St Croix/rod geeks spinning vs casting

[webertime]

I feel dumb that I don't know this.  St Croixs 68Mxf and 610MLxf they have in both spinning and casting Rods.  Are they the same blank between varieties? 

[MickD]

I expect they are, but am not 100% sure.  If the model numbers are exactly the same, they are the same.  Blanks can be built any way you want; the main thing (and challenge with subjective descriptions which are sometimes inconsistent even within the same company's blanks) is to get the power and action you want.

[webertime]

Thanks Mick.  I've got a Legend Xtreme 68Mxf casting and Avid 610MLxf casting and was wondering if it be worth having spinning rods in the same taper/action/power.

[MikeK]

My old St Croix blank catalogs are gone but when they stopped selling blanks Mud Hole had a cross reference to MHX blanks on their website.

 

St Croix had casting and spinning versions of blanks, so as an example from that cross reference

3S68MXF 6-12# cross to MXH DS821 with CCS power 310 grams

3C68MXF 8-14# cross to MHX MB812XF with CCS power 617 grams

 

Since they break down finished rods as spinning or casting that might follow but I do not know.

 

 

[MickD]

This shows the problem.  2 blanks called Medium power, same lengths, one at 310 grams one at 617 grams.  Just because one is called a "spin" and could be expected to be of less power, I don't think a difference of this magnitude is reasonable.  It's the same thing for action with one blank maker's lineup having blanks called "fast" with CCS AA's varying as much as 25 degrees.  What can be done?  1. Ask the blank maker for CCS data.  They have it and most will give it when asked.  2.  Set up your own CCS rig and measure your blanks.  In time you'll have a better understanding of what's going on, although there will still be surprises without having CCS data up front, 3.  Consult and support https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1r3zv1ygtuUjPBa-c5LT9RTYeDR_pnCDIkVIdDv0YoeQ/edit#gid=1592691333

 

If you are unfamiliar with CCS it is a method for objectively measuring the power and action of blanks and rods.  https://www.common-cents.info/  It was developed primarily for fly rods, but it is applicable to any blanks/rods.

[spoonplugger1]

Simply put when looking at the butt and tip diameters, the spinning blank are smaller in diameter on both.

[MikeK]

3 hours ago, spoonplugger1 said:

Simply put when looking at the butt and tip diameters, the spinning blank are smaller in diameter on both.

Pretty close for the ones I listed above . . .

 

Spin: 3S68MXF STC SC3 Spinning Blank 6'8" 1pc 6-12# B0.515 T4.5
Cast: 3C68MXF-F STC Bass 6'8" 1pc 8-14# B0.52 T4.5

[1984isNOW]

On 5/25/2023 at 4:59 PM, MikeK said:

Pretty close for the ones I listed above . . .

 

Spin: 3S68MXF STC SC3 Spinning Blank 6'8" 1pc 6-12# B0.515 T4.5
Cast: 3C68MXF-F STC Bass 6'8" 1pc 8-14# B0.52 T4.5

 

The next question would then be how much do they each weigh?

 

I'll say I'm less bothered by blanks/rods clearly marked as separate and different by intended purpose having different characteristics ie. the S vs C version with 300ip difference. But if the same blank/rod series had a 300ip difference between a 6'6 MF and a 7'2 MF that would be concerning. Or honestly even within the same manufacturer there should only be a reasonable difference between series, otherwise what the heck is the point of reference for the consumer?

 

But spinning blanks are widely designed to be lighter in power in general, and I think rightfully so as that is often their intended use. Its kind of like an octave and ahrps and flats in music, we don't use 188 different symbols for each sound but only 7, with a couple of specific modifiers to adjust accordingly for those in between sounds, the issue is when each manufacturer tunes their rods to a different key, so that across manufacturers (and oftentimes even internally) the same C sharp (MxF) is not actually the same as the next one.

 

A SC/RG blank that is MHF should feel about the same in terms of power and speed (given a reasonable deviation) across rod/blank lines. A mojo and legend will feel and fish different to a degree, but both being MHF should behave in a similar fashion when it comes to loading and casting and fighting a fish.

[MickD]

4 hours ago, Kites R4 Skyfishing said:

even within the same manufacturer there should only be a reasonable difference between series, otherwise what the heck is the point of reference for the consumer?

With some manufacturers there seems to be no rational explanation for the variation in the subjective descriptions of their blanks (and rods).   A big maker of blanks has recently been giving CCS numbers on their new blank introductions.  This did not happen by accident.  Builders on forums have been pressing for CCS data much more insistently lately.  The only solution is to continue to request CCS numbers, continue to press the manufacturers for the data, which they all actually do have.  Rainshadow RX10 spin and cast and Point Blanks are the only ones I know of that provide the data up front.  Here is a source of quite a bit of data:  https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1r3zv1ygtuUjPBa-c5LT9RTYeDR_pnCDIkVIdDv0YoeQ/edit#gid=1592691333

[Deephaven]

10 years ago when I built a big pile of rods the blanks were different.  Not sure if all were.  Somewhat close, but the tapers were in different spots.

[MikeK]

5 hours ago, Kites R4 Skyfishing said:

 

The next question would then be how much do they each weigh?

 

I'll say I'm less bothered by blanks/rods clearly marked as separate and different by intended purpose having different characteristics ie. the S vs C version with 300ip difference. But if the same blank/rod series had a 300ip difference between a 6'6 MF and a 7'2 MF that would be concerning. Or honestly even within the same manufacturer there should only be a reasonable difference between series, otherwise what the heck is the point of reference for the consumer?

 

But spinning blanks are widely designed to be lighter in power in general, and I think rightfully so as that is often their intended use. Its kind of like an octave and ahrps and flats in music, we don't use 188 different symbols for each sound but only 7, with a couple of specific modifiers to adjust accordingly for those in between sounds, the issue is when each manufacturer tunes their rods to a different key, so that across manufacturers (and oftentimes even internally) the same C sharp (MxF) is not actually the same as the next one.

 

A SC/RG blank that is MHF should feel about the same in terms of power and speed (given a reasonable deviation) across rod/blank lines. A mojo and legend will feel and fish different to a degree, but both being MHF should behave in a similar fashion when it comes to loading and casting and fighting a fish.

 

Specs cited are manufacturer.  I posted them in response that tip and butt diameters were a good way to distinguish.  I don't have weights and agree that is important but a measuring system like Micks CCS is more useful to me than any manufacturers system even if I can decode it.

 

 

[1984isNOW]

42 minutes ago, MikeK said:

 

Specs cited are manufacturer.  I posted them in response that tip and butt diameters were a good way to distinguish.  I don't have weights and agree that is important but a measuring system like Micks CCS is more useful to me than any manufacturers system even if I can decode it.

 

 

I hear ya, I was just asking because they were so close in size, if they're different in weight I'd imagine that means a difference in material which would likely be that 300 IP difference. CCS is certainly helpful, not perfect, as nothing is, but has its place.

[MickD]

1 hour ago, MikeK said:

even if I can decode it.

You cannot decode it because it does not exist.  There is one manufacturer which offers blanks all called "fast" which have CCS AA's from about 50 to 75 degrees if I remember correctly.  An incredible difference, all called "fast."