Curious what everyone prefers for their IP/AA for different fishing. Feel free to add whatever else.

Bass:
-Shakeyhead, weightless senko, etc
-Cranks, lipless cranks:
-Large swimbaits
-Frogs, etc
-Spinnerbaits, etc
-Jigs


Crappie/panfish:
Jigging:
Tight lining with live bait:

This system is for comparing blanks, not selecting blanks. If you don't have people's opinions from your region, fishing your water and structure conditions making suggestions you aren't going to get anything of value. My presentation requirements and conditions are completely different here in the west vs what they were when I was in Florida, or Michigan.

Spencer Phipps Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This system is for comparing blanks, not selecting
> blanks. If you don't have people's opinions from
> your region, fishing your water and structure
> conditions making suggestions you aren't going to
> get anything of value. My presentation
> requirements and conditions are completely
> different here in the west vs what they were when
> I was in Florida, or Michigan.

I use it for comparing blanks myself. A lot of people use it for selecting blanks too (purchasing). I was just curious, which I stated above, if people had certain IP/AA preferences for certain applications.

Jeremy, I still think they are comparing more than selecting, it's usually I have a rod I really like, and I want to build one like it, or they hear someone had great success with this blank from another company and is there something else similar? Lastly, you rarely hear many mentioning the material comparisons when evaluating, if the materials are not the same or similar than the results won't be either. All these powers and action angles can be built out of bamboo to X Ray C6O2, but they won't feel, react and fish the same.

Spencer Phipps Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Jeremy, I still think they are comparing more than
> selecting, it's usually I have a rod I really
> like, and I want to build one like it, or they
> hear someone had great success with this blank
> from another company and is there something else
> similar? Lastly, you rarely hear many mentioning
> the material comparisons when evaluating, if the
> materials are not the same or similar than the
> results won't be either. All these powers and
> action angles can be built out of bamboo to X Ray
> C6O2, but they won't feel, react and fish the
> same.

ahhh. Gotcha. I see what you are saying now. For example, I prefer X-Ray or X-Ray C6O2 .. IP/AA of them compared to a certain Delta might be similar but the the actual rod “performance” will be night and day. So yeah, IP/AA for a certain fishing application wouldn’t benefit us any without knowing the exact model among other things. We are on the same page now. lol

Blanks with the same power, action and length will indeed be the same, in terms of power, action and length. However, if they are made from different materials, they will FEEL different due to the difference in rod speed (reaction and recovery). For example, a carbon blank and a bamboo blank with the exact same, ERN, AA and Length, will indeed have the same exact power, action and length, but they will have markedly different rod speeds and therefore will feel different in use.

.............

Tom? Is the Common Cents System link in the upper left hand column fully functional? When I click on the CCS Articles link on the home page, nothing comes up? No page change, no PDF download.

There are no articles currently. Just the main instructions and cent to power chart. It's really all anybody needs to use the system.

..............

I recall another article showing how Dr. Hanneman showed how to measure each SECTION of a fly rod to get a more detailed understanding of the blank from tip to butt. Some rods have fast or slow tips and different mid or butt section AA's. It was fascinating and informative. (Maybe I saved it to a document file - I'll have to look and see.)

In another topic on jerk bait rods, it was mentioned that rods with fast tips and slower mid-sections were preferred to other bend profiles for this bait. When I read that, I immediately recalled Dr. H's article (tied to the larger CCS group of articles?) would be a useful tool for measuring the specific "sections" of a rod, not just its overall IP/AA = DBI.

I know I can measure the CCS on any rod one section at a time using the CCS guidelines. I just recall that article and thought it was very good. Dr. H spelled out how to do it.

The article you reference was published in RodMaker in 2004 under the title, "The Big Picture."

............

Les, you saying that you may have saved it to a document file made me think ........ clicking the links to the various articles resulted in a download of a PDF file. I have them all in my download folder. Well almost all of them ...... for some reason I don't have a PDF file for part 4, which I know I read. I do have PDF's of parts 1, 2, 3, and 5. If you want them, I'll pop them in an email and send them to you.

As far as the system being for comparing blanks, and not selecting them. It's true that the system was created so that a person could compare one blank or rod, to another blank or rod, by using common household items, and the same set of parameters. As Tom said, the basic CCS numbers, IP and AA, are not dependent on the material the blank is made of. If a bamboo blank has the same IP and AA as a graphite blank, then both blanks are going to perform similarly as they relate to the attributes those numbers represent.

While I don't think measuring a rods frequency is actually a part of the CCS, there is or was, an article that outlined the procedure to measure a rods frequency. Its' recovery speed. Frequency numbers are definitely one of the properties of a rod that are affected by the material the rod is made of.

Anyhow ....... yes, CCS numbers are comparative numbers. They don't determine what an angler might find a blank or rod, useful for., but they dang sure can be used to select a blank, or rod.

I relate CCS numbers to the numbers in joist and rafter span tables. Just like a carpenter uses the numbers in a span table to choose (select) the proper size, and type of lumber to fulfill the requirements of the task at hand., I use CCS numbers to choose a blank that will fit the requirements of the task at hand.

David Baylor Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Les, you saying that you may have saved it to a
> document file made me think ........ clicking the
> links to the various articles resulted in a
> download of a PDF file. I have them all in my
> download folder. Well almost all of them ......
> for some reason I don't have a PDF file for part
> 4, which I know I read. I do have PDF's of parts
> 1, 2, 3, and 5. If you want them, I'll pop them in
> an email and send them to you.
>
> As far as the system being for comparing blanks,
> and not selecting them. It's true that the system
> was created so that a person could compare one
> blank or rod, to another blank or rod, by using
> common household items, and the same set of
> parameters. As Tom said, the basic CCS numbers, IP
> and AA, are not dependent on the material the
> blank is made of. If a bamboo blank has the same
> IP and AA as a graphite blank, then both blanks
> are going to perform similarly as they relate to
> the attributes those numbers represent.
>
> While I don't think measuring a rods frequency is
> actually a part of the CCS, there is or was, an
> article that outlined the procedure to measure a
> rods frequency. Its' recovery speed. Frequency
> numbers are definitely one of the properties of a
> rod that are affected by the material the rod is
> made of.
>
> Anyhow ....... yes, CCS numbers are comparative
> numbers. They don't determine what an angler might
> find a blank or rod, useful for., but they dang
> sure can be used to select a blank, or rod.
>
> I relate CCS numbers to the numbers in joist and
> rafter span tables. Just like a carpenter uses the
> numbers in a span table to choose (select) the
> proper size, and type of lumber to fulfill the
> requirements of the task at hand., I use CCS
> numbers to choose a blank that will fit the
> requirements of the task at hand.

I also absolutely use it to help me select blanks to order also. Being I know the models of the NFC blanks, so I’m not blindly looking at CCS data only when selecting.

Hello All.

Tom, is this the article you spoke of?

Volume/Issue.............Article.....Author.......................Page.
6/3 CCS: & The "Big" Picture. By William "Dr. Bill" Hanneman. 10




Tight Wraps & Tighter Lines.

Yes, thanks.

..........

Tom Kirkman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yes, thanks.
>
> ..........


Now that I subscribed to the magazine, is there an online directory to look
up and read old issues?

Back issues are available for sale. There is no online repository of older articles other in the online library on this site and at the magazine website. Of course, these only present a few dozen out of over 1500 articles published since 1988.

........

thanks

David,

Hey there my friend! You have my email and I would benefit from your shared PDF's of CCS related articles. Thanks for your generosity in sharing with me and on this forum....again and again. I have a couple other questions I want to get your feedback on which we can discuss off-forum.....which will likely become forum topics later on (Like building my own NFC 725 X-Ray C6O2 blank with the 3+1 K-R Concept).

Where did, "The Big Picture" article go? Is this your missing Part 4? I know I read this article and recall its findings and benefits. Not trying to escape any paywalls here. I affirm that for the serious rod-builder, purchasing past copy(s) of Rod Maker for a particular build or general knowledge is a pennies to the dollar amount of information for all rod enthusiasts...or as it turns out, jerk bait experts as well. It is the next level of dialing it all in, IMO.

I found this article as a matter of course in doing a general, deeper dive into CCS not all that long ago. I just don't recall how I found it, but it wasn't hard to find. Don't quote me, but I think it was originally linked/related to the group of CCS articles in general under that same sub-title, "The Big Picture." All the CCS article(s) were tied together at one point?, and I read them one after the other....otherwise, I do not see how I would have even known of this article's existence. I remember a light going off in my mind at the time: "How can taper, power and action be pulled apart into separate categories (relatively) versus a single IP/AA number?"

At one time I had a suite of articles on the CCS online. Probably went online in 2005 as part of a short book of everything Dr Hanneman wrote on his system. I offered those until they sold out, which would have been maybe 2010.

At some point the amount of daily traffic between this site, RodMaker, CCS, RM Special Publications, subscriptions, etc., etc., I had to stop renting space on somebody's else's serve and buy a dedicated server for these sites. We did some clean up and added some things and dropped others. The old suite of CCS articles was dropped. I think that was about 2012 or 2014. Not sure.

..............

Thank you, Tom!

My first instinct was that something like you describe happened. (The older I get, the closer 2014 and 2024 seem like "just the other day...")

If the information from, "The Big Picture" is available in Rod Maker (volume and issue noted above) then that is where it is accessible now. Is this back issue still available?