Fun day at Bennett / something old is new to me

[Foghorn]

I had texted Sandy earlier that morning to see how she was doing and she said you and Pat were headed to Bennett. We had the 2 oldest grandsons for the last couple days so we weren't going to get there either. Had to get them home today for their annual trip to Florida. Bought my first fiberglass fly rod back in the mid 60's at a police auction at the county courthouse. It was an old Fenwick and it also had  a Martin automatic reel with it. Caught my first limit of trout on that rod a couple years later at Montauk. Thanks for the report Marty. May have to get my little 5'3" Fenwick out of the closet and fish it again. 

[Hawg]

14 hours ago, BilletHead said:

           Well after not going to Bennett for a good long while we made the trip over this morning for some fishing. It was a hoot with quite a few caught by Pat and me.  We did not go real early and could care less about hearing the siren go off. I would say moderate crowd.  Took our time getting ready gearing up. I have been messing with some vintage gear. A buddy gave me a automatic reel when I told him I would like to try one again. Had a quick stint with one I bought at Wal Mart in 1976 and that did not last long. So, this deal has snow balled. I began to search for a Shakespeare wonder rod. This I did, actually two at a whopping 15 bucks each. I also bought two Martin automatic fly reels for 15 bucks each at the same time. Did any of you know that Martin is the oldest active reel maker in the United States and started since 1884? Received a patent the automatic reel in 1899? Just some trivia for you all. I paired up the Martin #2 reel from the 1920s to 1930s with the wonder rod 8'6" circa 1954. Tried various lines and went with a five weight that @kjackson had extra. Thanks, Ketih!  This was the outfit for me today. We slipped into the water at the outlet entrance of the stream. We seen very few fish caught as we started to fish.  Tried various things watching for fish reaction. Pitiful it was and I quickly realized I was fishing with a different piece of equipment. I could not feel my back cast as line turned over at all. I adjusted my timing and began to hit my stride. Then finally I put on a small black leach deal and caught a couple.

Gave that to Pat and put on a leach made with bobcat. Caught more as Pat still had no luck so we worked up the outlet channel where Pat scored high sticking a big fox squirrel nymph. 

     So we crossed over to the stream just above the big rock bluff and fished some more. Caught more stripping. Then up to below the dam where we caught stripping, on beetles, ants and egg patterns. Before we knew it noon happened, and it got hot. I did waders in shorts. My knees got cold and hurt but it was the nicest cold hurt. Getting out of the water and walking back to vehicle in the hot made me appreciate that hurt. I'm hooked and this vintage deal will become part of the fly-fishing arsenal from now on. 

   There was a bad part of the day though. This morning Sandy @laker67 and I had been texting. Told her of our plans. She said she might drive over. I checked my text messages at 12:30 while we were almost to Lebanon. DANG she had got there at 10:30 and had texted me wondering where we were fishing. I felt so bad we wanted to see and fish with her. We traded fish pictures by text. She was catching too. Not sure where and how we missed her I have no idea. We will find her next time! 

   Yes, I could have caught more with modern gear. Yes, I would of casted much better with modern gear.  It's not about numbers with us anymore it about the whole process.  

  Story over....... Thanks for reading,

  The BilletHead's

Yeah Martin is an old company but the reels are made in China. That said, I love them and I bought 3 for $11 a piece this spring.

They’re so light on my small fly rods.

Also great crappie reels and catfish clickers…

[BilletHead]

1 hour ago, Hawg said:

Yeah Martin is an old company but the reels are made in China. That said, I love them and I bought 3 for $11 a piece this spring.

They’re so light on my small fly rods.

Also great crappie reels and catfish clickers…

            Hawg if I was you, I would do more research. Early Martin Reels were made in Mohawk New York. Starting as I said above in 1888 and the automatic patent in 1899. the one I am using says made in USA and others I have say the same. These are old reels. I am sure the new ones were farmed out at one time or another.

[BilletHead]

1 hour ago, Foghorn said:

I had texted Sandy earlier that morning to see how she was doing and she said you and Pat were headed to Bennett. We had the 2 oldest grandsons for the last couple days so we weren't going to get there either. Had to get them home today for their annual trip to Florida. Bought my first fiberglass fly rod back in the mid 60's at a police auction at the county courthouse. It was an old Fenwick and it also had  a Martin automatic reel with it. Caught my first limit of trout on that rod a couple years later at Montauk. Thanks for the report Marty. May have to get my little 5'3" Fenwick out of the closet and fish it again. 

  Get at it buddy! 

[BilletHead]

2 hours ago, fishinwrench said:

@oneshot 

What the hell happened down here last night?

         What?

[tjm]

So,  since I don't know how much you guys know, not sure how much I know, and I'm not very good at organizing my thoughts, I'll start way back and blunder through a line weight explanation as I understand  it. Remembering that everything changed as a result of WW2, but  industrial inventions and innovations changed the most. I'll try to establish a bit of background.

The old line ratings and the new don't cross over exactly, the letter sizes were diameter of braided  silk line and modern line sizes are based on weight of 30' of line, so any conversion can only be an approximation.  Up until WW2 all fly lines were braided silk and thus a given volume of line  would always weigh the same.  A given diameter and a given length always resulting in a known weight. Just prior to, during and just after WW2 the first synthetic fibers were discovered or invented and in the years following the war these synthetics were used in braided  fly lines, and because the synthetic fibers have different mass than silk (and from other synthetic fibers) the resulting lines  of any diameter would vary widely in weight for any given length. Then in 1953 Cortland added a plastic coating to a braided nylon core and made the 333 line. It's also kinda important to recall that any line taper was done by adding or removing threads from the line during the actual braiding process. Somewhere around 1960  Leo Martuch founder of SA invented a way to taper the plastic coating and changed the industry again. But, in 1959 the line manufacturers in the USA decided that a standard line measure was needed. Representatives of the five line companies (of which only Cortland still makes fly lines) spent a few months coming up with the AFTMA line standards  that we call AFFTA standard.

Basically the letter system went from A to I in 0.005" increments, with A=0.060" and I=0.020", so the most common used line C=0.050" and the small end of the taper common on that H=0.025" - HCH  would designate a double taper, made that way in silk so that at mid day you could reverse the line and have a dry line to fish instead of a soggy one. So, to solve the varying weight problem a system was established designating the total mass of the first 30' of line (disregarding any level line at the tip) - 30' was to accommodate the "Shooting Heads" that Sunset line made for west coast users. I tend to remember that "A"= #9 and count down from there, but the conversion is always approximate and most anglers used level line, tapers were dry fly lines. About as good as any chart to convert with-

http://flyanglersonline.com/features/bamboo/silklineconversionchart.gif

On the Wonderods you may find the model and date code on the reel seat or locking ring, the date code is the three letter  designation FCL  translating to Nov 1958. The 7'9' rod was likely a D, HDH ~#6

I fish some of my 'glass rods with lighter lines than they are rated for but any fly rod can work with multiple line weights, every time we extend the line 4-5' the line mass has gone up a line weight. So at 50' a #5  line has the mass rated to #9. With your rod I'd probably use the #5 but you did mention that you couldn't feel the rod loading and that indicates a heavier line needed perhaps. 'Glass rods because of their greater weight seem to bend/load under any movement even without the line. They do usually like a much longer and somewhat slower stroke than carbon rods, but it sounds like you adapted.  More later if I think of it, after rereading this. About typed out.

 

[fishinwrench]

1 hour ago, BilletHead said:

         What?

Looks like a twister touched down for about 2 miles along 64.    

I've talked to a few folks and they are saying it was just some wicked straight line winds. But it looks more like tornado damage to me.   

[BilletHead]

4 hours ago, tjm said:

So,  since I don't know how much you guys know, not sure how much I know, and I'm not very good at organizing my thoughts, I'll start way back and blunder through a line weight explanation as I understand  it. Remembering that everything changed as a result of WW2, but  industrial inventions and innovations changed the most. I'll try to establish a bit of background.

The old line ratings and the new don't cross over exactly, the letter sizes were diameter of braided  silk line and modern line sizes are based on weight of 30' of line, so any conversion can only be an approximation.  Up until WW2 all fly lines were braided silk and thus a given volume of line  would always weigh the same.  A given diameter and a given length always resulting in a known weight. Just prior to, during and just after WW2 the first synthetic fibers were discovered or invented and in the years following the war these synthetics were used in braided  fly lines, and because the synthetic fibers have different mass than silk (and from other synthetic fibers) the resulting lines  of any diameter would vary widely in weight for any given length. Then in 1953 Cortland added a plastic coating to a braided nylon core and made the 333 line. It's also kinda important to recall that any line taper was done by adding or removing threads from the line during the actual braiding process. Somewhere around 1960  Leo Martuch founder of SA invented a way to taper the plastic coating and changed the industry again. But, in 1959 the line manufacturers in the USA decided that a standard line measure was needed. Representatives of the five line companies (of which only Cortland still makes fly lines) spent a few months coming up with the AFTMA line standards  that we call AFFTA standard.

Basically the letter system went from A to I in 0.005" increments, with A=0.060" and I=0.020", so the most common used line C=0.050" and the small end of the taper common on that H=0.025" - HCH  would designate a double taper, made that way in silk so that at mid day you could reverse the line and have a dry line to fish instead of a soggy one. So, to solve the varying weight problem a system was established designating the total mass of the first 30' of line (disregarding any level line at the tip) - 30' was to accommodate the "Shooting Heads" that Sunset line made for west coast users. I tend to remember that "A"= #9 and count down from there, but the conversion is always approximate and most anglers used level line, tapers were dry fly lines. About as good as any chart to convert with-

http://flyanglersonline.com/features/bamboo/silklineconversionchart.gif

On the Wonderods you may find the model and date code on the reel seat or locking ring, the date code is the three letter  designation FCL  translating to Nov 1958. The 7'9' rod was likely a D, HDH ~#6

I fish some of my 'glass rods with lighter lines than they are rated for but any fly rod can work with multiple line weights, every time we extend the line 4-5' the line mass has gone up a line weight. So at 50' a #5  line has the mass rated to #9. With your rod I'd probably use the #5 but you did mention that you couldn't feel the rod loading and that indicates a heavier line needed perhaps. 'Glass rods because of their greater weight seem to bend/load under any movement even without the line. They do usually like a much longer and somewhat slower stroke than carbon rods, but it sounds like you adapted.  More later if I think of it, after rereading this. About typed out.

 

               Thanks man this is going to be a fun deal anyway we look at it. Just for kicks I went out in the yard and put on a 7wt WF line. As you said I adapted and began to throw it with a six-inch piece of blanket yarn on a nine-foot leader. This time I could feel it load easy. Then put on an 8wt sink tip and threw it too. Really, really felt it load that let me adjust the stroke even better. This was all just to experiment a bit more. 

[jdmidwest]

My old glass rods were made by Heddon and Herters.  Fun to fish.  I like the slow actions anyway.

[Terrierman]

If anybody has more fun in the outdoors than Marty and Pat, well, I don't want to hear about it.  Their stories make me jealous enough.

Nice buddy, real real nice and totally predictable from the likes of you two.