Common Cents System

[kbproctor]

I dug into this system because I wanted to determine the "weight" of the bamboo rod I am working on. It's pretty intriguing.

The 'boo rod came out at 8' 6", and a 3w with a slow action. I understand most bamboo rods are considered slow. To be more correct on the line weight, it should be a 100 grain line to fully load the rod with 30 ft of line out. If you routinely cast more line, the rod is effectively a lighter weight rod.

I checked some other blanks as well, then double checked my findings. The first rod I built came out spot on. The blank was supposed to be a fast 4W and it checked out as a 4W with a fast action. However, the Cabela's blank was supposed to be a moderate fast 4W and checked out as a moderate 3W that would benefit from one of the Scientific Angler lines that tend to be a half size heavy anyway. It isn't really a 4W at all.

I have 2 Batson Forcast blanks that are supposed to be 4 W, but the 2 pc checks out as a 5W and the 3 pc is a 3W.

To make a long story short, I am going to check out the TFO 5W I normally fish and like, and the Bass Pro Shops 6W I started with that feels clunky to cast, and see where they land. I may have the wrong line in that 6W.

Also, since I kept detailed notes on each blank, I am going to check them again after each rod is built to see if the double foot guides really do have a measurable effect.

[Bill Hanneman]

I would like to call your attention to the fact the Common Cents System (CCS) does not recognize the term "weight". "Weight" is simply a subjective number put on it by the rod's designer. It is "supposed" to tell the angler what line to use, but it is essentially useless. Any (or every) rod can cast any (or every) line for some distance and nowhere on the rod does it tell you the distance that rod was designed to cast. Stick with ERN.

Please don't try to start a discussion of the CCS on this forum. It is a subject of little interest here.

[LadyFisher]

Excuse me Dr. Bill, we have had some very good discussions on the Common Cents System on this board. Somehow you have confused something.
Regards,
Deanna Travis
LadyFisher

[JohnScott]

...Please don't try to start a discussion of the CCS on this forum. It is a subject of little interest here.

Whoa - where did this come from ?? Speak for yourself, but not for me, please.

[kbproctor]

I would like to call your attention to the fact the Common Cents System (CCS) does not recognize the term "weight". "Weight" is simply a subjective number put on it by the rod's designer. It is "supposed" to tell the angler what line to use, but it is essentially useless. Any (or every) rod can cast any (or every) line for some distance and nowhere on the rod does it tell you the distance that rod was designed to cast. Stick with ERN.

Please don't try to start a discussion of the CCS on this forum. It is a subject of little interest here.

Well, I am here and I am interested.

You will notice that the term "weight" was first used in quotes in my post above. However, your own Rosetta Stone (which I found most helpful and even printed an laminated for future use) connects the ERN to the AFTMA "Weight". I assume that this is because we buy this stuff by the "weight" and not by the ERN. I have yet to see one of your terms on a rod or box in a fly shop. I fully understand the disconnect there as well as the connect. While the term may not be correct, it is the one in most common use. I do not hear anyone saying he has a #7 rod. He or she always says they have a 7 weight rod.

I also understand that this has nothing to do with the forward cast. It is all with loading the rod on the back cast. I need 30 feet of line behind me to load the rod properly. Please correct me if I am wrong, but if I routinely have more or less line on my back cast, your Rosetta Stone is useless as it is based on the 30 foot figure.

I design wide area wireless networks for a living. I live by measurements. My systems' performance is defined by measurements. Measurements are good. Give me a way to measure something and I am a happy camper. A couple of people on this board referred me to your system and provided a link when I asked how to go about determining which line an old bamboo rod I came by would take.

I am impressed with your system. I can appreciate the work you went through to develop this system. However, I would appreciate it if, in the future, you would refrain from telling me what to discuss and where to discuss it.

[Bass_Bug]

H3ll just about everything pertaing to casting a fly rod is subjective.

And um....30 posts in 6 years? Obvisulsy NOT an (active) particapant on 'this board'!!!!!

By the way there are thread topics of little interest to me here as well. I just dont read them.
I myself am interested in learning more about the CCS.

Kevin, I admit to knowing next to nothing on the subject of weight determination, but when you say you need 30' (of given about of weighted line) on the back cast to load the rod, does this mean you "at least" 30'?

[lastchance]

Please, let's use our 'Common Cents' and keep this civil. I have studied the system and it certainly has merit and makes very good sense. I just don't enjoy getting that technical about my passion for fishing, tying and building. That doesn't mean there is anything wrong with it, it's just my preference.
Bruce

[No-tye-much]

The general response here has been similar to Lastchance's, some heated. There has been articles and many posts here over the years. For more acceptance and technical discussions, do a search over at the rodbuilding org site.

[Buddy Sanders]

I also didn't like the 'tone' of Bill's response...don't understand the reason for it.

But, he is the guy that developed the common cents system. It's a shame that he's not more open to discussing it here. Maybe he's just tired of 'defending' it. No way to tell.

I use it and like it.

Buddy

[kbproctor]

Bass Bug,

The way Dr. Bill has this figured out is that once you determine your ERN (Effective Rod Number), you can use his "Rosetta Stone" chart to determine the weight, in grains, of the proper line to load the rod with 30' of line out. The 30' corresponds with the fact that line number or "weight" is determined by the weight, in grains, of the first 30' of any numbered fly line. Less line does not load the rod fully and more line overloads the line. As with everything else we do, there is an acceptable range, but the 30' figure given here is the "optimum."

I may be over simplifying, and there are tons of charts and such to support his findings, but you can, of course load the rod with other weight lines but you will need a different length of line. The total weight of the line out required to load the rod is a constant. You can theoretically load the rod with any line. If the rod loads properly with 30' of 5W line, it will also load with 4W line at say 35' and 6W line at say 25' (Those figures are not meant to be accurate, just to demonstrate the theory) This corresponds with the practice of going up a line size or weight for small streams or down a notch for more open water by some folks.

I don't think this harms the "art" of fly fishing any at all. I think it explains how the art works. I know it caused a bunch of light bulbs to come on for me.

There are many more calculations that get into "feel" and other factors that I have not dug into as yet. The big eye opener for me was how a 5W rod might perform much better with a 4W line and why.

This also looks like a great way to be able to see and measure just how much double foot snake guides stiffen a rod, if at all.

I want to understand it better.