robtherake

Yeah, this one passed me by too. Thanks, Steve. Mind, my current fave is Keith Arthur's Tight Lines - currently the best coarse fishing programme on TV.

Try the Traditional Fisherman's Forum, Jack, they're pretty knowledgeable on all things vintage. http://www.traditionalfisherman.com/index.php http://www.traditionalfisherman.com/viewtopic.php?f=38&t=9653

It makes me shudder to think so, but that's as likely as any other scenario. Or maybe someone fancied a bit o' seal meat...who knows?

I've pulled out some seriously nasty ironmongery attached to night lines, Ian.

It's just as likely to be from a poacher's set line.

My thoughts exactly, philo. I've found a fresh approach can work wonders, though. Sick of carrying a tackle shop to the bankside, I've stripped back the gear I carry to a minimum and simply gone fishin' without set goals or expectations, just to have fun. Shedding the physical baggage and the mental pressure of meeting your own targets frees up the mind and lets the enjoyment back in.

A street busker, singing the 80s Bronski Beat hit "Smalltown Boy" is joined by the original singer - out walking his dog - for an impromptu duet. He still has that amazing falsetto voice, too! http://dailypicksandflicks.com/2013/11/04/jimmy-somerville-surprises-street-musician-in-berlin-video/

I did it almost the same way, Ian, but tied on a large hook and added weights until the rod locked up. Because I'm not so tall I stood on a chair, which allowed me to keep the handle more or less parallel to the floor. There's a guy who used to test rods for one of the monthlies. His method involved clamping the handle in a Workmate which stood on a table, then adding weight until the rod bent at 90 degrees from the horizontal. His comments often included the line, " Rod had a permanent set following the test". Now, he may have been following an established procedure by the book, but in doing so had stressed these rods beyond their powers of recovery. To my mind, his test didn't reflect an accurate representation of the rod's true abilities - had he done the experiment manually, as we did, he would have felt that point when the rod was nearing its limit. As it was, he was almost testing to destruction. Edit - FWIW, bud, I think the barbel guy's more or less right! I wager that my Reactorlite float rods will have a measured test curve of less than a pound, maybe only half of that figure, but because the action's progressive it's possible to apply so much pressure beyond that point that you're physically shaking with tension. At their launch, the advertising claimed that the No 1 match could dead lift 2kg, no trouble; the heavier No 2 shifted 3kg. Converting that into jolly old imperial gives a potential pull of almost 4 1/2 pounds for the lighter rod, and nearly 7 for the heavier, yet both behave like a typical float rod under normal conditions.

I may have to do a little back-pedalling here! Following my previous (admittedly, rather unscientific) "test", it occurred to me that the rods may not have been loaded enough. So, back to the lab (kitchen!) and this time weight was added in increments until the rod started to lock up. For the Specialist, this was 9oz; the Avon Duos both locked up at 15oz, so my initial assessment was probably way out and both rods seem to be pretty close to their stated test curve, assuming that the test is more representative. So how could I be so wrong, bearing in mind that I've used both rods and my perception was that they are equally powerful? The answer, I think, is in the apparent strength once the lower half of the rod comes into play. Although my second test indicated the weight needed to load the rod to the point of locking up, this doesn't take into account what the rods are capable of beyond this. In a real life fight with a hefty opponent both rods bend well beyond what - for the purposes of my test - I accepted as the blank's limit, without any apparent distress. A guy on another forum conducted a test curve experiment with his Duo-lite specialist and came to a figure of 1lb 10oz ! - I suspect his results indicate what the rod's really capable of at its extreme limit. I suppose if I fish the rods side-by-side the differences between them will be more apparent; this is the obvious next step. Edit - At the lock-up point, both rods displayed exactly the same fighting curve and amount of tip deflection.

If the fibres become brittle with age, then you would expect them to break more easily under load, wouldn't you? I'm not implying that they all begin to let go at once, but as a slow and gradual process that would result in a decline in strength and rigidity with time and use. I'm no materials scientist (although I do have a bit of experience in this field) but as a general rule, if you bend something brittle and fibrous it has a tendency to break.

There was a magazine article I read a few years ago, Ian; the author talked about a pair of Drennan carp rods (from the same period as the IM6 waggler, and so on) which had softened with use over the years, so I naturally assumed that they all do, to some extent. Certainly, some of my older float rods have mellowed slightly. As regards the Specialist; I've emailed Fox customer service, so it'll be interesting to see what they have to say about it (if I get a reply at all, that is!).

Can't say I'm disappointed, Andrew, but I was definitely expecting more delicacy. I'll continue with the method feeder/carp routine for a while, and see if it can be persuaded to soften up a little.

When the Duo-lite Specialist was unpacked and put together it surprised me that the "lite" part of its name is misleading; in fact, side-by-side with an Avon Duo, there was no appreciable difference in weight at all. On the scales, the Avon Duo weighs in at 7.5oz, the Duo-lite Specialist slightly heavier at 8oz - work that one out! It also seemed stiffer than expected. I put both rods together, added reels and threaded them up. With 7.5 oz of weight hanging from the tip of each rod the Duo-lite had a greater deflection but not by nearly as much as expected, considering that the test curve of the specialist is, at 8oz, half that of the Avon. Musing on this, a couple of things came to mind. The Avons are now eight years old and, as my tool of choice in a lot of fishing situations must inevitably have softened a bit, but surely not by almost half - there's no appreciable difference in use. The second thing, I'm not so sure of. As supplied, is a rod generally stiffer than its stated test curve, allowing for it to mellow during use? Anyhow, musings aside, I took the rod for a morning session on a local lake, hoping for crucians, but expecting carp of some kind even if they didn't show. Sadly, the crucians were noticeable only by their absence, but a succession of hard-fighting commons to just under double figures provided the the rod with a reasonably stern test. Happily, the rod performed faultlessly, with a lovely soft tip soaking up lunges without any drama and a surprising amount of power in the butt section dealing with more spirited runs. I had to really clamp down on a couple of fish to stop them rounding the small island in front of me, but there was enough power in the butt section to stop them in their tracks completely. Not bad for a rod that's designed with smaller species in mind. With the solid tip in place an easy flick sent the 25g flat method feeder 40 yards or so to the island margin. I suspect that a 70 yard cast with the same payload wouldn't be out of the question, which gives the rod a flexibility of use which was quite unexpected. So far, so good, then. Not quite what I bought the rod for, but it passed this particular test with flying colours.

Any feedback on the rod, Andrew? I picked up a Duo-lite specialist from the bay today - BIN, £50 and completely mint. Hopefully it's going to be just the job for those elusive big roach/ escapologists in my "secret" lake! It's been closed for a couple of months for work to be carried out - a small syndicate has taken it over, but (luckily) I know the guy in charge, so I can still fish it. I'll let you know how I get on with both rod and roach! http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/fishing-rod-/251358711953?_trksid=p2047675.l2557&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEWNX%3AIT&nma=true&si=ZDpC9d2FCtRmGchKrHRbV4gYhQc%253D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc

I have several Avon rods, Phone, but they've only ever been used on the Tees. Same with the "carp" bait - it's surprisingly attractive to big roach and crucians!

It's almost certainly the right thread size. I don't want anything for it, mate; just PM me your address and I'll stick it in the post.

Thanks, Ken. It's definitely the right thread - the male thread on a 440 handle is a perfect fit inside the mystery one.

Am I right about the handle, Steve? Uploaded with ImageShack.us

I might have what you're after; there's a mystery Mitchell handle in my spares drawer that may be from a 204 - it's certainly small enough. This particular handle has a female thread; does that sound right, Adam?

Looks like a helluva bargain for somebody, Gary. Well spotted, Sir.

Accessory chairs have become the Swiss Army knives of the chair world, Phone. They appeal to the gadget addict in many of us and just happen to be pretty practical, too. Where they really come into their own is on hard-banked venues where it's almost impossible to sink a rod rest.

It's a well thought out and hard-wearing chair. Mine (second-hand) came with a handle and wheel kit, so it can be transformed into a rather handy barrow. There's a big accessories range to accompany it - groundbait bowls, side tables, foot plate, multiifarious rod rest configurations, yada, yada - and all the add-ons designed for Preston boxes are the same fit. Korum's Ruckbag (also a well regarded product) is designed to clip on to the accessory chair, making transport a cinch - apparently. It's on my wish list

Your secret's out ,Rusty; the fish are homing in on the scent trail.........luvverly!!

That does look good - and at less than 5kg, it's fairly light, too. I use a Korum accessory chair, which I'm generally happy with, but it's too heavy for roving.

Love it! I was convinced that mine would have to be separated professionally; so firmly stuck was it, but it came apart with no more force than you'd normally use when breaking a rod down. Good stuff, that chamois! I'll save your method for a more stubborn problem, Philo. Great story, mate.