Wes Jordan, a piece of Bamboo rod history

[ShadowCaster]

In the history of split bamboo fly rod industry, there are several names that were indisputable leaders that set the trend. Wesley D Jordan is certainly one of those names.
He went down in history as a truly innovative bamboo rodmakers who had a major impact on the bamboo fly rod as we know it today. Jordan was involved with producing bamboo rods for more than 50 years, first with the Cross Rod Co. of Lynn, Massachusetts, then with South Bend in Indiana and finally with Orvis in Manchester, Vermont. His innovative genius and natural talent for craftsmanship turned all three companies into recognized leaders in the bamboo rod business.

In 1939 Wes Jordan went to work for Charles F. Orvis Co. in Manchester, Vermont. He worked for Orvis until his retirement in the early 1970s, during which time he helped resurrect the company and take it to the forefront in rod production. During his tenure at Orvis he developed the process for making impregnated rods, and designed and patented the famous Orvis screw lock reel seat.

The pinnacle of Jordan’s rod is none other than the Wes Jordan series of custom order rods offered while he was at the helm at Orvis. This series of rods are available on custom order only. The rod owner’s name will be inscribed on the butt section and the owner’s initial is engraved on the reel seat. The owner’s palm size is also recorded so that the thumb and palm imprint on the cork grip is customized for maximum comfort. Cane selection is done by Jordan himself and only the best grade is used. Jordan will personally mill the strips and complete the impregnation process. The rod always comes in the signature leather bound rod tube with an aluminium core.

Beside the 6-1/2ft Rocky Mountain model, the most sort after and collectible taper is none other than the 7-1/2ft 3-7/8oz 2/2 rod rated for a 6wt line. The serial number #68888 dates this rod to 1973. Wes Jordan rods in 7ft 6in are highly sort after.

Jordan’s taper are medium to medium slow action, but possess lot of concealed power. I was able to cast a #8 deer hair popper out to 80ft on a WF5 line. Yet, the rod tip is delicate enough to cast with just the leader outside the tip top. Because of the impregnation process, Wes Jordan rods are known to be bullet proof and can take a lot of abuse. Landing the 9lb foul tempered Kalui in the picture below is a rough job for any rod. But the 35 year old Wes Jordan did it with dignity like a true gentleman!

[Chee Yung]

Thanks for you Rod Story Tan Yik !

Makes me wanna eat the bridle leather rod tube for making fun of impregnated rods in my last post ;D ;D... makes me laugh when the running joke at banjo's Classic Fly Rod Forum is that Orvis Rods will be recovered in the future when all others have turned to dust... and Orvis will still remain the oldest flyrod company in the world!!! ;D ;D

Beautiful catches again!

BTW is the Jordan rod still in your possesion? It'll be sad if that nice piece of history leaves our little red dot .

Cheers
CY

[ShadowCaster]

cyk said:

BTW is the Jordan rod still in your possesion? It'll be sad if that nice piece of history leaves our little red dot .

Sad to say, the Jordan is on consignment as we speak for something else....... but who knows, the longevity of such rod may see it travel back to this part of the world again?

[Chee Yung]

OH No! ..sad indeed

BUT .... I'm sure your collection is more than just the Jordan ...so please astound us with another rod story ;D ;D ;D

Waiting with excitement

Cheers
CY

[ShadowCaster]

cyk said:

OH No! ..sad indeed

BUT .... I'm sure your collection is more than just the Jordan ...so please astound us with another rod story ;D ;D ;D

Waiting with excitement

Cheers
CY

I guess I'm more of a Bamboo fisher and not much of a Bamboo collector. I take a rather utilitarian approach in determining the value of any fly rod. I judge a rod mainly by how much I enjoy casting and fishing with it.

As I fished with the Jordan, I gradually discovered that my Type A medium fast casting temperment was simply unworthy to realize the full potential of Jordan's medium slow taper. While the rod's monetary value had gone up within the 2 years that I own it, its fishing value to me was actually not that high.

While I am awed by the craftsmanship and historical value of classic cane, I personally feel that as a fisherman, the rod would not mean much to me unless it elevates my fishing enjoyment.

I never appreciated what John Mills wrote until realizing this.

Another Jordan collector friend of mine (a Singaporean graphic designer) flinched when he heard that I fished daily with the Jordan for a month and took a mama Kalui and some medium size Toman on it. (Yep, I wake up 5:30 am every day so that I can fish for an hour and still be at work on time by 8am) He keeps his Jordan behind glass except on rare occassions where he lawn cast with it. I figure that when Wes built those rod half a century ago, he meant to build a fishing tool and not a display piece.

Nevertheless, I fully understand the joy of a collector whenever one acquires a rare classic specimen. The burden of preserving cane history is an important one!

If I ever get my filthy fingers on an original Gillum or Dickerson, I'll probably be tempted to fish the heck out of it until it withers ...... then trade it in for another fishable rod..... But I suspect I have neither the pocket nor the heart to face such temptations.

Thanks goodness that Baby Catskill is with you!

My next story is probably not due until Gary send me the 3rd Gen GF.

[Chee Yung]

Hi TY,

I must have guessed wrong when I thought you have an original Payne(101?) and a Leonard 50 among others. I thought you sold the AJ replica as you already have the original and that you specified the AJ hollowbuilt to be like the Leonard 50 as you prefer that action. based on one you already own.... sorry if i misunderstood your postings

Imagine.. I even thought the Jordan was bought off ebay sometime late last year when you posted some authentication questions at Clarks... how blur of me

Indeed I fish all the cane rods when possible including that Catskill... it is just that the only camera I own is the sony handycam and it is hell to lug around for 5.00am marsh garden/pandan raids!... too expensive to let it have a drink.

Till your GG7633 and my photos make an appearance.... enjoy your Thramer ;D

BTW, I was guilty of trying to 'convert' JimboZ in the other Brooks post... not really refering to you as you 'converted' ME! hahahaha ;D

Cheers
CY

[ShadowCaster]

Yikes! Apologies for the misunderstanding!

I actually did had an original pre-fire Leonard 50 in the late nineties. Heck of a rod and I fished the soul out of it. But it was starting to show signs of age and I liquidated it before it became a total lost. Its somewhere is Japan now...........

The Wes Jordan was bought from a dealer, Coldwater Collectible. The questions on Clark's was to ensure that I represent the rod correctly on eBay.

Never had the pocket for a fishable original Payne except for a Salmon rod by Ed Payne that probably would not survive one session on water. It did cast a 9wt >90ft on the lawn. My 100, 101, 197, 201 were all repros from AJ.

Let's continue to work on Jimmy......... ;D

[Chee Yung]

Sure TY .... anyway to rig a 4D draw ;D

Wonder what John Mills wrote... must've been rather philosophical or incredibly down to earth... either way still profound to me

Okay.. with those astounding Paynes, I think you must be the Thramer authority here with Billy being the second Thramerist ;D ;D... any story there???

Cheers
CY

[Admin]

Me?
I am poor in technical datas and the various tapers
just break down my grey matter.
Don't even know what parabolic means until I search the net last week. ;D

I old man already.
Let me catch up with you youngsters slowly. ;D
With my cane. ;D

[Chee Yung]

admin said:

Me?
I am poor in technical datas and the various tapers
just break down my grey matter.
Don't even know what parabolic means until I search the net last week. ;D

I old man already.
Let me catch up with you youngsters slowly. ;D
With my cane. ;D

Dont pretend pretend BT ;D.. just p[ost your thramer and the funny tale FC made up for it and pray AJ doesn't read it wahahahahahaha...aiya just post your boos la ;D... japanese boo also good

Dont wanna play kendo la... I'm a peaceful caniac ;D

Cheers
CY

[xxJiMboZxx]

cyk said:

Sure TY .... anyway to rig a 4D draw ;D
CY

Ha ha ha, thank you very much guys, but as soon as I am ready to aquire a boo... I am sure I will need your advice and help. By the way most of bamboos posted in ebay does not state its weight. How would I get to know? Some of the sellers dun even know much about the rod. Thanks

[Chee Yung]

Hi Jim,

Ebay is a dangerous place to find boos (eventhough you can get great bargains there)... as even experts are conned. Some rod weights are even misrepresented because lower wts (5wt and below) are worth more...

Then again, bamboo is not like graphite and is more medium action, thus allowing 2 to 3 wt categories just like my Brooks which can honestly cast 4wt to 6wt, depending on my own casting skill in modifying the stroke ... even TY and myself cannot tell you accurately about the weight.. the best is to purchase a 'reputable' rod from a good dealer,cast the rod and return it within three days if it is not to your liking..sans shipping cost of course. Meanwhile, TY and I are letting more people try out tapers during Picnics to save cost/ less risk on your side... someone has to do it right?

Till the next session,

Cheers
CY

[xxJiMboZxx]

Hmmm....h yes wat you said is correct, like the one I bid from ebay. The rod looks very nice in the pics and came back wif so thick laquer applied on it making it so heavy. And it a 4 - 5 wt. Wat I really want is a 2 - 3 wt rod. I did not know they had 3wts untill I tried yours. Anyway thank you very much for your advice . ;D

[ShadowCaster]

xxjimbozxx said:

Hmmm....h yes wat you said is correct, like the one I bid from ebay. The rod looks very nice in the pics and came back wif so thick laquer applied on it making it so heavy. And it a 4 - 5 wt. Wat I really want is a 2 - 3 wt rod. I did not know they had 3wts untill I tried yours. Anyway thank you very much for your advice . ;D

Incidentally, the AFTMA line weight categorization is a relatively new phenomenon (1970s) compared to the history of Bamboo fly rods (1870s onwards?).

Rodmakers in the old days are not constraint by categorizing rods in any specific line weight although they have some indication of from rod action. In fact, I doubt even the modern Graphite rod makers had figured out how to do this exactly right.

I penned my thoughts on this some time back in the old forum, and I attach the writeup here for discussion.

This is just my view and by no means the only perspective. Feel free to disagree!

=================================
With fast and stiff action fly rods being the rage in the market today, most rods bought off the shelf would most likely be capable of casting (to a certain extent) one or two line weight above its designation. In fact, some major fly line manufacturers market lines that are half a weight heavier than their designated line weight to “cater for modern fast action graphite rods”.

Why do we need to over-line? Most popular answer seems to be that a higher line weight would “load the rod better”. This seems kind of funny to some people. The reason being that if one prefers fly rods with a particular loading action (eg medium fast) and needs a 5wt rod, then he should go out and get a 5wt rod with a medium fast loading action. Why should one buy a super fast action 5wt rod, load it with 6wt line and “convert” it into a 6wt medium fast action, when what you really want is a medium fast 5wt to start with ? Well, it turns out that things are not as simple as it seems.

I certainly do not know the answer to this question but I’ll give it a shot anyway. Please don’t hesitate to raise the “bullshit” flag if you disagree with any of the following argument.

To address this problem, I think we must first understand what exactly does line weight means to rod and line manufacturers. It turns out the that line weight designation that we are familiar with today was standardize within the industry by the American Fishing Tackle Manufacturer Association (AFTMA) for fly line weight between 1wt to 12wt in the 1970s. The standards for 0wt and those 13wt and above had not been included in this agreement and thus, different manufacturer has different standards for them.

In the industrial standardization process, each line weight is determined by the weight in Grains for the first 30ft of fly line within that line weight. (for us who are used to metric weight measurement, 1 Grain equals to 0.0648 grams) The standardization also allow for certain variation of range of weight of the first 30ft of fly line within any particular line category. The line weights between 1 to 12 is listed as follow :

================================================
Line Wt, Weight of first 30ft of fly line (Grains), Allowable Variation
================================================
1 60 54-66
2 80 74-86
3 100 94-106
4 120 114-126
5 140 134-146
6 160 152-168
7 185 177-193
8 210 202-218
9 240 230-250
10 280 270-290
11 330 318-342
12 380 368-392
=================================================

For example, to be able to legally designate a fly line as a 5wt, the first 30ft of that fly line must weigh between 134-146 grains (8.68g to 9.46g). However, the interpretation of fly rods designation are not so precise and leaves a lot of room for interpretation. AFTMA says that a Xwt fly rod should be able to cast a Xwt line “comfortably”. And what exactly does AFTMA means by “comfortably” is to be interpreted by the millions of fly rods buyers out there. Some rod manufacturer (such as Scott and Orvis) use a “rod rating” or “flex rating” technique where they hang a static weight at the rod tip and see how far the rod will dip to determine if the rod is within a certain weight class. But such technique seems to be the exception rather than the norm.

To complicate matters, we almost never fish with just 30ft of fly line outside of our rod tip. Every feet of extra line outside the rod tip means extra weight that the rod has to handle. This means that rod manufacturers has to anticipate the “normal” casting distance and fishing situation (eg wind conditions, floating or sinking lines in used etc.) that a particular series of fly rods will most likely have to perform so that it can be built for that purpose. Winston used to state in their 2001 catalog the casting distance that each rod was designed for. Unfortunately, casting distance is relative to skills and technique of the caster and most flyfishers that buy the rods usually do not cast as well as rod designers do ! Winston had since removed that casting distance info in their catalog as it had created a lot of un-answered questions in beginners who bought the XTR and complained to Winston that the Winston was lying because they could not cast the 110ft that Winston claimed the XTR was capable of. Bottom line is that you may get a 5wt meant for spring creek fishing like the T&T Paradigm or a 5wt meant for “Technical Casting” like the Sage TCR, while both are meant to cast a line where the first 30ft weights between 8.68g to 9.46g, the Paradigm may not be able to cast more than 60ft of that line because it was built for delicate presentation, but the TCR can be pushed to almost 120ft, and create a splash down large enough to frighten Moby Dick. So much for industrial standards for fly rods ! But do not loose hope. More often than not, one is frequently able to decipher the situation that each fly rod is designed for from the manufacturer’s catalog. Failing which, there are always forums like this one where one can get detail info.

As if that is not enough to create confusion to matters, fly line manufacturers add salt to the wound by coming out with different taper and belly length and line density to meet different fishing conditions, and perhaps also their annual profit margin. Scientific Anglers alone market no less than 20 different taper and line density for a 5wt line. Some SA fly lines are also marketed deliberately outside of the industrial guidelines to meet buyers’ demand; 2 prominent examples are the GPX and the Headstart series from the Mastery line-up where each line is actually half a line weight heavier than the standard. The taper of the line matters as well, depending on your casting habit of how much line one chooses to aerialise during the cast. A long belly taper like the 5wt XXD or the 5wt Steelhead taper will quickly feels like a 6wt with more than 50ft of line in the air. The only line manufacturer that I know of that keeps strictly to the stated standards is Cortland. But even then, belly length and taper cannot be standardize as they are meant to practical situations. And with average fly rods getting faster and stiffer each day, I’ll not be surprised if Cortland breaks it too to keep their market share.

The density of fly line in combination with the front taper also contributes to the confusion as they affect line speed and turn over characteristics. A rod that cast a DT5F beautifully may be a disaster for a WF5S, despite the fact that the first 30ft of both lines weighs the same amount.

With all the variables listed above, the decision to over-line or under-line, in my personal opinion, need to be taken into context with the following considerations :

1. What is the primary situation that my rod is designed/suitable for ?
2. What is the characteristic line speed and typical distance it is capable of ?
3. Do I want to modify these characteristics to meet a specific situation ?
4. Do I want to :
a. Increase(under-line) or Decrease(over-line) line speed ?
b. Improve delicacy of presentation ?
c. Load the rod faster(over-line) or more gradually (under-line)?
d. Cast further or shorter “comfortably” ?

I am certain that I had not answered the question of whether or not one should over-line or un-line a fly rod, but hopefully I had provided some background upon which the revelation may be pondered.

Happy Casting !

=================================

[Chee Yung]

Now that's what I call a fine article about 'reading between the lines' TY ;D...

Anyway, I'm no casting expert but merely to steer this technical/qualitative question back to the most quantitative bamboo... I actually wanted to quote Gierach who once mentioned that bamboo rods were designed primarily for the 'feel' and some manufacturers actually did not even indicate the line wt. I think it is up to the user to find the appropriate line...IMHO, much like all 'magical' artifacts, like famous mythical swords and guns, it is said that the rod finds you and not you finding the rod

Overlining or underlining is also part of that search and we really can't blame the manufacturers for having so many varieties.. for example, if you overline a 5wt TCR like FC does, you may like it because:
1) the balance of the tackle.. the actual fulcrum is varies as different people have different hand sizes, strength in different fingers, actual length of arms etc ( Lefty has really long arms ).
2) the action of tackle... tip action ones like TCR basically translates dynamically to the effective length of the rod and perceived 'weight' of the rod due to the moment arm..eg. a less tippy rod of the same weight actually feels 'shorter' and sometimes 'lighter' than a fast action tippy one..hence the expression 'like a broomstick'.
3) technique.... good casters can manipulate their stroke and work different sections of a rod at will... some fellows dont even need a rod to cast the entire line... so there! ...BTW I dont know how it is done because to vary my stroke so subtly is impossible for me so far...

I also think that line wts apply more for modern graphites due to:
1) Graphites are mostly tippy rods and therefore are quite 'standard'
2) Graphites are too light, fast and 'hollow' to give the feel required and therefore 'tippy' is the best action
3) Modern lines are mostly WFs that basically mean modern flyers are casting 'sinkers' more than 'lines'
4) Modern graphite parabolics have only one characteristic which is fine for standardisation but may be less interesting for some people.. those who cast my Granger Repro and like it will know what this statement means.... lets just say that I prefer mysterious multidimensional rodS with more 'depth' of character.. if it means anything at all

This is one reason why I am not to particular about the action of rods as how much I can 'talk' to it or 'learn' to talk to it... I grew up using really 'lousy' rods but 'learned' how to use their strengths for various fishing situations. That said, a bamboo rod that has an action more generally acceptable to all eg Payne, Gillum, Garrison and Dickerson tend to be more saleable while very interesting but technically demanding rods like Paul Young's/ Pezon et Michel parabolics and Fairy wands are incredibly valuable only to a selected group.

Cheers
CY