MKIV S/U

[Paul D]

Shame about the tip letting go like that, seems a strange place to break? I do wonder if it's suffered a mishap in the past?

If you look at the thickness of the cane you can see they have shaved a lot off to get the tip ring to fit which will weaken the tip quite a lot. It looks like they've used the same tip ring as the Mk1v Carp and Avon.

Interesting stuff, so are you saying that's how it left the factory? Hope Julian sees this, he has a almost unused example, being interesting to see a close up of his tip...... Julian over to you sir.

[Snape]

Nigel, if you want to replace the reel bands I have a pair of originals your welcome to. Shame about the tip letting go like that, seems a strange place to break? I do wonder if it's suffered a mishap in the past?

Thanks, Paul. I am not a fan of these red ones so would be happy to buy yours off you.

[Ljm183]

Shame about the tip letting go like that, seems a strange place to break? I do wonder if it's suffered a mishap in the past?

If you look at the thickness of the cane you can see they have shaved a lot off to get the tip ring to fit which will weaken the tip quite a lot. It looks like they've used the same tip ring as the Mk1v Carp and Avon.

Interesting stuff, so are you saying that's how it left the factory? Hope Julian sees this, he has a almost unused example, being interesting to see a close up of his tip...... Julian over to you sir.

Paul D
I think it might only be the late version four rods that have the tip shaved to take the smaller tip ring.

[Snape]

So looking at close up it does appear that the tip has been whittled down to fit a tip which would probably fit a standard MKIV. This has weakened the cane and it has partially failed.
When the ring is in the bent position it is possible to see some bamboo fibres but I would estimate most of the tip is still attached so it only bends so far. After leaving it in the bent position for a few minutes it returns to normal by itself.
Does anyone know where I could obtain a tip ring which will fit it properly (annoyingly I had one for years which probably would have fitted but I got rid of it a few months ago! )
Thanks, chaps.

[Julian]

I see my name has been mentioned a few times in this post - only just reading it now - I 'll get my two S/U B.James MKIV's out and have a look , measure, and post up photos. I think the one Snape has is the same length and the last section betw een the pennultimate ring and the the last looks the same as both of mine.
I'll post up details and photos but probably not until tomorrow or Monday.

[PershoreHarrier]

I have a B.James MkIV and a MkIV S/U and am sure that the tip ring on the S/U is much more beefier than on the MkIV - I will see if I can get some photos of the rods although at the moment posting via Tinypic seems very hit and miss.

[Paul D]

Shame about the tip letting go like that, seems a strange place to break? I do wonder if it's suffered a mishap in the past?

If you look at the thickness of the cane you can see they have shaved a lot off to get the tip ring to fit which will weaken the tip quite a lot. It looks like they've used the same tip ring as the Mk1v Carp and Avon.

Interesting stuff, so are you saying that's how it left the factory? Hope Julian sees this, he has a almost unused example, being interesting to see a close up of his tip...... Julian over to you sir.

Paul D
I think it might only be the late version four rods that have the tip shaved to take the smaller tip ring.

Wonder why they saw fit to do that? Beef up a design then build into it a potential weak spot, strange.

[Julian]

Here are the specific details and photos of my two B.James S/U MKIV rods:

The first one I bought was purchased three years ago via a member of this forum who happens to fish with the angling author Jon Berry.
It was in excellent condition and I only had to pay Jon the bargain price of £125, and have used it frequently since then.

The second one I purchased as part of a three-rod B.James set - the MKIV carp, the MKIV Avon and the S/U MKIV from a another member of this forum. They are all in 'as new' condition and the MKIV carp has never been used. I have not used any of the three-rod set yet, but I do intend to.

Both the S/U MKIVs are very similar, both have the London, England inscriptions, both have handles about 28.5 inches long, neither has a hook-keeper or shoulder , both have doughnut ends to the handles. Both are fairly dark cane of a very similar thickness

The one that's in 'as new' condition is 10ft 2.25 ins when assembled, the other one is 10ft 2.75 ins when assembled.
Both have butt sections longer than the tip section, and both as you can see from the photos have almost identical end sections and end-eyes.

The 'as new' rod is the top one in each photo:









Just to add further, the B. James S/U MKIV rods do not have a standard test-curve. It is often said that they are 2lb TC (as opposed to 1.5 lb for the MKIV carp), but it appears that the test curves vary from about 2lb to somewhere nearer 4lb, as anglers who have these will tell you. I would estimate the test curve of the one I use regularly to be about 3lb.
Also the thickness of the cane on the S/U MKIVs varies - the one I use regularly is considerably thicker than the one that Pershore Harrier has ( we compared them at a TFF day).

With regard to dating B.James rods, the most accurate way for the MKIV carp and MKIV Avon is by the inscriptions - Ealing pre 1956, London 1956-57, England 1958 onwards ( to as late as mid 1960's maybe?).
Handle shape is not a good indicator - I have a England MKIV Avon ( 1958 onwards) but it has a trumpet handle, not doughnut as is indicated in info showing year by handle shape.

Its more difficult to date the S/U MKIV's. I think the Ealing period S/Us are very rare as the S/U MKIV was a later addition. Also no one seems to know when they started making or stopped making the S/U MK IV's

Finally - a bit of a sideline from the main topic, the S/U I use regularly has been through some battles with carp in very tight snaggy swims, and last September after the rod was bent rather severely by a carp going under a thick willow bough just above the water level, the butt eye was wrenchhed out of the whippings.
As a 'temporary fix' I super-glued it back on - see two photos below. I have used it a number of times since and it appears to have no effect on performance, but at some stage I obviously need it 'repaired' properly - ie just the whippings removed for that eye, replaced , and then revarnished.
Who should I ask to do the job?

[Snape]

Thanks for that Julian
I was shocked by the stiffness of the S/U I bought and it seems pretty similar to the Denis Pye 700 pike rod I have.
I have sent the tip section to Andrew Davis for a once over involving some rings being replaced, a couple of intermediates re-doing and the tip ring being fixed.
Andrew is excellent so why not PM him about fixing your butt ring?

[Paul D]

Very interesting Julian, I still think about the trio of as new rods you acquired, once in a lifetimes opportunity, why not have a go at re-whipping that ring yourself? If not ask Dr Cane (wallys cast) , I can never get my head around the forces and mechanics involved when a large fish is hooked, fancy the butt ring letting go, the last thing I would have expected to happen.