The Traditional Fisherman's Forum

My latest acquisition is another Chapman 500, my third in fact.
I was desperate to get hold of one when I started using cane rods again about six years ago.
I bought one from Redditch and was elated at the prospect of using it once it had been re rung and varnished.
It was a lucky rod, I caught my first chub barbel and carp with it.
I then decided to strip it, replace the bridge rings with high bells to give it a little more versatility.
Then I sold it
My wife bought me a Harvey Torbett, a very similar rod from Allcocks but with a slightly finer tip and fitted with high bells.
It's a really lovely float rod, light crisp in action and beautifully balanced.
This would replace the 500 I sold previously .
I then spotted another 500 for sale; bought it, restored it and sold it again
So, I've bought yet another, just for fun.
Its an early gold label rod in original condition (I think). It has low bells fitted although I thought they originally had bridge rings fitted?? I'm going to phone Mr Chapman to see what rings were fitted as standard on early rods.
What appealed to me was its condition, tired but sound. The rings were grubby but cleaned up very well, the varnish dull but intact, a few battle scars here and there but restorable. Two of the rings had been poorly re whipped and needed re doing and the tip ring had been replaced by a stand off threaded job.
The ferrules are tight, fit well and the cane sections are straight and true.
The colour of the cane is just lovely, a mellow amber/caramel shade which would be lost if the rod were stripped back to bare cane, which had been my original intention.
So, I decided to clean up the rod, leave the original whippings where possible, repair some damaged cork in the handle, add a coat of varnish (or two) and keep it as original as I can. It is the standard version not the deluxe.
It has its original bag but it's very tatty and the label so faded its unreadable.
For a sixty year old it's worn very well, its not been abused and has been properly stored.
I think I will keep this one. I like the idea of it being true to its identity and purpose, an honest rod just freshened up a bit.

Sounds like an early 500, i think you are doing the right thing Jeremy, a sympathetic restoration

I very much look forward to you working some magic into this rod Jeremy, and of course seeing the results - just try your best to keep hold of this one!!!

That sounds exactly like my 500 that I found in a junk shop in 1995, not long after APFA inspired me to begin my traditional journey. I didn't know what I was looking at in the shop that day but luckily I could see that it was 'Avon'ish' because my companion that day, a fellow angler, was watching closely and if I had put the rod down, he told me later, I would have lost it! It's still with me now albeit on its second restoration and unfortunately three inches short in the butt section after a mishap involving an ill advised punch cast (be warned!)

I have to tell you all that I have seen some pics of progress on Jeremy's 500 and all I can say is that you are going to love it when it is finished! The boy done good!!!!

Nice to have an iconic rod such as this, kept original. Looking forward to seeing the results Jeremy.

Wal.

Jeremy Croxall wrote: ↑Sat Dec 12, 2020 11:54 pm
Its an early gold label rod in original condition (I think). It has low bells fitted although I thought they originally had bridge rings fitted?? I'm going to phone Mr Chapman to see what rings were fitted as standard on early rods.

Hi Jeremy - Had a couple of conversations with John Chapman about this - have completely stripped back and restored 2 500s myself - one pre-'69 (plain cork butt) and one post '69 (black plastic butt cap) as identified by John. Interestingly, I've found the later rod to have a rather less parabolic action than the earlier model - to the extent they're effectively 2 different rods, in my opinion. The late model 500 has a very similar action to my Allcocks Lucky Strike (latest version I believe - black rectangular decal/ green print) albeit 6" shorter.

According to John, the original ring spec was full open bridge in, I guess, the style of an Avon rod of the time. He told me the original idea behind this model was to fight back against the early cheaper fibreglass rods, and offer an affordable option for the all-round angler in split cane. The std 500 had plain (unlined) butt and tip rings - the De Luxe spec upped this to include an aqualite butt and tip as well as the extra intermediate (took the opportunity to upgrade mine to this spec - why wouldn't you?)

There's still quite a lot of detail about these rods on the chapmanblanks.co.uk website in case you've not seen it - apologies if I'm teaching my Grandma to suck eggs on this!
Mike

Be glad to see the result of your restoration Jeremy.... can I place the fist bid?.....

A quick up date chaps:


I spoke to John Chapman today who confirmed that the early gold label rods had nickel low bells rings fitted

The picture shows the original rings cleaned up, original whippings untouched and the original varnish lightly sanded with 800 grit wet and dry then overcoated with two thinned coats.

Just need to fit the tip ring and its good to go!

Daltons wrote: ↑Mon Dec 14, 2020 7:18 pm

Jeremy Croxall wrote: ↑Sat Dec 12, 2020 11:54 pm
Its an early gold label rod in original condition (I think). It has low bells fitted although I thought they originally had bridge rings fitted?? I'm going to phone Mr Chapman to see what rings were fitted as standard on early rods.

Hi Jeremy - Had a couple of conversations with John Chapman about this - have completely stripped back and restored 2 500s myself - one pre-'69 (plain cork butt) and one post '69 (black plastic butt cap) as identified by John. Interestingly, I've found the later rod to have a rather less parabolic action than the earlier model - to the extent they're effectively 2 different rods, in my opinion. The late model 500 has a very similar action to my Allcocks Lucky Strike (latest version I believe - black rectangular decal/ green print) albeit 6" shorter.

According to John, the original ring spec was full open bridge in, I guess, the style of an Avon rod of the time. He told me the original idea behind this model was to fight back against the early cheaper fibreglass rods, and offer an affordable option for the all-round angler in split cane. The std 500 had plain (unlined) butt and tip rings - the De Luxe spec upped this to include an aqualite butt and tip as well as the extra intermediate (took the opportunity to upgrade mine to this spec - why wouldn't you?)

There's still quite a lot of detail about these rods on the chapmanblanks.co.uk website in case you've not seen it - apologies if I'm teaching my Grandma to suck eggs on this!
Mike

It must be the later rods had bridge rings fitted, I spoke to John today and he confirmed the early gold label rods had nickel low bells as per the photo I posted earlier today.

The action on my rod is quite steely, it feels very robust and I reckon it could stop a train!

I decided to stay with the standard ringing pattern on mine, I will see how I get on with it. If I feel it needs more rings I will do full strip and add a lined butt ring too.