Hello Everyone,

Over the past week, my son (with some help from me) completed his 5th rod. Each one is done a little bit better, a little bit nicer, and a little bit faster. I have been reading a fair amount about rod building, blanks, etc. When my son is working on a build, and I see an opportunity to pass on some of the info I have read, we will take a break and go over that article or you tube video. It is a nice way for him to learn something new while it is applicable to what he is working on (and it keeps me from overwhelming him and killing his spark to learn by printing off 200 pages of articles, posts, etc and telling him, "Here. Read this!").

So this weekend I read everything about the CCS on [common-cents.info] (Eventually, I will be able to get all the concepts across to him)

And I have some questions that I hope the fine people here will help me with (Note: I've subscribed to RodMaker Magazine. Haven't received our first copy yet, but I eagerly await being able to finally start learning from that wonderful source of information)

1. The CCS site has headings and links for 6 parts / articles, but part 6 - Overview, does not have a working link and it says "Coming Soon." The "forward" by Tom Kirkman on the main page says 2005... Is there going to by a Part 6 added to the site? Perhaps the article, "Simplified Common Cents System" is meant to be part 6? I just want to make sure I'm not missing something or waiting for something that is not coming. :)

2. In the article I just mentioned (Simplified Common Cents System), it makes reference to the terms TP and PR and the URRS (which by the way, I have mis-read as USSR more than once! That was supposed to be funny), but there isn't an article on the site that describes these terms and new system. I have made a search of past posts and see that they were discussed in an issue of RodMaker about 8 or 9 years ago, but there isn't any in depth conversation about them here on rodbuilding.org. However, the URRS chart that was just added to the library has TP and PR listed. Is it possible to post the article about this system and terms in the library? Otherwise, for us new folks that didn't subscribe to the magazine in 2008, we are not privy to what those measurements are, how to get them, and how to interpret them. Again, I don't want to miss something important.

3. I know that some blank manufacturers report the CCS data on there products. Can anyone just bring me up-to-date on how the system is used / not-used and/or been modified since the articles were published?

4. Is there any current research / testing on going to expand, refine, continue, broaden what was started by the CCS? I also did a search on Dr. William Hanneman, but couldn't find any definitive information about him. Can anyone bring me up to date about him since the last of his articles on the CCS site was written (2007 maybe)?

Thank you very much.

Best,
Gib

Father to William (15 yrs), who I hope has found his passion in custom rod building!

The CCS hasn't been changed much if at all since its inception. It's really no different that the systems we use for measuring things like temperature, weight, money, etc. They're all based on the same concept of objectivity and relativity. There isn't too much reason to expand anything further lest users get weighed down in far too many things that aren't necessary. Once you have length, weight, action, power and speed, you've pretty much run the gamut on what most folks need to know about any rod blank.

The URRS can be found in what I believe is the volume 11 #4 issue. I'll have to go back and check to make sure.

Dr. Hanneman suffered a stroke a few years ago but has largely bounced back. I still speak to him perhaps a couple times per year. He has written numerous articles for the magazine over the past 15 or so years. I may reprint some of those articles as we go along.

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



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/03/2017 08:11PM by Tom Kirkman.

With all due respect. Don't drown the kid while teaching him how to swim.

Hello Gib,
As Tom mentioned the resulting measurements of the CCS are simply objective measurements. That said, it’s pretty much up to each builder/fisherman to determine whether having those objective measurements can be used to their advantage. I’m mostly interested in Action Angle and ERN, with ERN being most important when I’m building fly rods. With my casting style (we all have our own when you think of it) I’ve come to believe that X.5 or so ERN rods fit the line weight I plan to fish with any given rod. For me, and I emphasize for me, a 3.5 (+/-) ERN blank usually results in a finished rod that fishes well with a three weight line, a 4.5 (+/-) ERN blank for a four weight line rod, and so on.

My casting style and average casting distance are factors. I also believe the components I choose for my rods (including reel seat weight) may also be a factor. That’s why I emphasize MY preferences in ERN for the blanks I choose. I’ve read other builders comment that 3.0 means three weight, 4.0 means four weight, and so on. For those particular builders ERN’s around X.0 are what they may be looking for when choosing a blank to cast a particular line weight. And they're right!

Enjoy the fishing and rod building with your son, soon he’ll get into the fumes…. Perfumes, Exhaust Fumes, etc.

Jeff

Lynn Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> With all due respect. Don't drown the kid while
> teaching him how to swim.


Yes. You are correct. I'm trying to be aware of how much "academic" learning goes on. I want him to stay excited about this activity so I usually try and bring something up when he is struggling or when he is working on something that I know would be better off if he learned about something said in an article or video.

Thanks!

Father to William (15 yrs), who I hope has found his passion in custom rod building!

I'd leave the technical stuff alone for a bit (although the CCS isn't terribly "technical)." Building and then catching a fish on the rod is probably the first order of business. That's how you hook someone on rod building.

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

Just my two cents. I've built and continue to build a lot of rods without using the CSS. I have used it in the past to determine the weight of a fly rod blank someone had given me without any information. It gave me a very accurate reading on what weight fly line the rod was designed to throw. Most of the time I rely on the manufacturer's rating to built the rod. I am partial to fly rods and rods in the 2-6 weight range, mainly St Croix blanks, and I have never had a problem with the way they throw the weight line recommended.

That being said, from a purely academic perspective the CSS is very interesting and provides a lot of very good information that can be used to compare rods from different manufacturers. I think it could also provide a way of consistently evaluating rods from any manufacturer and once you determine a set of numbers that work for you, the CSS will provide a consistent method to exactly determine whether or not a rod will perform the way you like. From a builder perspective, it can be used to determine what a customer really is looking for in a rod. Test casting rods with different CSS can be used to fine tune the customer desires.

Have fun with your son, he is embarking on something that he can do for many years to come.

Wright has it right. (second paragraph -
I would edit it to read "From a purely practical perspective. . .")

From purely practical... I agree. Throw back to my teaching days I guess.

All very good points. I appreciate the feedback.

I do agree that the CSS is interesting. I guess in all my earlier ramblings, one point was misunderstood and another was left out. I'm not teaching the CSS to my son right now. It is good for me to read and learn more about "things" since we are new to the trade. Maybe one day we can talk about some of its tenets. But when we have finished a rod build, first thing that happens is a trip to the lake to go fishing. He lives it.

What went unsaid, and that is my fault, is that to date, we have blanks from CRB, MHX, and uh... yeah. CRB & MHX. So we are familiar with that. But I have read the catalogs and websites about bushido, Rainshadow, St Croix, NFC, PointBlank and a few others. Not that I am going to drop a few hundred dollars on a blank or step up to a real high mod design, but I am interested in trying out something different. Since we can't touch and feel all the different blanks out there (unless I can get us to the ICRBE, which I'm trying to do), it seems the CCS is a good way to compare blanks and potentially differentiate everything on a cost basis as well. So I also, started this post wanting to know more about the CCS so I can try my best to use it in that manner.

We are still learning and trying to improve. Undoubtedly we will (continue to) make some "less than optimal" buying decisions along the way. None the less... I'm a reader and an analyzer by nature. I want to try and make the best buying decisions as we go along. This site certainly helps in that regard.

Again, thanks to all

Gib

Father to William (15 yrs), who I hope has found his passion in custom rod building!

All very good points. I appreciate the feedback.

I do agree that the CSS is interesting. I guess in all my earlier ramblings, one point was misunderstood and another was left out. I'm not teaching the CSS to my son right now. It is good for me to read and learn more about "things" since we are new to the trade. Maybe one day we can talk about some of its tenets. But when we have finished a rod build, first thing that happens is a trip to the lake to go fishing. He lives it.

What went unsaid, and that is my fault, is that to date, we have blanks from CRB, MHX, and uh... yeah. CRB & MHX. So we are familiar with that. But I have read the catalogs and websites about bushido, Rainshadow, St Croix, NFC, PointBlank and a few others. Not that I am going to drop a few hundred dollars on a blank or step up to a real high mod design, but I am interested in trying out something different. Since we can't touch and feel all the different blanks out there (unless I can get us to the ICRBE, which I'm trying to do), it seems the CCS is a good way to compare blanks and potentially differentiate everything on a cost basis as well. So I also, started this post wanting to know more about the CCS so I can try my best to use it in that manner.

We are still learning and trying to improve. Undoubtedly we will (continue to) make some "less than optimal" buying decisions along the way. None the less... I'm a reader and an analyzer by nature. I want to try and make the best buying decisions as we go along. This site certainly helps in that regard.

Again, thanks to all

Gib

Father to William (15 yrs), who I hope has found his passion in custom rod building!