[SSPey]

I have 2 Hardy Salmon #2 reels with the fat ribbed brass foot. These don't fit particularly well in the reel seats on my spey rods, especially my two winter rods, which have metal barrel reel seat that are unforgiving to large feet.

I know that some people cringe regarding filed feet - but they don't fit! Should I file these feet to fit, or shell out money for Archuleta to replace the feet? Or something else? I really don't care about collector status - just want a reel that won't pop out when mr fishy is running hard.

 

[Willie Gunn]

Sell your rods and buy some nice new B&Ws

I have a bastardised 4.5" perfect that I filed the foot on. The reel was made out of at least 3 reels but still makes a lovely noise. I use it in the winter when there is salt on the roads.

You can do a nice job with a grinder do one side at a time and match it to the other side. Take your time and it can look very professional.

 

[Big K1]

Sell the Marquis to me. Problem solved. :biggrin:
I have a Lamson Lightspeed 4 and a Tioga 12 I
would trade. They will fit.

 

[Willie Gunn]

You can do a nice job with a grinder do one side at a time and match it to the other side. Take your time and it can look very professional.

I actually meant a mini grinder, do you have a thing called a Dremel in the states?

Not one of these.

 

[SSPey]

Dremel tools exist. I don't have one, but a friend does.

maybe I should just buy 2 B+W rods, and give them along with the reels to Big K1 !

 

[Willie Gunn]

I will swap you my Dremel for your Marquises if you think that might help.

 

[hot chrome]

Just Purchased a Marquis Salmon 2

Just bought one on ebay, and didn't know about potential problems with foot sizes. Do you think I'll have problems with it on any of the following rods?

T&T 12' 8wt
Fly Logic 13' 8wt
Sage 8136

 

[SSPey]

Not all of the Marquis Salmon feet are the large ribbed brass type, only the older reels.

On your rods - why not just try it and see if it fits?

I find that the large ribbed feet will fit into all-metal reel seats (several of those on your rods, as with my T&T and Burkie), but you really have to crank it in, to the point where it is difficult to remove it. I am concerned about deforming and enlarging the reel seat, as I have other reels with feet that fit the rods just fine as they are.

 

[hot chrome]

ok, thanks

i'll have to wait patiently for delivery of my "new" reel. I am very excited about trying this baby out.

 

[Rob Estlund]

Marquis feet

I have never seen an "older" marquis that has the longer foot. They probably exist, but I've not seen it. Anyway, that's not what the next paragraph is about.

I have a Hardy Salmon #2 that had a foot that was standard length and width but wouldn't fit any of my rods because the foot was too thick. (not too wide or too long, but too thick) I was able to correct it by sanding the concave side of the foot. Using sandpaper, backed by the cork grip on my rod, I slowly and carefully sanded the foot until it was standard thickness. I found it easiest to have my helper hold the sandpaper and the rod grip still. I then worked the reel back and forth carefully. This solution appears to have worked perfectly. I doubt anyone could even tell it was done.

If that's your problem, its a simple fix, but it did not dawn on me right away so I thought I'd point it out.

 

[Big K1]

Loco said:

maybe I should just buy 2 B+W rods, and give them along with the reels to Big K1 !

Put in the order for the B&W's. I like your thinking Loco. :biggrin:

 

[Lohi]

Only have three Hardy Marquis Salmon #3, the oldest being from the 70´s, newest from the early 90´s. All the feet are brass, ribbed, but slim and small, will fit to any of my B&W rods, including the Hexos, Norways and Kola. Or any other reel seat I´ve seen so far. As also my Tana Spey reel, one of 20 ever manufactured, will fit into B&W reel seats with ease.

However, there is an issue with the Tana and the CND Steelhead specialist reel seat, whch is imho the worst (read narrowest) seat i´ve seen so far. The "HUGE" 76 mm foot does not fit into that seat at all... (the Marquises have a 65 mm foot) which means no CND:s for me :frown:, as fliling is not an option.

 

[Willie Gunn]

However, there is an issue with the Tana and the CND Steelhead specialist reel seat, whch is imho the worst (read narrowest) seat i´ve seen so far. The "HUGE" 76 mm foot does not fit into that seat at all... (the Marquises have a 65 mm foot) which means no CND:s for me :frown:, as fliling is not an option.

Worse than Sage reel seats they must be truely awful.

 

[Big K1]

I have a CND Custom and Marquis' fit no problem. Plenty of room.

 

[Lohi]

Yes, 11 mm is a big difference :biggrin: . It would be truly beneficial if the size of the max. reel foot length for any rod was given, e.g. 70 mm or something. With that piece of information, the suitability of any reel could be easily asessed, and any filing action minimized. Not too difficult to get or give, is it?

 

[sms]

It would be truly beneficial if the size of the max. reel foot length for any rod was given, e.g. 70 mm or something.

Or maybe everyone should follow the AFFTA reel foot standard. I mean both the reel and the reel seat manufacturers.

 

[Lohi]

The Standard established 1994 and revised 2004, gives to my understanding one reel foot size recommendation, the length being 2,5" ,i.e. 64 mm. Could you please advice, what should I do with my reel that does not conform to the standard?

a) Throw it away?
b) Buy a rod that has a reasonable size reel seat?

I go for the b) any day, as I have done, and will do. And therefore it would be nice to know the size of the reel seat of any given rod, especially for such rods that are not available this side of the pond, or ball

PS. I have a serious problem figuring out the benefits of reducing the reel seat length to fit only less than e.g. 64mm reel foot, at least when we talk about 2-handers.

PS2. I was very close to order a Salar/Thompson Specialist from overseas, but luckily found out from my friends Steelhead Specialist, that the reel seat is not suitable for my purposes. Well, the 16´3" B&W Kola Speycaster has a safe Fuji reel seat, and now I own one of those masterpieces. A great rod.

edit: Fiat corrected to Seat

 

[sms]

Yes, the standard is 2,5" and there was a different standard for spey. Can't find it anymore thou.

Of course you shouldn't have to replace the reel foot. Optimum would be that all older rods, reel seats and reel feet would be measured and published in some compatibility chart etc. Not gonna happen thou. And new rods would be equipped with reel seats that can hold a std foot and reels would have those std feet.

I don't see the advantage of a big reel foot even in spey. My biggest reel (made for SWFF) doesn't have a big foot. I bet that's not the place where the reel is going to fail if its going to fail in the first place.

If necessary the spey foot could be larger but standardized. And rods and reel seat should be labeled if they hold normal or spey foot of a reel.

Btw, I didn't know that some rods have reel feet. :razz:

 

[JR SPEY]

At a meeting during the Denver dealer show the AFFTA standards were revised. There is no longer a spey foot specification. ALL reelfoots and reelseats are supposed to adhere to the newly revised specifications for "standard" reelfoots and reelseats. These specs were not changed, but the degree of variance was narrowed considerably in many cases.

The spey specs were eliminated because there really is no such thing as a spey reel, only reels that are often used for speyfishing. Of course, these standards will still not help the guys who use older reels on newer rods and vice versa. That is a problem throughout the industry. For example, early Seamaster anti-reverse reels had a reelfoot that was longer than many saltwater flyrods in use at the time, and certainly longer than the standard is now. It's also often a problem with older cane rods and early classic reels. The only solution is to test before you buy, which is not always an easy option. Of course, we're also dealing with the fact that these standards are not required, only suggestions, and some companies (especially outside of North America) may choose to ignore them.

The most important change in variation is the length. Companies used to be allowed a 0.1" variance +/-. It is now 0.015". That is saying that all reelfoots intended to meet the standard will be almost exactly 2.5" long whether it's on a two inch trout reel or a five inch bluewater reel. The "D" dimension, which most of us would call the width of the reelfoot, used to be able to vary between +0.020" and -0.030 has been changed to +0.020" to minus 0. There are eight dimensions in the standard and they all effect the fit between the reelfoot and the reelseat. I haven't checked, but I'll bet the new standards might be available through the AFFTA.

 

[highlander2]

Funny you should mention the steelhead specialist, one of my favorite rods that I have a hell of a time trying to fit a few of my older pefects on, my trout rods have bigger reel seats then this