Page 1 of 1

J. S. Sharpes 9’ 3” Some Help Please

Posted: Sun Jul 14, 2019 12:13 pm
by Pallenpool
I have just acquired this rod - the only info I have from the previous owner is that it is all original and has not been used very much at all!

Well with regards to the above it certainly looks to be original the red dots on each ferrule align perfectly and the original ferrules and whippings also seem correct - one anomaly is the eyes - none are agate lined however I have been told this is not that uncommon.

The dating of this rod has me confused - the number marks are clearly stamped on the rod these being 2.5.21 and the stamper on each ferrule is 36. There is no Farlows logo present.

I have not been able to work out dates even after looking at the J S Sharpes lineage - any information and help would be very much appreciated. A couple of pictures are included.

Peter
:Hat:

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Re: J. S. Sharpes 9’ 3” Some Help Please

Posted: Sun Jul 14, 2019 12:52 pm
by Olly
Looks standard to me! I have a shorter version. This is designed for a multiplier I think.

Why should it have a Farlows logo?

Others will know more!

Re: J. S. Sharpes 9’ 3” Some Help Please

Posted: Sun Jul 14, 2019 1:02 pm
by Shropshire Lad
It was probably made May 1972 and was rod no 21 made that month, the farlows decal gets rubbed or scratched off a lot of the rods.

Re: J. S. Sharpes 9’ 3” Some Help Please

Posted: Sun Jul 14, 2019 1:09 pm
by Aitch
Thats entirely correct... both Sharpe's have no agate rings as stock... cracking rods... very powerful and a delight for carp or barbel

Re: J. S. Sharpes 9’ 3” Some Help Please

Posted: Sun Jul 14, 2019 2:13 pm
by Jeremy Croxall
My ferrules are stamped 35, the butt is stamped
77 . 172. All rings un-lined.
Fantastic rods Peter, you will enjoy using it!

Re: J. S. Sharpes 9’ 3” Some Help Please

Posted: Sun Jul 14, 2019 7:45 pm
by Pallenpool
Shropshire Lad wrote: Sun Jul 14, 2019 1:02 pm It was probably made May 1972 and was rod no 21 made that month, the farlows decal gets rubbed or scratched off a lot of the rods.
Thankyou for the info - may I ask how you arrived at the date?
:Hat:

Re: J. S. Sharpes 9’ 3” Some Help Please

Posted: Sun Jul 14, 2019 7:45 pm
by Pallenpool
Harry wrote: Sun Jul 14, 2019 1:09 pm Thats entirely correct... both Sharpe's have no agate rings as stock... cracking rods... very powerful and a delight for carp or barbel
Thanks Harry for the confirmation
:Hat:

Re: J. S. Sharpes 9’ 3” Some Help Please

Posted: Sun Jul 14, 2019 7:46 pm
by Pallenpool
Jeremy Croxall wrote: Sun Jul 14, 2019 2:13 pm My ferrules are stamped 35, the butt is stamped
77 . 172. All rings un-lined.
Fantastic rods Peter, you will enjoy using it!
Thanks Jeremy I think I will give it a whirl when I fish the Wye in September - looking forward to that!
:Hat:

Re: J. S. Sharpes 9’ 3” Some Help Please

Posted: Sun Jul 14, 2019 9:27 pm
by Old Man River
Pallenpool wrote: Sun Jul 14, 2019 7:46 pm
Jeremy Croxall wrote: Sun Jul 14, 2019 2:13 pm My ferrules are stamped 35, the butt is stamped
77 . 172. All rings un-lined.
Fantastic rods Peter, you will enjoy using it!
Thanks Jeremy I think I will give it a whirl when I fish the Wye in September - looking forward to that!
:Hat:
Just read this thread and I was guessing that that would be on your mind Peter , looks a very nice rod, with a bit of backbone!

David.

Re: J. S. Sharpes 9’ 3” Some Help Please

Posted: Sun Jul 14, 2019 11:19 pm
by Pallenpool
Old Man River wrote: Sun Jul 14, 2019 9:27 pm
Pallenpool wrote: Sun Jul 14, 2019 7:46 pm
Jeremy Croxall wrote: Sun Jul 14, 2019 2:13 pm My ferrules are stamped 35, the butt is stamped
77 . 172. All rings un-lined.
Fantastic rods Peter, you will enjoy using it!
Thanks Jeremy I think I will give it a whirl when I fish the Wye in September - looking forward to that!
:Hat:
Just read this thread and I was guessing that that would be on your mind Peter , looks a very nice rod, with a bit of backbone!

David.
That’s absolutely spot on David - I did not want to be under gunned and just in case the MKIV’s were lacking I thought this would be a good bet - and by the looks of it - it seems a good choice.