Hey Guys, Kinda slow on the old forum, you must all be either working or fishing. I've been working. Sorry. Trying to make sense of the info available
online for Dickerson 7613. Found the 1952 Howell version and the 1970 version in David Ray's taper library. First question, is one generally preferable
to the other? The 1970 version would appear to have a more flexible tip and a stiffer mid, perhaps faster than the 1950? Also, the 1950 taper as shown has no
measurements beyond 75 inches, any chance somebody could fill those in for me? Any feedback on which one, how each casts and fishes and other wisdom would be
appreciated. Rio Grande is up to over 5000 cfs today and blown out, but it is coming early so maybe we have a chance for a good stone hatch in June. Ray
0 Kudo
Dickerson 7613
| Author | Comment | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
 raywright |
Dickerson 7613 |
Lead | ||
|
Posts: 56 05/07/09 13:07:07 |
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
HexaMaineiac |
7613 | #1 | ||
|
Posts: 5 05/07/09 17:27:51 |
As in The Lovely Reed
1952 1970 Butt Tip Butt Tip 0 .360 .208 .360 .198 5 . 360 .198 .360 .185 10 .344 .180 .355 .175 15 .298 .170 .288 .158 20 .288 .155 .278 .142 25 .274 .140 .272 .128 30 .256 .122 .252 .115 35 .238 .104 .238 .098 40 .220 .090 .222 .082 45 .213 .068 .213 .068 Howell says the '52 version can take a six-weight and "can be thought of as a 7613 Special." He doesn't give varnish deductions, but for most Dickersons it is .006" for the butt and either .004 or .006" for the tip. I'm about to wrap the 1970 version, probably be another ugly rush job in my attempt to get it ready for my spring fishing trip. Sorry if it's hard to decipher, I guess I should learn to scan it in. Hope this helps, Henry.
A line in the water is hope extended. Catching a fish is hope affirmed.
Paul Quinnett, Pavlov's Trout.
Last Edited By: HexaMaineiac 05/07/09 17:39:01.
Edited 2 times.
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
Curley |
#2 | |||
|
Posts: 140 05/07/09 20:06:38 |
Ray,
I recently made 4 rods using an average of the 52 and 70 tapers in the butt, then each year's taper for two separate tips. I liked the '52 taper better, as it was stronger on my rods, but they aren't the exact numbers in the Lovely Reed. The '70 tip turned out to be more of a 4 wt. in my opinion, but it might be because I used a little less cane in the butt, in my averaging. Either way, the rods turned out wonderfully, and perfect for most small to mid-sized streams. Zac P.S. I've been busy fishing 
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
raywright |
#3 | |||
|
Posts: 56 05/08/09 04:00:18 |
Thanks for the info on this rod, the description of action is very helpful, as well as the butt dimensions you provided Henry. Glad you're fishing Curley,
nothing but good hatches and appreciative sports to you. BTW, the Rio is up over 6000cfs today, way early, way fast. Ray
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
splitcane |
#4 | |||
|
Posts: 532 05/08/09 04:56:34 |
I built the 70's version and thought it was a bit strong for what I was looking for, namely a 4w... John P. has the Original Dickerson 7612 taper, a very
rare rod but John understandably will not share the taper. Since it was a know Dickerson Taper and not a myth I set out to recreate how I think Lyle would of
done it and it came out sweet. Very similar to the 8013 action ( my favorite rod ) but in the 4w class, mission accomplished. I see Tom N. has a 7012 in the
library's, I have not built it but it look's interesting. It's a very small world, last year in one of my consignments sits a Pickard/Dickerson
7612, all I can say is I got it right..."-)
Take Care, Dave
Denver Dave's Vintage Bamboo Fly Rods |
|||
|
|
||||
|
oldschoolcane |
tapers | #5 | ||
|
Posts: 3 05/15/09 10:07:27 |
Sorry, I can't help to compare this forum versus the "other", the other day the Howell's Gillum tapers were posted and the moderators placed
the tapers on a "hidden" can't view basis until they spoke with the publisher to make sure they had permission to use them. I can kindof
understand this but it still seems a little too much. Back to the taper, thanks for sharing this.....
Tim |
|||
|
|
||||
