Has anyone on the board tired enough of using pennies and found a good source for a digital scale similar to a fishing scale that measures in grams as well as ounces? Questions to the group:
1) Source for such a scale (other than the Berkeley fishing scale)
2) Is there any reason why a length of mono attached to the rod tip, then to the scale and the scale then pulled downward until 1/3 rod length deflection is reached would not give a weight reading accurate enough to determine ERN?

Thanks
John

Good thought John.

Of course, pennies are probably a very accurately calibrated weight but it just sounds low-tech and homespun.

This is not a criticism of the system but it may be a perceptual problem to customers expecting something more sexy.

The use of the pennies are part of the genius of the system. They provide you with a 100% accurate constant to use, that your neighbor can use, that somebody on the opposite coast can use, that gives everyone the same results. You would be hard pressed to find a constant or a method that provided you with the accuracy and ease this system does.

I don't know why people insist on making things more difficult than they have to be. The first rule in any scientific system of measurement is to create a unit of measurement, or constant, that is as simple as possible and produces the same results over and over. If you keep trying to make things more difficult, you'll soon lose the accuracy that this present system now offers you.

Considering that the Common Cents system is intended to be used by rod builders and fishermen alike, and that few of them will have or be able to obtain any sophisticated equipment, Dr. Hanneman has fullfilled the first rule of create a really good scientific system of measurement.

It's a shame that we don't trust anything to do a good job unless it's complicated. If the Doctor had used some sort of hard to come by weight or expensive scale maybe more people would trust the system. But like so many things, if it's not expensive it can't be very good, sort of like fly rods, and if it's not complicated or sophisticated then it can't work very well. I often fall prey to this same notion. Wish I didn't.

I think it would be a great mistake to try and get rid of the pennies. They're the for sure constant in the equation. The only part of the system I find suspect is possible 'operator error' from the person taking the measurements.

Thanks for the input. I really didn't mean to imply that there's anything at all wrong with the pennies--just have a hard time imagining that rod blank manufacturers will characterize their entire inventory of blanks using pennies placed in a plastic bag. Ease of use and time considerations (corporate yield on investment of personnel time)seem logically important if we ever expect manufacturers to adopt the CC system. The great thing is that the system works well with pennies, and provides users invaluable information on whatever level they find most useful and practical. Great ideas often seem to function well on a range of different levels with a range of technologies.

John

I glued up some stacks of pennies and so I don't have to count them each time. They look just like a stack of weights like you'd use on a beam scale. Saves time. I got them in 10's and 20's and then can usually get my final measurement by placing between 1 and 9 into a bag hung with as many stacks as it takes to get close.

What currency do our fellow builders in Australia use? And what about Europe and Asia?

Sorry, I couldn't resist.

I think there was a conversion posted here awhile back from the Doctor on what to use overseas? You'd have to find it with a search.

As there is a notable shortage of US pennies here in the UK, I use a set of gram weights ex. a chemical pan balance.
It makes life a little more complicated.

The conversions I use are:
38.61 grains per. penny X .0648 grams per. grain = 2.5019 grams per. penny.
Or you can say grams X 15.4324 = Grains

The easiest way is to divide grams by 2.5019 = CENTS, but to maintain accuracy you must work to at least four decimal places.

So you can see just how lucky you are over there to have such a simple system based on a readily available and accurate unit of weight.

Keep it simple if you want it to work.

Dave

I wanted a scale for the same reason you did, and also for other fishing-related weighings (weight of lures, hooks, lead weights, etc., as well as weights of rod-building components). I found one "good enough" on @#$%& for $27 including shipping, a "Royal eX3" digital scale, 3# limit, reads to 0.1 ounce, also reads in grams and has a tare function. Made in China, but very accurate if you weigh multiples and then take the average, as I proved, naturally, by weighing pennies. Be aware, a scale that "reads to x" is not "accurate to x", but ought to be "accurate to 10x". And BTW, using this scale has given me several eye-openers about fishing lure weights - not what the labels say! Email me if you want the @#$%& details.

John-
I think your question to the board was a good one. I also think that the creation of "common cents" was equally good. I beleive that "common cents" was probably created to answer the very question you asked. There's got to be a better way. My Dad's '65 Mustang's brake system for instance, I would'nt want in my car. In time one system changes to another and another.....