Aspindale - Avondale

[PershoreHarrier]

I acquired an Aspindale Avondale 10 foot 6 hollow built cane rod some years ago having been rescued from a skip in Redditch.

I was fortunate enough to have the rod restored by Peter Aspindale and his wife and it saw some use last season on the local ponds being favoured by some nice roach.

The rod has stand off rings with the butt and tip rings being agate lined, the rings are whipped in green / black and the intermediate whippings are black.

I have never seen or heard of another Aspindale Avondale but I am sure this is the place to discover someone who has another one with the opportunity to compare notes on its performance and use in general.

Following the purchase of a digital camera I thought I would add a few photos of this rod.

[Nobby]

I have one too!


Lovely little rod with both butt and middle section being hollow-built. Mine is whipped in yellow and black jasper with red inters and tipping.

As light as a feather it is a perfect roach rod and weighs less than any other rod I own by a long chalk.

I've done a new tip section for it with the cane coming from Chapman's of ware:

The old, short, tip section I kept for quivertipping, but I doubt I'll ever use it:

[Ryeman]

I had one, bought from Peter Aspindale. Very light , lovely crisp action. Every time I think about it I wish I'd never sold it. ( I only did so for rather complex reasons.)
The only thing wrong with it was that the handle was too short for me, for comfort. I extended the butt by a few inches and this transformed the rod.

Alan

[JohnL]

I too have one, fantastic trotting rod for grayling, it has also landed salmon and sea trout for me (accidental). It was completely delaminated when I got it - quite a challenge putting hollow built sections back together and unfortunately it is 3" short in the tip. One day I will extend the handle by a few inches though.

[JohnL]

I too have one, fantastic trotting rod for grayling, it has also landed salmon and sea trout for me (accidental). It was completely delaminated when I got it - quite a challenge putting hollow built sections back together and unfortunately it is 3" short in the tip. One day I will extend the handle by a few inches though.

Here's a picture.

[PershoreHarrier]

Thanks guys for putting up photos of your Avondales which sort of confirms a worry I had about my rod which although restored by Aspindale's shows some differences.

My rod has an agate butt ring 12 and a quarter inches from the end of the cork handle.

The middle section of my rod has only two rings the first one being 16 inches from the bottom ferrule and the second one being 5 and three quarter inches from the top ferrule.

The top section has four rings spaced as follows - from the ferrule to the first ring 12 and a half inches, from first ring to second ring 13 and three quarter inches, from second to third ring being 9 and a quarter inches and from third to tip ring (agate) 7 and a quarter inches.

The cork handle on my rod measures 18 and a half inches including the rubber button.

When I acquired my rod the butt section appeared to have suffered some damage in the cane above the handle which may have been delamination which had been addressed by additional extended wide whipping. This issue appears to have been resolved by the restoration as this whipping is no longer in place. However, it does not explain the isue of the rings and I would welcome any comments in that regard. I am by no means an expert on such matters but it does appear to me that the reduction in rings does not assist the transfer of the loadings generated by the fish to the rod in an even and progressive manner.

Thanks in advance.

[Ryeman]

My Avondale had very few intermediate rings, though I can't now remember how many. When I mentioned this to Peter Aspindale at the time of purchase he replied that they didn't put many rings on in those days. The line certainly made some acute angles bettween those rings and I am sure it would have been better with more.

Alan

[GarryProcter]

I wish I hadn't read this thread - it has got me wishing I had an Avondale! (And my funds are somewhat depleted at the moment...)

[Nobby]

Well I'll be....there's loads of 'em out there!



Rings are tricky......especially stand off ones.....they may not weigh much individually, but stick a few on a soft actioned rod and they could take over when casting...but probably make little difference on a middle section.


I've often wondered how much rings are really needed....if you just had a tip ring, and the line going straight down to your reel, surely the rod would still absorb the same ammount of force....?....


As you can tell, ....Physics wasn't my strong suit at school

I wonder if GOS could help on that...?

[PershoreHarrier]

Ditto Nobby - I did A level Physics at school and achieved what can only be described as a marginal pass. However, it seems to me that the rings are points where the load on t'other end of line (a 2lb roach in this instance) is transferred to the rod and to do this efficiently the number and spacing of the rings are both significant factors. It is accepted that rings are generally more closely spaced as the taper of the rod reduces implying (to me at least) that the greater the load the longer the length of the rod is required to absorb it and therefore the distance between the rings increase proportionally to the increase in the taper towards the butt.

Anyway I am sure someone on here will know and whilst I do not expect my Avondale to fail on its mission it would be interesting to know the significance and importance of the rings and their spacings.