For anybody here who makes blank purchases and rod builds depending on CCS numbers - what CCS specs to you look for for specific techniques and presentations?

What CCS data = a good spinnerbait rod?

What CCS data = a good 1/4 oz Jig rod? 1/2 oz jig rod?

BFS rod?

Drop shot?

What CCS data = a good...

Please don't just say "it depends" - we all know it depends, if you feel inclined to type that, please tell us what it depends on and what you do for those circumstances. The more you share the better we all are for it, spill you guts out with the details. Be nitpicky, but please explain what each nit and pick is so we can learn together.

Maybe we could make this a repository of data like my CCS Data log thread...

If you would all be so kind as to list your preferred CCS data range for whatever technique and then recommend at least one blank that fits.

We have hundreds of separate threads for one rod/blank recommendations for one technique- let's make this a searchable/findable coverall with a variety of preferences and suggestions for blanks with supporting CCS data for many different techniques.

Recommendations from members

-Spinnerbait:

Preferred CCS: 750g - 850g IP / 75 degree AA +/- a couple degrees.

Recommended blanks:

Point Blank PB691MHXF, 800g/77deg
_

-Crankbait:

Preferred CCS:

Recommended blanks:

NFC APFG744, CCS: IP 450 AA 80
NFC APFG745, CCS: IP 575 AA 80

SCV70MM
_

-Hard Jerkbait:

Preferred CCS:

Recommended blanks:

St. Croix SCV70MF blank with three inches cut from the butt

Much love yall



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 01/16/2024 10:46AM by El Bolinger.

Not what the system was designed to do, it's for comparison purposes only, would be no better than asking who makes the best inch, or best pound.

Spencer Phipps Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Not what the system was designed to do, it's for
> comparison purposes only, would be no better than
> asking who makes the best inch, or best pound.

With the utmost respect, I disagree with the limited application of CCS data. Maybe that was its intended purpose at creation, but this site is filled with threads asking for blank recommendations and CCS numbers - because the two are deeply intertwined.

Now that I think of it perhaps its the semantics between us - because if CCS "is for comparison purpose only," then what is the purpose of the comparison? It is for determining what the behavior/performance of a blank will be, so that you can determine which technique those characteristics are well suited for.

People create a new thread titled "what's the best __(insert technique)__ blank"? The answers roll in with blank recommendations, and CCS data is often asked for or offered without an inquiry. People would likely not use a blank with an IP of 800 and AA66 for a ned rig. If we compare that to a blank with an IP of 325 and AA of 75, then the purpose of CCS comparison has been a success - I will know to choose the latter for a ned build.

@Spencer, I trust you my friend, and if you recommend a blank IP *** and AA ** for _____ technique I will take it to heart, and I'm sure if you consider the blanks you would build on for ___ technique they have an IP and AA you would like and you can think of IPs and AAs that you would think "I'm not building on that blank to use it for that technique, it just won't perform well."



Maybe I should rephrase the question - please list your blank recommendations for any given technique and add the CCS data for that blank.

Building rods in MA, Building the community around the world



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 01/12/2024 04:33PM by El Bolinger.

I'll go first....The primary reason I got into rod building was my favorite spinnerbait rod was discontinued so I wanted to duplicate the specs myself.

Ideal CCS for a spinnerbait rod to me: 750g - 850g IP / 75 degree AA +/- a couple degrees. Length is personal style, I like just under 7' for the way I fish.

Preferred blank: Point Blank PB691MHXF, 800g/77deg

The original rod I liked that was discontinued was the Megabass Gen1 XX Spinnerbait Special, which was/is 6'10" and 800g/75deg....The PB is better though.

El, you have no reason at all to rephrase the question. It's perfectly fine the way it is.

The way I see it, CCS is a tape measure for a rod builder. A rod builder can use his tape measure as a stock boy at a lumber yard would, and use it only to compare the size of one piece of lumber to another. Or a rod builder can use his tape measure as a carpenter would, and use it to choose a piece of lumber that will work for what he is intending to build.

i have thoughts dealing with your question, but I have to do it later. I'm having a gathering for the Browns playoff game with the Texans, and need to pick up some ...... supplies.

Go Browns !!!!

El,
So, you are saying if I built a rod out of bamboo, E glass, S glass, early generation carbon fiber, and X Ray material, as long as the IP and AA were identical you wouldn't care which one you used in your application? I was just saying I think there is more to it, and the high end option wouldn't always be my first choice.

I have built rods for every use you mentioned, except for the 1/2 ounce jigging rod (it’s usually too heavy for bass and walleye and too light for saltwater). I have only used CCS numbers a few times as verification of my selections. I build on just a few blank series and have become familiar with how they are rated. CCS is a great, quantitative comparison system. It’s just that I have learned St. Croix, Rainshadow, and United Composites offerings enough to accurately select for my preferred parameters. CCS is informative, but it won’t help you make the final selections for correctly working jerkbaits, crankbaits, stickbaits, shot-baits, and different saltwater jigs. There is more to blank selection than power and action angle at the tip.

I'll use something I've seen said more than a few times on this forum when someone has asked if a blank labeled as a spinning blank, can be used to build a casting rod, or vice versa ....." a blank doesn't know if it's being built as a casting rod or a spinning rod".

Sound familiar to any participants of this thread?

CCS measurements don't have a thing to do with what the blank being measured, is made of. At its' most basic, it's used to measure the power and action of a blank. If you delve further into it, and put other facets of CCS testing to use, it can most definitely help you make the final selection for working a jerkbait, crankbaits, stickbaits, etc ..... Even at their most basic, CCS IP (ERN for you purists) and AA numbers, can point you in the direction of a blank that can be a lot closer to what you're looking for in the power and action of a blank, than going by the named powers and actions, that the various blank and rod manufacturers use to classify their rods. Most of us know how widely those can vary

Of course you'd have to have actually put CCS testing to use before you could even begin to use the numbers it generates to categorize what you find certain powers and actions useful for, in the type of fishing you do. If you've used CCS numbers as verification of your blank selections, you've used it for more than just comparative purposes.

I know a lot of tournament anglers in my personal life that aren't getting paid to use a certain manufacturers rods, that are very brand loyal. When asked why they haven't tried any other brands of rods, the first answer the vast majority of them give, is because they know what to expect from the different named powers and actions from that manufacturer. Nothing at all wrong with that. But isn't that answer based on what CCS testing can tell you about a rod?

In my above post I made a reference to how measurements can be helpful to a carpenter. Three quarters of my working life have been spent in some kind of work, building things. Either carpentry, or manufacturing. What El is trying to do with this thread, is akin to the span tables for the various wooden members of a house. Different types of lumbers can span a greater distance than others. What the lumber will be used for, floor joists, ceiling joists, rafters, etc .... determine the type and the dimensions of the lumber that needs to be used. Depending on certain variables, live load, dead load, on center spacing, etc ..... 2, 3, or 4 different types of lumber can be used to perform the same task. But even though different types of lumber can perform the same task, one may be better for that task than others.

If 4 different types of lumber can be used to perform the same task, what makes one better than the other? Preference. If for instance if you're building a deck, a floor joist using 2x8 southern yellow pine spaced 16 on center may meet the clear span and load carrying requirements for your deck, but you may find the deck to be a little more springy than you like. If you lessen their on center spacing, or bump that floor joist up from a 2 x 8 to a 2 x 10, 16 on center, you're going to have a more solid platform to walk on, The numbers in a span table, like CCS numbers, allow you to compare one piece of lumber, or one rod blank, to another. On their own, without application, CCS numbers mean absolutely nothing.

It's a whole different story when you become familiar with that they represent, and learn how to apply them to your specific wants and needs, when it comes to your fishing rods.

It’s my belief that the more subtle parameters of blank design, like materials and tapers, vary greatly in their importance for supporting specific fishing techniques. Jerkbaits can heavily require specific functions to be performed by every portion of the rod blank. You have to be able to well-cast baits that don’t cast well, control bait movement with a fairly firm tip, and then have some flex in the aft portions of the rod to keep nice fish pinned on small trebles. Some saltwater jigs and baits require a rod that flexes a lot but can instantly lift big fish away sharp reefs and wrecks. Casting small flies to big fish with soft mouths is another example of getting complex rod function correct, as is working a float bobber for salmon and steelhead.

The advantage custom builders have is being able to research these parameters out and then build to angler preferences on how they are fulfilled. We also have several blank suppliers with lots of experience in many of these niches. If I am building a steelhead or salmon rod, I will now start with North Fork Composites. If it’s a North Woods rods, St. Croix has been my build every time. For many types of West Coast saltwater fishing, I look first at United Composites. If I am able to get into butterfly jigging in retirement, I’ll have to be convinced otherwise to not use a Black Hole blank designed by Kil Song. CTS will likely get my nod for any premium fly rod builds. Team Rainshadow has lots of experience and understands a vast array of species and technique specific requirements. Their Eternity drop shot rod absolutely nails it for me. For that jerkbait blank, I cut off a St. Croix to fulfill preferences and local needs. It does everything I want it to very well in Oregon, but wouldn’t be a great choice in much of Florida. I don’t really have strong preferences for spinnerbaits and a few kinds of plastic bait rods, though. Not every type of fishing requires a specialized rod.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/14/2024 02:14PM by Kendall Cikanek.

Spencer Phipps Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> El,
> So, you are saying if I built a rod out of bamboo,
> E glass, S glass, early generation carbon fiber,
> and X Ray material, as long as the IP and AA were
> identical you wouldn't care which one you used in
> your application?

Nope, was just asking if you were going to build a rod specifically for buzzbaits, what IP and AA do you look for in a blank? Or if you're building a rod for Ned rigs what IP and AA do you prefer?

@Logan thanks for sharing my man, exactly what I was looking for. Any other techniques you have preferred CCS numbers for?

@Kendal I agree, CCS is just one piece of the puzzle, and as you mentioned this is the me doing research part haha. I appreciate your input, but would you mind being more specific with your build preferences? You mentioned a number of manufacturers for certain techniques but no specific blanks for specific techniques from those particular manufacturers. And if you happen to have the CCS numbers for those blanks that would be helpful as well.

@David exactly man, thanks for getting me haha

I know you like your balanced NFC MB709 for flippin, have any other blanks/CCS ranges for other techniques?

Honestly what's the point of CCS and ERN if it isn't to help you understand a blank/rod and discern what applications it will perform better with relative to other options? If I did the CCS on two unknown blanks I found in the woods would I not be be able to figure out if one would make a better crankbait rod or a better heavy cover jig rod?

If CCS isn't to compare rods and blank options what is it for?

@ALL please share what blanks you build on for what techniques, and CCS data if you have it for those blanks.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/16/2024 10:20AM by El Bolinger.

For crankbaits, I like the NFC APFG744 and 745 (glass) rods. In my experience, the 744 throws the 1.0 to 1.5 square bills (lighter side) better. DT 6's to DT 8's go great with the 745. Really very serviceable all-rounders as I have used a variety of techniques with these rods testing them out on the water.

This is a rather unique series of rods, IMO, because they have an AA of 80 and IP's of 450 (744) and 575 (745). The Mid Section is forgiving and bends smoothly when loaded by driving a crankbait hard or with a fish attached. Butt section locks up at about the 1/3rd part. One might associate the high AA number with a "stiff" blank that will "not keep fish pinned." Not so!

Doing a DBI (Defined Bending Index) test, also part of the CCS system, is something that intrigues me.

El, I hope you are having a good day. I’m taking a building break.
These standardized measures are informative data points, but numbers alone will not necessarily tell you the best rod universally for a purpose. I used the St. Croix SCV70MF blank with three inches cut from the butt for my jerkbait rod. I’m focusing on this rod because it so well illustrates my point. It’s rated for 6-12lb line and more importantly for casting 3/16-5/8 ounce lures. I live in Northeastern Oregon where there is a long jerkbait season with a dominance of smallmouth, but some quality largemouth. The reservoirs on the Snake River get deep quickly and wrestling fish away from vegetation just isn’t a factor in the Spring as the water levels rise by many feet with the snowmelt. I work a lot more 78-100mm jerkbaits than an angler typically does in the South. I’m working deeper ones as well. I’m not fishing for money so I am not paranoid about losing a fish to vegetation when I do encounter it on the more upland reservoirs. My preference is to go with lighter line to cast better against canyon winds and get down deeper. You can watch video after video of tournament anglers recommending throwing a very popular Japanese jerkbait on 15lb line. Some will mention they do this to go light to work the bait better. The designer of that bait calibrated it to perform best on 6-8lb test. I think I’m correct going light. The Southern guys are just as sure about their preferences. The same CCS numbers aren’t going to bridge this difference. If you are of a different height than I am a 6’9” jerkbait rod might not work well for you. CCS won’t capture that.

I have several SCV and SCIV rods. One is rated for the same casting weight range, but in a moderate action. Another is a fast action in the next size up (MH). I could, with high certainty, match to my preferences without doing CCS based research. If I had that number it would likely not fit what you need in a jerkbait rod where you live. The moderate action SCV I mentioned is a SCV70MM. It absolutely fits my crankbait preferences and casts incredibly far. Many other anglers prefer fiberglass rods and heavier test lines than I use. They aren’t trying to cast as far and go as deep. Some value getting their fish to the boat as fast as possible. I do use CCS and ERN much more when going away from areas of familiarity. Still, it’s not really to make a final decision as much as to get in the right ballpark.

I can give a real world example. I was looking to build a rod for chatterbaits last year and the Bushido CB72/12-25 came up numerous times as a recommendation. Around here in the shallow, grassy, tidal rivers - chatterbaits are fished over, around, and thru some pretty thick vegetation as a rule and popping it free from the grass is how you trigger many strikes....So you typically want/need a rod with some power to it.

Well as soon as I unwrapped that Bushido I knew it was not going to work. I ran CCS on it and came up with 600g/70deg. If I had been able to find those #s before purchasing I never would have bought the blank because I would have known that it would not fit my needs...Regardless of any other characteristics, 600g is 600g and it will never have the oomph it needs to fish they way I want it to. It turns out to be a great rod for other techniques, but not for my intended purpose.

I am still looking to build a perfect chatterbait rod, so my ideal specs are undecided at the moment....Factory rods I've really liked in the past range in IP from 750 to 850 and I like the higher end of that range more than the lower.

Thanks Les, Kendall, and Logan


Logan Summers Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>I ran CCS on it and came
> up with 600g/70deg. If I had been able to find
> those #s before purchasing I never would have
> bought the blank because I would have known that
> it would not fit my needs...Regardless of any
> other characteristics, 600g is 600g and it will
> never have the oomph it needs to fish they way I
> want it to.

This is precisely my reasoning for creating this thread, if people aren't using CCS as a factor in deciding which blank to purchase to build a rod with a specific technique/purpose, then I have no idea what CCS is supposed to be used for

@Logan, what techniques did that Bushido blank shine for?

If the chatterbait IP range is somewhere between 750-850 what about your preferred AA?

El Bolinger Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> @Logan, what techniques did that Bushido blank
> shine for?
>
> If the chatterbait IP range is somewhere between
> 750-850 what about your preferred AA?


The Bushido CB72/12-25 is a great general purpose crankbait rod...DT6/8/10's, Squarebills, etc. It's also a good large topwater rod for full size walking baits like a Vixen.

On the chatterbait blank...I think I'm probably going to end up closer to 900g on IP in the end, AA is TBD but in general I like a 'mod-fast' taper. I've been experimenting with a few different NFC Delta Hybrid blanks which measure out to XF (80ish degress), but when actually loaded up with a fish it behaves like a moderate or mod-fast. The blank I have slated to try next is the Delta Hybrid CB7106 cut down to 7'3" and it measures 900g/80deg.

Logan, I totally get you not being happy with a rod with an IP of 600, for popping a chatterbait out of weeds. It's the same as when you're needing to pop a lipless crankbait out of the weeds to trigger a strike. Simply pulling until it pops free doesn't generate the speed you need to clear the bait of weeds. So even though a 600 gram IP isn't necessarily horrible for chatterbaits, (my primary chatterbait rod has an IP of 657 grams) it isn't going to cut it for your application. I can suggest a blank that may fit what you're looking for. It's a blank that El mentioned me liking earlier in this thread. The NFC MB 709 IM. I have two rods built on that blank that I use for flipping and pitching in and around heavy cover. IP, 987 - 993, with AAs of 67 - 68. Love them for the purpose I built them for

Personally, I've thrown chatterbaits with one of them, but I didn't like it. But I was using it on a straight retrieve. For that application I just thought it was too powerful. But with your application, I imagine the fish are hitting it just as it's pausing after being ripped from the weeds. So kind of like setting the hook on a fish that has hit the bait on a fall. If that's the case, it might be worth consideration. I know if I get a fish hooked solidly on it when flipping or pitching, that fish is coming in the boat. Love the rods I have built on that blank.

El, as far as rods for other baits I fish, I just mentioned that my primary chatterbait rod has an IP of 657 grams. Its' AA is 66.5. Its built on an NFC MB 666 IM blank. I'm either throwing a 1/4 or 3/8 oz bait with it. Occasionally I'll throw a 1/2 oz bait on it if I am fishing over deeper tapering weeds for largemouth, or mid depth rock and gravel flats for smallmouth. Personally for how I fish a chatterbait, 750 grams would probably be as high in power I would go. But heck, if I am having trouble getting bit on a chatterbait, instead of changing to a different type of bait, I may give what Logan mentioned, a try. I've thought about going with a 7' or longer rod, but I'm not one that makes real long casts when I'm fishing around heavier cover. So the 6' 6" works well for me. I fish chatterbaits on either 17# mono, or 15" fluorocarbon when I want to fish the bait deeper.

Spinnerbait is a bait you mentioned. I prefer a powerful rod for spinnerbaits. Big heavy hooks and the potential for big fish, plus you need to be able to snap the bait to clear the blades of weeds. IP 700 - 900 grams. AA, 68 - 72. I like a stiffer tip than a faster action might have. Can't really offer a blank suggestion because both of my spinnerbait rods are old Shimano Speed Master Fighting rods. One is a 5' 6" pistol grip rod. The other a 6.6" two handed casting rod. I will say that if I am fishing a spinnerbait for smallmouth, I have a rod built on an Immortal IMMC73ML blank. With an IP of 552 grams it's kind of light in power for a spinnerbait, but when I'm throwing a spinnerbait for smallmouth I want a rod that has a nice bend into the mid section of the blank. It helps keep them pinned better.

1/4 - 1/2 oz jig rod. I fish those in heavy cover as well as open water. Heavy cover, the MB 709 IM mentioned above, as well as a rod I have built on an Immortal IMMC72MH. Numbers for the Immortal blank, IP 1,033 grams, AA 73. The Immortal will absolutely move a fish on the hook set, Sensitivity is better than the MB 709 mentioned, but it's a tip heavy blank, so I had to add a pretty substantial amount of weight to the butt to get the type of rod/reel balance I like. Awesome rod though. That rod is also my frog rod.

When out in open water fishing a jig or a Texas rig for smallmouth (or largemouth) I have 2 rods built on NFC SJ 736 X ray blanks. IP 729 grams and 734 grams respectively. AA for both blanks, 76. At least one of those rods will have a 3/8 oz weedless football jig and trailer on it. They are also my most versatile rods. I throw tube jigs with them. Weighted and unweighted fluke style baiits, and IMO I don't know if you could build a better rod for pitching weightless 5" Senkos. I've even thrown hollow bodied swimbaits on them.

I'll add another post with more later.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/23/2024 04:29PM by David Baylor.

This is why there needs to be ample context when discussing ideal rods. I personally wouldn’t go much above 650 CCS value for a spinnerbait rod where I live. The one I will build later this year is rated at 589 (Eternity ETEC76MSS). I throw 5/8ths ounce ones when they are available and otherwise settle for 1/2 ounce offerings. I fish some vegetation with them, but usually have really nice vertical lanes to work through. Most of the time I’m along edges or breaks in rock-lined bottom structure. In the Spring, it’s about working the outer edge of submerged brush with Colorado blades in one lake. If I’m stuck, it’s because of a bad cast and it’s not snapping loose.

CCS still takes a builder or angler being able to anchor the numbers to s few datapoints (blanks they really know). Until Rainshadow put the Eternity series in during the summer of 2021, there was virtually no rod I owned or was likely to buy in the database. St. Croix and United Composites haven’t embraced the system. One of the rod companies I compared in it had values for the exact same blank over 100 grams apart. Another one has numbers for their “ML” blank that well exceed the “M” blanks of three other companies I used to compare. I’ve had trouble with that company putting up several varying conventional ratings for a blank I purchased. I didn’t know if that CCS value means they really rate that much lighter than their competitors, or if it’s just another sloppy error (they were one source in the CCS crowd).

I now have the minimum of three known data points, with some spread, of CCS values for blanks that I really know. Thank you for number three, Norm. I provided one point. The number “375” has no more meaning than “ML” if you don’t have experience with some higher and lower values. The problem with crowdsourcing is that someone in the crowd needs to have gone ahead of you. Many of my builds are on low volume blanks. So will be the majority of future builds.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/16/2024 11:34PM by Kendall Cikanek.

"El,
So, you are saying if I built a rod out of bamboo, E glass, S glass, early generation carbon fiber, and X Ray material, as long as the IP and AA were identical you wouldn't care which one you used in your application? I was just saying I think there is more to it, and the high end option wouldn't always be my first choice."

It is my opinion that if the IP, AA, AND TNF'S of the blanks are very close the blanks will fish/perform the same. Obviously you can get any IP/AA combination out of any material, but you cannot get the same IP/AA/TNF combination out of any material. TNF provides a third measurement that really dials in matching performance.

I have high end spinning rods that I've built that have close matches on all three measurements and I don't think I could differentiate between them if blindfolded.

Thanks Mick for your time messaging with me about this. The conclusion I’ve come to is that regarding casting and spinning blanks, CCS measurements alone will not give you lure weight ranges. The formula on CCS literature is little or no help. You must use IP and AA together and compare to a known quantity from your own tests or results from one of the data bases. Now that I’m resolved to that I’m more comfortable collecting and researching data to answer my questions. Incorporating TNF is even better. Fwiw I find that between two rods with the same IP the higher AA will have a lower lure weight range.