The Traditional Fisherman's Forum

Hey chaps,

some time ago I found this and couldn't get it out of my head. How often would you find an unused Chapman 500?
Finally I had to buy it.
Now the question: Would you leave it as it is or would you replace the butt and tip with lined rings?

I'd leave it as original spec. Nice rod.

Hi, I would consider making it De-Luxe spec, on the basis that the extra guide spreads the load more evenly throughout the cane. Super rod though and a joy to use

As far as I know the De-Luxe spec has the same number of rings. At least from what you can get as information from the Chapman's page. Or am I wrong?

I would leave it exactly as it is, in fact I would be umming and arring as I removed the plastic covering from that cork butt! But, being me, I would have to use it, and you cannot leave the plastic on for that.. What a lovely thing to find and own, I do like Chapman rods.

Ring spacing for the 500 De-Luxe taken from Chapmans website

" Ring spacing:
butt 20″ ——— 9- 3/4″
top 13″ ———- 11″ ——— 9″ ——— 6 1/2″

Rings butt size 18 Aqualite size 7 full open bridge (Chromed)
top Full open bridge size 5 —- 4 —– 4 —– 3 —– no 3 Aqualite tip "

Notice the extra ring on the top section

I normally re ring the standard 500 to 550 spec which gives an extra ring on the butt section as well



Lee

You can turn a 500 into a 550 by just adding two rings? Did I get this right? I thought the 550 has a taper like the MKIV's...

OldTackle wrote:You can turn a 500 into a 550 by just adding two rings? Did I get this right? I thought the 550 has a taper like the MKIV's...

No you cant turn a 500 into a 550 as the tapers are different, but you can add extra rings to a 500 to make it 550 ring spec.

I've two restored Chapman 500 deluxe spec. But I'd leave it the way it was originally made

+ 1 I ' d leave it be unless the varnish has gone ropey over the years, and if so I would make it deluxe.