I haven't cast it yet, but it appears to be a 5 weight. I'm not sure if this is classified as a 7' 8" or a 7' 9".
Has anyone of the Thomas experts out there heard of this 7'8" or a 7'9" Thomas?
Thanks,
Don
| Author | Comment | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
grayghost |
F. E. Thomas 7'8"-7'9"? |
Lead | ||
|
Not sure if this post should be on the rodmakers / manufacturers forum but I have just acquired a later F.E. Thomas Special 3/2, 7' 8" - 7'
9" ?? rod that appears not to be compromised from a longer rod. I have measured each section and all sections are 31 3/8 " depending upon how they
are measured. But they are no more than that length. All Thomas ferrules are used. Although I haven't measured drop at the ferrules, all the sections do
not appear to be shortened. The tip wraps are double back wrapped and the remainder of the wraps on the other sections are also original. Everything looks
intact and again, not compromised. It definitely is not a parabolic.
I haven't cast it yet, but it appears to be a 5 weight. I'm not sure if this is classified as a 7' 8" or a 7' 9". Has anyone of the Thomas experts out there heard of this 7'8" or a 7'9" Thomas? Thanks, Don
Last Edited By: grayghost 11/06/2007 01:34.
Edited 1 time.
|
||||
|
|
||||
Cane Head |
#1 | |||
|
F.E. Thomas supposedly tried his hand at building a 7'9" parabolic. I remember one being offered for sale in a 91/92 Keane catalog. If anyone has
his catalogs from that time period, perhaps they can paraphrase the offering. I've never seen one listed for sale after that.
|
||||
|
|
||||
Sal Fontinalis |
#2 | |||
|
Our own Short Tip has a similar rod that I have handled. He too thought it was original at 7'9" and not a cut down 8'er. It felt like a nice 5wt
as well. He knows his Thomas stuff so hoepfully he will weigh in.
One example is questionable but two examples and a reference to one in a Keane catalog are momentum towards confirmation. I have some Thomas catalogs that I will check but I don't recall any mention of a 7'9" rod. What is stamped on the butt cap? It should help determine production era. Does it have a HK at the winding check? Node pattern? Long tang tip tops? |
||||
|
|
||||
grayghost |
#3 | |||
|
Fontinalis,
The butt cap, that is pinned through, is not stamped but it has the concentric rings along with the stamp "F E Thomas Special Bangor Maine" on the side. The butt section while entering the grip is not extremely swelled. The winding check is typical Thomas with the HK attached. All ferrules are pinned. The tips are perfection style and not long tang. Guides are english twist. It is wrapped in Thomas dark reddish / brown color with no intermediates. Original signature wrap is 3x3x3. This strong rod casts effortlessly with a wf5 and a wf6. This is my kind of rod. I consulted with our own informed board member "Caneseeker" who referenced Marty Keane indicating you could purchase just about any length, action and configuration in the later years. Later this week, I hope to have Caneseeker take a look at it and render his opinion. I'm a little worried about prying it from his hands. |
||||
|
|
||||
spruce grouse |
#4 | |||
grayghost wrote: May I suggest carrying a Taser when you take the rod to Marc? And, Sal, it seems you've been infected by the FET virus pretty bad. You're starting to sound like an aficionado. Are we going to start seeing
"WTT: Itty bitty Leonards for itty bitty Thomases"?
|
||||
|
|
||||
Sal Fontinalis |
#5 | |||
|
I've been "infected" for a while but just decided this year to try and focus on only two builders. Itty bitty Leonards are a dime a dozen in
comparison to itty bitty Thomases. Ol' Fred got a lot of things right with his rods but I'm not sure if he will surpass Leonard as my overall
favorite.
I have heard on several occassions that Thomas would build whatever you wanted and I think that holds true for any rodmaker trying to make it his full-time profession. It sounds like an interesting rod and very similar to Paul's (although I think his is a Browntone). It does sound like a later era rod. |
||||
|
|
||||
Short Tip |
#6 | |||
|
Mine's a Mahogany and probably ca. 1920 or so. It appears original length at 7'9" 3/2 but has been monkeyed with a little over the years as far as wraps, varnish, etc. It does not have a swelled butt and is not any kind of parabolic, it's a fine tipped dry fly rod and a "true 5 wt". It has a snake stripper as well. It's one of my all time favorite casting rods. Good luck getting yours back from Marc! Tie a lanyard to it. Sal knows a good rod when he casts one. |
||||
|
|
||||
caneseeker |
#7 | |||
|
Well, Greyghost brought the rod over and we gave it a thorough going over. Several red flags led me to be convinced that it was cut down. First, it is stiff
as a crutch with rather thick tips .082". Second, the mid to butt stepdown is around .030". Third, the mid male ferrule has been replaced with a
Dirigo ferrule. And the cane is tremendously thick for a 7' 9" rod. The butt ferrule has been removed and re-set. There is evidence that the
stripper guide has been moved 3" closer to the butt (probably done so for new guide spacing). The mid is an earlier vintage replacement as there is
evidence of intermediate wrap ghosting, while the rest of the rod is clearly later production. The tips have only 4 snakes (the tip-tops now occupy the
location of the former fifth snake guide, IMO). The bag is clearly from a 7 1/2' rod. Several eyebrow raisers. Ghost is sending it back ASAP.
Marc |
||||
|
|
||||
Short Tip |
#8 | |||
|
Aw shucks. It sounded like a real neat rod.
|
||||
|
|
||||