Need help with an Edwards rod

0 Kudo

Author	Comment
rckdr	Need help with an Edwards rod		Lead	[-]
Posts: 42 04/20/2009 19:33	Tags : None I just bought an Edwards rod, and I could use some help identifying it. It is a 7 foot 2/2 for 4 weight. The signature says "E.W. Edwards Autograph". Below that it says "De Luxe #124A-7' ". It has black rubber winding and grip checks. It has brown wraps with gold-yellow tipping at both ends. There are three sets of alternating brown and yellow signature wraps above the butt wrap. The male ferrules have the two rings at the shoulder and are overwrapped to the first ring. The reel seat is walnut with nickel silver cap and ring lightly blued like the ferrules. To me this looks like a Mt. Carmel rod HOWEVER, the label on the Peerless tube says "E.W. Edwards & Sons Division of Horton MFG. Co. Bristol Conn". The sack is dark blue and does not appear original. Is this a Mt. Carmel De Luxe built before Eustis' death and if so why the Horton label on the tube? Is it just the wrong tube or is this one of the rods that was completed in the Mt. Carmel shop before Eustis' death that, according to Joe Black, Horton agreed to buy for $34 each? Also is this rod relatively rare in this size? I have not seen the cap and ring reel seat described before. . Thanks for any input anyone has. I can provide photos if someone wants to post them for me. Bob
Interact My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Invite Blocking Ignore User's Posts Report Post	Reply Quote
NorthBranch		#1	[url]	[-]
Posts: 192 04/20/2009 20:13	Hey Bob, Pictures would definetly help, but I'd feel pretty comfortable saying its a post Eustis rod. If it says Horton mfg. Co. Bristol Conn on the tube...it's a post Eustis rod. Alot of EWE's rod characteristics like the black winding check, the ferrules with double rings, brown/gold wraps, etc were also used by Bill and Gene after Eustis's death. The tubes with the EW signature were even the same except for the fact that Bristol built rods had the Horton mfg. Co Bristol Conn instead of the Mt. Carmel Conn. In terms of it being rare that it is a 7' Edwards, I'd say yes. They were made for sure, but not lots of them. Hope this helps. Patrick...chime in if I'm off on this. CR
Interact My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Invite Blocking Ignore User's Posts Report Post	Reply Quote
bobbeegee	An "Autograph" !!!	#2	[url]	[-]
Posts: 2592 04/20/2009 20:14	I eagerly await the Edwards afficinados replies on this one! Would love to see some pictures! Bob Go Heels!!!
Interact My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Invite Blocking Ignore User's Posts Report Post	Reply Quote
rckdr		#3	[url]	[-]
Posts: 43 04/20/2009 20:32	The only thing about this being post-Eustis is that I thought the De Luxe model stopped after Mt. Carmel and they switched to model numbers in the 50's for the expensive rods and model numbers starting with F for the cheap ones. What about the fact that it is signed E.W. Edwards instead of Bristol-Edwards? Any thoughts on the possibility that this could be one of the rods finished before Eustis' death that was acquired by Horton when the closed the deal 3 months after his death? I would love to post pics but don't know how. If someone wants to PM me an e-mail address, I would be happy to send them for posting. Bob
Interact My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Invite Blocking Ignore User's Posts Report Post	Reply Quote
NorthBranch		#4	[url]	[-]
Posts: 193 04/20/2009 21:22	Bob, I sent you a PM with my e-mail. Just send over the pics and I'll post them for you. That will help a bunch in identifying it. I'm still pretty sure just based on the Bristol Conn/ Horton writing on the tube that is a post Eustis rod. I guess it's always possible that it was a rod finished before his death and put in a Brisol tube after his death, but I'd defer to Patrick on this. The only thing your throwing me on is the when you say it's signed E.W. Edwards. If you mean the rod...then I would say its could likely be a Eustis (if it's got the pointy "W" its a slam dunk), but if you mean on the tube, many Bristol era Edwards tubes had the classic E.W. Edwards signature on them. In fact sometimes the only difference between a Mt. Carmel made or Bristol made tube was the city designation. The Deluxe rod was made after the Mt. Carmel years by the sons. Patricks book shows a Bristol era Deluxe rod on page 197 & a Gene Edwards Deluxe on pg. 202. CR
Interact My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Invite Blocking Ignore User's Posts Report Post	Reply Quote
rckdr		#5	[url]	[-]
Posts: 44 04/20/2009 23:06	CR, I sent pictures for posting. As you can see it is signed on the rod but I noticed it has rounded w's and a curly-cue at the top of he E. Bob
Interact My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Invite Blocking Ignore User's Posts Report Post	Reply Quote
NorthBranch		#6	[url]	[-]
Posts: 194 04/20/2009 23:22	To me...I am changing my vote. I think the first picture makes it pretty likely that it's a Eustis rod...and a REAL nice and rare one to boot. The signature look dead on to the one in Playing with Fire page #122. The "W" is a little off. I would say it's a Mt. Carmel era De Luxe. I own two 7' Mt. Carmel Deluxes and this is similar. I have heard of the #70, 120 and 21, but not a #124A and this may be the first one anyone's seen. I'd love to see the tube if possible, as it's wierd it says anything related to Horton Mfg which would make it a post Eustis. A fine rod. Patrick....thoughts? CR Last Edited By: NorthBranch 04/21/2009 01:21. Edited 1 time.
Interact My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Invite Blocking Ignore User's Posts Report Post	Reply Quote
rckdr		#7	[url]	[-]
Posts: 45 04/20/2009 23:45	I am sorry I could not get a good picture of the tube label at night. It is the typical elongated label placed lengthwise on the tube. The top olive-colored stripe says EW Edwards and Sons. The middle white stripe has spaces for model length and weight which are not filled out. The lower olive stripe says Manufactured by EW Edwards and Sons Division of the Horton MFG. CO., Bristol, Conn. BTW this rod is in great shape. The varnish has only a few tiny defects, still has a lot of its gloss, and has a fine patina like a piece of fine antique furniture. The ferrules are extremely tight even after cleaning. The circumferential lapping marks are still visible on the male ferrules. One male ferrule has only a couple of vertical scratches that normally occur from assembling the rod. The other ferrule shows no vertical scratches at all. The cork has been cleaned but has only slight ridging. Its extremely light and has a fast dry fly action.
Interact My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Invite Blocking Ignore User's Posts Report Post	Reply Quote
NorthBranch		#8	[url]	[-]
Posts: 195 04/21/2009 01:17	Bob, One thing I forgot...is their anything incised on the butt cap? Alot of times the butt caps were incised to say either E.W. Edwards Sons Makers Mt. Carmel, Conn or Bristol, Conn. This would probably solidify if it were pre or post 1931. Everything about the rod appears to look like a Eustis, but sometimes it's tough to tell. The "W" looks a little off but the "E" with the curley cue's you show do appear on alot of Eustis rods. RPL had a Deluxe with greem wraps that had "E" the same as yours, but the "W" was very pointy.
Interact My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Invite Blocking Ignore User's Posts Report Post	Reply Quote
rckdr		#9	[url]	[-]
Posts: 46 04/21/2009 07:32	CR, Nothing on the butt cap.
Interact My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Invite Blocking Ignore User's Posts Report Post	Reply Quote
fishnbanjo		#10	[url]	[-]
Posts: 5941 04/21/2009 07:33 the Canefather	Beautiful rod! Unfortunately my own is on loan in MI and I can't find my photos to bump them against your script, mine is definitely a Eustis built rod. banjo Fly fishing is my Quisisana (the name is Italian for "place where one heals one's self.") "...... SLG Visit my website about Bamboo rods... Fishnbanjo's Place
Interact My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Invite Blocking Ignore User's Posts Report Post	Reply Quote
cwfly	script	#11	[url]	[-]
Posts: 918 04/21/2009 08:09	Her are some photographs to compare it against. Earlier thread The script looks different to me. The "W" is different and the "e" in De Luxe is lower case instead of a small upper case. But it's a lovely rod. The brook runs over the bones of the planet and carries the sky on its back…. Odell Shepard
Interact My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Invite Blocking Ignore User's Posts Report Post	Reply Quote
RPL		#12	[url]	[-]
Posts: 186 04/21/2009 08:16	Wonderful rod there! Might not be possible to definitively date it, though, which makes Edwards rods so interesting. Nice perfection-type male ferrules, but I have seen similar ones on rods that were definitely Bristol era. The cap and ring reel seat appear different than the often-used "butterfly" ring in the Mt. Carmel Filbert Street eras; your cap and ring seem to have some kind of knurling along the edge that I have not seen before. The edges of the metal don't come out sharp in the picture so it is hard to tell what's going on there. Can anyone identify that knurling and place it in chronological context? With regard to the handwriting, I would say that the hand that wrote on some Mt. Carmel rods also wrote on Bristol rods, except, of course, for Eustis himself. So similarity of handwriting on this rod to certain Mt. Carmel rods might not accurately date the rod to one era or the other. If the tube is original to the rod, it's still possible, though unlikely, that the rod was made during Eustis's lifetime, survived the Mt. Carmel fire, and was later completed at Bristol after his death -- but that course of events is less likely than it simply being a Bristol rod. On a separate thread in this section, we have the case of a Dickerson rod that Dickerson signed, but left unfinished. A modern maker recently put the finishing touches on the rod. Is that a Dickerson rod? Certainly has his signature. Dickerson must have put the taper on the blanks. So the making of a rod can often straddle the period before and after the original maker's death. What maker finishes every rod he started?
Interact My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Invite Blocking Ignore User's Posts Report Post	Reply Quote
pcg	Here's info on the actual period	#13	[url]	[-]
Posts: 2658 04/21/2009 08:28 Admin	This rod first appeared in 1935, and was sold as an Edwards rod by Paul Young. The exact model # appears, as written on the shaft of this rod, in the '35 catalog. We now know that ALL the rods labeled "Autograph" are post-1931, and probably even later by a couple years. I had been under the belief that the various numbered rods were late, late Mt Carmel period. But that was for lack of documentation. There are Autograph as well as numbered rods (see pages 137 & 138 in "Playing With Fire") that I indicate are probably experimental EW Edwards rods: I was wrong. Both George Black and I believed that these may have been prototype rods from the late 1920s, but my documentation now indicates that assumption was wrong by at least 5-7 years. EW Edwards made none of these rods. See the catalog cut below: Pat
Interact My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Invite Blocking Ignore User's Posts Report Post	Reply Quote
rckdr		#14	[url]	[-]
Posts: 47 04/21/2009 19:41	Patrick, This evidence is hard to argue with, but do you have any thoughts on what their thinking was in calling these rods "autograph" when the person whose name it was was already dead? Then again, why did they call their lowest-priced rods "special". One thought on RPL's comment. The timeline that Keane and Campbell mention is wrong. Horton signed an option agreement with the Edwards two weeks before Eustis' death. There must have been a not inconsequential number of finished rods in the shop at that time because their purchase was specified in the contract. The fire did not occur until one year later. Therefore there must be some Mt. Carmel rods out there in Horton tubes. One more thought. I just removed a piece of thick paper that was lining the cap of the tube (paper had an old weather forecast on it). Underneath the word "3 oz" is written in the cap. Could this be the wrong tube for the rod? Certainly the bag is not original but the case is made for a 7 foot rod. Bob Last Edited By: rckdr 04/21/2009 19:56. Edited 1 time.
Interact My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Invite Blocking Ignore User's Posts Report Post	Reply Quote
rckdr		#15	[url]	[-]
Posts: 48 04/21/2009 23:14	RPL, The rod is a joy to cast. Produces nice tight loops with a DT4 with an easy but fairly fast action. I will not get to weigh it for a few days, so I would appreciate it if you could keep an eye on this thread. Bob
Interact My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Invite Blocking Ignore User's Posts Report Post	Reply Quote
RPL		#16	[url]	[-]
Posts: 189 04/21/2009 23:28	Interesting. As noted, it is possible, though unlikely, that this is one of those Mt. Carmel rods that found its way into a Horton tube. How many such rods do you suppose there were? Have any been substantiated as Mt. Carmel rods? How much does the rod weigh? If it weighs less than 3 oz., as written in tube cap, perhaps the tube is not original to the rod. Why would a rod that's supposed to weight 2 to 2 1/4 oz. be placed in a tube labeled 3 oz.? Expediency? Mistake? Can we hope to ever know? I noticed that the writing on the second line on the rod is "De Luxe 124A-7" but the model name in the catalog seems to be simply "124-A" suggesting that the person who placed the model number on the rod may not have been familiar with the model names. Notice that in the relevant line in the catalog the "7" in "7 feet" runs into "124-A" so that someone unfamiliar with the models might mistakenly write "124-A7". Or am I reading too much into this line? Do other "124-A" rods have "124-A7" inscribed on them? Or simply "124-A"? Now if the rod weight is inconsistent with the weight of the "124-A" and if the "124-A7" designation is the wrong way to label this rod, you might have a stronger case for a Mt. Carmel rod. In other words, someone had to put a label on this 7 ft. rod and mis-wrote the model number as it went out the door. If it weighs in at 3 oz., then that weight would suggest that it was not built as a "124-A" but so labeled by default. Or the rod might be some kind of unexplained anomoly. Of course, all of this is speculation and we may never get to the bottom of it.
Interact My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Invite Blocking Ignore User's Posts Report Post	Reply Quote
rckdr		#17	[url]	[-]
Posts: 49 04/23/2009 19:40	I just weighed this rod and it weighs exactly 3 ounces. That would significantly reduce the chance that it is the same rod mentioned in the 1935 Paul Young catalog. Other questions I have are: 1) Were the Mt. Carmel style ferrules used as late as 1935? Wouldn't they have run out of old stock by then? 2) Are there autograph rods that are proven without a doubt to be post 1931 that say "E.W. Edwards? In answer to RPL's last query, George Black states in Casting a Spell that the Edwards family suffered significant financial hardship in part because Horton originally agreed to buy the finished Eustis rods for up to $34 dollars apiece and then paid less than one quarter that amount. There had to be a significant number of these rods in order to create a financial hardship. Thus I suspect that there were a significant number of rods made before Eustis' death that were sold by Horton. We may never know if my rod was one of them.
Interact My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Invite Blocking Ignore User's Posts Report Post	Reply Quote
RPL		#18	[url]	[-]
Posts: 190 04/23/2009 20:33	Rod weights are notoriously inexact. Did the weights in the catalog, for example, include the weight of hardware? Or just the blank? You might have to compare the weights of some of the other rods in the catalog to the designated catalog weights to determine what those weights included. That said, 3 oz. does suggest that your rod might not fit the specs of the catalog rod. Here's a stab in the dark. I've always thought it odd that there was an E.W. Edwards autograph rod even after his death. Could there be a connection between these autograph rods and the surviving EWE-made rods sold by Horton? There may have been some attempt to differentiate those EWE rods from the others. Hence the "A" in the model number? From the catalog, it appears that there was an orderly progression of model numbers until you get to the 7 ft. rod, and then suddenly they stick an "A" on the number. Does "A" stand for autograph? Was there a model 124 (without the "A")? Why did someone misplace the hyphen in the model number when they inscribed your rod? Did they make the same mistake on other rods? The Perfection ferrules appear on a good number of Bristol rods. Not sure that we know when they stopped using them. Bottom line is that you have an unusual rod. Raises lots of interesting questions.
Interact My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Invite Blocking Ignore User's Posts Report Post	Reply Quote
rckdr		#19	[url]	[-]
Posts: 50 04/23/2009 20:52	The catalog weights included hardware since it says "Locking reel band adds 1/2 ounce" Thanks for the interesting thoughts.
Interact My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Invite Blocking Ignore User's Posts Report Post	Reply Quote
pcg		#20	[url]	[-]
Posts: 2665 04/23/2009 21:01 Admin	As I've noted before, none of the numbered rods are Mt Carmel. Period. And all the "Autograph" rods are the same. They're all post-1931. Pat
Interact My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Invite Blocking Ignore User's Posts Report Post	Reply Quote

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Yuku free message boards

Need help with an Edwards rod

Need help with an Edwards rod

Quick Reply