Hi Guys,
I'm looking for opinions on MHX blanks compared to RodGeeks and NorthFolks blanks in a 6'6" ML-F. I personally like to fish with lighter rods for walleye and I built myself a 6'6" L-F rod from NorthFolk and love it. So last year I ordered a MHX 6'6" L-F so I had something to compare it to from MHX blanks. In my opinion it is way lighter as far as backbone between the two. Probably a good Blue Gill Crappie blank in IMOP. Not knocking it at all. But if I'm going to order a 6'6" ML-F blank and it has this much of a difference to the RodGeeks and NorthFolk blanks I think I would probably have to order a M-F blank.
Any and all input is appreciated.
Thanks in advance
Rick

The Spinning blanks ive used from MHX dont have much backbone. Check out the MHX SJ781. its more inline with the MLF St Croixs.

what was the NFC model that ya liked?

MHX spinning blank I like the NEPS78MF for walleye, NEPS81MXF for an all around bass finesse rod.

It is a FW 662-1 (IM)

Look at the data being collected in the CCS Data Log string of posts. You may be able to find the CCS numbers of the various blanks you are discussing/considering. . The subjective descriptors L, ML, M, MH, etc have little meaning especially when going between differet brands. IP and ERN are objective measures of power, and if you find the blank that is too light in power you may find one with significantly higher numbers that would indicate that it would work.

Well I guess only one real way to compare blanks from one manufacturer to another is to get them. So I will be ordering a NEPS78MF and also SJ782. This way I will have them on hand for myself to compare and have them for future customers to compare.
I want to thanks those who gave me some input.
I also want to say that this site is a gold mine of knowledge and information for all rod builders of different levels. I do not post on it very often but do look at it often. When I do run into something I'm un sure of I search and if I don't find what I'm looking for I will add a post in search of an answer. Never disappointed!!!!
Thanks to all the rod builders that share
Rick

Rick - I feel the elite pro’s from mhx don’t compare to the other blanks from mhx. The elite x and standard blanks are on G loomis old mandrels and more along those old loomis lines, per what I’ve heard. The elite pro’s were on a completely different path and are a bit softer but also way lighter than standard blanks. You’re going to like the NEPS78MF for walleye, super light and sensitive. I have mb842’s and like them a lot but it’s more of a moving baits/top water blank. Not the exact same as a sj782 but my closest comparison.

The 6'6" LF is in the spinning line for MHX and is really small diameter - nice little blank that I'd use for finesse walleye with 6# line for sure. But if you want to level up in power the SJ781 in the MXH spin jigs is very light and faster/more power - it probably feels lighter in hand than the S782 due to the larger diameter.

Elite Pro's feel really nice too, but to me almost are a tad stiffer than standard - look at the line rating on them more than the power rating for insight. The tips are really nice, but lot's of back bone due to the faster actions.

Very interesting about the last 2 comments above me - entirely contrary to one another.

Does anybody have any CCS data on the MHX Elite Pros to actually measure if they are relatively softer or more stiff?

Here’s a couple MHX elite pro blanks.
MHX NEPS78MF IP 400 AA 74
MHX NEPS78MXF IP 602 AA 76.5
Both very nice blanks, but different in power
Norm

I guess I found the Elite Pro's to have a softer tip, but very fast and stiffen quicker than MHX. And it depends on the model too. Both are nice stuff either way.

Rick's right, might as well order a truckload and get to testing! Don't forget to post your results. Lol.

Well I ordered a 6’ 6” MHX Elite Pro NEPS78MLF to compare with RODGeeks C2 and NorthFork IM blanks. I also ordered a 6’ 6” MHX Elite Pro NEPS78MF to compare with RODGeeks C2 and NorthForks IM blanks.
IMOP they feel pretty equal. At least now I have them on hand to offer future customers more options.
Rick

Rick, did you have time to compare those blanks yet??

>"Rick's right, might as well order a truckload and get to testing! Don't forget to post your results. Lol."

Those cynics who maintain this is the reason manufacturers don't more often post CCS data (that they obviously have) might be right. ". . .order a truckload. . ." and try to find what you want. Go Point Blank. You know in advance what you are going to get. Or Rainshadow RX 10.

Michael, you completely misconstrued Lynn's post. Did you not catch the lol at the end?

As far as suggesting Point Blank or Rainshadow RX10 .... if you had looked up the NFC blank Rick mentioned liking, on the CCS data base that Kevin has been maintaining so beautifully, you'd have seen that it has an IP of 185 grams. Point Blank doesn't make a blank anywhere near that light in power. And the closest RX10 blank that Rainshadow offers, has a 60 gram higher IP.

Also, those are pretty pricey blanks. Not everyone wants to spend that kind of money on a rod blank. But who knows ..... maybe the addition of some TNF numbers would convince him to spend that kind of money?

David, I don't see it that way. Rick said: "Well I guess only one real way to compare blanks from one manufacturer to another is to get them."

I was mentioning Point Blank and RX10 in a general sense as the manufacturers who are publishing CCS data. So one can know in advance what he is getting. Rather than having to "get them."

Since Todd Vivian was the blank designer for Lamiglas, wouldn't you think that they would be more patterned that way? As I have said before, I wouldn't want to bet my life on the differences I have seen between many of the IMX and IM700 of old, the IMX blanks were a bit more damage prone due to the differences in scrim used.