Chapman 500 power and action

[JohnL]

I have been reading with interest on here about Chapman 500 rods and most comments on here seem to suggest they are a fairly light duty Avon rod.
I picked one up several years ago that was a bit of a wreck, the bottom of the handle had obviously been damaged in a car door and 2-3" were missing from the tip but the cane was very good, steely and straight. I refurbished it to delux specification and it made a very tasty rod that stalked me a lot of carp into double figures without the slightest complaint but I found it too powerful for general Avon work. Would the bit missing off the tip make that much difference or do the blanks vary in power?

[SeanM]

That sounds more like a 550 John. My 500 exactly matches the Chapmans description and is a good lightish avon rod. I use it for chub fishing mostly, but I've had double figure carp and barbel on it. I don't think it would last long if I used it for barbel in the Summer though. I've not heard about any significant variation in the action.

[JohnL]

It does say 500 on it though and the only worries I've had using it for summer barbel on the Avon is that it didn't catch any!

[Kevanf1]

I think a lot depends on whether you have the tackle balanced properly. Too many have too high a line strength on their reel meaning they tighten the clutch up seemingly without fear. But that's wrong because, in my humble opinion, it will mean that the rod can be bent over and beyond it's intended curve with a big fish. This is where the problem's start. After all, it's easy to hook into a leviathan with the lightest of float fishing tackle. Do you cut the line or play the fish properly allowing it to take line from the clutch (I know some backwind). Balanced properly the tackle should cope with that occasional lunker

[Loop Erimder]

I am now the owner of this rod (thank you John) my neighbour just dropped it round and all I can say is that I think it's amazing the finish on it is fantastic the whippings brilliant it just looks great. Will probably use it for stalking carp or hopefully bag a barbel at anchor meadow this year.

[Beresford]

I think a lot depends on whether you have the tackle balanced properly. Too many have too high a line strength on their reel meaning they tighten the clutch up seemingly without fear. But that's wrong because, in my humble opinion, it will mean that the rod can be bent over and beyond it's intended curve with a big fish. This is where the problem's start. After all, it's easy to hook into a leviathan with the lightest of float fishing tackle. Do you cut the line or play the fish properly allowing it to take line from the clutch (I know some backwind). Balanced properly the tackle should cope with that occasional lunker

I've always set my clutch very light and applied finger pressure to the spool. I did smile when I stumbled over and image of Peter Thomas doing the same.

I've always thought the Chapman 500 as having a stiffer middle section than say the James Avon making it less suited to tackling more powerful fish.

[Greentura]

laying my 500 and 550 tips side by side the tapers are similar and virtualy match if the 500 is slid 4"up they are virtualy identical, not as shown in the chapmans website. it's as if the tips for both came out of the same stock tip section, just 4" apart and one ferule size. so what it seems is to get a short 550, lop 4" off a 500 in theory but in practice the butt section ov the 550 is more powerful as well. I have never shied away from 'shortened rods' and have a very nice Mk 4 carp that was once an early 'onion' according to the sone of it's original owner. It lost 4 inches from the tip so to make it the same length folded down he had hacksawn 4" off the end of the butt and glued on a walking stick rubber foot. not content with that he cut the cork off at the reel area, removed the 25mm aqualite and fitted a cheap 'sea type' screw down reel seat then fitted a fuji butt guide with black whipping and what looked like araldite.I'ts been compleatly stripped to the blank and sympathetically rebuilt with new everything except original tip and butt aqualites that the son had found for me and put in the tube, even an original rod bag which my own Mk4 avon now resides in as it was better than the one it came in.

May many more fish come to your net at the end of your shortened 500 :thumb: and remember, being traditional isn't all about perfection and restoring to better than mint is't nessesary to enjoy what you have

[Loop Erimder]

May many more fish come to your net at the end of your shortened 500 :thumb: and remember, being traditional isn't all about perfection and restoring to better than mint is't nessesary to enjoy what you have

Lets hope so, I'm no perfectionist, personally I cant see a massive difference in the rod being a couple inches shorter, If I lose a fish I may of lost it anyway even with a couple of extra inches :thumb:

[RyanBurns]

Interesting that this topic should come up now, I have just finished building both a 500 and a 550 blank. These are exactly the same as the originals except i shall be building the handles on a hollow built section of split cane with a reverse taper.
Although both rods are of a similar configuration, ie two piece with a separate handle, this is where the similarity ends!
The 500 is a straight taper, and is actually a few thou bigger than the 550 at the tip. It then tapers at a steady and consistent rate all the way through. This gives the rod a true all through action, it bends consistently from the tip to the butt, the plain brass tube ferrules also help with this.
The 550 starts slightly thinner at the tip, as mentioned above, however it tapers quickly sonn overtaking the 500. The taper then slows for section before increasing again leadin g into the ferrules. The butt section of the 550 is a straight taper. What this does is creates sensitivity in the tip, which enables light freelined baits to be cast better. Whilst delivering power in stages through the middle and tip. The straight taper butt section will give the rod an all through action under maximum load, but will appear to have a tip to m iddle action under half load.
Hope this is of some interest
Ryan

[Nobby]

Ryan has just perfectly described 'the hinge' of Richard Walker's original Mark IV design, I think. Chapman's made their 550 as a replica of the Mark IV, but thought the compound taper inappropriate for the lighter 500, and thus deviated from Walker's later 'Avon' as made by B.James.

It'll be interesting to hear how either rod handles with a 'versa' butt!

If the new butts are just 24 inches I wonder if they can deliver the effort and flex of Milward's originals?

I can see the 500 being rather nice, but wonder if the 550 will become like a very whippy Swimversa with even more weight to make it flex? Either way, I bet it casts a long, long way......