SPONSORS
2024 ICRBE EXPO |
Comparing PB701LXF to PB691MLXL Blank
Posted by:
Ron Beloff
(---.phlapa.fios.verizon.net)
Date: October 14, 2021 04:46PM
Just got my Winter rod building project blank in - A Point Blank 701LXF blank. Doing some comparisons to the PB691MLXF I built spinning last year and it actually looks like the MLXF blank is thinner near the top section of the blank compared to the PB701LXF blank.
I am not familiar to ERN or CCS numbers but the PB701 blank feels like it'll handle more than the 1/16 to 3/16 ozs as listed in the Point Blank PDF document (the one lising all blanks, in color) specs. It also feels a lot stiffer. Also, the uppermost tip section gets pretty thick in a hurry compared to the MLXF blank. Appreciate any input regarding this blank. I was planning to use it for 1/4 oz.poppers but it feels like it'll handle a lot more. Ron Beloff Re: Comparing PB701LXF to PB691MLXL Blank
Posted by:
Norman Miller
(---)
Date: October 15, 2021 11:30AM
Both are great rods. The CCS numbers for the PB691MLXF are IP=512 gm, and AA=77. For the PB701LXF, IP=439 gm and AA=77. This means that the PB691MLXF is more powerful than the PB701LXF (as expected) and both have the same action angle, which is in the extra fast range. In my experience, Point Blanks have a much broader casting weight range than listed, and this is due to the way they are made with with the fast tip combined with a powerful butt section. So you should have no problems throwing 1/4 oz poppers with the PB701LXF, in fact it will throw even heavier lures with no problem. Both blanks are very light and because of the use of high modulus graphite will feel stiff.
Norm Re: Comparing PB701LXF to PB691MLXL Blank
Posted by:
Ron Beloff
(---.phlapa.fios.verizon.net)
Date: October 15, 2021 02:24PM
Norm,
Thanks so much. I really did not know what to expect from a LXF blank. I'm XF rod caster. By that I hold my rod at 90° and just give the tip a fast jerk forward. Most of the time the lure shoots towards the target like a bullet. This rod will definitely do that. Thanks again Ron Re: Comparing PB701LXF to PB691MLXL Blank
Posted by:
Ron Beloff
(---.phlapa.fios.verizon.net)
Date: October 19, 2021 03:36PM
Norm,
I was going to use the KR Concept for this build, namely KL 18H, 8H, 5.5M, KB4, and the rest KT4's to a LG 4 tip top. Do you think I would need to use more than 1 KB4 guide for this build? Thanks again, Ron Re: Comparing PB701LXF to PB691MLXL Blank
Posted by:
Norman Miller
(---)
Date: October 19, 2021 07:12PM
One KB is sufficient, but I mostly use two. So basically your choice.
Norm Re: Comparing PB701LXF to PB691MLXL Blank
Posted by:
Ron Beloff
(---.phlapa.fios.verizon.net)
Date: October 20, 2021 05:47AM
Thanks Re: Comparing PB701LXF to PB691MLXL Blank
Posted by:
Michael Danek
(---.alma.mi.frontiernet.net)
Date: October 24, 2021 08:45AM
You probably know by now there is no KLH18, it's either a 16 or a 20. I've used 16-8-5.5M and 20-10-5.5M and prefer the 20-10-5.5M because it is more versatile allowing heavier line if I want to use it. Because the reduction train is relatively low on the rod its effect on sensitivity is negligible if there is an effect at all. Whether 20 or 16 does not affect natural frequency on these XF blanks. I always use two KB's although I'm not sure it's necessary. I also use a total guide count of 9 (3 reductioin, 2KB's and 4Kt's) + tiptop on these blanks. I'm a big fan of the PB line of blanks and exclusively use the KLH-KB/KT guides on spin, RV-KB-KT on cast. Re: Comparing PB701LXF to PB691MLXL Blank
Posted by:
Ron Beloff
(---.phlapa.fios.verizon.net)
Date: October 26, 2021 10:05AM
Thanks Michael. Guide trains for this rod are easy - I'm still debating the reel seat and handle - carbon fiber, CCT reel.sest, etc.? Too many choices... Re: Comparing PB701LXF to PB691MLXL Blank
Posted by:
Michael Danek
(---.alma.mi.frontiernet.net)
Date: October 26, 2021 05:32PM Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
|