How many of these have you seen?

[Jim Schottenham]

Just trying to get a feel for how many of these very early rod/reel combo's exist in collections. Thanks to ORCA's own Dr. John Elder, the tired old wood received a face-lift, so don't let the finish fool you - this is a pre-1900 handle with a small 2" diameter spool. The "star" shaped brass spool retainer that is flush with the wood is just awesome. Oh, and there is a constant click too.
Who has one or has seen another?




Jim

[BAP-62]

Never have seen one, but that's neat!

[RAM]

English? Beautiful item Jim! And nice work Deke (as usual!)

Bad Bob

[Steve]

One or two, depending on whether or not the photos I sent you showed the "before" version or another combo altogether.

[reelsmith.]

Love it Jim !

Can you post a picture of the reel handle more close up ..it looks pretty cool !

Thanks for showing us ...and congrats !

Dean.

[Jim Schottenham]

Bob - yeah, it could be English, but I'm leaning towards American.
Steve - you were privy to the "before" photos with the tired looking wood when I got this some 10 years back.
Dean - as requested:

[Steve]

Jim, that explains why I found them in the privy. Time flies when you're transferring stuff from computer to computer. Glad they survived the trips.

[reelsmith.]

Very Nice !

Thanks Jim.

Dean.

[RonG]

Jim, Do you know what wood the handle is made of? It looks like Mahogany or Cherry.

[Mike N]

Jim, Do you know what wood the handle is made of? It looks like Mahogany or Cherry.

Ron, the short black pores are, I think, a giveaway that it’s mahogany. Here is a mahogany sample photo from a museum website vs. our rod, below.

[oc1]

It looks more like Barbara wood to me. Similar to mahogany but more elastic and not as brittle as mahogany. It was more commonly used for hard wood rods too.
-steve

[sdlehr]

It looks more like Barbara wood to me. Similar to mahogany but more elastic and not as brittle as mahogany. It was more commonly used for hard wood rods too.
-steve

Steve, did your spell check make Barbara from Bethabara? The only Barbara wood I find was an artist. And apparently a good one.

[joe klaus]

Beautiful combo Jim! Thanks for posting.

[Steve]

"Bethabara" was Malcolm Shipley's trade name for the wood products, e.g., rods, that he manufactured, not for a particular wood. Listen to him aver:

[Mike N]

It looks more like Barbara wood to me. Similar to mahogany but more elastic and not as brittle as mahogany. It was more commonly used for hard wood rods too.
-steve

From vintagefishingtackle.net:


WOOD RODS

“Early Wooden Rods can be found on this page and quite a few different types of wood were used in their manufacture.

Greenheart was the most popular and commonly used rod making material at that time but woods like Lancewood were commonly used for top sections as they were less likely to splinter than Greenheart when under pressure.

Some very early rods were made from woods such as Mahogany, Hickory and Elm.”

[john elder]

I assumed it was greenheart. As Steve V. reports above, Bethabara was a made up name and I thought I had read it was actually greenheart or a close relative. As picked up by Steve (Oct1) and Mike, it has a close grain much like Mahogany and may in fact, be the latter...cute little piece of history..we just have to figure out whose!

The reel part was not really amenable to breaking down without serious excavation and I don't think it was ever meant to be opened....the clicker remains a mystery!

[sdlehr]

I assumed it was greenheart.

Yeah, but I believe the problem is that each country or region had a wood they called "greeheart", a wood they called "lancewood", etc. They varied from region to region.... hence the need for Linnaeus' taxonomy names to avoid confusion (Quoting Steve (Oc1) from another post on this forum or perhaps another). I've seen just in the last hour references to Washaba and Ipe being the same as "Bethabara". This has been debated for nigh on a century now, I believe.....

[Steve]

This has been debated for nigh on a century now

Debate? Washaba and Bethabara are the same British Guianian wood. Ipe is a generic term for Brazilian catalpas.

[sdlehr]

Debate? Washaba and Bethabara are the same British Guianian wood. Ipe is a generic term for Brazilian catalpas.

So what about this Ipe, is it also Bethabara as it states? It is a Tabebuia, which might be a Catalpa (family Bignoniaceae) but it certainly doesn't appear straightforward and clear-cut which is which to me... This Tabebuia listing calls it Ipe and Surinam greenheart. Steve, you may have it figured out in your head, but it's still a mishmash of wood to me.
As an aside, in my search, I discovered that those trees out in the park outside the back gate are Catalpas. There's also Tabebuias out there. They bloom beautiful yellow flowers in the spring that fall all over lawns and driveways for a good few weeks. I'm growing Calcutta Cane (Dendrocalamus strictus) in the front yard. It's south Florida, lots of stuff grows.

[Alan Baracco]

Folks,

Great discussion. This is the Shipley US Trademark from 1907 (he had two, one without the fish). Claimed a first use date of March 15, 1882, as Steve's paragraph indicates.

Alan

[Steve]

this Ipe, is it also Bethabara as it states?

I would ignore "info" from an ad and go by the more scientific info in the old excerpt. "Common names" doesn't mean they're accurate names.

[oc1]

Sorry, I intended to say Bethabara. No excuses, I just screwed up. Latin name - Handroanthus serratifolius , formerly Tabebuia serratifolia formerly Bignonia serratifolia. Family - Bignoniaceae. Common names - ironwood, ipe, washaba or washiba wood, bethabara wood, noibe wood (selected bethabara), yellow trumpet flower tree, yellow poui, Surinam greenheart, wassiba, and others.

It is readily available today in the US under the name ipe (it rhymes with ebay). The only hardwood I know that can make a fine 1/16 inch tip section that is strong enough to fish with.

The problem with sorting out types of wood used for rods is the reliance on common names instead of the Linnaeus nomenclature.
-steve

[sdlehr]

"Common names" doesn't mean they're accurate names.

That was my point, and the source of all the confusion I was trying to address. Maybe "debate" was the wrong term.