Help identifying a Milwards Rod plus other ramblings

[SeanM]

If the numbers are always sequential then it's post 1953 as the serial number on my Flycraft is 3655 and I have provenance showing it to be a 1953 rod, or at least one sold around that time.

[Nobby]

Ha ha Haydn!


Well there's nothing like it in my '56 or '62 catalogues. It does look un-restored though.

Perhaps it's pre-war after all?


Sheet cork is pretty rare post-war, apart from a certain Allcocks rod that stuck with it throughout.



I'm uncertain of the significance of the black lozenge behind the crest on older Milward's rods and it maybe that early rods don't all have it.

[PDuffield]

Thanks Nobby, I guess it will have to remain a bit of a mystery which is no bad thing really. I'll post some pictures of the rod when I've finished it.

I'd normally strip all of the varnish down to the bare cane, but I've looked over the rod carefully and the varnish all seems sound so I think this time I'm going to try just cleaning it up and putting on the new rings to try to keep it as close as I can to its current appearance.

Haydn, glad you liked the blog and thanks for the link to the similar rod you found.

Paul

[Haydn Clarke]

I don't know, Nobby. You pay a man a compliment, you bow at the alter of his greatness, and then he thinks you're taking it. What has the world come to, I ask?


Sean, where abouts in the Milwards Cronology does my Swimversa, serial number 7739 come? Must admit I did'nt realise they were serial numbers, rather I thought a model number.

Paul, I had similar thoughts regarding the above mentioned rod. The varnish was really not that bad, just some rusty guides and, of course, a new tip. I decided to strip all down regardless as having no inters it should, in theory, be a lot quicker. However, I'm agonising over thread like my missus agonises over shoes and handbags. I think, in the interests of keeping the rod kosher that I am going to do it in the black and red, despite not likeing it.

[PDuffield]

Haydn, I know what you mean about thread, I just can't bring myself to use a different thread colour to the original on a 'classic' rod. I know it's a ridiculous position to take, but I've even passed up bidding on a rod that I knew was going to need a full restoration if I didn't like the cosmetics because I knew I would never be quite happy with the rod if I restored it in a different colour.

I'm better with less collectable and un-named rods though which I usually whip in red like many Allcocks rods, or more recently burgundy like a Mk IV whatever colour was originally used.

Paul

[SeanM]

It's slightly confusing this! I always assumed that the numbers on the Milwards rods were serial numbers. Here's the one on my Flycraft:



If they are serial numbers then my rod is the 3655th rod they made and yours is the 7739th Hayden. This looks logical as mine is an early 50s rod and yours is around 1960 (?).

Mine hasn't got the black lozenge:



Maybe they were pre-war rods Nobby?

As Nobby says, the furniture on Paul's rod looks pretty pre-war to me and there is certainly nothing remotely like it in the early 50s catalogues, but the serial number , if it is one, points to a mid to late 50s rod. I still have a hunch that this was a special, possibly a worming rod which would explaing the slightly anachronistic fittings for the serial number and also the lack of a name. But then, I thought that the specials didn't have the Milwards logo.....

[MGs]

Some nice rods there guys. Pretty hard to come by. Very few from the usual sources. I'm guessing they fish well, being a favoured rod by Bernard Venables. There is an unrestored Featherlite on ebay at the moment at, but this is too similar to a couple of other rods I already have

[Nobby]

BV has been pictured using a Swimversa and definitely owned a Craftversa, but I don't know if he used other Milwards rods or not. The Featherlite and Senior Featherlite are made from Spanish reed and it isn't the strongest of stuff, indeed the Milwards catalogues carry a warning that these rods are not to be used for big fish. I guess they were aimed at the matchmen and silvers man.

Nevertheless they were top of the maker's range pricewise, which rather refutes the old story that the cost of making the Swimversa 'broke' Milwards, when the match rods cost more. Both rods were offered for a number of years which doesn't tally with a company on its uppers due to one product line, more likely surely, they were struggling against cheap imports from abroad across the whole spectrum?

Perhaps if they'd have looked at fibreglass?