Milwards Matchcraft?
Posted: Thu Jul 27, 2017 12:18 pm
Hello,
I'm wondering if someone here can help me please by confirming whether the rod described below is actually what it says it is - namely a Milwards Matchcraft.
I recently purchased it for a few pounds out of curiosity as with my limited experience I'd not seen a Milwards rod like it.
It is a 3 piece rod with butt and middle sections made of some very light metal tubing with a split cane top. Each section is approximately 43" long, the cork handle is approx. 17.25" long. The rod weighs 10 oz. The reel fittings are identical to those on a Floatcraft rod I have. It has a faded green bag.
The Butt cap has Milwards, Made In England, engraved on it and the butt section has the Milwards and Matchcraft logos and the number 152(?)15 on the opposite side.
The butt and tip rings are lined, the butt ring has been rewhipped at some time in the past. The rest of the guides are high bells (which I'm replacing). Virtually all of the whippings use (probably) white and black jasper which is the same as on other Milwards rods I have.
Each of the tubular sections are comprised of two pieces of tube, one set inside of the other with binding over the step down in diameter. Both tubular sections do flex.
The cane top section is straight and has no delamination - it is a similar colour and quality to that on other Milwards rods I have - slightly finer than on my Floatcraft.
The ferrules are in good order and the three sections now fit together well and I think it will make a usable rod for the smaller species - one of my grandsons has already claimed it for himself.
I am just starting to refurbish it which should be a very simple rewhip and new guides. I will probably just wire wool the cane section and re-varnish rather than strip it completely and also put a couple of coats of varnish over the logos and number.
I would be most grateful if someone could please confirm if this rod is a Milwards Matchcraft and, if so, provide me with a bit more information as to when it was made, what it is made out of etc
Many thanks,
Geoff
I'm wondering if someone here can help me please by confirming whether the rod described below is actually what it says it is - namely a Milwards Matchcraft.
I recently purchased it for a few pounds out of curiosity as with my limited experience I'd not seen a Milwards rod like it.
It is a 3 piece rod with butt and middle sections made of some very light metal tubing with a split cane top. Each section is approximately 43" long, the cork handle is approx. 17.25" long. The rod weighs 10 oz. The reel fittings are identical to those on a Floatcraft rod I have. It has a faded green bag.
The Butt cap has Milwards, Made In England, engraved on it and the butt section has the Milwards and Matchcraft logos and the number 152(?)15 on the opposite side.
The butt and tip rings are lined, the butt ring has been rewhipped at some time in the past. The rest of the guides are high bells (which I'm replacing). Virtually all of the whippings use (probably) white and black jasper which is the same as on other Milwards rods I have.
Each of the tubular sections are comprised of two pieces of tube, one set inside of the other with binding over the step down in diameter. Both tubular sections do flex.
The cane top section is straight and has no delamination - it is a similar colour and quality to that on other Milwards rods I have - slightly finer than on my Floatcraft.
The ferrules are in good order and the three sections now fit together well and I think it will make a usable rod for the smaller species - one of my grandsons has already claimed it for himself.
I am just starting to refurbish it which should be a very simple rewhip and new guides. I will probably just wire wool the cane section and re-varnish rather than strip it completely and also put a couple of coats of varnish over the logos and number.
I would be most grateful if someone could please confirm if this rod is a Milwards Matchcraft and, if so, provide me with a bit more information as to when it was made, what it is made out of etc
Many thanks,
Geoff