TFF Initiative - The TFF Brass Spreader
Posted: Sun Dec 30, 2018 1:53 pm
TFF Group - Brass Spreader Initiative
Most users of vintage and vintage-style fishing tackle prefer teardrop-shaped ash-hooped landing nets. Several new makers have such things on offer, and many enthusiasts attempt to make their own. Although the process of making is time-consuming it’s not really very difficult, and with the breadth of information available on this forum it is within the scope of most people to achieve.
The great hurdle for most would-be landing-net makers is to acquire a tasteful, light and efficient brass spreader. Many of us have started with blocks of brass and filed away for hours and hours, with varying results. They all do the job, but without the lightness of touch and aesthetic perfection of the 1930s originals. Back then, Farlows made what we now call the Crabtree net (although the net design pre-dated the eponymous Crabtree Net by decades).
Twenty-five years ago Edward spotted the opening market (essentially, being created within the coarse fishing world by Chris.) and began his rod making business. The ‘Crabtree Net’ was a natural extension of that style. Edward cleverly used much-the-same shape used by Farlows, but reversed the attachment of the ash frame to the spreader by tapping the metal to accept countersunk machine screws: so much better than wood screws for this application, provided a fine thread is used. The wood of pre-war Farlow-style nets almost always split at that point, and surviving old nets often bear home-repair bindings, or replacement ends scarfed-in, more in hope than expectation. Edward’s system is much, much better.
My suggestion is that TFF assemble a bulk order that would make a spreader casting order viable. I don’t know how many would be required to reduce the price to an acceptable level of (say) £30 each, but I expect there is a well-connected member here who can say. Professional landing net makers might want fifty for stock. Net making is fun, so I expect there would be multiple orders from some enthusiasts. The same spreader size is perfectly adequate for all sizes of hoop, so there is a case for making three sizes to suit different angling outings.
As to specification – I would prefer bronze to brass: it threads well, is stronger and stiffer but it can be slightly heavier. Bronze would be better if the final design agreed were to be small enough: it is enormously strong so the spreaders wouldn’t need to be heavily built. I think Edward’s 1990s versions were made from bronze, and if they were they were more than adequate for any size of hoop. In fact roach-sized nets don’t need three points of attachment, so can be cut down to reduce weight and look more appropriate on a smaller hoop.
I don’t think lilies need to be gilded. The original Farlows-cum-Edward design is smallish, subtle, and tasteful. Visually, I much prefer it to the sculpted design Edward (and Paul Cooke) used later. It’s also probably as light in weight as any universal spreader can be.
I’d take five, maybe ten. Might other members be interested? Maybe more importantly, is there that well-connected member who might lead this initiative. I must admit, I know nothing about the processes, and no one who does. I’m sure someone would volunteer his Farlow or Barder net spreader as a model to copy. Someone just whispered 3D printer casting to me.
(Following which might be the knotless-net bulk order initiative.)
W.
Most users of vintage and vintage-style fishing tackle prefer teardrop-shaped ash-hooped landing nets. Several new makers have such things on offer, and many enthusiasts attempt to make their own. Although the process of making is time-consuming it’s not really very difficult, and with the breadth of information available on this forum it is within the scope of most people to achieve.
The great hurdle for most would-be landing-net makers is to acquire a tasteful, light and efficient brass spreader. Many of us have started with blocks of brass and filed away for hours and hours, with varying results. They all do the job, but without the lightness of touch and aesthetic perfection of the 1930s originals. Back then, Farlows made what we now call the Crabtree net (although the net design pre-dated the eponymous Crabtree Net by decades).
Twenty-five years ago Edward spotted the opening market (essentially, being created within the coarse fishing world by Chris.) and began his rod making business. The ‘Crabtree Net’ was a natural extension of that style. Edward cleverly used much-the-same shape used by Farlows, but reversed the attachment of the ash frame to the spreader by tapping the metal to accept countersunk machine screws: so much better than wood screws for this application, provided a fine thread is used. The wood of pre-war Farlow-style nets almost always split at that point, and surviving old nets often bear home-repair bindings, or replacement ends scarfed-in, more in hope than expectation. Edward’s system is much, much better.
My suggestion is that TFF assemble a bulk order that would make a spreader casting order viable. I don’t know how many would be required to reduce the price to an acceptable level of (say) £30 each, but I expect there is a well-connected member here who can say. Professional landing net makers might want fifty for stock. Net making is fun, so I expect there would be multiple orders from some enthusiasts. The same spreader size is perfectly adequate for all sizes of hoop, so there is a case for making three sizes to suit different angling outings.
As to specification – I would prefer bronze to brass: it threads well, is stronger and stiffer but it can be slightly heavier. Bronze would be better if the final design agreed were to be small enough: it is enormously strong so the spreaders wouldn’t need to be heavily built. I think Edward’s 1990s versions were made from bronze, and if they were they were more than adequate for any size of hoop. In fact roach-sized nets don’t need three points of attachment, so can be cut down to reduce weight and look more appropriate on a smaller hoop.
I don’t think lilies need to be gilded. The original Farlows-cum-Edward design is smallish, subtle, and tasteful. Visually, I much prefer it to the sculpted design Edward (and Paul Cooke) used later. It’s also probably as light in weight as any universal spreader can be.
I’d take five, maybe ten. Might other members be interested? Maybe more importantly, is there that well-connected member who might lead this initiative. I must admit, I know nothing about the processes, and no one who does. I’m sure someone would volunteer his Farlow or Barder net spreader as a model to copy. Someone just whispered 3D printer casting to me.
(Following which might be the knotless-net bulk order initiative.)
W.
