otherwise nice Orvis 1874 reels in original walnut boxes but missing their handles. I had one that I acquired last year, this one is a customer's - just the motivation I needed to repair both reels.
I hand filed the brass crank like the original and turned the grasp from hard rubber. The spindle is steel and shaped to match the original. Richard Lodge lent me one of his reels with an original handle to use as a model. Once assembled, the piece was nickel plated and lightly distressed to match the reel. Here is the result:
Nice, Michael! Say, if you (or anyone reading this!) happen to run into one of those original boxes with no reel, please grab it for me! I have a very nice early reel with engraving on the foot by Orvis, but it's in a reproduction box...would love to put it in the proper early box!
BUT...I must add that this brings to the front a problem we are grappling with in preparing guidelines for the restoration of reels, to be ready for publication this summer. It's a beautiful handle and it's great to take such a wonderful piece of history and make it "whole" again. However, how do you mark/indicate that the handle is a replacement? Even though it is a great job and looks like the original, I know I would be livid to find that I paid full boat for an original reel that had the handle replaced. Michael, i have no doubt that if you were to sell that reel, you would disclose the handle history, as would your friend. However, we are but caretakers of all this tackle and it WILL be passed down to future caretakers, one way or the other. In this case, perhaps initials and/or a date on the back of the handle would do it without being obtrusive.
I would be interested to hear others thoughts on this rather sticky issue!
John, if you've read some of my other posts, you know that I am very careful about this. These have my initials "MH" stamped on the backside of the handle where it can only be seen when removed from the reel. I try to put my initials or some other mark on all replacement parts I make. Screws and other tiny parts are an exception simply because they are too small. I haven't come up with a good solution for those. I do sometimes file an "X" on the end of the screw but who would ever see that. Even marking parts though, if the buyer does not look, they would not know. Of course, I would tell any buyer but lets say that buyer passes the reel on and doesn't.
What about taking parts off a parts reel to put on a better condition reel that's missing a part? It's still not original but it is a part made by the original maker.
Frankly, there is no good answer. This is not unique to reels either, basically any collectable has similar challenges once the value of the item goes beyond some threshold. I used to collect antique woodworking tools and saw many examples of planes with replacement irons that the owner insisted were original. He might have thought they were.
Even a well informed buyer with lots of experience can be taken. The higher the value of the reel, the greater the risk of potential tampering.
Good answer and I'm glad to hear you've thought this through.
Re the replacement parts, that's yet again part of the dialogue that will be in the Guidelines we are trying to set forth. The consensus is that using parts from a beater reel of the same type/mode/vintage is acceptable, as are use of parts from kits that are available for many brands of reels. Further, you have the issue that certain parts are interchangeable between reel models...identical...so it comes down to the point that even if you decided that was "wrong" at some level, it would not be detectable nor something that could be policed. Fabricating replacement parts is a whole different level and the path you have chosen is certainly a "best" one for those parts.
As you say, there is no perfect answer to this and it is a problem with every collectible...we certainly are as pure as the driven snow compared to other areas. I will never forget the conversation I had with a well-known and respected restorer, now gone, where he related making repairs for many famous galleries and auctions (not fishing-related) where he had to sign a document declaring that he would not disclose that he made such repairs at any time in the future! ...and that is considered accepted practice!
I have a friend who is a museum restorationist. In some circles, even cleaning an item is taboo.
At the end of the day, these are old things! They are going to be well used, dirty, broken, missing parts, etc. If the item is extremely rare, it probably shouldn't be touched - missing parts and all. If it is extremely common and is intended to be used, then by all means replace the parts (I plan to use my Orvis reel, that's why I made the handle). If it is somewhere in-between, it's a judgement call. The closer to the rare end of the spectrum, the higher the value and the less I would advocate changing/fixing/cleaning it. I have an entire box full of original Philbrook & Payne reel parts. I also have a Bi-metal that is totally beat (I mean really far gone, decomposed, broken side plates, etc). I certainly could restore this reel with all original parts - including the Leonard stamped side plate. I might even be able to do it well below its current market value, so I would, in theory, be able to sell the reel for a profit. So, what about using parts from the original maker? Is that better than donated parts from a beater reel? In this case, I have a beater reel that I could bring back to life. I won't do it though because in this case, the reel is out at the rare end of the spectrum.
I think its good that we are creating a guideline for this. It will help keep honest folks honest.
