A Touradif rod

[reelmaker]

thanks to both of you.....that time frame fits well with the history of this rod that I know...

[2dabacking]

I would like to share some additional thoughts regarding the A&F rods. If anyone is able to shed any light or provide a hypothesis, puhlease feel free to help us. I am much less concerned with being right or wrong than finding the truth. As I stated from the start of this thread, definitive answers are very difficult when it comes to trade rods; thus, the best that I can do is provide a high degree of probability based on both documentation and known rods marked by the maker.

I'll start by revisiting my thoughts on production rods, as a good point has been made that retailers likely reached out to whoever could provide the goods. While I respect that point, I am struggling with it for two reasons. First, there must have been some order to the decision-making process. For example, A&F's tackle department must have had a first-call list for its specific lines of rods. Whenever it needed Touradif rods, it seems likely that it would reach out to, say, Payne, first, to see if the rod shop could handle the production needed. It is difficult to grasp the idea that A&F would contact several different makers for a product that was to be made consistent in look and taper. It would also mean that several different rod makers had the same stamp to mark the rods. I don't know how efficient or costly that would be, but it would also make it difficult to identify other trade rods based mostly on a single rod maker owning the only stamp.

Second, if retailers contracted multiple rod makers for the same rod, and those rod makers used the same Montague components for trade rods, how would we ever be able to tell by looking at the fittings which maker made any trade rods? In my view, ferrule designs (and other fittings) were pretty standard during those times, and all of the rod makers, including Payne, Thomas, Edwards, Varney, Hawes, and Leonard, could - and did - make very similar ferrules, sliding bands, and reel seats. The only way to identify such a rod (in the absence of documentation), is to pick at the finest details of the rods and components and compare them to known marked rods. With regard to the early Touradif and BIC rods, they most closely resemble the rods marked with Payne's own stamp. In fact, all of the hardware is identical to known Payne hardware. I agree that it is similar to hardware seen on Thomas, Hawes, Leonard, and Varney, but the details (i.e., knurling, proportions, winding check, incisions, node spacing, wrap patterns) point to Payne.

To me, trade rod identification by parts is a numbers game. If the vast majority of a certain rod known to date compare favorably to the known marked rods by a specific maker, then the rods were most likely contracted to and made by that maker. Any one-offs seen would then be rods made during high demand or sent in for repair to a different shop. Of course, this doesn't account for time, as retailers could, and did, change suppliers for many reasons over time.

I will provide examples and continue documenting the A&F rods as soon as I can. Thanks again for any and all contributions to this thread.

[Broken Rod]

To, Reelmaker and you-all,

Everybody is correct. This is the Second Model Walton built by Fred... the only Walton always made from Calcutta cane, the first batch of this bamboo coming personally from Hiram Leonard. The reel seat and grip check are straight un-reworked Monty fittings, and the ferrules are serrated Varneys (also made by Montague). This rod was sold retail, and wholesale to other dealers, through Whittemore who was the sole agent from 1901 to 1927 (and-or later)-- one of only 2 "sole agent" agreements Thomas ever had with the 25 dealers he sold through.

In 1901, Ed Payne also entered a sole agent agreement with Whittemore, who then brokered some of his Kosmics to the prestigious A & F until at least 1904.

[2dabacking]

Hello A.J.,
It may be that we are closer in agreement than it seems. I just realized that we are looking at this from different angles. I have been looking at production from the perspective of A&F, while you seem to be looking at it in terms of the supplier/maker. Also, we may be basing our opinions on two potentially different business strategies - that of Payne and that of Thomas. Please correct me if I am am wrong, but your argument is that rod makers, in order to fill requests from retailers, would do whatever he could to meet those requests and put food on the table. Now, I see your point more clearly about why Thomas and others would purchase hardware from large manufacturers like Montague. In addition to the potential economics, it was to keep customers happy. The economics per rod didn't necessarily make sense to me, but add in the volume and customer satisfaction, and I am with you.

With regard to the relationship among Payne, Whittemore, and A&F, it is currently my unproven hypothesis that A&F dropped the Kosmic rods from its inventory because it was able to secure a contract with Payne to provide its own line of rods at competitive prices. Once the Touradif and BIC rods were proven sellers, A&F no longer needed the middleman, Whittemore, to offer Payne rods to the public. If I may ask, what are your thoughts on this?
Thanks, Joel

[jeffkn1]

I'll weigh in here until AJ has the opportunity to get back online.
The understanding some of us have regarding Kosmic is that the rights to the trademark were in possession of Whittemore beginning sometime around 1901(?). Whittemore did a good wholesale business and as sole agents (per their letterhead) had control of who got Kosmic products, just as Spalding and USN&T had before. Payne continued making the rods but the distribution of them should have been Whittemore's part; I think that though Payne made the rods they were purchased by A&F through Whittemore. Another scenario would have A&F selling inventory left over from the two year period between 1898 and 1900, a period when E.S. Osgood was in the shop on Broadway (Charlie can correct me on that if I've misremembered what he found). The other rods Payne made for A&F had nothing to do with the Whittemore sole agency for Kosmic. The trade rods sold by A&F would have been direct purchases from the makers, whoever A&F decided they would be. I can't cite the source but it has been said that Whittemore dealt in Kosmic products well into the 1920's.
Waltons were solely Fred Thomas'. He made them and he controlled where they were sold though there's no reason to think that he ever denied orders for them from anyone. This is in sharp contrast to the Kosmic line where someone other than the maker controlled the sales and marketing of the rod. It also meant Fred had a big say (total?) in the content and evolution of the rod.

[2dabacking]

Thanks, Jeff. I understand the sole agents agreement with Whittemore. It was essentially a broker/dealer arrangement. They took care of the marketing, sales and distribution. I have Whittemore letterhead stating it was the Kosmic sole agent, and I recall you explaining to me that the rights to Kosmic were held by Whittemore. I got that, brother of the angle.

What I am wondering is if there is any evidence yet to believe that A&F nixed its buying arrangement (if it was not selling leftover inventory rods) with Whittemore because it no longer needed the middleman to provide Payne rods? It would seem a possibility, given that A&F offered its Touradif rods at a discount to Kosmic rods in the exact same configurations. There was no longer a need to provide customers with Kosmic rods (assuming it was going through Whittemore), because it had its own brand of rods, the Touradif and BIC rods, and A&F could offer a rod of the same quality (by the same maker) at a lower price. The rods even had a similar look as the Kosmics.

(It is interesting that A&F listed itself as "agents" for the Kosmic rods in its catalogs; however, I assume the term meant simply "seller" in that context. "Agents" and "sole agents" had a whole host of meanings in that period.)

I am also wondering if the term "manufacturer" was an arrangement with a rod maker, whereby the retailer provided the marketing and sales and controlled the brand and production. Similar to a "sole agent" but without the wholesale distribution. That would explain why A&F listed the rods as being "made under the immediate supervision of our rod expert, a fisherman of wide experience and a well known Tournament winner." Of course, I believe this person to be A&F's employee, Lou Darling, rather than a specific rod maker.
Best wishes, Joel

[jeffkn1]

I agree that terms like manufacturer and agent are general, almost misleading terms commonly used in marketing in those days. The presence of Kosmics could have been A&F's way of showing they were contenders in the higher end tackle market in those earlier years, though the exact source of those rods may still be in question. I don't know about Touradifs, but somewhere I have in my files a small ad prominently featuring the BIC c1903 or 1904, and they did catalog both rods as being theirs for decades after the intro.

[reelmaker]

One of the things that really puzzled me about this Walton was that it has a now very frayed bag marked Edwards that fits the rod perfectly...., I know the total history of this rod and I am it's second owner ,,so I am pretty sure the bag is original to the rod. Any thoughts ie,, replacement mistake or could it be that it was made not by Thomas,,but rather Edwards?

[Broken Rod]

To reelmaker,

Maybe Fred gave the rod to Edwards, his photographer neighbor at this time. The Walton was first designed by Thomas in 1889 and it remained a Thomas rod until its end sometime around 1930. Your rod, a Second Model, was built with straight Montague fittings, no customization like we see in the labor-intensive Transitional Walton. This enabled Fred to cost-effectively produce a rod for Whittemore at a jobber price, and the rod could therefore be marked-up twice more-- to wholesale and retail. I might add that a lot of collectors believe/believed the model was manufactured by Montague... but the singular unchanging die stamp, and unique signature wraps are clearly Thomas.

I think Joel and Jeff have both made good points. We really don't know the true story of the A & F Kosmics, possibly left-over stock acquired while Osgood was on the floor, or maybe from Whittemore. Concerning Whittemore, it's perhaps coincidence, perhaps not, that Appleton & Bassett folded in 1901 and Whittemore began that same year. Did a head salesman, just like Osgood, switch from Appleton & Bassett to Whittemore? A & B was a very big account for Thomas, Edwards, & Payne, and so we may be looking at a continuation of that relationship. In any event, Whittemore's 1901 letterhead features sole agent agreements for both the Kosmic and Walton. The 1927 Whittemore catalog also carried both rods. Personally, I don't believe either rod saw high volume sales, more like just pestegious names. The number of Payne Kosmics sold through Whittemore is quite low compared to the numbers sold earlier through Spalding and U.S. Net & Twine. Same with the Walton.

As you say, the Touradif may have replaced the popularity of the A & F Kosmic, maybe happening early on. The interesting thing about the 2 Touradifs I mentioned on my first post-- both mimic the Transitional Walton, a rod made between 1900 and roughly 1902. This falls in line with the time-frame of the A & F Kosmic's disappearance. It's all interesting, as is the second-guessing. (nuk, nuk, nuk)

[Broken Rod]

To reelmaker,

Maybe Fred gave the rod to Edwards, his photographer neighbor at this time. The Walton was first designed by Thomas in 1889 and it remained a Thomas rod until its end sometime around 1930. Your rod, a Second Model, was built with straight Montague fittings, no customization like we see in the labor-intensive Transitional Walton. This enabled Fred to cost-effectively produce a rod for Whittemore at a jobber price, and the rod could therefore be marked-up twice more-- to wholesale and retail. I might add that a lot of collectors believe/believed the model was manufactured by Montague... but the singular unchanging die stamp, and unique signature wraps are clearly Thomas.

I think Joel and Jeff have both made good points. We really don't know the true story of the A & F Kosmics, possibly left-over stock acquired while Osgood was on the floor, or maybe from Whittemore. Concerning Whittemore, it's perhaps coincidence, perhaps not, that Appleton & Bassett folded in 1901 and Whittemore began that same year. Did a head salesman, just like Osgood, switch from Appleton & Bassett to Whittemore? A & B was a very big account for Thomas, Edwards, & Payne, and so we may be looking at a continuation of that relationship. In any event, Whittemore's 1901 letterhead features sole agent agreements for both the Kosmic and Walton. The 1927 Whittemore catalog also carried both rods. Personally, I don't believe either rod saw high volume sales, more like just pestegious names. The number of Payne Kosmics sold through Whittemore is quite low compared to the numbers sold earlier through Spalding and U.S. Net & Twine. Same with the Walton.

As you say, the Touradif may have replaced the popularity of the A & F Kosmic, maybe happening early on. The interesting thing about the 2 Touradifs I mentioned on my first post-- both mimic the Transitional Walton, a rod made between 1900 and roughly 1902. This falls in line with the time-frame of the A & F Kosmic's disappearance. It's all interesting, as is the second-guessing. (nuk, nuk, nuk)

To Joel,

Yes, we must always include the "food-mortgage factor." Unlike modern rodmakers who have alternative jobs to fall back upon, Fred and Ed had growing families and dependent employees. They would "bend," as it was, to please their wholesaler-retailer while trying to figure out ways to protect their own reputation as quality rodmakers. With both men, the quality of the bamboo shafts had to remain at the highest level. So the only real varient in the maker's price equation fell to the fittings, the metal furnishings.

[jeffkn1]

Here are closeups of a BIC I purchased a year ago. Serial number is X3.
There are some Thomas-like elements to it but I'm not ready yet to declare Thomas the maker.

[2dabacking]

Nice looking rod, Jeff.

I am not sure who made the A&F rods marked with an "X" prefix before a number. It is my hypothesis that the Touradif and BIC rods were made from 1903 through the late 1920s in the following order over those years based on stamps: no numbers, just numbers, then "X" followed by numbers. It seems that the earliest of these rods were made by Payne. When Ed Payne passed in 1914, Jim took over the business and may have continued making rods for A&F for a short time, thereafter; however, I don't know if he continued the Touradif and BIC rods beyond the late teens, when the rods with an "X" might have begun.

The "X" may represent a transition to another maker. If Jim continued these rods, he did so with different hardware and knurlings than seen on the earlier rods. Whoever made the rods with an "X" did a fine job of making them look similar to the earlier rods.

Looking at the rods with an "X" prefix, we might be able to see a transition from one rod maker to another if we are able to locate enough rods to examine. Within the "X" prefix marked rods, we also see a difference in the "BIC" stamp. Charlie pointed this out above. The "I" is the most notable difference. Your rod fits in just before Ed's rod with X104, and it carries the same "BIC" stamp.

It seems that the numbers stamped into the rods are inventory numbers for A&F. It helped them keep track of rod orders and suppliers. As you know, a couple of other makers who used a similar stamping system were Hawes and Divine. They both made rods for A&F and used letters followed by numbers for tracking/orders. Those numbers were stamped sequentially, helping us date them today.

Of course, Kosmic and Walton rods were also marked with just numbers (though some had no numbers).

Regards, Joel

P.S. For anyone interested in a project, if you look at a Payne hang tag beginning in the late '20s, you will see an inventory/order number written on the top of the tag. I have not checked enough tags to form a hyphothesis, but those numbers may also help us date the later Payne rods (or they may not?). Just a thought.

[2dabacking]

Went through hundreds of rod photos this morning looking for features to help us identify the rods marked with an "X." It looks like Divine to me, but I wouldn't rule out Thomas without seeing similar Thomas hardware. Below is a comparison of the butt caps from a BIC marked with an "X" and a BIC with just a number. The BIC with just a number has a Payne butt cap. The BIC with an "X" looks to have a Divine butt cap (based on photos in Gnome's book, p. 184/5). The knurling on the X rod butt caps is also located where it appears Divine located knurling on its butt caps - just below the top ridge, as opposed to on it. I was also unaware that Divine used cedar for its spacers, but found information confirming that. I previously thought it was cherry.

I don't have a rod with this butt cap to include in the comparison below, but if anyone could provide one, it would be very helpful and appreciated.

[jeffkn1]

OK, here are hardware details for my BIC. The welts on the females are not familiar to me. Female ferrules are pinned, while males are not. No serrations, just a winding plain ramp, but it's crimped to the flats. Though drawn, males slides are sized, usually a sign of a better maker. Also note circles on the butt cap. Was that a Divine characteristic as well? Forward end of the cedar filler has a step where it meets the grip.

[2dabacking]

Check out page 76 of Sinclair's Restoration Handbook. My Divine knowledge is limited.

Any Divine aficionados able to help out, please?

[adrien schnee]

The "Touradif" name likely derives from the name of a river in Quebec. The model was available through A&F for a large number of years and came in a very large number of models - salmon, trout, tournament, bait, tourist, valise. The model was also liekly made by a number of makers throughout its existence.
Hit the search button and enter Touradif and you will find some previous discussions.

Charlie, as a Canadian I found this bit of history and information enlightening, knowing that Touradif is likely derived from the upper and lower lakes and river in Quebec. Another wonderful thread that many took their time to share a tremendous amount of information for us!

Again, thanks to all who helped inform me here.

[uniquafly]

OK, here are hardware details for my BIC. The welts on the females are not familiar to me. Female ferrules are pinned, while males are not. No serrations, just a winding plain ramp, but it's crimped to the flats. Though drawn, males slides are sized, usually a sign of a better maker. Also note circles on the butt cap. Was that a Divine characteristic as well? Forward end of the cedar filler has a step where it meets the grip.

I'm certainly no Divine EXPERT however I do recall Michael Sinclair stating in his book on Restoration, that no other maker other than Divine milled the steps into the wood spacers where it transitions into the cork handle. The Divine butt caps on the rods having wood spacers also have rings on their bottoms. The ferrules on your rod are quite similar to Divine ferrules. Overall, looking at the photos you have posted here, I would say the rod has numerous Divine characteristics.

[jeffkn1]

AJ will be over tomorrow with a BIC from another maker, Payne this time. There are similarities to mine but I'm comfortable with attributing mine to Divine.

[Broken Rod]

Hello, All

I brought two rods over to Jeff's yesterday. Here they are. The marked BIC, with the wooden reel seat, is fairly early. The other one is only marked to A&F and might be even earlier. Notice the reel seat bands are nearly identical and the A&F roll-stampings ARE identical.

[uniquafly]

Hello, All

I brought two rods over to Jeff's yesterday. Here they are. The marked BIC, with the wooden reel seat, is fairly early. The other one is only marked to A&F and might be even earlier. Notice the reel seat bands are nearly identical and the A&F roll-stampings ARE identical.

Okay, I'll bite. Who are they attributed to?

Looking at the rod on top, where the cork meets the wood, I want to say that it looks a little Divine. The winding check as well as the start of the wraps also look something like Divines' work???