Well, I ended up with the rod...

Since I couldn't convince anyone else to become interested in that Orvis Rod
I posted about a week or so ago, I am now the proud owner. I had called
Orvis about the rod--I think I mention that before--and they said that it
was made 8/1/1957. For some reason, the guy who's father-in-law died called
me over to his shop this morn to tell me that he wanted me to have the rod.
I hadn't inspected the shipping tube that accompanied the rod before this
afternoon.

Anyway, on the way home I noticed that the shipping tube (cardboard) had a
UPS shipping label? Funny I thought to myself. I didn't know USP ran way
back in 1957? I looked the tube over more carefully, and discovered a
shipping date--8/10/1970? Why on Earth would Orvis hold a rod 13 years and
then decide to sell it, I thought? I decide something was fishy in Boone
and that I needed to give Orvis another call. However, first I needed to
stop by my 77 year old uncle's place and show him my latest acquisition. I
was tellin' him the long drawn out story, as he pulled the rod from it's
sock. But section, mid-section, tip-section and another tip-section? Wait
a minute, this is a single tip rod! It says so right on the rod tube and
cap? Another thing, this tip is shorter, darker, and broken mid-way up with
a band of old maskin' tape around it?

I inspected the broken tip. It was worn, soiled, and had the same SN as the
good tip. Mystery solved, I think? Apparently, this rod had been sent back
to Orvis for repair and the entire rod was refinished, as the thread wraps
are much wider on the new sections (from butt to tip-top). Everything about
this rod looks new, except for the bad tip section, with the exact same
serial number.

Has anyone every seen this before. I mean everything is new, including the
grip and reel seat? Why would they redo the rod entirely, and send the
broken tip back with it? I haven't called Orvis again, yet, but I intend
to, as they told me that their record did not show that the rod had ever
been returned for repair, since 1957?

I feel quite certain that the rework is Orvis's, as everything looks exactly
like all the other Orvis rods that I have.

Any help would be appreciated.

Op

Mr. Opus McDopus wrote:
Since I couldn't convince anyone else to become interested in that Orvis Rod
I posted about a week or so ago, I am now the proud owner. I had called
Orvis about the rod--I think I mention that before--and they said that it
was made 8/1/1957. For some reason, the guy who's father-in-law died called
me over to his shop this morn to tell me that he wanted me to have the rod.
I hadn't inspected the shipping tube that accompanied the rod before this
afternoon.

Anyway, on the way home I noticed that the shipping tube (cardboard) had a
UPS shipping label? Funny I thought to myself. I didn't know USP ran way
back in 1957? I looked the tube over more carefully, and discovered a
shipping date--8/10/1970? Why on Earth would Orvis hold a rod 13 years and
then decide to sell it, I thought? I decide something was fishy in Boone
and that I needed to give Orvis another call. However, first I needed to
stop by my 77 year old uncle's place and show him my latest acquisition. I
was tellin' him the long drawn out story, as he pulled the rod from it's
sock. But section, mid-section, tip-section and another tip-section? Wait
a minute, this is a single tip rod! It says so right on the rod tube and
cap? Another thing, this tip is shorter, darker, and broken mid-way up with
a band of old maskin' tape around it?

I inspected the broken tip. It was worn, soiled, and had the same SN as the
good tip. Mystery solved, I think? Apparently, this rod had been sent back
to Orvis for repair and the entire rod was refinished, as the thread wraps
are much wider on the new sections (from butt to tip-top). Everything about
this rod looks new, except for the bad tip section, with the exact same
serial number.

Has anyone every seen this before. I mean everything is new, including the
grip and reel seat? Why would they redo the rod entirely, and send the
broken tip back with it? I haven't called Orvis again, yet, but I intend
to, as they told me that their record did not show that the rod had ever
been returned for repair, since 1957?

I feel quite certain that the rework is Orvis's, as everything looks exactly
like all the other Orvis rods that I have.

Any help would be appreciated.

Op

The only rod I have ever broken was my Orvis Battenkill, back around
1976. It came with two tips, so I finished the season with the one good
tip, and sent the rod back to Orvis for repair. When I got the rod
back, they included the broken tip in the package, but they had removed
the ferrule, tip top, and guides, and used them on the replacement tip.
They also put the serial number of the rod on the new tip, just above
the ferrule. Almost sounds like the repair/refinish on your rod was
done by someone other than Orvis.

On Thu, 4 May 2006 20:20:42 -0400, "Mr. Opus McDopus"
wrote:

Since I couldn't convince anyone else to become interested in that Orvis Rod
I posted about a week or so ago, I am now the proud owner. I had called
Orvis about the rod--I think I mention that before--and they said that it
was made 8/1/1957. For some reason, the guy who's father-in-law died called
me over to his shop this morn to tell me that he wanted me to have the rod.
I hadn't inspected the shipping tube that accompanied the rod before this
afternoon.

Anyway, on the way home I noticed that the shipping tube (cardboard) had a
UPS shipping label? Funny I thought to myself. I didn't know USP ran way
back in 1957? I looked the tube over more carefully, and discovered a
shipping date--8/10/1970? Why on Earth would Orvis hold a rod 13 years and
then decide to sell it, I thought? I decide something was fishy in Boone
and that I needed to give Orvis another call. However, first I needed to
stop by my 77 year old uncle's place and show him my latest acquisition. I
was tellin' him the long drawn out story, as he pulled the rod from it's
sock. But section, mid-section, tip-section and another tip-section? Wait
a minute, this is a single tip rod! It says so right on the rod tube and
cap? Another thing, this tip is shorter, darker, and broken mid-way up with
a band of old maskin' tape around it?

I inspected the broken tip. It was worn, soiled, and had the same SN as the
good tip. Mystery solved, I think? Apparently, this rod had been sent back
to Orvis for repair and the entire rod was refinished, as the thread wraps
are much wider on the new sections (from butt to tip-top). Everything about
this rod looks new, except for the bad tip section, with the exact same
serial number.

Has anyone every seen this before. I mean everything is new, including the
grip and reel seat? Why would they redo the rod entirely, and send the
broken tip back with it? I haven't called Orvis again, yet, but I intend
to, as they told me that their record did not show that the rod had ever
been returned for repair, since 1957?

I feel quite certain that the rework is Orvis's, as everything looks exactly
like all the other Orvis rods that I have.

Any help would be appreciated.

Op

I have no idea what Orvis charged for replacing a tip section or
refinishing a rod circa 1970, but I suspect that just the refinish would
have been considerably less than a new 2nd tip and refinish. As such, I
can envision such as this scenario: The guy rarely fished it anymore,
maybe because from the early sixties to the early seventies were the
heyday of all sorts of new fiberglass "super rods," (not to be confused
with Wonderods) and 'boo was falling out of favor with many folks, maybe
because he didn't FF anymore, whatever. But this rod was fairly nice or
sentimental or whatever and had gotten some heavy use in the prior 13
years, getting a broken tip along the way. The guy didn't want to spend
what it would take to replace the tip, but the cost of the refinish was
worth it to him, so off it went. As there was really not any "repair"
per se done, a record wasn't kept (this assumes that Orvis was
particular about record-keeping at that time). Since it was what
normally would be a two-tip model, it had a label attached indicating
that this particular rod only had the single tip, so as to avoid someone
conducting what would have been a fruitless search thinking the 2nd tip
was floating around misplaced in the shop.

Also, someone could have just stuck it in the wrong rod tube or shipping
tube. Are you sure everything is "right" as far as what goes with what
with regards to the tubes?

TC,
R

wrote:
On Thu, 4 May 2006 20:20:42 -0400, "Mr. Opus McDopus"
wrote:

Since I couldn't convince anyone else to become interested in that Orvis Rod
I posted about a week or so ago, I am now the proud owner. I had called
Orvis about the rod--I think I mention that before--and they said that it
was made 8/1/1957. For some reason, the guy who's father-in-law died called
me over to his shop this morn to tell me that he wanted me to have the rod.
I hadn't inspected the shipping tube that accompanied the rod before this
afternoon.

Anyway, on the way home I noticed that the shipping tube (cardboard) had a
UPS shipping label? Funny I thought to myself. I didn't know USP ran way
back in 1957? I looked the tube over more carefully, and discovered a
shipping date--8/10/1970? Why on Earth would Orvis hold a rod 13 years and
then decide to sell it, I thought? I decide something was fishy in Boone
and that I needed to give Orvis another call. However, first I needed to
stop by my 77 year old uncle's place and show him my latest acquisition. I
was tellin' him the long drawn out story, as he pulled the rod from it's
sock. But section, mid-section, tip-section and another tip-section? Wait
a minute, this is a single tip rod! It says so right on the rod tube and
cap? Another thing, this tip is shorter, darker, and broken mid-way up with
a band of old maskin' tape around it?

I inspected the broken tip. It was worn, soiled, and had the same SN as the
good tip. Mystery solved, I think? Apparently, this rod had been sent back
to Orvis for repair and the entire rod was refinished, as the thread wraps
are much wider on the new sections (from butt to tip-top). Everything about
this rod looks new, except for the bad tip section, with the exact same
serial number.

Has anyone every seen this before. I mean everything is new, including the
grip and reel seat? Why would they redo the rod entirely, and send the
broken tip back with it? I haven't called Orvis again, yet, but I intend
to, as they told me that their record did not show that the rod had ever
been returned for repair, since 1957?

I feel quite certain that the rework is Orvis's, as everything looks exactly
like all the other Orvis rods that I have.

Any help would be appreciated.

Op

I have no idea what Orvis charged for replacing a tip section or
refinishing a rod circa 1970, but I suspect that just the refinish would
have been considerably less than a new 2nd tip and refinish. As such, I
can envision such as this scenario: The guy rarely fished it anymore,
maybe because from the early sixties to the early seventies were the
heyday of all sorts of new fiberglass "super rods," (not to be confused
with Wonderods) and 'boo was falling out of favor with many folks, maybe
because he didn't FF anymore, whatever. But this rod was fairly nice or
sentimental or whatever and had gotten some heavy use in the prior 13
years, getting a broken tip along the way. The guy didn't want to spend
what it would take to replace the tip, but the cost of the refinish was
worth it to him, so off it went. As there was really not any "repair"
per se done, a record wasn't kept (this assumes that Orvis was
particular about record-keeping at that time). Since it was what
normally would be a two-tip model, it had a label attached indicating
that this particular rod only had the single tip, so as to avoid someone
conducting what would have been a fruitless search thinking the 2nd tip
was floating around misplaced in the shop.

Also, someone could have just stuck it in the wrong rod tube or shipping
tube. Are you sure everything is "right" as far as what goes with what
with regards to the tubes?

TC,
R


The replacement tip cost me $65. Believe it or not, I bought the entire
Battenkill outfit in 1974 for $212. That included the two tip rod, CFO
III reel with spare spool, and floating and sinking line. Thirty odd
years later that'll buy you a couple of tanks of gas and a carton of
smokes.

On 4 May 2006 21:05:45 -0700, "George Adams"
wrote:



The replacement tip cost me $65. Believe it or not, I bought the entire
Battenkill outfit in 1974 for $212. That included the two tip rod, CFO
III reel with spare spool, and floating and sinking line. Thirty odd
years later that'll buy you a couple of tanks of gas and a carton of
smokes.

Pretty cool. It's amazing what 'boo has been through with the FFing
community. I look at old bamboo rod invoices, notes, catalogs, etc.,
and it fascinates me as to what 'boo has been through. From, basically,
the only material for rods with prices probably on relative par with
rods today, to a "yesterday's technology" with giveaway prices, to a
return-to-favor and prices in the stratosphere. When looked at from an
economic standpoint, it is an interesting, at least to me, slideshow on
the changes in what others will trade monetarily for the labor of others
and what people feel they can demand for that labor, and when you
consider what a labor of love it is to build even a merely-decent
one...to digress, that is one of the things I always thought George
forgot when he started down the "mass-produced" road...anyway...at what
price art?

TC,
R
and BTW, any idea, for both Opie's info and my own, what Orvis charged
for a refinish circa 1970?

No Idea on the refinish cost. At the time I bought the Battenkill, cane
was enjoying a return to popularity, and the rod shop at Orvis was
straight out, so I expect it might have been a bit pricey in 1970
dollars.