It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 4:19 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




  Page 1 of 1   [ 16 posts ] New Topic Add Reply
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Mar 28, 2019 11:33 am • # 1 
User avatar
Full Member

Joined: 12/10/14
Posts: 218
Location: Manitoba
I did a Common Cents evaluation on the Maxcatch 1 wt I purchased a few weeks ago and found it to be very near the number where the 2 wts begin. This got me curious about where my Cabela’s CGR 2 wt fell. It turns out it was slightly more of a 1 wt than the new Maxcatch. Sorry, don’t remember the exact numbers but I would be willing to redo the tests if anyone likes.

Anyway, that got me thinking about whether this method of comparing rods works when crossing between fiberglass and graphite. To my mind, fiberglass, given that all else is equal, should always flex more and earlier than graphite. The slower action will bend more throughout its whole length than the equivalent graphite rod using the same load of pennies. Or maybe none of this matters and the process just measures the beefiness of a rod.

I expect our southern friends are out fishing but perhaps a few northerners would care to share their thoughts.

Harry


Top
  
PostPosted: Thu Mar 28, 2019 8:44 pm • # 2 
User avatar
Hero Member

Joined: 09/09/14
Posts: 519
Location: southern Brazil
Harry, you could probably consider me a southerner now, even when not out fishing.

I have used the CCS on rods and blanks made out of bamboo, fiberglass, fiberglass-“graphite” composites, and carbon fiber, including some for which there was no line rating. My understanding is that the rod material doesn’t matter much if any; what does matter is the taper or design. After all, those pennies never know what they are measuring.

Of course, this is all hard to apply to ice-fishing!

Incidentally, if it’s not too much trouble, I would like to see those numbers.


Top
  
PostPosted: Fri Mar 29, 2019 3:12 pm • # 3 
User avatar
Full Member

Joined: 12/10/14
Posts: 218
Location: Manitoba
I ran the test for a number of my rods and passed the results on.

Here are the numbers for the two rods mentioned in my original post.

CGR 6’2” 2 wt
ERN=1.2. AA=62 ( I checked this ERN 3 times )

Maxcatch 6’ 1 wt
ERN=1.92. AA=63

So the Maxcatch ends up near the upper end of the 1 wt range while the CGR 2 wt at the lower end of the 1 wt range. Go figure. The CGR weighs 1.9 oz and the Maxcatch 2.0 oz.

If anyone with these rods feels like doing this test I’d love to see their results.

Harry


Top
  
PostPosted: Thu Apr 04, 2019 10:31 am • # 4 
User avatar
Hero Member

Joined: 11/19/08
Posts: 1172
Location: Fayetteville, NC
The Common Cents System was developed after carbon fiber (graphite) rods had been on the market for several years, and both fishermen and rodmakers had found their favorite method of evaluating glass and bamboo rods by swishing them back and forth just didn't cut it with the new graphite rods. About the same time, lines lighter than 4wt became available to the general (non-custom silk) market, and most fishermen had no idea how to judge naturally stiffer graphite rods for 1, 2, and 3wt lines—They all felt too stiff for such light lines compared to glass and bamboo. All that said, you can certainly use CCS to evaluate glass blanks and finished rods, but comparing the results to graphite is going to leave you scratching your head until you've backed up your results with some actual casting with fly line, on water, to get some reference points.


Top
  
PostPosted: Fri Apr 05, 2019 8:52 am • # 5 
User avatar
Administrator

Joined: 06/25/09
Posts: 3259
Location: Winston-Salem, NC
I couldn't have said it better than Cross Creek. Those are my thoughts exactly.


Top
  
PostPosted: Sat Apr 06, 2019 2:35 pm • # 6 
User avatar
Full Member

Joined: 12/10/14
Posts: 218
Location: Manitoba
I took a look at the CCS numbers that came out of the 2 wt shootout (sticky above this thread) and am even more convinced the numbers provide little guidance in selecting line weights, especially in the case of fiberglass rods.

The ERN range of the 2 wt rods tested varies from a low of .89 to a high of 4.16, a range of rod weights of from 1 wts to 4wts. The two lowest ERN numbers, .89 and 1.12, come from fiberglass rods. Although usually the reviewer comments support the ERN numbers they often oppose them.

Harry


Top
  
PostPosted: Mon Apr 08, 2019 2:27 pm • # 7 
User avatar
Newbie

Joined: 03/18/10
Posts: 27
Location: Frisco, TX; DFW MetroPlex
Does all this really mean much? I can’t but a rod unless I “feel” it work! I just think it’s how a rod feels and casts for me! I just think it’s all very subjective! I guess I am just too darn old and stuck in my was! But I’m the same with a gun, I have to feel how it fits and shoots!


Top
  
PostPosted: Wed May 22, 2019 5:26 pm • # 8 
User avatar
Hero Member

Joined: 05/28/18
Posts: 603
Location: Tucson , Hellazonia
So how do you do a CCS ?


Top
  
PostPosted: Wed May 22, 2019 9:44 pm • # 9 
User avatar
Hero Member

Joined: 08/27/15
Posts: 781
Location: New Jersey
jangles wrote:
So how do you do a CCS ?


https://www.common-cents.info/


Top
  
PostPosted: Thu May 23, 2019 11:28 am • # 10 
User avatar
Hero Member

Joined: 05/28/18
Posts: 603
Location: Tucson , Hellazonia
Thanks knotty . That looks like a lot of work to me . I could be wrong though .


Top
  
PostPosted: Thu May 23, 2019 2:00 pm • # 11 
User avatar
Full Member

Joined: 04/02/17
Posts: 221
Location: Colorado
You guys lost me before I even got started. I looked at the CCS and hurt myself.


Top
  
PostPosted: Thu May 23, 2019 7:35 pm • # 12 
User avatar
Hero Member

Joined: 07/10/09
Posts: 1555
Location: Plano Texas
For me if the rod looks nice and feels nice test it with the rated line, not nice go one up then two up. So much work then you still have to try it out. Just my two cents worth.


Top
  
PostPosted: Thu May 23, 2019 11:08 pm • # 13 
User avatar
Hero Member

Joined: 08/27/15
Posts: 781
Location: New Jersey
jangles wrote:
Thanks knotty . That looks like a lot of work to me . I could be wrong though .


Seems like a useful tool but I’ve never utilized it.


Top
  
PostPosted: Fri May 24, 2019 5:43 pm • # 14 
User avatar
Hero Member

Joined: 05/28/18
Posts: 603
Location: Tucson , Hellazonia
Knotty wrote:
jangles wrote:
Thanks knotty . That looks like a lot of work to me . I could be wrong though .


Seems like a useful tool but I’ve never utilized it.


I was lost on the homepage .


Top
  
PostPosted: Sat May 25, 2019 1:12 am • # 15 
User avatar
Full Member

Joined: 05/02/13
Posts: 136
Takes me around 5 min to perform the CCS on a blank or a rod. Remember it is just a good guide line. An individuals results may vary due to their casting skills or ability. A blank that spec out as a 4 wt, may just perform better for an individual with a 3 or 5 wt.


Top
  
PostPosted: Sun May 26, 2019 1:26 am • # 16 
User avatar
Hero Member

Joined: 05/28/18
Posts: 603
Location: Tucson , Hellazonia
SWCR wrote:
Takes me around 5 min to perform the CCS on a blank or a rod. Remember it is just a good guide line. An individuals results may vary due to their casting skills or ability. A blank that spec out as a 4 wt, may just perform better for an individual with a 3 or 5 wt.


Yeah Roger but you been doing it for a hundred years ! :lol


Top
  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  

  Page 1 of 1   [ 16 posts ] New Topic Add Reply

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  


- OurBoard Support -