g1BKjI802448 for ; Mon, 11 Feb 2002 14:45:18 - Mon, 11 Feb 2002 15:45:15 -0500 Subject: Re: Glue/Binder/Binding Cord But we have a national treasure in this list and it is a lot of fun. Correction, Adam, an INTERnational treasure!!!! LOLArt But we have a national treasure in this= is a lot of fun. Correction, Adam, an INTERnational = LOLArt from baconrod@gsmrinc.com Mon Feb 11 16:12:05 2002 g1BMC4808602 for ; Mon, 11 Feb 2002 16:12:04 -0600 Subject: All.The unit that I use is the model Mark 300A which you can use on =both Nickle Silver and Alum. The unit is made by Marking Methods Inc.Alhambra Ca.Best Hal. All. that = The unit is made by Marking Methods Inc. Ca. Hal. from jsschaeffer@hotmail.com Mon Feb 11 16:16:49 2002 g1BMGm808983 for ; Mon, 11 Feb 2002 16:16:48 - Mon, 11 Feb 2002 14:16:43 -0800 "Rodmakers List-serv" Subject: Re: heavy use rod- a question FILETIME=[C9459690:01C1B349] This talk of heavy rods makes me wonder- what handle dimensions and reelseats are people using? Is there such a thing as a "traditional look" for aneight or nine weight cane rod? Perhaps someone would be willing to sharesome designs with the list. Jeff Schaeffer from chris_wohlford@yahoo.com Mon Feb 11 16:37:35 2002 g1BMbY811056 for ; Mon, 11 Feb 2002 16:37:34 - Mon, 11 Feb 2002 14:37:33 PST Subject: Re: heavy use rod- a question Rodmakers List-serv Well...IMHO, Bob Venneri's Uplock with a removablefighting butt turned from burled wood set a newstandard for the "traditional look." Regards,Chris --- Jeff Schaeffer wrote: This talk of heavy rods makes me wonder- what handledimensions and reelseats are people using? Is there such a thing as a"traditional look" for aneight or nine weight cane rod? Perhaps someone wouldbe willing to sharesome designs with the list. Jeff Schaeffer __________________________________________________Do You Yahoo!?Send FREE Valentine eCards with Yahoo! Greetings!http://greetings.yahoo.com from caneman@clnk.com Mon Feb 11 17:52:39 2002 g1BNqc814047 for ; Mon, 11 Feb 2002 17:52:38 -0600 (Post.Office MTA v3.5.3 release 223 ID# 0-61365U2500L250S0V35) Mon, 11 Feb 2002 17:51:08 -0600 Subject: Binder Selling a 4 string binder. Have 2, only need one! Those interested apply =offlist. First come, first serve. Later,Bob R.L. Nunley, RodmakerCustom Split Cane Flyrodshttp://www.caneflyrod.com serve. Later,Bob R.L. Nunley, RodmakerCustom Split Cane Flyrodshttp://www.caneflyrod.com from avyoung@iinet.net.au Mon Feb 11 18:01:29 2002 g1C01R814746 for ; Mon, 11 Feb 2002 18:01:27 - Rodmakers List-serv Subject: Re: heavy use rod?????????? Wait till Peter McKean sees this message and see what he reckons. Peter made a trip to the "Top End" of Queensland fishing for Barramundi etc and used bamboo.I forget the taper but he seemed to think it was no big deal apart from the wind.He did use graphite too though and it may have been the wind that made him decide to do that.Tony At 11:38 AM 2/11/02 -0600, Harry Boyd wrote: John, I guess we're supposed to feel sorry for you, huh? [:-)] That being said, a couple of things are worth thinking about. Since you are making your own rods, breaking a rod, or putting a set in a rod you built, is no major problem. You can repair it yourself. I built an 8' 6" hollow 9 weight. It was on the heavy side, but excelled at throwing large flies long distances. With a few weeks conditioning, throwing that rod for 14 hours a day was not so uncomfortable that I avoided it. The 15-35 minute battles with big (up to 35 lbs.) King Salmon did leave a slight set, but it was easily removed at home. Train yourself to turn the rod over occasionally in order to apply some strain in the opposite direction. I never learned to do that. Second, you may have to be willing to live with some of the limitations of the material you are using to make rods. I know I'll hurt some feelings here, but bamboo may not be the best material for heavy saltwater rods. I think most anglers would enjoy a 9' 10 weight graphite rod more than a similarly sized bamboo rod. Even a 10 weight is going to be on the small side for regular bouts with 20-50 lb tarpon. In fact, I think that regularly fighting fish that size is better accomplished with baitcasting rigs than fly rods. (Flame away, it's just my opinion) Even with drags that will stop a truck, a fly reel largely limits the amount of line you retrieve with each turn of the handle, and pushes the limits of sport. I know it can be done, I just wonder if it should. Harry Jkvseafood@aol.com wrote: i could really use the groups help. i'm making a 815 dickerson taper rod to fish for snook, redfish and bonefish in so florida. i'm worried that this rod may may not hold up to the pressure. i will be catching 7-20 lb fish on a regular basis. i could, if i chose to, catch from 10 to 20, 20 - 50 lb. tarpon in a single day. i will be using a 6- 12 lb tippet. i've been told that if i make a heavier rod say a 9 ft 10 wt that the rod would be very heavy and not enjoyable to use. i'm worried about sets and the like using the 7 wt this way. please HHEELLPP!!!!!!!!! what do you guys think. i'm lucky to have the great fishing down here, if you guys are coming this way ask and i'll direct you to the hot spots. i've built graphite for 25 years and am just startting to make bamboo. i was a commercial fisherman for 10 years ( hook and line) and really know the area. thanks for your help, john henry mitchell rod man.not in book. --Harry Boyd http://www.canerods.com/ Bamboo Rodshttp://www.fbcwin.com/ Our Church /*************************************************************************/AV Young Visit my web site at: www.iinet.net.au/~avyoung/flyrod.html First snow, then silence.This thousand dollar screen diesSo beautifully. Unknown /*************************************************************************/ from Jkvseafood@aol.com Mon Feb 11 19:06:29 2002 g1C16S816884 for ; Mon, 11 Feb 2002 19:06:28 - for ; Mon, 11 Feb 2002 20:06:17 - Subject: thanks re heavy rods. thanks, to all of you what a help. if anyone has anymore to add it would be appreciated. john from bdcbfr@chartermi.net Mon Feb 11 19:10:00 2002 g1C1A0817082 for ; Mon, 11 Feb 2002 19:10:00 - g1C1D5p28739; Subject: Re: heavy use rod?????????? Ted Williams alots of other guys caught bonefish, etc on Bamboo. (Para 19, Ithink) and Zane Gray caught giant blue water stuff on bamboo boat rods. Thecane will do it, but, admittidly, at greater weight. It becomes a mind overmatterthing.If you don't mind, it doesn't matter. Brian ----- Original Message ----- Subject: heavy use rod?????????? i could really use the groups help. i'm making a 815 dickerson taper rod to fish for snook, redfish and bonefish in so florida. i'm worried that thisrod may may not hold up to the pressure. i will be catching 7-20 lb fish ona regular basis. i could, if i chose to, catch from 10 to 20, 20 - 50 lb.tarpon in a single day. i will be using a 6- 12 lb tippet. i've been toldthat if i make a heavier rod say a 9 ft 10 wt that the rod would be veryheavy and not enjoyable to use. i'm worried about sets and the like usingthe 7 wt this way. please HHEELLPP!!!!!!!!! what do you guys think. i'mlucky to have the great fishing down here, if you guys are coming this wayask and i'll direct you to the hot spots. i've built graphite for 25 yearsand am just startting to make bamboo. i was a commercial fisherman for 10years ( hook and line) and really know the area. thanks for your help, john henry mitchell rod man.not in book. from drinkr@voicenet.com Mon Feb 11 19:14:47 2002 g1C1Ek817352 for ; Mon, 11 Feb 2002 19:14:46 - (209.71.85.58) Subject: Thumbnail Bits I spent part of the day on Saturday convincing the R and D folk at MLCSWoodworking that they ought to carry a modified thumbnail bit for reel seatmakers. I use a reground bit with a 45 degree angle ground into the tipssimilar to Jack Howell but I noticed that Bob Venneri's bits are ground abit flatter. I think that there would be enough interest just in this list purchasing 25 or so of the modified version since the price should only bearound $20 bucks and offering them to anyone at cost. What I really need toknow is a consensus of opinion on the best angle for a 5/8 inch bit to beground. Then I can go back and wheel and deal. Let me know and let me knowif there is much interest in general. Maybe I could talk them into making astraight bit with a 60 degree notch for a the Medved roughers out there.Thanks in advanceDavid Rinker from DCURTIS@satx.rr.com Mon Feb 11 19:17:51 2002 g1C1Hj817610 for ; Mon, 11 Feb 2002 19:17:45 -0600 for ; Mon, 11 Feb 2002 19:15:24 -0600 Subject: Off Topic but free No financial interest but just wanted some of you hungry folks to know thatIHOP is having free pancakes tomorrow. Here is the web link that I follow http://www.slickdeals.net/ Darrin CurtisSan Antonio from Grhghlndr@aol.com Mon Feb 11 21:16:04 2002 g1C3G3820281 for ; Mon, 11 Feb 2002 21:16:03 - Subject: Re: heavy use rod- a question fbcwin@3g.quik.com,Jkvseafood@aol.com, rodmakers@wugate.wustl.edu I have one of these that I am putting on a big rod and it is beautiful http://bretsovens.bravepages.com/ I have one of these thatI am putting on a big rod and it is beautiful http://bretsovens.bravepages.com/ from atlasc1@earthlink.net Mon Feb 11 23:01:54 2002 g1C51s822975 for ; Mon, 11 Feb 2002 23:01:54 - ([209.179.146.95] helo=computer) id 16aV4h-0006Lv-00; Mon, 11 Feb 2002 21:01:52 -0800 Subject: Re: Hello list:) Tony, Glad to see you are back for awhile. We are still swapping lies and =stealing each others ideas.. Shoot even Terry's back keeping an eye on =us. Adam Subject: Hello list:) Just signed back up for a while. My college education is off to a good =start, so I have some extra time. Received a 98% on speech about making =Bamboo Fly Rods LOL (didn't see that coming I'll bet.:)) My best class =is composition. I'll bet you guys who know me get a laugh out of that =one. :)) But it's true. I found out that from my experience with the = I understand the list a little more now that I have a psychology class =LOL:)) just kidding around So how are things going in the Bamboo world? Did I miss anything? Tony Miller (always in the dog house) -------------------------------------------------------------------------=-----Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: Click Here Tony, Glad to see you are back for awhile. We= swapping lies and stealing each others ideas.. Shoot even Terry's back = an eye on us. Adam ----- Original Message ----- Anthony Miller Sent: Monday, February 11, 2002= PMSubject: Hello list:) Just signed back up for a while. My college education is off to a = making Bamboo Fly Rods LOL (didn't see that coming I'll bet.:)) My = psychology class LOL:)) just kidding around anything?Tony Miller (always in the dog house)www.homestead.com/= Here from ajthramer@hotmail.com Tue Feb 12 01:50:22 2002 g1C7oL826185 for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2002 01:50:21 - Mon, 11 Feb 2002 23:50:08 -0800 Tue, 12 Feb 2002 07:50:07 GMT rodmakers@wugate.wustl.eduSubject: Re: heavy use rod- a question FILETIME=[E4212470:01C1B399] From: "Jeff Schaeffer" Subject: Re: heavy use rod- a questionDate: Sat, 16 Feb 2002 17:17:12 - 0800 This talk of heavy rods makes me wonder- what handle dimensions and reelseats are people using? Is there such a thing as a "traditional look" for aneight or nine weight cane rod? Perhaps someone would be willing to sharesome designs with the list. Jeff Schaeffer I used Bob Vennerri's spin seat and the wooden butt cap assembly for a fighting butt.A.J. _________________________________________________________________Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer athttp://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp. from avyoung@iinet.net.au Tue Feb 12 03:22:51 2002 g1C9Mm827321 for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2002 03:22:49 - Subject: Re: Hello list:) The dark one from the North is keeping just below the radar, but he's out there. Be amused, be very amused [:-)] At 07:22 PM 2/11/02 -0800, Adam Vigil wrote: Tony, Glad to see you are back for awhile. We are still swapping lies and stealing each others ideas.. Shoot even Terry's back keeping an eye on us. Adam----- Original Message -----From: Anthony Miller Sent: Monday, February 11, 2002 12:33 PMSubject: Hello list:) Just signed back up for a while. My college education is off to a good start, so I have some extra time. Received a 98% on speech about making Bamboo Fly Rods LOL (didn't see that coming I'll bet.:)) My best class is composition. I'll bet you guys who know me get a laugh out of that one. :)) But it's true. I found out that from my experience with the list, I'm practically an expert on the subject of plagerism LOL LOL I understand the list a little more now that I have a psychology class LOL:)) just kidding around So how are things going in the Bamboo world? Did I miss anything? Tony Miller (always in the dog house) www.homestead.com/bambooshop/home.html > ----------Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: Click Here /*************************************************************************/AV Young Visit my web site at: www.iinet.net.au/~avyoung/flyrod.html First snow, then silence.This thousand dollar screen diesSo beautifully. Unknown /*************************************************************************/ from petermckean@netspace.net.au Tue Feb 12 05:05:45 2002 g1CB5h828222 for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2002 05:05:43 - g1CB5T480700; Subject: Re: heavy use rod?????????? Tony is quite correct. I made a Canadian Canoe copy, and it was fine, but I am not a caster'sbootlace, really, and in the end trying to buck the wind drove me back to mygraphite 7 weight. I now build rods of between 6'3" 3-weight and 8'6" 6-weight, and FOR MYSTYLE OF BUILDING, FISHING AND CASTING I believe that those measure thepractical limits of hexagonal bamboo construction. (Do, please, note the disclaimer in capitals before thumbing off your safetycatches and engaging full auto!) In fact, I prefer to build 7'0", 7'6" and 8'0" 4-weights and 5-weights.Although I must confess to a plan to do a 9'0" 5-weight this year, hollowbuilt when I nut out the fine details. Peter from dmanders@telusplanet.net Tue Feb 12 07:02:06 2002 g1CD25829403 for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2002 07:02:05 -0600 (InterMail vM.5.01.04.01 201-253-122-122-101-20011014) with Tue, 12 Feb 2002 06:01:59 -0700 Subject: Re: Rod Weights Bill, While I took a poke @ building the rod, I certainly didn't think that I was goingto be "bang on" to what Marinaro had in mind. Still, it's a start on solvingwhat could/might be an interesting problem. I weighed the ferrules andhandle and other parts and for the life of me can't figure out how he got asub-4 oz. rod. And I only built the rod as a 2 piecer. So there is only 1 set of ferrulesinvolved. Figured I wouldn't waste another ferrule on my "flight of fancy".Used aluminum reel seat as well, although I went with a complete reel insertof cottonwood bark. The finished rod weighs over 5 1/4 ozs. in the 2 piece configuration. Still, itcasts OK. While it may have been presumptuous of me to attempt a rod based on justdrawings, one wonders why he didn't post the tapers. Maybe it was his secretto keep. Does interest me though - pushing the limits of cane about a far as it will go. I don't know where I could have shaved any more cane from the rod and stillhad a rod that would cast a 5 wt. line. Maybe if he had not said that he builtall his rods for a 5 wt. line and the rod was built for a 3 weight, it might havebeen possible with the taper I derived. Back to the drawing board I guess. catch ya' Don At 11:29 AM 2/11/02 -0500, you wrote: Ralph, Rods that were weighed before the fittings were mounted were not meantto satisfy our legalistic propensities toward "truth-in-advertizing." Instead, they were weighed at that point in their construction as evidence of a rod's ability to handle a fly line of a certain weight (back in the days when the relationship between silk line, rod length and rod weight was a relevant, determining indicator). The weight of the cane, alone (relative to a rod's length), told a customer what to expect of that rod's action. Vince, did not like that system either, but it was because he believed so fervently that hardware itself was bound to alter a rod's action. So he built his lightest rods with small grips, cork reel seats (or balsa), mounted with light aluminum rings, and only a couple coats of very thin varnish. Then he would weigh. Vince spent many, many years of trial-and-error before he was able toobtain the the "magic" combination of strength and minimum weight in the cane. Everything depends upon how the shape (trajectory) of the convex tapersare managed within each of the rod's sections. One does not simply look at his drawings in "The Ring of The Rise" and then go build the rod. You can build a good, fishable rod, no doubt, but you probably will not have built the very lightest rod that COULD be built. That was what Vince spent years searching out. Cheers, Bill ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ralph W. Moon" Cc: Sent: Monday, February 11, 2002 10:45 AM Subject: Re: Rod Weights Don It was my understanding that the rod weight was figured before fittings. I always thought that was a stupid idea, because how could anybody ever check it out without tearing the rod to pieces. Ralph Don & Sandy Andersen wrote: Guys/Gals, Some time ago there was a discussion of when rods should be weighed. Just finished up my rendition of the tapers drawings that VinceMarinaro included in the "Ring of the Rise". He says that the rod should weight under 4 ozs. In my case, the raw cane without gluing or other finishing items came about at 3.3 ozs. Based on the fact that says that he builds all his rods for a 5 weight line it would seem that the rod I've made that casts a 5 weight cannot have any more cane removed anywhere and still cast a 5 wt. So did you think that he might have weighed it without fittings? Is this typical of rodmakers or lawyers or only in combination? catch ya' Don http://www.telusplanet.net/public/dmanders/index.html ffff,0000,0000http://www.telusplanet.net/public/dmanders/index.html from caneman@clnk.com Tue Feb 12 07:31:52 2002 g1CDVp800115 for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2002 07:31:51 -0600 (Post.Office MTA v3.5.3 release 223 ID# 0-61365U2500L250S0V35) Subject: Re: Rod Weights Weight is very dependant on the particular taper you're building. = finished a 3pc 7'6" 5 weight that weighs (finished wt, with reel seat, =guides, grip and varnish) 3 7/8 ounce. Of course my rods don't have a =swelled but and that is with only a 6 1/2" RHW grip and a Leonard Style =Cap and Ring reel seat courtesy Tony Larson. Now, we're talking about =two entirely different tapers, but still, about two rods that will =perform essentially the same end function. This same rod is the rod =that Troy Miller cast here and is building for himself. It will lay =down a flyline like a feather, yet if you need to, you can shoot it to =the moon. A little less cane, overall, but still an efficient casting =machine.I've fished many rods that weigh much more than 5 ounces, but only =one that I make does weigh in that heavy and it's a monster. I'm just =more comfortable with light rods and since I don't, personally, see any =advantage to having that much cane glued to a reel seat, I make mine to =be light. Of course, too many "shop bites" keep me pretty gimped up and =when you're sore most of the time, you don't want to have to fight any =more bamboo (or anything else) that you have too. *S* Later,Bob R.L. Nunley, RodmakerCustom Split Cane Flyrodshttp://www.caneflyrod.com Subject: Re: Rod Weights Bill, While I took a poke @ building the rod, I certainly didn't think that =I was going to be "bang on" to what Marinaro had in mind. Still, it's a =start on solving what could/might be an interesting problem. I weighed =the ferrules and handle and other parts and for the life of me can't =figure out how he got a sub-4 oz. rod.And I only built the rod as a 2 piecer. So there is only 1 set of =ferrules involved. Figured I wouldn't waste another ferrule on my ="flight of fancy". Used aluminum reel seat as well, although I went with =a complete reel insert of cottonwood bark.The finished rod weighs over 5 1/4 ozs. in the 2 piece configuration. =Still, it casts OK.While it may have been presumptuous of me to attempt a rod based on =just drawings, one wonders why he didn't post the tapers. Maybe it was =his secret to keep.Does interest me though - pushing the limits of cane about a far as it =will go.I don't know where I could have shaved any more cane from the rod and =still had a rod that would cast a 5 wt. line. Maybe if he had not said =that he built all his rods for a 5 wt. line and the rod was built for a =3 weight, it might have been possible with the taper I derived. Back to the drawing board I guess. catch ya' Don At 11:29 AM 2/11/02 -0500, you wrote:Ralph, Rods that were weighed before the fittings were mounted were not =meant tosatisfy our legalistic propensities toward "truth-in-advertizing." =Instead,they were weighed at that point in their construction as evidence of =a rod'sability to handle a fly line of a certain weight (back in the days =when therelationship between silk line, rod length and rod weight was a =relevant,determining indicator). The weight of the cane, alone (relative to a rod's length), told a =customerwhat to expect of that rod's action. Vince, did not like that system either, but it was because he =believed sofervently that hardware itself was bound to alter a rod's action. So =hebuilt his lightest rods with small grips, cork reel seats (or balsa),mounted with light aluminum rings, and only a couple coats of very =thinvarnish. Then he would weigh. Vince spent many, many years of trial-and-error before he was able to =obtainthe the "magic" combination of strength and minimum weight in the =cane.Everything depends upon how the shape (trajectory) of the convex =tapers aremanaged within each of the rod's sections. One does not simply look =at hisdrawings in "The Ring of The Rise" and then go build the rod. You can =builda good, fishable rod, no doubt, but you probably will not have built =thevery lightest rod that COULD be built. That was what Vince spent =yearssearching out. Cheers, Bill ----- Original Message -----From: "Ralph W. Moon" Cc: Sent: Monday, February 11, 2002 10:45 AMSubject: Re: Rod Weights fittings. I always thought that was a stupid idea, because how couldanybody ever check it out without tearing the rod to pieces.Ralph Don & Sandy Andersen wrote: Guys/Gals, Some time ago there was a discussion of when rods should be =weighed.Just finished up my rendition of the tapers drawings that Vince =Marinaroincluded in the "Ring of the Rise". He says that the rod should =weight under4 ozs. In my case, the raw cane without gluing or other finishing =items cameabout at 3.3 ozs.Based on the fact that says that he builds all his rods for a 5 =weightline it would seem that the rod I've made that casts a 5 weight =cannot haveany more cane removed anywhere and still cast a 5 wt.So did you think that he might have weighed it without fittings? =Is thistypical of rodmakers or lawyers or only in combination? catch ya' Donhttp://www.telusplanet.net/public/dmanders/index.html = 5 ounces, I just finished a 3pc 7'6" 5 weight that weighs (finished wt, = have a swelled but and that is with only a 6 1/2" RHW grip and a Leonard = less cane, overall, but still an efficient casting machine. = than 5 ounces, but only one that I make does weigh in that heavy and = me pretty gimped up and when you're sore most of the time, you don't = *S* Later,Bob R.L. Nunley, RodmakerCustom Split Cane Flyrodshttp://www.caneflyrod.com ----- Original Message ----- & Sandy Andersen Cc: TSmithwick@aol.com ; rmoon@ida.net =; rodmakers@mail.wustL.edu = Sent: Tuesday, February 12, = AMSubject: Re: Rod Weights took a poke @ building the rod, I certainly didn't think that I was = be "bang on" to what Marinaro had in mind. Still, it's a start on = could/might be an interesting problem. I weighed the ferrules and = other parts and for the life of me can't figure out how he got a sub-4 = rod.And I only built the rod as a 2 piecer. So there is only 1 set = ferrules involved. Figured I wouldn't waste another ferrule on my = fancy". Used aluminum reel seat as well, although I went with a = insert of cottonwood bark.The finished rod weighs over 5 1/4 ozs. = presumptuous of me to attempt a rod based on just drawings, one = didn't post the tapers. Maybe it was his secret to keep.Does = though - pushing the limits of cane about a far as it will go.I = where I could have shaved any more cane from the rod and still had a = would cast a 5 wt. line. Maybe if he had not said that he built all = guess.catch ya'DonAt 11:29 AM2/11/02 = before = at that point in their construction as evidence of a = = = It = always thought that was a stupid idea, because how = = from edriddle@mindspring.com Tue Feb 12 07:49:45 2002 g1CDnj800712 for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2002 07:49:45 -0600 helo=oemcomputer) id 16adJG-0003Lv-00 for rodmakers@mail.wustl.edu; Tue, 12 Feb 2002 08:49:26 -0500 Subject: Off Subject Please pardon the non-rodmaking question. A while back, someone on the list provided instructions for blocking =email from an individual. I'd like to see those instructions again. I'm getting spam from one particular address practically every time I =turn this box on. I'm using Microsoft Internet Explorer and Outlook =Express. TIA.Ed question. A while back, someone on the list = I'm getting spam from one particular = practically every time I turn this box on. I'm using Microsoft Internet = and Outlook Express. TIA.Ed from harms1@pa.net Tue Feb 12 08:24:15 2002 g1CEOF802556 for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2002 08:24:15 -0600 Subject: Re: Rod Weights Don, I looked over my email on this thread, and want to apologize for being, Ithink, downright insulting to you and your efforts to try Vince's convextaper ideas. That was unintended, but also quite unnecessary. Vince was building rods only for his own use, and with the exception ofRobert Crompton, George Parker Holden, and (very late), Hoagy CarmichaelandTom Maxwell, he spoke with no other rod makers. Although he studiedeverything he could get his hands on, he spoke with no other rod makers, andcarried on his work pretty much in a vacuum. In those days (1930s-1970s), most rod makers simply did not communicatemuchwith one another or share their information. There are some notableexceptions, of course, but Vince was unaware of most of the work that wenowknow was actually going on among amateur builders. It was really onlysubsequent to the demise of most of the commercial builders (and, ofcourse,the publication of Hoagy's book on Garrison) that makers began what we nowhave as a completely open forum. At the time Vince taught me to build (mid-seventies) I too knew no othermakers, although I now realize that, indeed, there were already quite alarge number of other amateurs out there. During the earlier decades(following "A Modern Dry Fly Code") when Vince was working out his theorieson cane rods, his fear was that some commercial builder might sieze upon histapers and market a series of rods in his name, but without his permissionor oversight. His concern was a matter of rather intense personal pride,but it was also a matter of "fair play" and ecomomics. Vince was an absolute perfectionist in rod construction, and completelyobsessed with his ideas of fly rod design. He did not want his tapers to beknown before he had worked each one out to its ultimate conclusion, but,with the exception of perhaps two or three rods, he never quite reached thatgoal. So, the tapers were never made available--not to me, not to Hoagy, and notto Tom Maxwell. Most of Vince's rods were, frankly, a "mess" (well, bytoday's aesthetic standards) because he had little interest in that part ofthe craft. I re-finished two of his rods and Tom Maxwell did one of them,but we were both requested, expressly, not to mike the rods' dimensions.Many of my friends still assume that I secretly harbor Vince's tapers, but Ido not. Late in Vince's life, he had it in mind to seek out a commercial maker whowould build a special series of rods in his name, while he was to retainfinal supervision in all matters of quality control. This did notmaterialize for a variety of reasons, and the tapers died along with Vince.Today, the Pennsylvania Fly Fishing Museum owns Vince's entire collection,but sadly, although we have his rods and other paraphernalia, there are nosurviving records, neither of his building notes nor his tapers. Vince's rods are not to be regarded as the finest rods ever built,but they certainly mark one of the most remarkable (even if, apart from thechapter in "In The Ring of The Rise," unknown)contributions in thedevelopment of dry-fly taper design. He spent dozens of years obsessingabout rods that would be capable of delivering maximum power at minimumweight--but was seldom satisfied. I am not nearly so obsessed (even though I also regard an optimalweight-to- power ratio as important), but if, like Vince, you want to reachsome ultimate goal, then "back to the drawing board," as you put it, is theonly way to get there. Vince, too, could not imagine a way to reduce weightfurther, and then, perhaps years later, he would figure out a way. Cheers, Bill ----- Original Message ----- Subject: Re: Rod Weights Bill, While I took a poke @ building the rod, I certainly didn't think that I was going to be "bang on" to what Marinaro had in mind. Still, it's a starton solving what could/might be an interesting problem. I weighed theferrules and handle and other parts and for the life of me can't figure outhow he got a sub-4 oz. rod. And I only built the rod as a 2 piecer. So there is only 1 set of ferrules involved. Figured I wouldn't waste another ferrule on my "flight of fancy".Used aluminum reel seat as well, although I went with a complete reel insertof cottonwood bark. The finished rod weighs over 5 1/4 ozs. in the 2 piece configuration. Still, it casts OK. While it may have been presumptuous of me to attempt a rod based on just drawings, one wonders why he didn't post the tapers. Maybe it was his secretto keep. Does interest me though - pushing the limits of cane about a far as it will go. I don't know where I could have shaved any more cane from the rod and still had a rod that would cast a 5 wt. line. Maybe if he had not said that he built all his rods for a 5 wt. line and the rod was built for a 3 weight,it might have been possible with the taper I derived. Back to the drawing board I guess. catch ya' Don At 11:29 AM 2/11/02 -0500, you wrote: Ralph, Rods that were weighed before the fittings were mounted were not meanttosatisfy our legalistic propensities toward "truth-in-advertizing." Instead, they were weighed at that point in their construction as evidence of a rod's ability to handle a fly line of a certain weight (back in the days when the relationship between silk line, rod length and rod weight was a relevant,determining indicator). The weight of the cane, alone (relative to a rod's length), told a customer what to expect of that rod's action. Vince, did not like that system either, but it was because he believed sofervently that hardware itself was bound to alter a rod's action. So hebuilt his lightest rods with small grips, cork reel seats (or balsa),mounted with light aluminum rings, and only a couple coats of very thinvarnish. Then he would weigh. Vince spent many, many years of trial-and-error before he was able to obtain the the "magic" combination of strength and minimum weight in the cane.Everything depends upon how the shape (trajectory) of the convex tapers are managed within each of the rod's sections. One does not simply look at his drawings in "The Ring of The Rise" and then go build the rod. You can build a good, fishable rod, no doubt, but you probably will not have built thevery lightest rod that COULD be built. That was what Vince spent yearssearching out. Cheers, Bill ----- Original Message -----From: "Ralph W. Moon" Cc: Sent: Monday, February 11, 2002 10:45 AMSubject: Re: Rod Weights Don It was my understanding that the rod weight was figured before fittings. I always thought that was a stupid idea, because how couldanybody ever check it out without tearing the rod to pieces. Ralph Don & Sandy Andersen wrote: Guys/Gals, Some time ago there was a discussion of when rods should beweighed.Just finished up my rendition of the tapers drawings that Vince Marinaro included in the "Ring of the Rise". He says that the rod should weight under 4 ozs. In my case, the raw cane without gluing or other finishing items came about at 3.3 ozs. Based on the fact that says that he builds all his rods for a 5 weight line it would seem that the rod I've made that casts a 5 weight cannot have any more cane removed anywhere and still cast a 5 wt. So did you think that he might have weighed it without fittings? Is this typical of rodmakers or lawyers or only in combination? catch ya' Donhttp://www.telusplanet.net/public/dmanders/index.html http://www.telusplanet.net/public/dmanders/index.html from edriddle@mindspring.com Tue Feb 12 08:24:48 2002 g1CEOk802583 for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2002 08:24:46 -0600 helo=oemcomputer) id 16adrO-0002Mg-00; Tue, 12 Feb 2002 09:24:43 -0500 Subject: Re: Off Subject Thanks Todd.Ed----- Original Message ----- Subject: Re: Off Subject Ed, Try going into help, and once in there, click the index tab. Search for"rules" and then find "e-mail message rules" Help should walk youthrough the process of setting this up. Ed Riddle wrote: Please pardon the non-rodmaking question. A while back, someone on the list provided instructions for blockingemail from an individual. I'd like to see those instructions again. I'm getting spam from one particular address practically every time Iturn this box on. I'm using Microsoft Internet Explorer and OutlookExpress. TIA.Ed -- Todd Talsma8412 North Maple CourtZeeland MI 49464------ web design business page: http://www.webbizbuilders.com/Bamboo Tips site: http://www.webbizbuilders.com/Bamboo/Bamboo Sources site: http://www.webbizbuilders.com/Bamboo_Sources/home page: http://external.sligh.com/~toddt/genealogy pages: Under construction from rkrees@mcn.net Tue Feb 12 09:08:17 2002 g1CF8G805305 for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2002 09:08:16 -0600 helo=rkrees.mcn.net) id 16aeXT-0001HY-00; Tue, 12 Feb 2002 07:08:12 -0800 Subject: Re: Off Subject Go to tools Then inboa Assistant then make your choice and saveRon from Troy.Miller@BakerOilTools.com Tue Feb 12 10:08:13 2002 g1CG8B809165 for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2002 10:08:11 -0600 (bhihdcimc01.bakerhughes.com [204.253.245.34] (may be forged)) (5.5.2653.19) id ; Tue, 12 Feb 2002 09:53:35 -0600 Subject: RE: Rod Weights The reason that I chose this taper of Bob's for my first rod, is that it islight, but very fast as well. This seemed contradictory to me at first, butthe rod's inertia is very low and it loads and unloads with authority. Fora newbie, trying to wean hisself from plastic, this is a great entrytaper.... Thanks for sharing it with me Bob! TAM-----Original Message----- Subject: Re: Rod Weights Weight is very dependant on the particular taper you're building. Forinstance, Don's 3 piece rod weighed in at over 5 ounces, I just finished a3pc 7'6" 5 weight that weighs (finished wt, with reel seat, guides, grip andvarnish) 3 7/8 ounce. Of course my rods don't have a swelled but and thatis with only a 6 1/2" RHW grip and a Leonard Style Cap and Ring reel seatcourtesy Tony Larson. Now, we're talking about two entirely differenttapers, but still, about two rods that will perform essentially the same endfunction. This same rod is the rod that Troy Miller cast here and isbuilding for himself. It will lay down a flyline like a feather, yet if youneed to, you can shoot it to the moon. A little less cane, overall, butstill an efficient casting machine.I've fished many rods that weigh much more than 5 ounces, but only onethat I make does weigh in that heavy and it's a monster. I'm just morecomfortable with light rods and since I don't, personally, see any advantageto having that much cane glued to a reel seat, I make mine to be light. Ofcourse, too many "shop bites" keep me pretty gimped up and when you'resoremost of the time, you don't want to have to fight any more bamboo (oranything else) that you have too. *S* Later,Bob R.L. Nunley, RodmakerCustom Split Cane Flyrodshttp://www.caneflyrod.com ----- OriginalMessage ----- ; rmoon@ida.net; rodmakers@mail.wustL.eduSent: Tuesday, February 12, 2002 6:59AMSubject: Re: Rod Weights Bill, While I took a poke @ building the rod, I certainly didn't think that I wasgoing to be "bang on" to what Marinaro had in mind. Still, it's a start onsolving what could/might be an interesting problem. I weighed the ferrulesand handle and other parts and for the life of me can't figure out how hegot a sub-4 oz. rod.And I only built the rod as a 2 piecer. So there is only 1 set of ferrulesinvolved. Figured I wouldn't waste another ferrule on my "flight of fancy".Used aluminum reel seat as well, although I went with a complete reel insertof cottonwood bark.The finished rod weighs over 5 1/4 ozs. in the 2 piece configuration. Still,it casts OK.While it may have been presumptuous of me to attempt a rod based on justdrawings, one wonders why he didn't post the tapers. Maybe it was his secretto keep.Does interest me though - pushing the limits of cane about a far as it willgo.I don't know where I could have shaved any more cane from the rod and stillhad a rod that would cast a 5 wt. line. Maybe if he had not said that hebuilt all his rods for a 5 wt. line and the rod was built for a 3 weight, itmight have been possible with the taper I derived. Back to the drawing board I guess. catch ya' Don At 11:29 AM 2/11/02 -0500, you wrote: Ralph, Rods that were weighed before the fittings were mounted were not meanttosatisfy our legalistic propensities toward "truth-in-advertizing." Instead,they were weighed at that point in their construction as evidence of a rod's ability to handle a fly line of a certain weight (back in the days when therelationship between silk line, rod length and rod weight was a relevant,determining indicator). The weight of the cane, alone (relative to a rod's length), told a customerwhat to expect of that rod's action. Vince, did not like that system either, but it was because he believed sofervently that hardware itself was bound to alter a rod's action. So hebuilt his lightest rods with small grips, cork reel seats (or balsa),mounted with light aluminum rings, and only a couple coats of very thinvarnish. Then he would weigh. Vince spent many, many years of trial-and-error before he was able to obtain the the "magic" combination of strength and minimum weight in the cane.Everything depends upon how the shape (trajectory) of the convex tapersaremanaged within each of the rod's sections. One does not simply look at hisdrawings in "The Ring of The Rise" and then go build the rod. You can builda good, fishable rod, no doubt, but you probably will not have built thevery lightest rod that COULD be built. That was what Vince spent yearssearching out. Cheers, Bill ----- Original Message -----From: "Ralph W. Moon" Cc: Sent: Monday, February 11, 2002 10:45 AMSubject: Re: Rod Weights Don It was my understanding that the rod weight was figured before fittings. I always thought that was a stupid idea, because how couldanybody ever check it out without tearing the rod to pieces. Ralph Don & Sandy Andersen wrote: Guys/Gals, Some time ago there was a discussion of when rods should be weighed.Just finished up my rendition of the tapers drawings that Vince Marinaro included in the "Ring of the Rise". He says that the rod should weight under 4 ozs. In my case, the raw cane without gluing or other finishing items came about at 3.3 ozs. Based on the fact that says that he builds all his rods for a 5 weight line it would seem that the rod I've made that casts a 5 weight cannot haveany more cane removed anywhere and still cast a 5 wt. So did you think that he might have weighed it without fittings? Is this typical of rodmakers or lawyers or only in combination? catch ya' Donhttp://www.telusplanet.net/public/dmanders/index.html http://www.telusplanet.net/public/dmanders/index.html from tjtrodmaker@yahoo.com Tue Feb 12 11:19:25 2002 g1CHJO813328 for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2002 11:19:24 -0600 12 Feb 2002 09:19:14 PST Subject: tony larsens i have seen tony larsen's, (or is it larson), wesitebut need some assistance to find it again. wouldsomeone assist me? timothy ====="Gooda' mornin', mister bear!" ...Ride, boldly ride,"The shade replied, -"If you seek for Eldorado!" -- E.A.Poe __________________________________________________Do You Yahoo!?Send FREE Valentine eCards with Yahoo! Greetings!http://greetings.yahoo.com from Harris.James@ev.state.az.us Tue Feb 12 11:32:32 2002 g1CHWV814233 for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2002 11:32:31 -0600 Tue, 12 Feb 2002 10:33:04 -0700 10:30:33 2002 -0700 with Novell_GroupWise; Tue, 12 Feb 2002 10:32:24 -0700 Subject: Re: tony larsens FILETIME=[537B23B0:01C1B3EB] g1CHWW814234 Timothy,Try http://pages.prodigy.net/pumpkin10/ timothy troester 02/12/02 10:19AM >>> i have seen tony larsen's, (or is it larson), wesitebut need some assistance to find it again. wouldsomeone assist me? timothy ====="Gooda' mornin', mister bear!" ...Ride, boldly ride,"The shade replied, -"If you seek for Eldorado!" -- E.A.Poe __________________________________________________Do You Yahoo!?Send FREE Valentine eCards with Yahoo! Greetings!http://greetings.yahoo.com > from rcurry@ttlc.net Tue Feb 12 11:34:022002 g1CHY1814410 for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2002 11:34:01 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:0.9.4)Gecko/20011019 Netscape6/6.2 Subject: Re: tony larsens timotheus, I've had success with www.rushriverrods.com Best regards,Reedhttp://www.overmywaders.com/ timothy troester wrote: i have seen tony larsen's, (or is it larson), wesitebut need some assistance to find it again. wouldsomeone assist me? timothy ====="Gooda' mornin', mister bear!" ...Ride, boldly ride,"The shade replied, -"If you seek for Eldorado!" -- E.A.Poe __________________________________________________Do You Yahoo!?Send FREE Valentine eCards with Yahoo! Greetings!http://greetings.yahoo.com . -- > from tjtrodmaker@yahoo.com Tue Feb 12 11:46:31 2002 Received: from g1CHkU815370 for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2002 Received: from[24.4.255.51] by web11206.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Tue, 12 Feb 2002 Cc: "rod 'akers" In-Reply- owner-rodmakers@wugate.wustl.edu X-Listprocessor- Version:8.2.09/990901/11:28 -- ListProc(tm) by CREN all, thanks all for the help!timotheus --- Reed Curry wrote: timotheus,I've had success with www.rushriverrods.com ====="Gooda' mornin', mister bear!" ...Ride, boldly ride,"The shade replied, -"If you seek for Eldorado!" -- E.A.Poe __________________________________________________Do You Yahoo!?Send FREE Valentine eCards with Yahoo! Greetings!http://greetings.yahoo.com from ttalsma@macatawa.org Tue Feb 12 12:15:01 2002 g1CIF1816765 for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2002 12:15:01 -0600 id ; Tue, 12 Feb 2002 13:07:57 -0500 id D56AMGSX; Tue, 12 Feb 2002 13:07:52 -0500 Subject: Re: tony larsens All, Remember that most of these can be found in the Bamboo Sources site(address below). If there is something missing there, please let meknow so that I can add it. Thanks timothy troester wrote: all, thanks all for the help! timotheus --- Reed Curry wrote: timotheus,I've had success with www.rushriverrods.com ====="Gooda' mornin', mister bear!" ...Ride, boldly ride,"The shade replied, -"If you seek for Eldorado!" -- E.A.Poe __________________________________________________Do You Yahoo!?Send FREE Valentine eCards with Yahoo! Greetings!http://greetings.yahoo.com -- Todd Talsma 8412 North Maple Court Zeeland MI 49464 ------ email: http://www.webbizbuilders.com/ Bamboo Tips site:http://www.webbizbuilders.com/Bamboo/ Bamboo Sources site:http://www.webbizbuilders.com/Bamboo_Sources/ home page:http://external.sligh.com/~toddt/ genealogy pages: Under construction from caneman@clnk.com Tue Feb 12 12:47:25 2002 Received: from Tue, 12 Feb 2002 12:45:57 -0600 Message-ID:From: "Bob Nunley" References:Subject: Re: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook rodmakers@wugate.wustl.edu X-Listprocessor- Version:8.2.09/990901/11:28 -- ListProc(tm) by CREN Here's Tony's sitehttp://pages.prodigy.net/pumpkin10/ Later, Bob R.L. Nunley, RodmakerCustom Split Cane Flyrods http://www.caneflyrod.com ----- Original Message Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2002 11:19 AMSubject: tony larsens i have seen tony larsen's, (or is it larson), wesitebut need some assistance to find it again. wouldsomeone assist me? timothy ====="Gooda' mornin', mister bear!" ...Ride, boldly ride,"The shade replied, -"If you seek for Eldorado!" -- E.A.Poe __________________________________________________Do You Yahoo!?Send FREE Valentine eCards with Yahoo! Greetings!http://greetings.yahoo.com from hartzell@easystreet.com Tue Feb 12 13:01:24 2002 g1CJ1N819365 for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2002 13:01:23 -0600 g1CIxB617733; TSmithwick@aol.com,rmoon@ida.net, rodmakers@mail.wustL.eduSubject: Re: Rod Weights Bill,There was some talk a few years ago about a book on Marinaro whichwouldinclude his tapers. This was presumably why they have been kept so secret. Isthere any more news about that?Ed Hartzell WILLIAM HARMS wrote: Don, I looked over my email on this thread, and want to apologize for being, Ithink, downright insulting to you and your efforts to try Vince's convextaper ideas. That was unintended, but also quite unnecessary. Vince was building rods only for his own use, and with the exception ofRobert Crompton, George Parker Holden, and (very late), Hoagy CarmichaelandTom Maxwell, he spoke with no other rod makers. Although he studiedeverything he could get his hands on, he spoke with no other rod makers,andcarried on his work pretty much in a vacuum. In those days (1930s-1970s), most rod makers simply did notcommunicate muchwith one another or share their information. There are some notableexceptions, of course, but Vince was unaware of most of the work that wenowknow was actually going on among amateur builders. It was really onlysubsequent to the demise of most of the commercial builders (and, ofcourse,the publication of Hoagy's book on Garrison) that makers began what wenowhave as a completely open forum. At the time Vince taught me to build (mid-seventies) I too knew no othermakers, although I now realize that, indeed, there were already quite alarge number of other amateurs out there. During the earlier decades(following "A Modern Dry Fly Code") when Vince was working out histheorieson cane rods, his fear was that some commercial builder might sieze uponhistapers and market a series of rods in his name, but without his permissionor oversight. His concern was a matter of rather intense personal pride,but it was also a matter of "fair play" and ecomomics. Vince was an absolute perfectionist in rod construction, and completelyobsessed with his ideas of fly rod design. He did not want his tapers to beknown before he had worked each one out to its ultimate conclusion, but,with the exception of perhaps two or three rods, he never quite reachedthatgoal. So, the tapers were never made available--not to me, not to Hoagy, and notto Tom Maxwell. Most of Vince's rods were, frankly, a "mess" (well, bytoday's aesthetic standards) because he had little interest in that part ofthe craft. I re-finished two of his rods and Tom Maxwell did one of them,but we were both requested, expressly, not to mike the rods' dimensions.Many of my friends still assume that I secretly harbor Vince's tapers, but Ido not. Late in Vince's life, he had it in mind to seek out a commercial maker whowould build a special series of rods in his name, while he was to retainfinal supervision in all matters of quality control. This did notmaterialize for a variety of reasons, and the tapers died along with Vince.Today, the Pennsylvania Fly Fishing Museum owns Vince's entire collection,but sadly, although we have his rods and other paraphernalia, there are nosurviving records, neither of his building notes nor his tapers. Vince's rods are not to be regarded as the finest rods ever built,but they certainly mark one of the most remarkable (even if, apart fromthechapter in "In The Ring of The Rise," unknown)contributions in thedevelopment of dry-fly taper design. He spent dozens of years obsessingabout rods that would be capable of delivering maximum power at minimumweight--but was seldom satisfied. I am not nearly so obsessed (even though I also regard an optimalweight-to- power ratio as important), but if, like Vince, you want to reachsome ultimate goal, then "back to the drawing board," as you put it, is theonly way to get there. Vince, too, could not imagine a way to reduceweightfurther, and then, perhaps years later, he would figure out a way. Cheers, Bill ----- Original Message -----From: "Don & Sandy Andersen" Cc: ; ; Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2002 7:59 AMSubject: Re: Rod Weights Bill, While I took a poke @ building the rod, I certainly didn't think that I was going to be "bang on" to what Marinaro had in mind. Still, it's a starton solving what could/might be an interesting problem. I weighed theferrules and handle and other parts and for the life of me can't figure outhow he got a sub-4 oz. rod. And I only built the rod as a 2 piecer. So there is only 1 set of ferrules involved. Figured I wouldn't waste another ferrule on my "flight of fancy".Used aluminum reel seat as well, although I went with a complete reel insertof cottonwood bark. The finished rod weighs over 5 1/4 ozs. in the 2 piece configuration. Still, it casts OK. While it may have been presumptuous of me to attempt a rod based onjust drawings, one wonders why he didn't post the tapers. Maybe it was hissecretto keep. Does interest me though - pushing the limits of cane about a far as it will go. I don't know where I could have shaved any more cane from the rod and still had a rod that would cast a 5 wt. line. Maybe if he had not said thathe built all his rods for a 5 wt. line and the rod was built for a 3 weight,it might have been possible with the taper I derived. Back to the drawing board I guess. catch ya' Don At 11:29 AM 2/11/02 -0500, you wrote: Ralph, Rods that were weighed before the fittings were mounted were notmeant tosatisfy our legalistic propensities toward "truth-in-advertizing." Instead, they were weighed at that point in their construction as evidence of a rod's ability to handle a fly line of a certain weight (back in the days when the relationship between silk line, rod length and rod weight was a relevant,determining indicator). The weight of the cane, alone (relative to a rod's length), told a customer what to expect of that rod's action. Vince, did not like that system either, but it was because he believed sofervently that hardware itself was bound to alter a rod's action. So hebuilt his lightest rods with small grips, cork reel seats (or balsa),mounted with light aluminum rings, and only a couple coats of very thinvarnish. Then he would weigh. Vince spent many, many years of trial-and-error before he was able to obtain the the "magic" combination of strength and minimum weight in thecane.Everything depends upon how the shape (trajectory) of the convextapers are managed within each of the rod's sections. One does not simply look at his drawings in "The Ring of The Rise" and then go build the rod. You can build a good, fishable rod, no doubt, but you probably will not have built thevery lightest rod that COULD be built. That was what Vince spent yearssearching out. Cheers, Bill ----- Original Message -----From: "Ralph W. Moon" Cc: Sent: Monday, February 11, 2002 10:45 AMSubject: Re: Rod Weights Don It was my understanding that the rod weight was figured before fittings. I always thought that was a stupid idea, because how couldanybody ever check it out without tearing the rod to pieces. Ralph Don & Sandy Andersen wrote: Guys/Gals, Some time ago there was a discussion of when rods should beweighed.Just finished up my rendition of the tapers drawings that Vince Marinaro included in the "Ring of the Rise". He says that the rod should weight under 4 ozs. In my case, the raw cane without gluing or other finishing items came about at 3.3 ozs. Based on the fact that says that he builds all his rods for a 5 weight line it would seem that the rod I've made that casts a 5 weight cannot have any more cane removed anywhere and still cast a 5 wt. So did you think that he might have weighed it without fittings? Is this typical of rodmakers or lawyers or only in combination? catch ya' Donhttp://www.telusplanet.net/public/dmanders/index.html http://www.telusplanet.net/public/dmanders/index.html from JNL123141@msn.com Tue Feb 12 13:20:36 2002 g1CJKZ820622 for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2002 13:20:35 - Tue, 12 Feb 2002 11:20:22 -0800 Subject: Rod weights FILETIME=[51488E70:01C1B3FA] Greetings, All,I remember talking to Bill Waara about ten years ago about rod weights. =He was pretty certain their indicated weights were as blanks but he didn'=t know why. My guess is with hardware options the weights could vary all=over the place for the same rod. Perhaps also, the old masters were ver=y weight conscious even back in those days but not overt about it. Kind =of like a silent war. Maybe its also like the manufacturers G.V.W. of a =vehicle-with an empty gas tank. Just my 2=A2. Greetings,All=, I remember talking to Bill Waara about ten years ago about r= so, the old masters were very weight conscious even back in those days&nb= from canazon@mindspring.com Tue Feb 12 14:11:59 2002 g1CKBw823409 for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2002 14:11:58 - helo=oemcomputer) id 16ajHG-0000L0-00; Tue, 12 Feb 2002 15:11:46 -0500 Subject: Re: Rod weights i had the pleasure of meeting a well known maker a few weeks ago and =since my quandry at the time was adding an extra ounce ( for a reelseat) =to a 2 oz. rod, it wasn't long before we touched on the topic of =overall weight. he said that there was a old rod that he had been trying =to make for some time but he could not make it at the advertised weight. =after taking every approach imaginable, he came to the conclusion that =the listed weight of the rod had to be from the blank.mike weeks ago and since my quandry at the time was adding an extra ounce ( = overall weight. he said that there was a old rod that he had been trying = taking every approach imaginable, he came to the conclusion that the = weight of the rod had to be from the blank. from paul.blakley@ntlworld.com Tue Feb 12 14:13:33 2002 g1CKDW823647 for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2002 14:13:32 - Tue, 12 Feb 2002 20:13:29 +0000 Clive Harrison Subject: The Lee Wulff 'Midge'Taper And first for a bit of background info......... The original specification for 'Midge'rods was laid down by theFederation of Flyfisherman during the early sixties.The preliminary standards being set as 'Midge' rods must be 6' or lessin length and have a weight of 2 ozs or less.All this recent discussionon the list of what does rod weight mean, i.e weight of the blank orweight of the finished rod made me weigh the example I have had thepleasure to measure and cast and I can state that the Farlows Lee Wulff'Midge'weighs in at less than 2 ozs for the complete rod ( courtesy ofmy wifes kitchen scales). The rod I have had to study is owned by a Clive Harrison of Gainford andto him I would like to say thanks very much in helping me to determinethis truly classic transatlantic taper (US designed and Brit built ). What do we know about this rod;The rod was designed by Lee Wulff and it was built by Sharpes ofAberdeen for Farlows of Pall Mall in London.It was also marketed andsold in the US by Norm Thomson Outfitters.The rod was in production fromat least the mid to late sixties , but possibly longer and from thenumber of rods i have ever seen for sale( less than an handful in thelast ten years ) I would say that production was very limited ?Catalogue cuts for the rod describe it as being built using SharpesArmourcane process which translates into the blanks being impregnatedand unvarnished.Legend has it that Lee Wulff 'killed'a 22lb Salmon onthe rod and trade literature says that the rod is capable of handlingfish up to 20 to 30lb................The rod was fitted with Stainless Steel Snake Guides/Rings with a HardChrome Butt Ring ( aka Stripper ).The rod is two pieces with hand machined ferrulesLength is 6'Weight is 1 7/8ozRod Whippings /tyings being Royal Blue SilkRod was available with one or two tips , complete with sack andAluminium TubeRecommended line being HCF, WF7.Note I have also found references to state that the rod for distancecasting should be used with a #5 weight line ! The above all said my initial impression of the rod was that the handlewas ridiculously small ( even with my tiny hands ) and that the roddespite being light was quite stiff and 'clubby' .The owner of the rodhad me thread up a modern #4DT line on a Hardy featherweight reel andonce the rod was cast with this line ( note how this differs from therecommended manufacturers line size ? ) the rods action softened up andwas very pleasant to cast. The rod action being a slow andthrough...........Within the constraints of Clives garden the rod could easilly cast aDT#4 line 10 yards and gave the impression of having ample reservepower..........Lee Wulff having been reported to be capable of casting90 ' with the rod . Mmmmmmmmmmmm I wonder what size of line this waswith ?........... All that said here are the dimensions of the rod ( flat to flat startingat the closest juncture to the tip ring for the top and from the femaleferrule on the butt section and measured wherever possible in 5"increments ); Tip section length 36 1/4 "2 ( say 2"below the tip ring to allow for the tube and end wrap ), .079"5, .090"10, .106"15, .118"20, .134"25, .154"30, .165"34, .181"Then ferrule and wrap Butt section length 37"2 ( say 2" below the female ferrule to allow for the ferrule length andwrap ) .197"5, .200"10, .213"15, .217"20, .224"25, .236"and then it's the handle....... Handle and Reel Seat total length 7 1/4 " ( thats correct 7 1/4 " ! )Length of handle 4" and shaped like a miniature Orvis Superfine gripranging from .453" at the front of the handle to .748" at the rear.Length of reel seat 3 1/4" parallel cork of .410" diameter with a flared/fish tail shaped end and fitted with two miniature aluminium slidingbands , each 1/8" wide with a tiny aluminium end cap at the end of thereel seat (to prevent cork wear when resting the rod on the ground........)The rod the above dimensions were extracted from was for the recordmarked as follows;Lee Wulff 'Midge'( on the top side )#832 6' 1 7/8 ozs Armour Cane ( on the next indexed side )" Made by Farlows" ( on the next indexed side ) Well thats it.............should any of you make the rod please me knowwhat you think of it ( and let me know what size lines you are using)........now all you need is a 20-30 lb fish to try it on !Tight lines.........Paul from paul.blakley@ntlworld.com Tue Feb 12 14:45:40 2002 g1CKjd825563 for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2002 14:45:39 - Tue, 12 Feb 2002 20:45:38 +0000 Clive Harrison Subject: Lee Wulff 'Midge' Taper Addendum No 1 Further to my earlier posting I forgot to add the rod ring spacings ! Tip section has 5 guides plus tip ring indexed at;41/2",51/4",61/4",7" and 8". Butt section has one guide plus stripper/butt ring indexed at 4 1/4"and 91/4" . Thanks........Paul from richjez@enteract.com Tue Feb 12 17:27:12 2002 g1CNRB804448 for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2002 17:27:11 - "Adam Vigil" , "Bob Marbert", Subject: Re: Glue/Binder/Binding Cord As a licensed clinical social worker, I will testify before the judge to spring you. Not to convince the judge I am sane???? Rich Jezioro At 12:27 AM 2/11/2002, Don Schneider wrote: Bob, Welcome aboard. You sound as insane as the rest of us on this list and should fit right in. I have this mental image though of licking a piece of bamboo just as my wife walks into my shop, the conversation should go something like this: "I knew you were over the edge and now you just proved it, kissing that damn bamboo. I m having you committed." I hope you all will come visit. Don----- Original Message -----From: Adam Vigil rodmakers@wugate.wustl.eduSent: Sunday, February 10, 2002 9:50 PMSubject: Re: Glue/Binder/Binding Cord Bob, I remember your gorilla glue suggestion in the "Mag". To bad the magazine ended the way it did. Glad to have you on board. Most of us are good natured and we tolerate and mostly ignore our "onery" brethren and sisters. But we have a national treasure in this list and it is a lot of fun. Adam Vigil----- Original Message -----From: Bob Marbert Sent: Sunday, February 10, 2002 9:33 PMSubject: Glue/Binder/Binding Cord My name is Bob Marbert. I have been making rods for about six years, and so far, I've produced about thirty-five. I'm not in the business of selling rods.......my only purpose(s) are to thoroughly entertain myself and ensure my two sons are equipped in the manner to which they are accustomed. When I started, there was no one in my area to ask, so I struggled. Thank goodness for the Garrison book. It provided the concept and basics......... from there, I improvised. One of my first improvisations was in the area of adhesives. After evaluating the standards, I decided that I didn't want to mix anything harder than alka-seltzer and water. I settled on Gorilla Glue. In the fall '98 edition of Bamboo Fly Rod Magazine, my comments on it's applicability were published in Tips and Techniques under the title "King Kong Adhesives". As I read the Tips glue section, I see that some of you have tried the monkey glue, and still have questions concerning longevity and workability. Well, I can't say how much longer it will last, but I can say that right now it's six years and counting. I have experienced no problems, no failures. As for workability, I add water. Preliminary heat treating drives moisture out of the cane, and the glue needs moisture to do whatever it is that it does. After I cut the masking tape and lay my strips out, I take a wet sponge or moisened brush and reintroduce moisture before I brush on the glue. Yes, the moisture causes the glue to foam more, but it also extends the time you have to play with your section before you hang it up to dry. On my splices (my first two rods had nodes, the rest have been nodeless), I apply Gorilla Glue to one side of the splice, I lick the other side. As for binders, I built a Garrison binder to specs, ran a couple of dowells through for testing, took the binder apart, and put the parts in a drawer. I'm a confirmed hand-binder. I like to feel the line tension in my fingers, and I really did not want another piece of equipment sitting around that could only be used for one thing (it's kinda' like a cotton picker that's used two to three weeks a year, and sits idle the rest of the year). My solution.......a fly reel. I had an old fly reel that had been around the house for thirty years. It doesn't even have a name on it, but it does have an excellent drag. It's mounted on a piece of 5/8 " doweling (slide bands are brass pipe fittings) which I drop into one of the dog/stop holes on my work bench. I load it up with string, tweak the drag, and bind. Yes, my wrists do tire at times, but for one that only produces five or six rods a year, I have plenty of time to recover between rods. My binding cord.......#10 crocheting thread. It's stong enough, relatively inexpensive, available at the local craft store, and works equally well for glueing and heat treating. To all who have contributed to the tips section, thanks. I wish I had known about it six years ago. I could have saved a great deal of wear and tear between my ears had I known about this site. Oh.....one last thing. Varnish. I didn't see any mention of my brand in the tips, so I'll just mention it myself. I use Behlens Masters Water White (WW) Restoration Varnish. It's a flexible, waterproof spar varnish available at most wood working stores. from harms1@pa.net Tue Feb 12 18:26:05 2002 g1D0Q4807375 for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2002 18:26:04 -0600 ,, Subject: Re: Rod Weights Ed, Yes, a book is being prepared on Vince and his rods. And, yes, the taperinformation will be included. No, the reason for "secrecy" is not due to the pending book. It is due, asI indicated in my earlier email, to Vince himself and his wishes. Hisremaining family members have only recently agreed to sell Vince'scollection to the PA Fly Fishing Museum, but not without a few importantstipulations--some of which concern the release of his tapers. Among themore important of those considerations is a request that nobody shouldprofit from the sale or use of those tapers. That issue is one we areanxious to protect,but the legal particulars still need to be worked out. Vince left no taper information behind, and we have not yet even miked mostof his rods. So this whole thing really isn't a matter of secrecy at all.It is a matter of "efficiency" within a small, voluntary organization, andthe very limited funds we have to oversee the work properly. Cheers, Bill ----- Original Message ----- ;; Subject: Re: Rod Weights Bill,There was some talk a few years ago about a book on Marinaro which would include his tapers. This was presumably why they have been kept so secret. Is there any more news about that?Ed Hartzell WILLIAM HARMS wrote: Don, I looked over my email on this thread, and want to apologize for being, I think, downright insulting to you and your efforts to try Vince's convextaper ideas. That was unintended, but also quite unnecessary. Vince was building rods only for his own use, and with the exception ofRobert Crompton, George Parker Holden, and (very late), HoagyCarmichael and Tom Maxwell, he spoke with no other rod makers. Although he studiedeverything he could get his hands on, he spoke with no other rod makers, and carried on his work pretty much in a vacuum. In those days (1930s-1970s), most rod makers simply did notcommunicate much with one another or share their information. There are some notableexceptions, of course, but Vince was unaware of most of the work thatwe now know was actually going on among amateur builders. It was really onlysubsequent to the demise of most of the commercial builders (and, of course, the publication of Hoagy's book on Garrison) that makers began what we now have as a completely open forum. At the time Vince taught me to build (mid-seventies) I too knew no othermakers, although I now realize that, indeed, there were already quite alarge number of other amateurs out there. During the earlier decades(following "A Modern Dry Fly Code") when Vince was working out his theories on cane rods, his fear was that some commercial builder might siezeupon his tapers and market a series of rods in his name, but without his permission or oversight. His concern was a matter of rather intense personal pride, but it was also a matter of "fair play" and ecomomics. Vince was an absolute perfectionist in rod construction, and completelyobsessed with his ideas of fly rod design. He did not want his tapers to be known before he had worked each one out to its ultimate conclusion, but,with the exception of perhaps two or three rods, he never quite reached that goal. So, the tapers were never made available--not to me, not to Hoagy, and not to Tom Maxwell. Most of Vince's rods were, frankly, a "mess" (well, bytoday's aesthetic standards) because he had little interest in that part of the craft. I re-finished two of his rods and Tom Maxwell did one of them, but we were both requested, expressly, not to mike the rods' dimensions.Many of my friends still assume that I secretly harbor Vince's tapers, but I do not. Late in Vince's life, he had it in mind to seek out a commercial maker who would build a special series of rods in his name, while he was to retainfinal supervision in all matters of quality control. This did notmaterialize for a variety of reasons, and the tapers died along with Vince. Today, the Pennsylvania Fly Fishing Museum owns Vince's entire collection, but sadly, although we have his rods and other paraphernalia, there are no surviving records, neither of his building notes nor his tapers. Vince's rods are not to be regarded as the finest rods ever built,but they certainly mark one of the most remarkable (even if, apart from the chapter in "In The Ring of The Rise," unknown)contributions in thedevelopment of dry-fly taper design. He spent dozens of yearsobsessingabout rods that would be capable of delivering maximum power atminimumweight--but was seldom satisfied. I am not nearly so obsessed (even though I also regard an optimalweight-to- power ratio as important), but if, like Vince, you want to reach some ultimate goal, then "back to the drawing board," as you put it, is the only way to get there. Vince, too, could not imagine a way to reduce weight further, and then, perhaps years later, he would figure out a way. Cheers, Bill ----- Original Message -----From: "Don & Sandy Andersen" Cc: ; ; Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2002 7:59 AMSubject: Re: Rod Weights Bill, While I took a poke @ building the rod, I certainly didn't think that I was going to be "bang on" to what Marinaro had in mind. Still, it's a start on solving what could/might be an interesting problem. I weighed theferrules and handle and other parts and for the life of me can't figure out how he got a sub-4 oz. rod. And I only built the rod as a 2 piecer. So there is only 1 set of ferrules involved. Figured I wouldn't waste another ferrule on my "flight of fancy". Used aluminum reel seat as well, although I went with a complete reel insert of cottonwood bark. The finished rod weighs over 5 1/4 ozs. in the 2 piece configuration. Still, it casts OK. While it may have been presumptuous of me to attempt a rod based on just drawings, one wonders why he didn't post the tapers. Maybe it was his secret to keep. Does interest me though - pushing the limits of cane about a far as it will go. I don't know where I could have shaved any more cane from the rod and still had a rod that would cast a 5 wt. line. Maybe if he had not said that he built all his rods for a 5 wt. line and the rod was built for a 3 weight, it might have been possible with the taper I derived. Back to the drawing board I guess. catch ya' Don At 11:29 AM 2/11/02 -0500, you wrote: Ralph, Rods that were weighed before the fittings were mounted were not meant to satisfy our legalistic propensities toward "truth-in-advertizing." Instead, they were weighed at that point in their construction as evidence of a rod's ability to handle a fly line of a certain weight (back in the days when the relationship between silk line, rod length and rod weight was a relevant, determining indicator). The weight of the cane, alone (relative to a rod's length), told a customer what to expect of that rod's action. Vince, did not like that system either, but it was because he believed so fervently that hardware itself was bound to alter a rod's action. So he built his lightest rods with small grips, cork reel seats (or balsa),mounted with light aluminum rings, and only a couple coats of very thin varnish. Then he would weigh. Vince spent many, many years of trial-and-error before he was ableto obtain the the "magic" combination of strength and minimum weight in the cane. Everything depends upon how the shape (trajectory) of the convex tapers are managed within each of the rod's sections. One does not simply look at his drawings in "The Ring of The Rise" and then go build the rod. You can build a good, fishable rod, no doubt, but you probably will not have built the very lightest rod that COULD be built. That was what Vince spent years searching out. Cheers, Bill ----- Original Message -----From: "Ralph W. Moon" Cc: Sent: Monday, February 11, 2002 10:45 AMSubject: Re: Rod Weights Don It was my understanding that the rod weight was figured before fittings. I always thought that was a stupid idea, because how couldanybody ever check it out without tearing the rod to pieces. Ralph Don & Sandy Andersen wrote: Guys/Gals, Some time ago there was a discussion of when rods should be weighed. Just finished up my rendition of the tapers drawings that Vince Marinaro included in the "Ring of the Rise". He says that the rod should weight under 4 ozs. In my case, the raw cane without gluing or other finishing items came about at 3.3 ozs. Based on the fact that says that he builds all his rods for a 5 weight line it would seem that the rod I've made that casts a 5 weight cannot have any more cane removed anywhere and still cast a 5 wt. So did you think that he might have weighed it without fittings? Is this typical of rodmakers or lawyers or only in combination? catch ya' Donhttp://www.telusplanet.net/public/dmanders/index.html http://www.telusplanet.net/public/dmanders/index.html from Lazybee45@aol.com Tue Feb 12 21:29:59 2002 g1D3Tw811406 for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2002 21:29:58 -0600 for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2002 22:29:50 -0500 Subject: Joke delete if no sense of humor! Standing at the edge of the lake, a man saw a woman flailing about in the deep water. Unable to swim, the man screamed for help. A trout fisherman ran up. The man said, "My wife is drowning and I can't swim. Please save her. I'll give you a hundred dollars." The fisherman dove into the water. In ten powerful strokes,he reached the woman, put his arm around her, and swam back to shore. Depositing her at the feet of the man, the fisherman said,"Okay, where's my hundred dollars?" The man said, "Look, when I saw her going down for the third time, Ithought it was my wife. But this is my mother-in-law." The fisherman reached into his pocket and said,"Just my luck. How much do I owe you?" mark visit Marks Magic Workshop http://hometown.aol.com/lazybee45/myhomepage/business.html from b2g@jps.net Tue Feb 12 22:03:31 2002 g1D43U812367 for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2002 22:03:30 - id 16aqdk-0005YW-00 for rodmakers@wugate.wustl.edu; Tue, 12 Feb 2002 20:03:29 -0800 Subject: Beveller Mill Cutters List, Can anybody point me in the direction of were I could purchase mill cuttersthat I could use in making a non-tapered beveller. The bore of the cutterswould need to be 5/8 of an inch with a key slot in it (if I am not wishing because I think I remember someone posted this kind of info before. For anexample of what mill cutters I am looking for one could look at thebevellers on the Golden Witch web page. I just about got everything puttogether to make a beveller (total cost so far $0) and that is except themill cutter which I believe will be my only expense. Also one more technical question. Would running the mill cutters on the themotor shaft at 1725 RPM be enough or should I step up the the speed of thecutters with a shaft, belt, and pulley system? The reason why I ask is ifyou look at the photographs of different bevellers the cutters are mountedon the shaft of a common TEFC, 56C face, 1/4+ HP motor that runs approx.1725 RPM. If any one can help let me know. Thanks in advance. Robert H. List, Can = in the direction of were I could purchase mill cutters that I could use = 5/8 of an inch with a key slot in it (if I am not wishing for to much) = mill cutters I am looking for one could look at the bevellers on the = beveller (total cost so far $0) and that is except the mill cutter which = believe will be my only expense. Also = = shaft of a common TEFC, 56C face, 1/4+ HP motor that runs approx. advance. Robert = H. from paul.blakley@ntlworld.com Wed Feb 13 01:42:06 2002 g1D7g5815990 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2002 01:42:05 - Subject: Lee Wulff Taper Addendum No 2 Please note that there is a missing measurement from the taper as postedto the list on 2nd Feb......... Butt Section 30 .238" Apologies.........Paul from bob@downandacross.com Wed Feb 13 08:20:22 2002 g1DEKK822434 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2002 08:20:20 - Subject: RE: Beveller Mill Cutters Robert:I can only tell you answers based on what the experts have told me regardingfinishing mills and cutter speeds.-I would look at MSC or Travers to see if they have the cutters. Travers iswhere I got quad cutters for the Bellinger mill I once owned. It had a oneinch 60 and 45 degree cutters (see Travers Catalog p. 230). I only see 1 and1.25" hole diameters available.-As far as speeds go, the suggested speeds should be somewhere around5700rpms. I would also recommend a 1 to 1.5 HP motor.You really need to get a hold of Chris Lucker or Ed Hartzell if you want toknow what's best. They are the real experts. My mill is still a long wayoff, taking back seat to the beveler I am working on. Let us know how itturns out.Just in case anyone wants to see the Orvis mill and cutters from the 1974catalog, I scanned them into a pdf. It is 750K, so maybe not everyone wantsto download the 3 pages of shop photos and text. I offer it only for sharinginformation. I will only have it up on the site until tonight, because I amnot sure what the legality of posting that info is.http://www.downandacross.com/orvis1974.pdfGood luck,Bob-----Original Message-----From: owner-rodmakers@wugate.wustl.edu Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2002 11:02 PM Subject: Beveller Mill Cutters List, Can anybody point me in the direction of were I could purchase millcutters that I could use in making a non-tapered beveller. The bore of thecutters would need to be 5/8 of an inch with a key slot in it (if I am notwishing for to much) to fit the shaft of the motor. I looked in thearchives because I think I remember someone posted this kind of info before. bevellers on the Golden Witch web page. I just about got everything puttogether to make a beveller (total cost so far $0) and that is except themill cutter which I believe will be my only expense. Also one more technical question. Would running the mill cutters on thethe motor shaft at 1725 RPM be enough or should I step up the the speed ofthe cutters with a shaft, belt, and pulley system? The reason why I ask isif you look at the photographs of different bevellers the cutters aremounted on the shaft of a common TEFC, 56C face, 1/4+ HP motor thatrunsapprox. 1725 RPM. If any one can help let me know. Thanks in advance. Robert H. can only tell you answers based on what the experts have told me = finishing mills and cutter speeds. look at MSC or Travers to see if they have the cutters. Travers is where = quad cutters for the Bellinger mill I once owned. It had a one inch 60 = degree cutters (see Travers Catalog p. 230). I only see 1 and 1.25" hole = diameters available. speeds go, the suggested speeds should be somewhere around 5700 rpms. I= also recommend a 1 to 1.5 HP motor. need to get a hold of Chris Lucker or Ed Hartzell if you want to know = best. They are the real experts. My mill is still a long way off, taking = out. anyone wants to see the Orvis mill and cutters from the 1974 catalog, I = them into a pdf. It is 750K, so maybe not everyone wants to download the = of shop photos and text. I offer it only for sharing information. I will = have it up on the site until tonight, because I am not sure what the = posting that info is. http://www.downandacr=oss.com/orvis1974.pdf luck,Bob HolderSent: Tuesday, February 12, 2002 11:02 = RodmakersSubject: Beveller Mill =CuttersList, Can = me in the direction of were I could purchase mill cutters that I could = 5/8 of an inch with a key slot in it (if I am not wishing for to much) = mill cutters I am looking for one could look at the bevellers on the = beveller (total cost so far $0) and that is except the mill cutter = believe will be my only expense. Also = mounted on the shaft of a common TEFC, 56C face, 1/4+ HP motor that = advance. H. from lblove@omniglobal.net Wed Feb 13 08:41:38 2002 g1DEfb824023 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2002 08:41:37 - (63.71.237.137) Subject: RE: Beveller Mill Cutters --=====_101361111818467=_ Hi Bob,what diameter of cutters are you spinning at 5700 rpm??rpm doesn't mean that much to me with out cutter size, as the threefactors of cutting speed are surface feet per minute, rpm, and cutter=diameterall have a lot to do with one another. Change one and the other disclaimer, the above formula is for imperial units not metric After figuring out the sfm and rpm then the chip load per toothand chip load per revolution can be figured. from these numbersthen the inches per minute of feed can be determined. I always thought it funny that you have surface feet per minuteand then the feed is figured in inches per minute on milling machinesand inches per revolution on a lathe... Brad *********** REPLY SEPARATOR *********** On 2/13/02 at 8:32 AM Bob Maulucci wrote:-As far as speeds go, the suggested speeds should be somewhere around5700=rpms. --=====_101361111818467=_ Hi Bob,what diameter of cutters are you spinning at 5700 rpm??rpm doesn't mean that much to me with outcutter size, as the threefactors of cutting speed are surface feetper Change one and the other rpm=sfm*12/3.14*cutter diametersimplified is rpm=sfm*3.82/cutter diameter.disclaimer, the above formula is for imperialunits not metric After figuring out the sfm and rpm then thechip load per toothand chip load per revolution can be from these numbersthen the inches per minute of feed can be determined. I always thought it funny that you havesurface feet per minuteand then the feed is figured ininches per minute on milling machinesand inches perrevolution on a lathe... Brad *********** REPLY SEPARATOR***********On 2/13/02 at 8:32 AM Bob Maulucci wrote: -As far as speeds go, the suggested speeds should be somewhere around 5700 rpms. --=====_101361111818467=_-- from Jkvseafood@aol.com Wed Feb 13 10:17:41 2002 g1DGHf828566 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2002 10:17:41 - for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2002 11:17:12 - MAILINID74-0213111724; Wed, 13 Feb 2002 11:17:24 -0500 Subject: leonard thread hello guys,a friend wants me to refinish his 13ft leonard rod. red wraps. which threadtype and color is closest to the orignal? is there a place on the web where ican research for myself. m sinclairs rod rest. hndbk. didn't show leonards.thanks again, john from KyleDruey@aol.com Wed Feb 13 10:24:27 2002 g1DGOR829060 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2002 10:24:27 -0600 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2002 11:24:06 -0500 0213112406; Wed, 13 Feb 2002 11:24:06 -0500 Subject: Quadrate Questions List, I am building a quadrate for my second rod but I am not sure about some ofthe details: Ferrules – Can square ferrules be purchased, if so where? Or, dostandard ferrules need to be modified and made square? Binding – Should a Garrison style binder not be used? If not, what arethe alternatives? Tip Top – I assume nothing special here other than rounding the blankwhere the tip top tube will fit, or is there another way? Tapers – from what I have read if you convert a hex taper usingequivalent cross section the resulting quad taper will be faster, if youconvert the hex taper using stress the resulting quad taper will be slower. Anyone have experience with this? I converted a Para 15 taper usingequivalent stress and I don't think I would not want it to be slower than thehex design. Enamel – Is there a problem with removing power fibers when makingthe outer side flat? Seems like more enamel will have to be removed thanwith a hex. What else? Any other advice would be appreciated. BTW, I finished building my quad forms and can provide details if anyone isinterested. Kyle from bdcbfr@chartermi.net Wed Feb 13 11:38:38 2002 g1DHcb810622 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2002 11:38:37 - g1DHcQd16635; "Rodmakers" Subject: Re: Beveller Mill Cutters Hey! Those guys don't look like they're from China! Brian Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2002 8:32 AMSubject: RE: Beveller Mill Cutters Robert:I can only tell you answers based on what the experts have told me =regarding finishing mills and cutter speeds.-I would look at MSC or Travers to see if they have the cutters. =Travers is where I got quad cutters for the Bellinger mill I once owned. =It had a one inch 60 and 45 degree cutters (see Travers Catalog p. 230). =I only see 1 and 1.25" hole diameters available.-As far as speeds go, the suggested speeds should be somewhere around =5700 rpms. I would also recommend a 1 to 1.5 HP motor.You really need to get a hold of Chris Lucker or Ed Hartzell if you =want to know what's best. They are the real experts. My mill is still a =long way off, taking back seat to the beveler I am working on. Let us =know how it turns out.Just in case anyone wants to see the Orvis mill and cutters from the =1974 catalog, I scanned them into a pdf. It is 750K, so maybe not =everyone wants to download the 3 pages of shop photos and text. I offer =it only for sharing information. I will only have it up on the site =until tonight, because I am not sure what the legality of posting that = http://www.downandacross.com/orvis1974.pdfGood luck,Bob-----Original Message-----From: owner-rodmakers@wugate.wustl.edu = Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2002 11:02 PM Subject: Beveller Mill Cutters List, Can anybody point me in the direction of were I could purchase mill =cutters that I could use in making a non-tapered beveller. The bore of =the cutters would need to be 5/8 of an inch with a key slot in it (if I =am not wishing for to much) to fit the shaft of the motor. I looked in =the archives because I think I remember someone posted this kind of info =before. For an example of what mill cutters I am looking for one could =look at the bevellers on the Golden Witch web page. I just about got =everything put together to make a beveller (total cost so far $0) and =that is except the mill cutter which I believe will be my only expense. Also one more technical question. Would running the mill cutters on =the the motor shaft at 1725 RPM be enough or should I step up the the =speed of the cutters with a shaft, belt, and pulley system? The reason =why I ask is if you look at the photographs of different bevellers the =cutters are mounted on the shaft of a common TEFC, 56C face, 1/4+ HP =motor that runs approx. 1725 RPM. If any one can help let me know. =Thanks in advance. Robert H. China! Brian ----- Original Message ----- Maulucci Sent: Wednesday, February 13, = AMSubject: RE: Beveller Mill =Cutters Robert:I can only tell you answers based on what the = told me regarding finishing mills and cutter =speeds. look at MSC or Travers to see if they have the cutters. Travers is = quad cutters for the Bellinger mill I once owned. It had a one inch 60 = degree cutters (see Travers Catalog p. 230). I only see 1 and 1.25" = diameters available. speeds go, the suggested speeds should be somewhere around 5700 rpms.= also recommend a 1 to 1.5 HP motor. need to get a hold of Chris Lucker or Ed Hartzell if you want to know = best. They are the real experts. My mill is still a long way off, = out. case anyone wants to see the Orvis mill and cutters from the 1974 = scanned them into a pdf. It is 750K, so maybe not everyone wants to = the 3 pages of shop photos and text. I offer it only for sharing = I will only have it up on the site until tonight, because I am not = the legality of posting that info is. http://www.downandacr=oss.com/orvis1974.pdf luck,Bob HolderSent: Tuesday, February 12, 2002 11:02 = RodmakersSubject: Beveller Mill =CuttersList, point me in the direction of were I could purchase mill cutters that = need to be 5/8 of an inch with a key slot in it (if I am not wishing = put together to make a beveller (total cost so far $0) and that is = the mill cutter which I believe will be my only =expense. ask is if you look at the photographs of different = cutters are mounted on the shaft of a common TEFC, 56C face, 1/4+ HP= H. from CALucker@aol.com Wed Feb 13 11:50:16 2002 g1DHoF811888 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2002 11:50:15 - Subject: Re: Beveller Mill Cutters In a message dated 2/12/02 8:04:06 PM Pacific Standard Time, b2g@jps.netwrites: Also one more technical question. Would running the mill cutters on the motor shaft at 1725 RPM be enough or should I step up the speed of the cutters with a shaft, belt, and pulley system? The reason why I ask is if you look at the photographs of different bevellers the cutters aremounted on the shaft of a common TEFC, 56C face, 1/4+ HP motor that runsapprox. 1725 RPM. If any one can help let me know. Thanks in advance The rpm's are not the sole issue -- you need to think about the relationship between rpms and the diameter of the cutters. For example, in the mid 80's at least, Charlie Jenkins used 2 inch three wing Sears shaper cutters that he custom ground and ran at 9,000 rpm. Dickerson used 2.75 inch cutters and three inch cutters running at 5749.9 rpm. If you do the math, you will see that the surface speed of the three inch cutters at 5750 is not far from the surface speed of the two inch cutters at 9000 rpm. One quarter horse is too light. Try 3/4 to 1.5 horse. Three quarter horse is the lightest I have ever used. A BIG motor will allow you to shove 2x4's through the cutters. All that being said, I would make two recommendations. Get the regular old 2.75 HSS cutters with too many teeth for wood cutters. They work fine for roughing, and even work for finals. They are the easiest to find at most any tool supply houses. They are the least expensive. They have a one inch hole, but that's okay. Get a shaper head with a one inch shaft from Mooradian (East Los Angeles) or a pair of pillow blocks and a one inch shaft. Use pulleys to step your speed up. Ten and three inch pulleys would give you the speed you need for a comfortable hogging feed rate of about one inch per second.I don't want to poo poo anyone's designs, but you know a motor shaft and bearing is not really designed to take the stresses of hogging bamboo. Also, there is runout and play in motors. Stick with one inch shafts. You ill be pleased with the big squares of bamboo you can shove through the cutters ina single pass. You will pity the guys taking light cuts with routers.Use a bed of MDF (medium density fiberboard). You will need to make a relief roughing mill, you will not need to make manu adjustments in cutting depth, however, in the few of these type roughers I made I allowed the bed to be shimmed so that the bed could be raised. But, you will probably find that rough sixties about 0.220 will suit you fine.Chris Lucker In a message dated 2/12/02 8:04:06 PM PacificStandard Time, b2g@jps.net writes: Also one more technical RPM be enough or should I step up the speed of the cutters with a shaft, photographs of different bevellers the cutters are mounted on the shaft ofa common TEFC, 56C face, 1/4+ HP motor that runs approx. 1725 advance The rpm's are not the sole issue -- you need to think about the relationship mid 80's at least, Charlie Jenkins used 2 inch three wing Sears shaper you do the math, you will see that the surface speed of the three inchcutters at 5750 is not far from the surface speed of the two inch cuttersat 9000 rpm. you to shove 2x4's through the cutters. easiest to find at most any tool supply houses. They are the least expensive. one inch shaft from Mooradian (East Los Angeles) or a pair of pillow blocks and three inch pulleys would give you the speed you need for a comfortablehogging feed rate of about one inch per second.I don't want to poo poo anyone's designs, but you know a motor shaft and taking light cuts with routers. be a roughing mill, you will not need to make manu adjustments in cuttingdepth, however, in the few of these type roughers I made I allowed the bed to that rough sixties about 0.220 will suit you fine.Chris Lucker from CALucker@aol.com Wed Feb 13 11:54:37 2002 g1DHsa812274 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2002 11:54:36 - Subject: Re: leonard thread In a message dated 2/13/02 8:18:31 AM Pacific Standard Time, Jkvseafood@aol.com writes: a friend wants me to refinish his 13ft leonard rod. red wraps. which thread type and color is closest to the orignal? Gudebrod 2/0 626, if the rod is a "Red Wrap"Chris Lucker In a message dated 2/13/02 8:18:31 AM PacificStandard Time, Jkvseafood@aol.com writes: a friend wants me torefinish his 13ft leonard rod. red wraps. which thread type and color isclosest to the orignal? Gudebrod 2/0 626, if the rod is a "Red Wrap"Chris Lucker from paul.blakley@ntlworld.com Wed Feb 13 11:56:12 2002 g1DHuB812583 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2002 11:56:11 - Subject: Re: Lee Wulff Taper Addendum No 2 Oooooooooooops again !The posting should have read the measurement missing from the 12th febposting and not the 2nd ( cos there wasn't one on that day ).....Pleaseaccept my apologies.....Paul "paul.blakley" wrote: Please note that there is a missing measurement from the taper as postedto the list on 2nd Feb......... Butt Section 30 .238" Apologies.........Paul from LambersonW@missouri.edu Wed Feb 13 13:44:26 2002 g1DJiP819037 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2002 13:44:25 -0600 content-class: urn:content-classes:messageSubject: RE: Quadrate Questions Thread-Topic: Quadrate QuestionsThread-Index: AcG0q4kSThZzkSCbEdaKfwBglD88hQAGmDZw g1DJiP819038 I am not aware of the availability of square ferrules, but it is possible to buyferrules with four tabs. Tony Larson has nice ones. http://pages.prodigy.net/pumpkin10/ Some builders of quads have commented that the sections don't rollsmoothly in a Garrison style binder. I use a Smithwick binder; a Milward stylefour- string binder would probably be better. http://www.canerod.com/rodmakers/tips/milward.gif I usually square the tip top over a piece of square stock filed to a point. That fits with my experience. I have compensated by choosing moderatelyfast action rods, the powerful Dickersons for example, to convert by stress. It has worked pretty good. You will lose some power fibers if you sand the outside flat, especially at thebutt. It is a considerable amount. It is possible to sand the flats andmaintain the radius of the bamboo, I do this even for hex rods. An easy wayto accomplish it is to tape a piece of coarse sandpaper to a 2" diameter pipeand sand a concave curvature in a hard rubber sanding block. I have done thecalculations to correct for leaving the curvature, and I think it is also in BobMilward's book. Other advice, be careful of the edges of the strips, they are very fragile. Beprepared to produce some extra strips, I usually expect to throw away abouthalf the strips when building quads because a fiber will peel off the corner, ora scarf will chip. Good luck! Bill Lamberson -----Original Message----- Subject: Quadrate Questions List, I am building a quadrate for my second rod but I am not sure about some ofthe details: Ferrules – Can square ferrules be purchased, if so where? Or, dostandard ferrules need to be modified and made square? Binding – Should a Garrison style binder not be used? If not, what arethe alternatives? Tip Top – I assume nothing special here other than rounding the blankwhere the tip top tube will fit, or is there another way? Tapers – from what I have read if you convert a hex taper usingequivalent cross section the resulting quad taper will be faster, if youconvert the hex taper using stress the resulting quad taper will be slower. Anyone have experience with this? I converted a Para 15 taper usingequivalent stress and I don't think I would not want it to be slower than thehex design. Enamel – Is there a problem with removing power fibers when makingthe outer side flat? Seems like more enamel will have to be removed thanwith a hex. What else? Any other advice would be appreciated. BTW, I finished building my quad forms and can provide details if anyone isinterested. Kyle from aport@si.rr.com Wed Feb 13 14:23:22 2002 g1DKNL821174 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2002 14:23:22 - Wed, 13 Feb 2002 15:23:20 -0500 Subject: Re: Beveller Mill Cutters I always thought it funny that you have surface feet per minuteand then the feed is figured in inches per minute on milling machinesand inches per revolution on a lathe... Brad,As a retired math teacher, I can tell you why that is. So we can =answer kids when they ask "Why do we need to know this stuff?"*BSEG* Art I always thought it funny that you have= feet per minuteand then the feed is figured in = minute on milling machinesand inches per = lathe... Brad, stuff?"*BSEG* Art from b2g@jps.net Wed Feb 13 16:50:09 2002 g1DMo8829042 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2002 16:50:08 - helo=default) id 16b8E2-0007f6-00; Wed, 13 Feb 2002 14:50:06 -0800 Subject: RE: Beveller Mill Cutters Well Chris and the rest of the list members that responded. I did find the cutters that have been suggested. Luckily I did find that Ican get the locally and at a comparable price that is listed on the MCS website. Also I think I am going to change my design some from what I haveread so far and add a shaft, pulley, and belt system to step up the speed ofthe cutters. So back to the drawing board. Also Chris I am going to haveto contact you later and ask a few questions since more than one personsuggested that I talk to you about this subject. Thanks again foreveryone's help in recalibrating my compass. Robert H.-----Original Message-----From: owner-rodmakers@wugate.wustl.edu Subject: Re: Beveller Mill Cutters In a message dated 2/12/02 8:04:06 PM Pacific Standard Time,b2g@jps.netwrites: Also one more technical question. Would running the mill cutters on themotor shaft at 1725 RPM be enough or should I step up the speed of thecutters with a shaft, belt, and pulley system? The reason why I ask is ifyou look at the photographs of different bevellers the cutters are mountedon the shaft of a common TEFC, 56C face, 1/4+ HP motor that runs approx.1725 RPM. If any one can help let me know. Thanks in advance The rpm's are not the sole issue -- you need to think about therelationship between rpms and the diameter of the cutters. For example, inthe mid 80's at least, Charlie Jenkins used 2 inch three wing Sears shapercutters that he custom ground and ran at 9,000 rpm. Dickerson used 2.75inch cutters and three inch cutters running at 5749.9 rpm. If you do themath, you will see that the surface speed of the three inch cutters at 5750is not far from the surface speed of the two inch cutters at 9000 rpm. One quarter horse is too light. Try 3/4 to 1.5 horse. Three quarterhorse is the lightest I have ever used. A BIG motor will allow you to shove2x4's through the cutters. All that being said, I would make two recommendations. Get the regularold 2.75 HSS cutters with too many teeth for wood cutters. They work fine most any tool supply houses. They are the least expensive. They have a oneinch hole, but that's okay. Get a shaper head with a one inch shaft fromMooradian (East Los Angeles) or a pair of pillow blocks and a one inchshaft. Use pulleys to step your speed up. Ten and three inch pulleys wouldgive you the speed you need for a comfortable hogging feed rate of aboutoneinch per second.I don't want to poo poo anyone's designs, but you know a motor shaft andbearing is not really designed to take the stresses of hogging bamboo.Also, there is runout and play in motors. Stick with one inch shafts. Youill be pleased with the big squares of bamboo you can shove through thecutters in a single pass. You will pity the guys taking light cuts withrouters.Use a bed of MDF (medium density fiberboard). You will need to make arelief for the tips of the cutters into the MDF. The relief will give you aguide for where the fence and spring loaded guides go. Since this will be aroughing mill, you will not need to make manu adjustments in cutting depth,however, in the few of these type roughers I made I allowed the bed to beshimmed so that the bed could be raised. But, you will probably find thatrough sixties about 0.220 will suit you fine.Chris Lucker Chris and the rest of the list members that =responded. read so far and add a shaft, pulley, and belt system to step up the = everyone's help in recalibrating my compass. H. CALucker@aol.comSent: Wednesday, February 13, 2002= Re: Beveller Mill CuttersIn a messagedated = PM Pacific Standard Time, b2g@jps.net writes: cutters on the motor shaft at 1725 RPM be enough or should I step up = why I ask is if you look at the photographs of different bevellers = cutters are mounted on the shaft of a common TEFC, 56C face, 1/4+ HP= Thanks in advanceThe rpm's are not the sole = need to think about the relationship between rpms and the diameter of = inch three wing Sears shaper cutters that he custom ground and ran at = the three inch cutters at 5750 is not far from the surface speed of = regular old 2.75 HSS cutters with too many teeth for wood = to find at most any tool supply houses. They are the least expensive. = shaft from Mooradian (East Los Angeles) or a pair of pillow blocks and = pulleys would give you the speed you need for a comfortable hogging = of about one inch per second.I don't want to poo poo anyone's = you know a motor shaft and bearing is not really designed to take the = guys taking light cuts with routers.Use a bed of MDF (medium = not need to make manu adjustments in cutting depth, however, in the = these type roughers I made I allowed the bed to be shimmed so that the = from bob@downandacross.com Wed Feb 13 17:02:40 2002 g1DN2d829699 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2002 17:02:39 -0600 Subject: RE: Quadrate Questions HI Bill:I sent a post to Robert earlier that never made it to the list because I wassending it from work. It is extremely scary when I read your post. Imentioned every thing you said here. Tony, Smithwick Binder, Milward binder,Round sanding block, and the Milward book. Maybe Robert could resend thattothe list just for kicks. Man, great mind think alike!(And sometimes I get lucky)Bob M. -----Original Message----- R. Subject: RE: Quadrate Questions I am not aware of the availability of square ferrules, but it ispossible to buy ferrules with four tabs. Tony Larson has niceones. http://pages.prodigy.net/pumpkin10/ Some builders of quads have commented that the sections don't rollsmoothly in a Garrison style binder. I use a Smithwick binder; aMilward style four- string binder would probably be better.http://www.canerod.com/rodmakers/tips/milward.gif I usually square the tip top over a piece of square stock filed to a point. That fits with my experience. I have compensated by choosingmoderately fast action rods, the powerful Dickersons for example,to convert by stress. It has worked pretty good. You will lose some power fibers if you sand the outside flat,especially at the butt. It is a considerable amount. It ispossible to sand the flats and maintain the radius of the bamboo, Ido this even for hex rods. An easy way to accomplish it is to tapea piece of coarse sandpaper to a 2" diameter pipe and sand aconcave curvature in a hard rubber sanding block. I have done thecalculations to correct for leaving the curvature, and I think itis also in Bob Milward's book. Other advice, be careful of the edges of the strips, they are veryfragile. Be prepared to produce some extra strips, I usuallyexpect to throw away about half the strips when building quadsbecause a fiber will peel off the corner, or a scarf will chip. Good luck! Bill Lamberson -----Original Message----- Subject: Quadrate Questions List, I am building a quadrate for my second rod but I am not sure aboutsome of the details: Ferrules – Can square ferrules be purchased, if so where?Or, do standard ferrules need to be modified and made square? Binding – Should a Garrison style binder not be used? Ifnot, what are the alternatives? Tip Top – I assume nothing special here other than roundingthe blank where the tip top tube will fit, or is there another way? Tapers – from what I have read if you convert a hex taperusing equivalent cross section the resulting quad taper will befaster, if you convert the hex taper using stress the resulting quad taper will be slower. Anyone have experience with this? Iconverted a Para 15 taper using equivalent stress and I don't thinkI would not want it to be slower than the hex design. Enamel – Is there a problem with removing power fibers whenmaking the outer side flat? Seems like more enamel will have to beremoved than with a hex. What else? Any other advice would be appreciated. BTW, I finished building my quad forms and can provide details ifanyone is interested. Kyle from avyoung@iinet.net.au Wed Feb 13 17:43:07 2002 g1DNh4801324 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2002 17:43:05 - Subject: Re: Beveller Mill Cutters It's cruel and un natural to threaten kids with the need to know feet and inches and down right diabolical to make them use it in fractions [:-)] Tony At 03:21 PM 2/13/02 -0500, arthur port wrote: I always thought it funny that you have surface feet per minuteand then the feed is figured in inches per minute on milling machinesand inches per revolution on a lathe... Brad,As a retired math teacher, I can tell you why that is. So we can answer kids when they ask "Why do we need to know this stuff?"*BSEG*Life's just perverse, that's why!Art /*************************************************************************/AV Young Visit my web site at: www.iinet.net.au/~avyoung/flyrod.html Yesterday it worked.Today it is not working.Windows is like that. Unknown/*************************************************************************/ from darrell@vFish.net Wed Feb 13 17:45:15 2002 g1DNjE801493 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2002 17:45:14 - Wed, 13 Feb 2002 17:45:09 -0600 Subject: RE: leonard thread I think Chris means the 326... This will work okay, but if you want it tolook like original, I have a vintage Chinese red silk that is spot on. Regards, Darrell LeeAnglers Collectibles Exchangehttp://www.vfish.netInfo & Int'l Line: (323)465-4551 U.S. Toll-Free Order Line (877) 452-2420 ==================Angling, collecting & rod making books at:http://www.vfish.net/files/acebooks7.PDF================== -----Original Message-----From: owner-rodmakers@wugate.wustl.edu Subject: Re: leonard thread In a message dated 2/13/02 8:18:31 AM Pacific Standard Time,Jkvseafood@aol.com writes: a friend wants me to refinish his 13ft leonard rod. red wraps. whichthread type and color is closest to the orignal? Gudebrod 2/0 626, if the rod is a "Red Wrap"Chris Lucker on. Regards,Darrell LeeAnglers 452- CALucker@aol.comSent: Wednesday, February 13, 20029:54 = threadIn a message dated 2/13/02 8:18:31 AM= Standard Time, Jkvseafood@aol.com writes:a friend wants me to refinish his 13ft leonard rod. red = orignal?Gudebrod 2/0 626, if the rod is a Wrap"Chris Lucker from channer@frontier.net Wed Feb 13 17:48:34 2002 g1DNmX801808 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2002 17:48:33 - for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2002 16:48:40 - Subject: Re: Beveller Mill Cutters Tony;Right thinking folk everywhere know that the metric system is theinstrument of the devil! LOL!!!!!!!! Tony Young wrote: It's cruel and un natural to threaten kids with the need to know feet andinches and down right diabolical to make them use it in fractions [:-)] Tony from avyoung@iinet.net.au Wed Feb 13 18:06:02 2002 g1E060802572 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2002 18:06:00 - Subject: Re: Beveller Mill Cutters Aw gee, I feel like Mephistopheles now [:-)] Tony At 04:48 PM 2/13/02 -0700, channer wrote: Tony;Right thinking folk everywhere know that the metric system is theinstrument of the devil! LOL!!!!!!!! Tony Young wrote: It's cruel and un natural to threaten kids with the need to know feet andinches and down right diabolical to make them use it in fractions [:-)] Tony /*************************************************************************/AV Young Visit my web site at: www.iinet.net.au/~avyoung/flyrod.html First snow, then silence.This thousand dollar screen diesSo beautifully. Unknown /*************************************************************************/ from LECLAIR123@aol.com Wed Feb 13 18:59:15 2002 g1E0xE804055 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2002 18:59:14 - Subject: Re: Beveller Mill Cutters Robert, that speed is too slow. You should shoot for around 6,000 RPM. I run mine at around 3,500RPM and it's still a little too slow.The cutters tend to grab the cane and pull it out of your hands.If you run it around 6,000 RPM, this will eliminate this. Dave L check out our new site at- flyandrodroom.com AOL site- http://hometown.aol.com/leclair123/index.html from edriddle@mindspring.com Wed Feb 13 19:08:04 2002 g1E183804361 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2002 19:08:03 -0600 helo=oemcomputer) id 16bANT-0006y5-00 for rodmakers@mail.wustl.edu; Wed, 13 Feb 2002 20:07:59 -0500 Subject: Heat Gun Oven After much hand wringing, I've about decided to go with Frank =Neunemann's design for a heat gun oven to be used for tempering and =glue-up. Any comments, pro or con, is appreciated...off list is OK.TIAEd After much hand wringing, I've about = OK.TIAEd from TSmithwick@aol.com Wed Feb 13 19:37:53 2002 g1E1bq807579 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2002 19:37:52 -0600 Subject: Re: Quadrate Questions Kyle - Since the other questions have been answered, I'll just take on a couple. On the matter of taper conversion, I would suggest you stay away from the stress method. Stresses in a quad are much lower and the rod will bemuch softer. Hex D X .93 will give you equal areas, and the rod will cast the line weight, but will feel slower, at least on lighter, shorter rods. I will admit to having no experience with heavier rods. I have had better luck with D X .95 as the conversion factor, the rods having a feel closer to the hex, but with a big reserve of power. That may not be the case with a rod like a para 15, but If I were going to build one, that's where I would start. Worst case scenario, you wind up with a line weight heavier. All of this flies in the face of mathmatics and theory, but that is what I have seen in my own rods and those of others. The easiest way around the ferrule problem is to use an oversized truncated ferrule. Build up the ferrule seat area with cane or hardwood strips, and size the ferrule so you only slightly round the corners of the blank. It works and looks OK, and the weight is kept down by the short ferrules.I would not have suggested a Quad as your second rod. You will find the strips have a tendency to wiggle in the forms and mess up the angles, also, the edges are fragile and will want to split. Keep the strips in the deepest section of the form as you work, and keep your plane very sharp. Straighten the strips as well as you can before planing, as this will help them sit well in the forms. from jsschaeffer@hotmail.com Wed Feb 13 19:50:51 2002 g1E1oo808685 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2002 19:50:50 - Wed, 13 Feb 2002 17:50:41 -0800 Subject: Re: lathe for sale FILETIME=[0273ED20:01C1B4FA] I am selling my Taig lathe. The Taig is great for handles and ferrules, andit can do simple reel seats.I found that I like machining my own components, and now want a lathe thatis more capable for fancy reel seats and ferrules.So I am getting asherline, and selling the Taig. Please contact me off list. Jeff Schaeffer from bdcbfr@chartermi.net Wed Feb 13 20:08:04 2002 g1E283809247 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2002 20:08:03 - g1E27rd00480; Subject: Re: Beveller Mill Cutters Wasn't he one of the leads in 'CATS?'----- Original Message ----- Subject: Re: Beveller Mill Cutters Aw gee, I feel like Mephistopheles now [:-)] Tony At 04:48 PM 2/13/02 -0700, channer wrote: Tony;Right thinking folk everywhere know that the metric system is theinstrument of the devil! LOL!!!!!!!! Tony Young wrote: It's cruel and un natural to threaten kids with the need to know feet and inches and down right diabolical to make them use it in fractions [:-)] Tony /*************************************************************************/ AV Young Visit my web site at: www.iinet.net.au/~avyoung/flyrod.html First snow, then silence.This thousand dollar screen diesSo beautifully. Unknown /*************************************************************************/ from thardy@blarg.net Wed Feb 13 20:17:09 2002 g1E2H8809630 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2002 20:17:09 - for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2002 18:17:08 - for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2002 18:17:07 -0800User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook- Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2022 Subject: Phillipson tapers understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. After a search of the archives, I can't find any tapers for Phillipson 8.5rods. (5 or 6wts). Anyone have any they would be willing to share? Thanks,Tom Hardy Phillipson tapers After a search of the archives, I can't find any tapers for Phillipson =8.5rods. (5 or 6wts). Anyone have any they would be willing to share? Thanks,Tom Hardy from KyleDruey@aol.com Wed Feb 13 20:24:57 2002 g1E2Ou810964 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2002 20:24:56 -0600 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2002 21:24:44 -0500 Subject: Quadrate Forms Content-Language: en g1E2Ou810968 List, I decided to post answers to the questions I received off list aboutthe quad forms I built. Hereęs a picture of them: http://members.aol.com/kyledruey/quadform.jpg Basically, its a three barform made in much the same way the Penrose formsare made (do a web search for *Thomas Penrose bamboo* to find the link tohis website that has the form building instructions). You use the sameprocedures as outlined by Penrose, with the following modifications 1) All three bars of 0.75 inch CRS are clamped together, draw filed, anddrilled. 2) Each station has a doweling pin. The outside bars each have a set ofpush/pull screws located on the same side as the bar (they are on oppositesides with the Penrose design), with the cap screw and set screw on eitherside of the doweling pin. 3) To file the groove the middle bar is removed and the two outside barsare fastened together with the cap screws. A square mill file is glued to awooden block that has a 90 degree trough routed in it (see picture from url) http://members.aol.com/kyledruey/files.jpg 4) After filing out the groove, assemble the bars with the square,non- grooved, middle bar back in place. 5) I built a special 45 degree grooved tray for my Medved Beveler,otherwise you will have to make a special roughing form that has a similargroove as the tray (see picture from url) http://members.aol.com/kyledruey/quadbed.jpg 6) You can buy a Starrett 45 degree contact point for around $3 (MCS partnumber 58713181). You use the indicator and 45 degree contact point thesameway as with 60 degree forms, the only difference is that the indicatorreading (i) is exactly half of the desired groove depth (this will make sense ifyou work out the math) i = 0.5*(desired groove depth) The only exception to this is if the desired groove depth is greater thanthe diameter of the contact point, in that case the indicator reading (i) should be i = desired groove depth - 0.5*(diameter of 45 degree contact point) (again, do the math and it will make sense) 7) The dimensions for the forms and splines will be as follows apex-to-flat dimension = 0.5 * (flat-to-flat dimension) form depth = (((apex-to-flat)2)*2)0.5 i = indicator reading for form depth (see 6 above) 8) These are 6' forms with 5" stations. Butt side starts at 0.200" andends at 0.113", tip side starts at 0.113" and ends at 0.025", the slope ofthe groove is 0.00125" per inch. Not sure if the larger taper is necessary,but it made sense to me at one time. Thatęs about it. It was more time consuming than making 60 degreeforms,but it wasnęt more difficult. I probably left out some critical details, sodrop me a note if you need more information. Good luck, Kyle from bob@downandacross.com Wed Feb 13 20:56:38 2002 g1E2ub815436 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2002 20:56:37 - 13 Feb 2002 21:56:28 -0500 Subject: RE: Phillipson tapers Phillipson tapersHi Tom:This was posted by Barry K a while back. Yes, I keep everything. I also havea 7.5 and 8' taper in Joe Byrd's BRMDP that I could send a TDE file of.Bob [KlingB@health.missouri.edu] Subject: Phillipson PowerPakt 8 1/2 foot 5 wt Taper, Guide Placement Not long ago I posted this taper, but I went back and re-measured, whilealso getting the guide placement. I've had a couple of requests so I'll justrepost the whole thing. This is a varnished rod, with measurements taken over the varnish. Thevarnish is not especially thick. It looks like it was ammonia toned andglued with resorcinol. It is not impregnated. Wrapped with bright yellownylon with black tipping. A really lovely rod to cast. Inches Avg of the 3 from End Flat-to-flatOf Tiptop MeasurementsLoop Just below wrap at base of tiptop 0.0785 0.09910 0.11215 0.13520 0.15125 0.15430 0.16032 3/8, above ferrule wrap 0.16235 estimated 0.17736, below ferrule wrap 0.17940 0.19545 0.21250 0.22655 0.24260 0.24165 0.24366 3/8, above ferrule wrap 0.24770, just below ferrule wrap 0.27075 0.28980 0.29985 0.31490 0.33991 1/8, above wrap at winding chk 0.36691 5/8 - cork begins95 0.375?100 0.375?102 0.375? Guide placement, inches from end of tiptop loop:5 3/811 1/21825 1/432 1/2 (at top end of ferrule)36 1/4 (at bottom end of ferrule)44 1/452 1/462 7/8Stripping guide at 72 5/8 Barry Kling Phillipson tapers Tom:This was posted by Barry K a while back. Yes, I keep everything. = have a 7.5 and 8' taper in Joe Byrd's BRMDP that I could send a TDE file = of.Bob From:owner-rodmakers@wugate.wustl.edu on behalf of Kling, Barry = Phillipson PowerPakt 8 1/2 foot 5 wt Taper, Guide Placement Not long ago I posted this taper, but I went back and = whilealso getting the guide placement. I've had a couple of requests = justrepost the whole thing. Thevarnish is not especially thick. It looks like it was ammonia = andglued with resorcinol. It is not impregnated. Wrapped with bright = yellownylon with black tipping. A really lovely rod to cast. 0.375? 1/21825 1/432 1/2 (at top end of ferrule)36 1/4 (at= of ferrule)44 1/452 1/462 7/8Stripping guide at 72 =5/8 Barry Kling from thardy@blarg.net Wed Feb 13 21:09:44 2002 g1E39h815991 for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2002 21:09:43 - for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2002 19:09:42 - for ; Wed, 13 Feb 2002 19:09:42 -0800User-Agent: Microsoft-Outlook- Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2022 Subject: Thanks for the Phillipson tapers! What fast responses! You guys are great. from avyoung@iinet.net.au Thu Feb 14 00:26:05 2002 g1E6Q3820670 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2002 00:26:03 - Subject: Re: Beveller Mill Cutters Could have been but the one I meant was basically Beelzebub's soul pimp [:-)] You know I've always wondered why America didn't go metric 200 years or so back what with the close ties with the French (sorry to mention that) during the revolution and the general distaste of things British after it was all over bar the shouting as we say here.It's always struck me as an outstanding example of a strange decision. I mean, after the English were kicked out you started driving your buggies on the wrong side of the road and I believe considered using German as the national language, it would have been the last straw to use the Frenchies means of measurement just to slam the gate shut if for no other reason. Tony At 09:07 PM 2/13/02 -0500, Brian D. Creek wrote: Wasn't he one of the leads in 'CATS?'----- Original Message -----From: "Tony Young" Cc: Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2002 7:12 PMSubject: Re: Beveller Mill Cutters Aw gee, I feel like Mephistopheles now [:-)] Tony At 04:48 PM 2/13/02 -0700, channer wrote: Tony;Right thinking folk everywhere know that the metric system is theinstrument of the devil! LOL!!!!!!!! Tony Young wrote: It's cruel and un natural to threaten kids with the need to know feet and inches and down right diabolical to make them use it in fractions [:-)] Tony /*************************************************************************/ AV Young Visit my web site at: www.iinet.net.au/~avyoung/flyrod.html First snow, then silence.This thousand dollar screen diesSo beautifully. Unknown /*************************************************************************/ /*************************************************************************/AV Young Visit my web site at: www.iinet.net.au/~avyoung/flyrod.html First snow, then silence.This thousand dollar screen diesSo beautifully. Unknown /*************************************************************************/ from oossg@vbe.com Thu Feb 14 07:46:33 2002 g1EDkX826097 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2002 07:46:33 - for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2002 08:44:32 - Subject: Planing Form Has anyone received their Planing Form newsletter yet?Scott from mmihalas@mindspring.com Thu Feb 14 08:05:27 2002 g1EE5R826864 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2002 08:05:27 - helo=smaug) id 16bMVp-0005dc-00 for rodmakers@wugate.wustl.edu; Thu, 14 Feb 2002 09:05:26 -0500 Subject: Re: Planing Form Regarding the Planing Form, can someone tell me who I need to contact tosubscribe? How much is it and how many times a year is it published? Isthere a web page? I have books and magazines that have the address butwantto make sure I am sending my check to the current address. Thanks, Mike Mihalas Has anyone received their Planing Form newsletter yet?Scott from canazon@mindspring.com Thu Feb 14 08:07:42 2002 g1EE7f827123 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2002 08:07:42 - helo=oemcomputer) id 16bMXy-0003YK-00; Thu, 14 Feb 2002 09:07:38 -0500 Subject: Re: Planing Form scott,i didn't get my planing form either. do you think maybe i should renew my subscription?mike from JNL123141@msn.com Thu Feb 14 08:19:21 2002 g1EEJK827710 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2002 08:19:20 - Thu, 14 Feb 2002 06:19:11 -0800 "RodmakersPost" Subject: Re: Planing Form FILETIME=[928AD8C0:01C1B562] I talked to Ron the other day and he said they were going out today or to=morrow. He was having some grief with his printer in printing the addres=s labels. john ----- Original Message ----- Subject: Planing Form Has anyone received their Planing Form newsletter yet?Scott I talked toRo= tomorrow.&n= s anyone received their Planing Form newsletteryet?Scott from tgoodman@mail.as.miami.edu Thu Feb 14 08:26:01 2002 g1EEQ1828088 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2002 08:26:01 - id ; Thu, 14 Feb 2002 09:14:24 -0500 Subject: Link for the Planing Form this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. from the rodmakers site:http://www.canerod.com/rodmakers/pagegifs/planingf.gifMaybe we haveto convince Ron Barch to use email & such- Tom CleanCleanDocumentEmail MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle- rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso- style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para- margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow- orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman";} from the rodmakers site: =http://w=ww.canerod.com/rodmakers/pagegifs/planingf.gif Maybe we have to convince Ron Barchto use email & such- Tom from mmihalas@mindspring.com Thu Feb 14 08:40:06 2002 g1EEe5828883 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2002 08:40:05 - helo=smaug) id 16bN3J-0002kD-00 for rodmakers@wugate.wustl.edu; Thu, 14 Feb 2002 09:40:01 -0500 Subject: Re: Planing Form Thanks to everyone who replied with subscription info for the Planing Form! Mike Mihalas from dati@selway.umt.edu Thu Feb 14 09:56:28 2002 g1EFuR803037 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2002 09:56:27 - for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2002 08:56:26 - Subject: ferrules Hello list, I have an old south bend that I am restoring. One of the male ferrules isbadly split and needs to be replaced. Can I use a nickle silver malereplacement ferrule with the original chrome plated brass female ferrulewithout problems. Also, to remain ethical, do I put my name on the rod as the personwho restored the rod or should I leave it as if it had never beenrestored? Thanks so much for your timeDarin******************************* Darin J. Law **** School of Forestry **** University of Montana **** Missoula, MT 59812 **** **** (406) 243-2472 ******************************* from Grayson.Davis@valpo.edu Thu Feb 14 11:09:05 2002 g1EH94807315 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2002 11:09:04 - g1EH93n17350 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2002 11:09:04 - M2002021411090326542 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2002 11:09:03 - Subject: 8'6" #5 2-piece easy casting taper wanted I'm thinking of a progressive or mildly parabolic 8'6" #5 2-piece. I could try modifying a Garrison if no one on the list has a hot suggestion. -Grayson -----------------------------------------Grayson DavisEmail: Grayson.Davis@valpo.eduValparaiso University from Grayson.Davis@valpo.edu Thu Feb 14 11:17:51 2002 g1EHHo808179 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2002 11:17:50 - g1EHHnn18763 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2002 11:17:49 - M2002021411174913272 for ; Thu, 14 Feb 2002 11:17:49 - Subject: re: cutting rings Rethinking an old thread ... I have a hard time parting in the traditional way with my mini-lathe. For parting small stock, I mounted a piece of key stock on my Dremel tool and put the key stock into the tool holder, making a poor (but not fus