Thanks Bob. (He says pretending he understood what you said.) 
This forum began as Clark's Classic Bamboo Rod Forum, founded by Clark Davis for all who share a passion for classic rods. The forum is now owned by Whitefish Press aka Dr. Todd Larson - banjo.
For those who don't use English as their primary language we now have a translator for your language of choice hosted by Google.
0 Kudo
- Members Corner
- Forum Announcements
- Collecting Bamboo Fly Rods
- Fishing Bamboo Fly Rods
- Rod making, restoration, repairs and discussion on those related topics concerning bamboo rods.
- Rod and Reel Makers Forum
- Information About Makers & Manufacturers
- Taper Exchange
- Appraisals & Identification of Bamboo Fly Rods
- Ephemera, empherma and Ephemerella.....
- Book Talk
- Photos, paintings, written stories and talents.
- Classic Reels
- Collecting and Tying Classic Flies
- The Cooks Kitchen
- The Classic Fly Rod Classifieds
- Technical Support
Adjusting a taper back to step down ferrules?
| Author | Comment | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
 Jim Lowe |
#21 | |||
|
Posts: 546 05/14/2009 19:30 |
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
J W Foster |
#22 | |||
|
Posts: 49 05/15/2009 10:40 |
Most of the makers lately have been referring to the old step down ferrules as "stepped ferrules". While the tapers themselves are referred to as
step down. The ferrules are the same as super z's as far as sizing goes. Z's are just a little easier to fit. As to which tapers you prefer, that is a
personal matter, unless you believe "one size fits all".
My rod preferences as a maker are totally irrelevant to anyone else's choice. Regards Jerry
Last Edited By: J W Foster 05/15/2009 10:43.
Edited 2 times.
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
MontyMontana |
one more argument for... | #23 | ||
|
Posts: 508 05/15/2009 18:12 |
1- piece rods...God Bless Al Talbot and now Bruce Howell....now there are two who really deserve Saint Hood.
Monty Montana
Your Signature ... I fish via our criminal justice system..."Catch and release"
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
HexaMaineiac |
Really? | #24 | ||
|
Posts: 561 05/20/2009 22:17 |
mattcliff wrote: Such ferrules exist, of course, but they're not what decent rodmakers have ever used in most cases. |
|||
|
|
||||
|
mattcliff |
Dickerson ferrules | #25 | ||
|
Posts: 114 05/25/2009 20:19 |
Did Dickerson use those? I've never owned a Dickerson, but those who have have told me he used standard step-downs. The only time I've personally
come across ferrules designed to fit on different-diameter tip/butt sections was when I acquired some that were made by W&M for early fiberglass rods. But
again, I have no personal knowledge of Dickersons, so if anyone knows better I'm happy to stand corrected.
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
rlnunleycom |
#26 | |||
|
Posts: 523 05/26/2009 08:35 |
mattcliff wrote: No, a drop in dimension does generally NOT mean a drop in ID from female to male on the ferrule. There are a couple of places out there that are making what they call "TRUE STEP DOWNS", but, for the most part, the makers of past and present that used step down tapers do not (did not) use ferrules that were different dimension from female to male. Generally, what you'll find is that the flats on the butt (or mid) are taken to round or nearly round and just the corners of the tip are taken down to allow the male barrel to fit. The male slide part on a step down ferrule is, of course, smaller in I.D. than the male, so there is a portion of the tip sections that have to be turned 2/64ths smaller than the male (although I do know of someone drawing tubing right now that makes the male slide only 1/64th smaller than the female, but I don't like that "thin" junction you have doing that). OK... did I add to the confusion? 
Bob |
|||
|
|
||||
|
mattcliff |
#27 | |||
|
Posts: 116 05/26/2009 13:17 |
Nah, that makes perfect sense. Thanks. Turns out I do understand the basics of ferrules, but should know better than to opine on what sort of ferrules
classic rodmakers used (not exactly my strong suit).
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
rlnunleycom |
#28 | |||
|
Posts: 524 05/27/2009 09:26 |
I've had Young rods with Super Z's and with step downs, every Payne I've had in the shop had stepdowns, as did all the Leonards, FE Thomas, etc...
I don't think the Catskills shops, for the most part, never moved from Step Downs to Super Z's.
Honestly, as Jerry Foster said, the Step Downs are harder to fit to the cane, but I personally like the cleaner looking more slim lines of the step downs. There are some that claim that the Step Downs are a superior ferrule, but I'm kind of in agreement with my good friend Jeff Wagner who said that the Stepdowns got a bad wrap in "the book". I think you'll find that most of the Golden Era makers used Step downs, but that was possibly because of ease of manufacture or widespread availability. I'm just guessing on the reason. Bob
Last Edited By: rlnunleycom 05/27/2009 09:34.
Edited 1 time.
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
jasonklett |
#29 | |||
|
Posts: 48 05/27/2009 21:46 |
I think I finally get it. The ferrules have nothing to do with the action of the rod, it's the step in the taper that affects it. As to the ferrules
themselves, I can see how it would be easier to make one from tubing that had the same ID. My question is that if you're making them from bar stock and
there is a difference in the bamboo, wouldn't it make sense to match the diameters of the holes to that of the bamboo? I think that it would make for a
smoother transition from the bamboo to the metal and you wouldn't have to take any more material off than needed. Am I over-complicating this or does it
make sense to anyone but me? I know that this is straying from the original question so if need be I can start a new thread.
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
john channer |
#30 | |||
|
Posts: 763 05/27/2009 23:16 |
I don't know of any ferrules from "back in the day" that were machined from solid stock, all I've seen or heard of were either made from
tubing or drawn from sheet stock. Either way, wall thickness of 1/64th or less was the norm and sizing was pretty much dictated by the tubing. Granger and
Phillipson and possibly some others made their ferrules with a true difference between the male and female, but their ferrules were drawn, at least the males
were anyway, the females appear to be just a straight tube with a plug soldered in for a water stop. Making ferrules from bar stock seems to be a modern thing,
I don't think that rodmakers who lived thru the
Depression would be so wasteful of material and money, metals are bought by the pound after all. john |
|||
|
|
||||
|
HexaMaineiac |
Dickerson ferrules | #31 | ||
|
Posts: 562 05/30/2009 17:16 |
Mind you I've not taken one off of a rod, but I recently purchased a "Dickerson reproduction ferrule" from someone on the rodmakers' list and
it is quite different from the CSE step-down ferrules that have two different diameters to the male. This ferrule is a 15/64 on the female side and a 14/64 on
the male side. It doesn't bulge out like a Super-Z, but is more like Tony Larson's 13-to-12 stepdown. Haven't decided what rod to put it on.
Henry.
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
canerodscom |
#32 | |||
|
Posts: 2148 05/31/2009 08:00 Bamboo preacher |
Henry,
Could you post a picture? Or might you PM me with your source? Thanks, Harry |
|||
|
|
||||
|
HexaMaineiac |
I'll try | #33 | ||
|
Posts: 563 05/31/2009 21:48 |
The PM question from Lee Koch was:
Last Edited By: HexaMaineiac 06/01/2009 09:44.
Edited 1 time.
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
HexaMaineiac |
another attempt | #34 | ||
|
Posts: 564 06/01/2009 09:49 |
||||
|
|
||||
|
canerodscom |
#35 | |||
|
Posts: 2150 06/01/2009 10:03 Bamboo preacher |
Thanks Henry,
That sure does have an amazingly similar look to a Super Z style ferrule. The female even appears to be a composite of two pieces of tubing. Of course, I may not be seeing all that is really there. Harry |
|||
|
|
||||
|
HexaMaineiac |
#36 | |||
|
Posts: 565 06/01/2009 17:45 |
Compared to a size 15 Super Z ferrule that I have on a rod, this female appears to taper less between the body of the ferrule down to the tabs, and the body is
about .01 smaller in O.D. than that of the Super Z.. Looking into the ferrules I think that this is milled, but can't be sure. After all, this was offered
as a Dickerson reproduction, not a Dickerson, so it might be dimensionally correct but structurally different.
My understanding is that when Dickerson gave a ferrule a size he was referring to the size of the male. This also corresponds to the sizes given in The Lovely Reed. Henry. |
|||
|
|
||||
|
Lee Koch |
Dickersons | #37 | ||
|
Posts: 483 06/01/2009 22:20 |
This thread has gotten off track from the original intent, but given that it has already done so, I'll take it a little farther afield:
Here are some photos of Dickerson ferrules: Female 8012: 
8012 male ferrules: 
661510 males ferrules: 
661510 female ferrules: 
Unusual female on a big rod, 9 or 9-1/2 ft 2-pc....I've forgotten the exact model number.... He obviously was worried about stress on the female tube and re-inforced it. 
To my eyes, every one of these female ferrules are a straight tube, with the male slide appx 2/64ths smaller... In each of these cases, the shoulder of the male matched the diameter of the female, indicating it was cut from the same drawn tubing. The question that I still have is, what is under that male shoulder? The bamboo coming into it is smaller in diameter than the bamboo coming into the female.... So how was that joint accomplished? I'd love for some knowledgeable person to elucidate. All the best, Lee |
|||
|
|
||||
- Members Corner
- Forum Announcements
- Collecting Bamboo Fly Rods
- Fishing Bamboo Fly Rods
- Rod making, restoration, repairs and discussion on those related topics concerning bamboo rods.
- Rod and Reel Makers Forum
- Information About Makers & Manufacturers
- Taper Exchange
- Appraisals & Identification of Bamboo Fly Rods
- Ephemera, empherma and Ephemerella.....
- Book Talk
- Photos, paintings, written stories and talents.
- Classic Reels
- Collecting and Tying Classic Flies
- The Cooks Kitchen
- The Classic Fly Rod Classifieds
- Technical Support
Quick Reply
The Orvis database by Greg Reynolds Finally available again!!
Check out the Paul Young Rod Co. database which is owned and maintained by member Robert Golder (quashnet).
Paul Young Rod Co. database by quashnet
DISCLAIMER:The views, and opinions, posted here are the sole responsibility of the poster. Negative comments, when directed at individuals, or other private concerns, will not be tolerated, posters should treat this media no differently than any other media source, in other words, if you would not submit what you are going to post in the newspaper, or a magazine, and sign your name as the author, kindly refrain from doing so here. The Classic Fly Rod Forum is not an open air forum for vendor/maker complaints. If you seek resolution, it is recommended you talk to the vendor/maker. If you seek an audience, it is recommended you go elsewhere. The admin and the Moderators reserve the right to remove any items deemed inappropriate according to the rules of conduct prominently displayed on each forum. If you have any questions or concerns you are free to email us at
send email to the Classic Fly Rod Forum
Posting to sell Domain names and the like, i.e. SPAM, is against YUKU Policy, if you post these types of posts here you will be banned from this board and YUKU will more than likely ban you from the site entirely. Thank you..........
The Fly Fishing Loop is sponsored by flydepot.com
[ Home Waters | Next | Random | List | Search ]
