The Traditional Fisherman's Forum

Latin inscriptions - or perhaps not!

I have been lucky in acquiring a nice little 3.5” Wallis reel, which I believe is the no. 1 version with a jewel bearing.
Inside are the maker’s initials JBW , Joe Wallace, who was with them from 1910 to 1939.
The figures XXI are also stamped, both on the spool and on the inside of the backplate. Of course, it could be IXX, depending on how you look at it!
I also have a 3.5” Eureka which is stamped with XII (or IIX) on the spool and backplate.
My 4” Eureka and Conquest reels have no maker’s initials or any other markings inside.

My first thought was that the XXI referred to 1921, but I cannot believe the Eureka dates to 1912.

Is there any explanation, please?
Are they just markings to indicate which parts are intended to go together?
Thank you!

Apologies for the double post!

I also ought to add a couple of photos.

They are just marks for that the spool & backplate go together

Thanks for your reply, Paul F.

I am happy and disappointed at the same time!

The "XXI" on the bottom of the reel backplate, second picture, is not stamped but appears to have been scribed or scratched in free-hand.

It is certainly not in keeping with the standard of engraved, or cast-in lettering on the rest of the reel and given their high standard, I cannot imagine that such crude markings would have even been permitted, let alone passed the rigid inspection standard at the Hardy Bros. factory.

Many owners put their own initials and other marks on them and because these reels are old, they have probably passed through more than one set of hands before yours, so the significance of these particular markings will probably never be known.

-Sorry!

Thank you for your thoughts Leszek, appreciated as always.
I do suspect that the marks were scratched on in the Hardy factory. My Eureka carries the same symbols X and I, albeit in a different sequence, which suggests that it was an internal method of controlling parts.
I have a couple more questions:
What is the red jewel likely to be?
It acts as a low friction contact for the spool axle pin, but there is no way of adjusting the end play. The end play is exactly as I would have set it, roughly 0.3 of an Imperial smidgen, but is it simply made possible by the accuracy of the engineering?

Many thanks for your reply Sir..

I have previously seen -and done some remedial work on identical reels of this make and model-but never seen markings such as these before and just cannot believe that this left their Alnwick factory with defacements such as this. I cannot imagine anything more off-putting to a would-be purchaser of an expensive new reel to see something like this inside.. it just doesn’t ring true.
If such marking was deemed necessary, surely it would have been done in a neater and less indiscreet fashion?

Anyway… The red jewel constituted Hardy Bros. “Jewelled bearing” feature on many of their reels. I am uncertain as to what stone it is but may well be a synthetic one such as “agatine”.
Using stones for an end bearing made good sense on account of-as you say-it’s very low friction and resistance to wear.

Set within a phosphorus bronze mount-not copper-these would have been set up individually by toggle press to get the optimum least end float/best running position for life with the backplate spindle-and far less likely to be tampered with, as grub screws inevitably are!

It’s almost certain that years of use would have increased the end-float as the spindle end wore, but it might be wise to not try to readjust it now without the correct equipment. Small stones both natural and sintered can crack very easily!

wm+

I had never heard of a ‘toggle press’, but it makes perfect sense that the spool endplay should be adjusted during manufacture, rather than relying on the accuracy of the individual parts! Thanks again, Leszek.