on this. The blank I have is not what I would call ML, and is certainly not a L. I have several factory rods in that IP range, and consider none of them under-powered for bass fishing. I wouldn't throw a punch rig, or a heavy C-rig on those rods, but a 1/4oz weighted t-rigged plastic, 3/8oz jig and trailer, or 1/2 oz spinnerbait are all in that wheelhouse. And, I’ve caught bass up to 8lbs on them. Just would not use them in thick cover with heavy line. Here in Illinois, thick cover and 8lb bass are not the norm.

David, I also would not call that Eternity blank under-powered for bass fishing. Having built several rods on blanks from the Eternity series, I would not call any of them under-powered. If anything, I would call all of them I’ve had my hands on under-rated. Most St Croix rods are under-rated. A St Croix medium is equivalent to most other medium-heavy power sticks. The Eternity and Immortal lines are in that direction. Which makes some sense, with Batson’s designer being from St Croix.

Gary, Wow!!! We really do have a difference in perspective, and I think this difference makes our points. For most of the rods I deal with an IP of 345gm would be a light powered rod for example the NFC MB 66i HM has an IP=337 gm and an AA= 68 and is considered an UL F by the manufacturer, the NFC MB662-HM has an IP=386 gm and an AA=72 and is considered L F. The Point Blank PB661LXF has IP=410 and AA= 75 and is considered L XF. None of these blanks would I consider stout bass rods, but you would. If you asked me to make you a stout bass rod I would be in real trouble. Thank God for CCS data.
Norm

Gary, first let me thank you for the compliment. I appreciate it. But now I have to say that like Norman, we have different perspectives on rod powers. And that's to be somewhat expected, but based on your assessment of the Eternity 610MXF blank, we are further apart in our perspectives than I thought we might be. Of course there's nothing wrong with that .... it's just surprising to me. To me, the 610MXF blank is something I would only use with a light wire, open hook. A bait or technique where it is easy for the fish to get to the hook point. A drop shot, Ned rig, or a light wacky rig.

Just for a perspective on where I am coming from as far as powers of rods goes. As I said earlier, I did CCS tests on all of the rods I've built thus far. The two drop shot rods that I built and mentioned earlier have IPs of 346 for the Eternity blank, and 387 for the rod built on the NFC DS 6107 IM blank. Just to show how much named powers mean, as you know the Eternity blank is labeled as medium power. The NFC blank is labeled as a mag light power. I will say that the DS 6107 blank is the first blank I ever built on with the DS designation. Meaning it is the first blank I ever built on that was designed for a drop shot. And they are a completely different animal when compared to other types of blanks I've built on.

As far as the baits you mentioned in your most recent post. I'd be looking to throw those baits on a rod with an IP of at least 560. And I'd prefer something higher for a 3/8 oz jig, or a 1/2 oz spinner bait. Something with an IP around 700. Those are bigger baits with heavier hooks. Bass can clamp down pretty hard on a bait, especially smallmouth, and I want a rod with the power to move the bait in the fish's mouth.

Anyhow ....... absolutely love the conversation.

I just posted in another thread above concerning two different NFC blanks designated Mag Light as a possible replacement for a G. Loomis rod designed as a Mag Light. One NFC Blank was a 6’ SJ blank that has a publish IP of over 800 gm, the other was a SB blank that had a published IP of less than 250 gm. Go figure!
Norm

Thanks, gents for this interesting conversation. David, where are from? Texas? Florida? Somewhere with big bass? I am not. here in the middle of Illinois, you wont find heavy vegetation. You will find clearer water, more sparse cover, and smaller bass than what is expected further south. I have only caught two bass of 8lb. None bigger. That does mean lighter line. A lot more bites on 10lb line than on 17. I only have two rods that meet your specs. A Dobyns Champion; IP of 712, AA of 76°. And a Daiwa L&T; IP of 600, AA of 65°. I don't often use either when fishing in my area. Different perspectives indeed.

Now, to make this story even more curious, here are some details on the blank. 6’6”, butt dia = 0.412, tip = 5/64, blank weight = 1.67oz. Sounds like a light or med-light power stick, doesn't it?

The blank is a CTS, designed for saltwater slow pitch jigging in deep to very deep water, rated for PE2 line, and 80-100g jigs. I have been wanting to try a CTS blank, so I checked out what they had at the ICRBE this year. Most of the stock they had on hand were long rods, fly, switch, spey, salmon and steelhead blanks. But they had a few shorter, one piece blanks. I picked this one up, and in hand, flexing against the carpet, it felt to me like a very light weight, medium to med- heavy, mod-fast blank, so I bought it. I prefer a shorter rod for spinnerbaits, and i thought this might be what I wanted. Looking forward to taking it for a ride.

Gary, I definitely agree that this is a very interesting conversation. I am very surprised by the measurements and specs you provided for the blank that you mentioned in your opening post. That's a smallish butt diameter compared to the blanks I've built on. The tip is in the range of what I would expect from a medium to medium heavy powered rod, but measurements can be deceiving. What really gets me is how light the blank is. I realize it's only a 6'6" blank, but that's pretty light. I wouldn't expect a blank with those measurements to be rated for (assuming the g represents grams) weights in the 3 oz range.

As far as where I live, I live in northeast Ohio. Definitely not an area that is known for large fish on inland waters. Lake Erie is a different animal. Average keeper sized fish that I catch is probably 2 1/2 lbs. Of course there are days that I would be lucky to catch that size fish as an average. And days where you might be culling that size fish. Although the culling fish that size days are far less frequent than the days you catch nothing but dinks. lol Some of the lakes I fish have very heavy vegetation, some of them very heavy shoreline cover, and others absolutely no vegetation at all. Most of the lakes I fish are reservoirs that are in the chain of flow augmentation reservoirs for the Ohio River. Those lakes get drawn down over the summer so they lose their shoreline cover, the weeds mat over and thicken up, so you're either fishing thick vegetation, or you're fishing off shore for deeper fish.

I'm a pretty hard core tournament fisherman, and I am sure that has an influence on the power I like in rods. Don't get me wrong, on fun fishing days I like playing fish, probably not as long as others do, but it's fun to see them jump. But I'm really more about getting them in the boat. Even when fishing open water, I prefer a rod with some power to it. The exception to that would be techniques where I am fishing an open hook. I don't know if you use braided line or not, but I only use it when absolutely necessary.I use fluorocarbon line on pretty much every rod it is appropriate for. I use Tatsu, which is lower in stretch than a lot of the fluorocarbon lines on the market, but it still stretches. I read a test on it where it says it stretches 8%. On a 30 cast, 8% equates to roughly 2.5' of line stretch. That stretch robs power from your hook set. And it also lessens the chances of the hook set moving or turning the fish's head. When fishing heavy cover it pays to move or turn the fish's head with the hook set. If not you may not get it out of the cover.

Anyhow .... even though I am a bit of a power monger when it comes to the power of rods I fish, that doesn't change my perception of the Eternity blank we have shared our thoughts on. One of the first places I fished that rod was up on Laker Erie, chasing smallmouth bass. We were fishing anywhere from 25 - 30' deep. Sometimes dropping vertically on fish we'd see on the electronics, other times making longer casts. The rod is super sensitive. I was counting pebbles with it, but when it came time to pull into a fish on a cast, well lets just say I didn't land one fish with it where the fish wasn't pretty much directly under the boat. The one thing that is perplexing to me is it is an awesome Ned rig rod. Feel the fish and just pull as you reel and it's fish on. And when you hook them solidly, the blank has more than enough bend into the butt that it keeps them pinned. But you have to get them hooked first.

I've tried braided line on one of my spinning rods and I absolutely hated it. It catches even the lightest breeze, and I personally think it isn't as good as a fluorocarbon line, when using light baits. Anyhow.... sorry for running on. As I said earlier .... I love the conversation

So I will continue to buy blanks based on the opinions of builders who seem to think along the same lines as I think. At least I think that's what I think.