Oh and I would be remiss if I didn't once again say a huge thank you to Kevin for devoting his time and effort is seeking data from manufacturers, and for his keeping up with all the data members are providing. Kevin, if we were to ever meet some day. I will surely offer to buy you one heck of a dinner.

Great job !!!!

Added Logan's additional info into Spreadsheet.

Here is my take regarding Logan's comment about the two rods of same length with very similar CCS measured powers and the rod with the more moderate action feeling significantly more powerful:
CCS just takes a measurement of the mass to deflect each rod to 33% of length. This is a great way to compare rods but it is looking at power at just one deflection point. Like was mentioned earlier if you went further and deflected each of those rods to say 40% of length it is very likely that the spread in your SJ would be greater than at the 33%. So if that was the case the SJ would have more "total" power. That has to do with how the rod is tapered along the length of the blank and can get complicated pretty quick. Looking at the specs for each of those blanks the SJ has a larger butt diameter so my take is that at the 33% deflection you just hadn't gotten as far into the backbone "total power" of your SJ blank.

You could experiment with those two blanks and continue deflecting them (just don't get to breaking point) and see if your SJ requires significantly more mass to deflect further than your MB.

I don't think I helped you much here and hoping that some others will chime in :)

Just wanted to post something about the two blanks I posted CCS numbers for recently. They were the original version of the X ray blanks, meaning they still had the resin ridges on them. I don't like those ridges so as with the very first 2 X ray blanks I got, I sanded them to remove the ridges.

Well, I've sanded one so far. The SB 724. The CCS numbers I posted for the two blank were on bare blanks that hadn't been sanded. Out of curiosity, I when and did an IP check on the SB 724 blank after sanding. The sanding changed the IP lowering it by 4 grams. No it's not a big deal. I just thought it was interesting.

I'm going to check them after I build them into rods, and see what kind of difference I come up with. It's most definitely going to change. Just curious how much it will change. I'll post results.

Noticed this error in the spreadsheet. There are two Lamiglas blanks, IMP843 and IMP843R, that are listed at 100 inches in length. They should be listed at 84 inches in length.

Ed Kramer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Noticed this error in the spreadsheet. There are
> two Lamiglas blanks, IMP843 and IMP843R, that are
> listed at 100 inches in length. They should be
> listed at 84 inches in length.

Corrected spreadsheet for these Lamiglas blanks. Thanks for heads-up.

If any new builds in the pipeline get me those measurements. I've got some I need to get measured up here soon.