Yuku free message boards

AG,

I have a G.F. 702 just like it, right down to the little "4.1" inked next to the hook keeper wraps. Your rod is in considerably better shape. Mine is worn around the edges, some of the wraps aren't original, and the grip is completely loose and spins around the rod blank. Because of the loose grip, I haven't test cast the rod.

I don't have any information for faux bamboo glass rods in the Wiki because I don't have any pre-1954 catalogs. I think this rod and the other faux bamboo painted Heddon rods were pre-1954, very early fiberglass (Vic Johnson's book indicates Heddon began building glass rods in 1950). For one thing, our rods have nickel silver ferrules and Heddon cane rod style reel seats. The Heddon Pals I've seen have aluminum ferrules and a lesser grade of reelseat (Superlatives excepted). The labels on the faux bamboo models were hand lettered and the Pals and subsequent rods were all decaled.

I compared the G.F. 702 side by side with a 7'6" #70 Deluxe Pal. The two rods appear to flex the same way and have the same guide layout. I suspect the rods were made on very similar rod blanks. But the G.F. 702 is 0.30 oz heavier (4.40 oz vs 4.10 for the Pal), perhaps due to all that paint. The balance point of the G.F. 702 is further toward the tip than the Pal also.


Tom

Heddon, Phillipson, Montague, and even Shakespeare were all building on their established cane rods with their fiberglass models. Conolon and Pacific Laminates (Silaflex) on the other hand were upstart companies that built their market share in fairly short order. Of the two, Conolon (eventually Garcia) grabbed a larger percentage of the market. In the long run, I think Fenwick was the greatest competitor because they entered the business later than the rest but still managed to claw their way up and dominate the high end of the market until graphite came along.


Tom