Old Partridge hook

[ibookje]

I was given these hooks by a friend. The labels show they are Partridge hooks, but unlike any Partridge hooks I know they have much finer wire and longer shank. Looks very much like the Mustad 94831, but being 4x fine it's not. The E1A Hooper was my initial thought but these have thicker wire and not as long a shank.

Anyone know what model Partridge hook these might be?



Tied a Light Cahill with this hook

[Hellmtflies]

Jay,
Those hooks look to be a "D4A" from Partridge.
Mark

[ibookje]

It's too (4x!) fine (delicate) to be a streamer hook (that's the D4A) I think?
Also going down to size 16 doesn't sound like a streamer hook.

[bearbutt]

Jay--yes, E1As. Which are 4x fine and 1/2x long. It's a very nice hook, and your Cahill does it justice.

bb

[ibookje]

Hi BB thank you!
That's what I thought initially but I found a good picture of the E1A Hooper hook and now I'm doubting. The hook in the picture has quite a thicker wire and is not as long shank as the ones I have?

Got this picture from Whitetail fly tieing:

[bearbutt]

That's a contemporary Partridge--look at the barb on it--no relation at all to the vintage Partridge hooks made in the UK. I'll dig up some vintage Hoopers tomorrow and see if I can get some pics up. I don't trust ANY hook pics that do not also come with pics of the packaging--it's the only way you can confirm dating too.

bb

[slw]

I know those hooks well, and have them in quantity. They are "hand made" at the old Partridge factory in Redditch. Marketed here in the US by Orvis and shown only in their 1977 Spring catalog. If memory serves, there was also an ad in FFM at the same time announcing their production and availability in the US at approximately the same time. IIRC, that ad showed a woman holding in her fingers a partially formed hook in one of the machines that formed the barb or bend or eye.
Orvis offered a total of 12 Partidge hook styles for both trout and salmon tying in the same small cardboard boxes with the same lableing. Having tied on Mustad hooks for some years prior, these Partridge hooks were a revelation to me. As a side note about these hooks, to the best of my knowlege, they were the first time "hand made" British hooks were commercially available in the US for some years. Sealy, Allcock and such were gone.

After Orvis quit carrying these hooks (1978), Redditch made Partidge hooks showed up in the US in different boxes with different lables. Also very good quality. I bought some of those at the old Yellow Breeches shop in PA.

I've given up trying to post photos here from hosting sites. If you'll contact me by PM with your email addy, I'll try to send you scans of whatever I can find. You can repost them here if you wish.

[dale]

It never ceases to amaze me at the depth and breadth of knowledge on this forum!

Dale

[bearbutt]

I pulled a few packages of Hoopers, and have pieced together a small history of the hook and its variations. From left: E1A Patridge packaging, 1970s; E6A Flymakers repacking of NOS hooks, early 2000s; E6A Patridge packaging ? 2000s; E1A Patridge packaging, 1970s-1980s.



"Hooper" was Ken Hooper, who worked as a hookmaker for both Partridge and Sealey for 50 years. The pattern is based on the "premium" 4x dry fly hook that Sealey made for Orvis, and which Partridge press labels described as "a down eye favoured by North American, Japanese and many other fly tyers." These were produced, as far as I can tell from the packaging, in the 1970s.

Hoopers came in both long shank versions (E1A) and short shank versions (E6A). Both are described in Dick Stewart's The Hook Book:

E1A: 4x fine, 1/2 x long
E6A: 4x fine, 1x short

For a size 12,

the E1A has a shank length of 10mm and gape of 4.8mm (one source) or 5mm (another source)
the E6A has a shank length of 8 mm and gape of 5.0mm



Here's a sample of a size 12 E1A next to one of Jay's hooks--which seems to be 1x long and with a slightly narrower gape. The packaging indicates these are from an earlier period, and from before Hooper's version evolved. My hook collection isn't deep enough to go into this period, but the fact the hooks are numbered as they are would suggest a period after the 1960s. Does anyone have any early Partridge catalogues to help revolve this? Another option would be to reach out to Richard Jeffries--who knows Partridge history very well.

Cheers,
bb

[ibookje]

Wow that's some amazing historic overview.
Thank you BB

[BigTJ]

If those are 4x fine the standard wire must be the diameter of chain link fence. Could it be 4 xl? At best that’s fine wire. Or maybe just marketing hyperbole. Whatever the typical fine wire sz 12 dry flies by other manufacturers have wire finer than that.

[bearbutt]

If those are 4x fine the standard wire must be the diameter of chain link fence. Could it be 4 xl? At best that’s fine wire. Or maybe just marketing hyperbole.

Nope, it's not hyperbole, and it's not 4xl: the wire of size 12 4xf E1A is .51mm in diameter. Weight is 36mg.

bb

[BigTJ]

I just measured a Tiemco 100 sz 12, 1xf at 0.48 mm. A Tiemco 2302 standard wire hook is 0.53 mm. I see similar diameters from other manufactures for 1x fine wire. If it’s not hyperbole then it’s as I thought, Partridge wire is heavier for a given rating than other brands. It was easy to tell from the photo that supposed 4x fine wire is darn close to what other hook companies call standard wire.

I tried but I cannot find any other manufacturer claiming to make a hook with 4 xf wire to make a comparison.

I found the Partridge wire weak for its diameter and stopped using the trout hooks 25 years ago as a consequence. May have just been one or two models but it was enough for me to move on. That was in the 80’s from what I understand they had a loyal following.

My intention of these posts is not to put down Partridge rather it’s information sharing to other tiers so they understand that different manufactures use different wire so you have to take the ratings with a grain of salt and you need to understand the wire strength can vary per given dia too.

[bearbutt]

I just measured a Tiemco 100 sz 12, 1xf at 0.48 mm. A Tiemco 2302 standard wire hook is 0.53 mm.

Well, OK, but to me this is apples and oranges: the Partridge hooks we are taking about date from the early 1970s. When were your Tiemcos made?

As Datus Proper wrote in What the Trout Said, there was no consistency between manufacturers; and even within the history of one hook maker, a specific model will have different specs over time.

The specs I provided are from the manufacturer. Dick Stewart's book has additional specs for 1980s era TMCs. His TMC 100 size 12 has .51 wire. Stewart also provides "Bend Resistance" ratings in ounces. His size 12 TMC 100 bends at 22 oz. A Partridge E1A size twelve bends at 29 oz. A size 12 E6A is rated at 22 oz. You can find his testing process described on pp 17-20.

Keep in mind his data is skewed at places; his hook weights are all off, and should be cited in mg, not g.

Like you say--all this data is to be taken with considerable salt.

bb

[creakycane]

I inherited a bunch of hooks in boxes like Jay initially posted. 10's, 12's and 14's, some labelled 4x fine wire, some fine wire; some 1x long and some 2x long. Some have a the modern Partridge emblem embossed on the box in blue (ie, circa 70s). Never did match them to a particular model at Partridge. Orvis sounds like a likely answer; learn something new on this forum all the time...... Pretty nicely-shaped Catskill hooks, they are not weak, but I am not sure about their potential to break. I would never have guessed them to be called 4x fine by any customary standard I am aware of.....

[slw]

My head's getting a bit swimmy with all the minutia about these hooks ;-)

As I said, I have them in quantity and have been tying on them and fishing with them for 45 years now. While I'm not a head hunter, I occasionally catch an out sized trout. I've never had these hooks fail. Not even when I've pinched the barb down.

Since I was working in an Orvis Store during the late 1970s, I was also selling them. I don't recall anyone returning them because they failed.

As to the 4x fine designation, I can't offer much help. What I do know is that these hook with the 4x fine designation were intended to compete with the Mustad 94833 hook, which had become popular because of the popularity of hackleless dry flies starting in the early '70s. I stocked both Mustads and these Partridge hooks at the same time and was familiar with both. It's been a very long time since I had a 94833 in my hands but my recollection from that time is that the 4x fine Partridge hooks were a bit finer wire than the 94833. It never occured to me to mic or weigh them. I could be wrong.

[ibookje]

The Partridge next to a Mustad 94840 size 12
The Partdridge looks a tad finer wire than the Mustad

[BigTJ]

Bear butt - my TMCs are from the late 80’s. About the same era as the Partridge hook hook package in the picture, if my memory serves me.

As far as hook wire diameter perhaps Mr Stewart didn’t have access to a highly accurate measurement tool, I’m using a mitutoyo dial caliper which is pretty dead on, I’ll check with my micrometer later after I find a battery.

If Mr Stewart’s bend resistance data is right it lends even more credence to the fact the Partridge wire is heavier for its rating than other manufacturers. Tiemco wire is high quality steel the only way I can see for Partridge hooks to be stronger is the wire is heavier. I have landed some very big fish on the as 12 Tiemco hooks, including some Vancouver Island summer run steelhead, so I trust them.

Also the 100 has a wider gap so the moment arm is greater for the same applied force, or equal with a lower applied force to a smaller gap hook. That’s the trade off for these modern wide gapped hooks.


John

[bearbutt]

As to the 4x fine designation, I can't offer much help. What I do know is that these hook with the 4x fine designation were intended to compete with the Mustad 94833 hook, which had become popular because of the popularity of hackleless dry flies starting in the early '70s. I stocked both Mustads and these Partridge hooks at the same time and was familiar with both. It's been a very long time since I had a 94833 in my hands but my recollection from that time is that the 4x fine Partridge hooks were a bit finer wire than the 94833. It never occured to me to mic or weigh them. I could be wrong.

I think this nails it as far as the rationale for 4x hooks at this time period.

I just took out some 94833s and 94831s and 9480s for comparative wire measurements--along with Jay's 4x Partridge, and (for comparison purposes) Bergman's regular wire Blue label hooks--measured them with a Mitutoyoa digital micrometer--and this is what I got:




Both the 94833s and 94831s were ever so slightly lighter than the 4x Partridge. I measured the hooks at the center of the shank--where the wire is at its roundest (the forging process on Mustads flattens the bend slightly).

As for TJ's comment on Stewart's measuring instruments--he used what appears to be a Brown & Sharpe dial caliper:



His bend resistance testing apparatus doesn't look too shabby, but I;m not mechanical engineer--have you read what he wrote about it and his process?

bb

[ibookje]

It seems the hooks are 'old' like early 1970's.
Davy Wotton who used to work for Partridge said:
"Yes l was the technical director for many years when my friend Alan Bramley owned the business that he bought from the Partridge family. Does the box not show a code, if not these hooks go way back. The forged Redditch bend was used on many of the older hooks, other hook makers like Edgar Sealey also more or less made the same hook profiles."