Old production rods

[Hank3]

Hi out there,

This is something I have been thinking about for some time. Can anyone tell me why the lower cost rods by the big production companies of old are considered so bad to fish? I've never even tried one because when I started thinking about trying bamboo I read many stories about what to stay away from. I certainly understand that cheap ferrules , reel seat and cork as well as fewer guides make a difference. I also understand that the quality of the cane used would enter in the equation. I really can't believe that after seeking out the best came for their higher end rods the companies spent a lot of time sorting for the lesser grade rods. This leads me to the question of the taper. Did companies really use bad tapers for hundreds of thousands of rods? It makes no sense. My question boils down to this. Would a low end rod with the same hardware and amount of guides as a high grade rod fish close to the same? If not, why?

Thanks,

Hank3

[doloresboy]

I just bought a lower end Heddon "Blue Water" from a a forum member. Both tip down 1 1/2-2 inches. Lower end rolled ferrules.

I've built 2 of these tapers for friends. It's a great taper and I couldn't tell the difference between the one I bought and the ones I built. (Casting them).
An extra guide wouldn't hurt but not a great difference.

I don't think the tapers changed between grade quality.

I don't know if the cane quality did. I couldn't tell the difference.

Matt

[arfly]

Some of the old production rods were quite good. Orvis, Phillipson, Leonard, Heddon, Winston, Southbend, Montague and Horrocks Ibbotson etc. were all production rods. When people think of the bad or low end production rods it is usually Montague and HI along with the old Japanese rods. Some of the Montagues and HI were quite good. A lot of them were just awful. Yes some of them had really bad tapers that were nearly unfishable regardless of the hardware used. I think many of them had somewhat decent tapers, but like you said they had cheap hardware and a lack of guides. Some of them where not "cooked" right either making them prone to bad sets. I have seen that more in the old Japanese rods. Most of the lower end production rods I have played with tended to be on the heavier and slower side. I have had some old HI's that I redid and added more guides to. They fished alright with the extra guides. A 9' rod with only 4 guides is ridiculous, but it was done.

[Hank3]

Thanks for the reply's. I was referring to the U. S. companies. I thought a great deal of the problem must have been in the tapers. Still I find it amazing that this was not figured out and the tapers adjusted. I have noticed that Heddon and Granger seemed to carry their tapers throughout their rods regardless of price points. This is what I don't understand about Montague, H&I and Union Hardware.

Thanks again for your reply's!

[fisherman911]

Thanks for the reply's. I was referring to the U. S. companies. I thought a great deal of the problem must have been in the tapers. Still I find it amazing that this was not figured out and the tapers adjusted. I have noticed that Heddon and Granger seemed to carry their tapers throughout their rods regardless of price points. This is what I don't understand about Montague, H&I and Union Hardware.

Thanks again for your reply's!

Back when Montaque, H&I, Union Hardware etc. were building 1000's of rods a year most of the people who bought them didn't know or care too much about rod tapers. They were just looking for a tool to fish with. In fact I bet the majority of them used these rods to fish bait not flies.

[oldschoolcane]

Many of the rods were built to a price point, so components were sacrificed along with following a cheaper process to create the blank. Many of these rods were sold before or during the depression and raw materials were hard to find because of the wars. Montague and HI made some very good fly rods, you just have to know what your looking for.

[Heddon20]

Can't comment on Montague rods since I've never fished or owned one.

The shorter H-I rods (Tonka Queen, Tonka King, Princess, Prince, and Canada Creek) were very good and are worth buying. When you get into their longer rods, the quality begins to drop off dramatically. It's a shame that they didn't put more of an effort into their longer rods................

[waltryan1]

I like the 2 piece H-I rods and currently own a Tonka Queen and a Tonka Prince and both are very good small to medium size stream rods. I have owned 2 piece Montague Rapidans and have since learned that they came in more than one ferrule size and that the size is not marked on the rod.

[EastslopesTH]

I agree that H-I 2pc rods - Tonka Queen, Tonka Prince and Princess - are very decent fishing rods. However, be aware there was some variation in the tapers and not all tapers were very good.
For instance the Tonka Prince line (and equivalent Pocono, Sportking M/71 et.) have at least two different tip tapers with the fine-tip version creating a nice 4wt weight rod while the thicker tip-version feels quite stiff or rather loggy feeling that requires a 5wt (see: viewtopic.php?f=64&t=34065&p=182544&hil ... gy#p182535).


This variation also applies to the Tonka Queen series with variations in length and taper of the Tonka Queens rods (see: viewtopic.php?f=66&t=54879&hilit=+queen#p536522). Generally, though, I've found the 7'9" and 7'7" models cast a 5wt and the 7'8" taper requires a 6wt line. Some of this may be personal preference too.

I will add the 7-1/2' Princess is a sweet 4/5wt and although I've only experienced 3 of these, the tapers were consistent.

[64Emmons]

Don't overthink the taper thing with production rods. They took stock sections and trimmed them to suit whatever rod lengths they needed and even sanded areas like the final nine to twelve inches in tip sections. There were not special 9 foot three piece tapers and special 8 1/2 foot tapers in those production rods -- even Young, Leonards and Paynes. Heck, Dickerson used very few patterns to make his tapers -- a single pattern bar worked for a variety of rods.

[Hank3]

Ok. You are saying they really did not have a dedicated 9' taper in most cases? That helps to explain why so many don't fish well. I still don't understand why they did this as I feel it would have been more cost effective iron out a taper and let the machines do their work as opposed to tweaking on stock lengths. For the sake of conversation, is a Montague 9' Rapidan tapered different than a Flash, Mt. Tom etc? I can't believe they would go to the trouble. Thanks!

[ShenRods]

Chris is right.

Do not think individual model tapers for any production rod - Instead, think "grade" of the blank and quality of components. All the sections were mass produced from one template and then graded due to cosmetic quality. The better the cosmetic quality, the better the components. This meant more guides, fancier wraps and better hardware for a high grade rod.

Second, to answer your question, all the rod section blanks were produced at a standard longer length so they then could cut them to various lengths depending on the need / model. You can see this on longer rods when you take tapers at 1" intervals. They jump from one ferrule size to another in a matter of inches and run flat and then jump again. A tip section may have an area for 10, 11 and 12 ferrule - for a three or two piece rod.

They all only had a limited number template patterns for their mills and everything was run off of them. They ran the production of a section until the cutters dulled and they had to stop running the mill. It was the production technology at the time. Even Payne and Leonard had very limited templates. Sections were used for various models from trout rods to salmon rods.

The bottom line was these guys had to put chicken on the table at the end of the week. These were production minded workers who had a system to make these rods at the most cost effective means possible.

Chris

[Hank3]

Thanks for that great information. I did not realize the better makers were using that method as well.

[jeffkn1]

Most low end rod models from any given (production rod) company differed largely in content other than the blanks. They'd change to a different thread color, fewer guides, a plainer seat, and they had a whole new model to market. But the blanks were probably common to a large number of rods.

[oldschoolcane]

Chris,
Are you saying that some of the rods were built off the same tapered 9' section but others weren't? For example the Tonka Queen which was 2 piece 7'9" rod, with a swelled butt, I can't see this rod coming from the same cookie cutter format? Maybe we should agree some rods were built this way and some weren't?

[64Emmons]

Not all sticks were made for nine foot three piece rods, if that is what you are asking.

Your Tonka Queen could very likely have had its tips trimmed from stock tips that could have been five feet long? Who knows for sure? Your butt, even with the swell, could have been trimmed from a longer section too.

It is not safe to say, however, that Tonka Queens had special taper patterns for every model.

[St Vrain Angler]

This--and poor quality control--might account for the variation in Tonka Queen lengths. I currently have two standard 7'9" TQs, but I've also owned a 7'8" and a 7'10" TQ. And regardless of length, they're all nice casting 5wts.

[BigTJ]

Don't be shocked folks this is the way most bamboo rods have been made in terms of total numbers over the years. The variations in measured tapers that are attributed by some to design are in fact machining variations. Some of the finest rods were made this way - Winstons were. It's far more efficient. Linear tapers lend themselves to this kind of production.

[baetisrodhani]

Thanks for this topic. Very instructive...and it sure all makes sense !

[Broken Rod]

Don't overthink the taper thing with production rods. They took stock sections and trimmed them to suit whatever rod lengths they needed and even sanded areas like the final nine to twelve inches in tip sections. There were not special 9 foot three piece tapers and special 8 1/2 foot tapers in those production rods -- even Young, Leonards and Paynes. Heck, Dickerson used very few patterns to make his tapers -- a single pattern bar worked for a variety of rods.

Chis hits it on the head. The taper idea is a modern construct. Traditional rodmakers used the term "action," whereas "taper" wasn't in their vocabulary. The notion/idea of tapers shows up in the 1970s with Keane, Carmichael, and Garrison. Every quality and "middling" maker used taper sticks, usually 5 feet long. For a three piece rod, the maker chose what he considered the correct three sections to produce the "action" he desired. For instance, a rod built to a 17/64 butt ferrule and a 10/64 tip ferrule would have an extremely "fast action." By using 15/64 and 10/64, he had a slow-actioned rod.

Frankly, many production rods, aka "trade rods," are near masterpieces. On the downside, cheap rods are heavy, doggish, and the brass ferrules will break. A rod should have German silver ferrules, a quality reel seat, and a solidly constructed blank with no glue voids. As a rule, blemished blanks do not diminish castability. I don't wish to insult anyone, but if he can't afford a good rod-- which will be stronger, lighter, and more enjoyable-- then he has chosen the wrong hobby.