Old Epoxy on a Sage Rebuild - Advice Requested.

Lewis Chessman

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 16, 2008
Messages
1,985
Location
Isle of Lewis
Hi, folks. I have an old Sage double-hander, a 12' 6" #9 3 pc. from circa 1985, designed by Goran Andersson . It is a GFL 9126-3B, the 'B' denoting it was sold as a blank and custom-built - long, long ago. This 'GFL' is from Sage's first series of graphite composite.
It has a basic Weyland reel seat (like a Fuji) and ceramic-lined bridge guides.

While I can't be sure, the whippings are typical of Simpsons of Turnford who were importing Sage blanks into the UK back in the '80s and offered a building service.
What I've found odd about this rod is that it has been built with only 9 guides (excluding the tip ring) rather than the 11 Sage recommend. Why spend so much money on a state of the art American blank then skimp on the guides? And why the heavy bridge rings rather than snakes?

I don't know the answers but, having cast it a couple of times this season, I do feel that the eyes are too small. This is something I've found with several 1970s/80s rods rigged with single-leg ceramics - you can barely thread a WF line through them! I presume that when they were built DT lines were far more common than WFs, but I don't know if this is the case?

Anyway, enough pre-amble. I'm resolved to re-whip the rod with the right number of snake guides and put them in Sage's recommended spots so have stripped the old bridge rings from the blank. I'm left, as I'm sure you can imagine, with old epoxy residue. There are little ridges around where the feet sat and 'spiral tracks' where the thread once was.
Is there a means to remove this residue without damaging the Sage Brown rod varnish beneath? I'm happy to be painstaking if that's what it takes.
Thanks your your thoughts.

I think I've found my answer on this YouTube demo vid. A little heat, an ice lolly stick and a bit of ipa. I'll try that tomorrow.
 
Last edited:

gordy000

Member
Joined
Jan 13, 2013
Messages
15
Sounds like it might have been used for float fishing with spinning reel at a time. Or something like that.

It will depend how well the original builder has prepared the blank before applying the finish to the whipping. If you are lucky then a little heat might lift any. Just take your time.

Are you putting a new reel seat on also? Or just changing the eyes?
 

gordy000

Member
Joined
Jan 13, 2013
Messages
15
It's easy enough to just replace over the top of the old eyes and hide the old glued areas. But that will still only give you 9. But at least they would be snakes
 

Paul_B

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 14, 2008
Messages
3,280
Location
West Riding of Yorkshire
Sounds like it might have been used for float fishing with spinning reel at a time. Or something like that.

It will depend how well the original builder has prepared the blank before applying the finish to the whipping. If you are lucky then a little heat might lift any. Just take your time.

Are you putting a new reel seat on also? Or just changing the eyes?
I'm going the other way with an 11ft Shakespeare, it a crap fly rod so I'm going to have a go at changing the reel seat and making the rod into a trotting rod.
 

Lewis Chessman

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 16, 2008
Messages
1,985
Location
Isle of Lewis
Hi, Geordie, thanks for your thoughts. My own feeling is that these ceramic bridge eyes were fine with the double taper lines predominant in their day but aren't suitable for the fatter running lines of todays Speys.
The old epoxy came away OK with a little heat and scrape but the old whippings did leave their mark. As the reason for doing the job was to try Sage's recommended eye sizes and placement points I couldn't but put them somewhere new - except the stripping ring where I felt the 1 cm difference between old and new was negligible so re-used the old spot.
Sure, the rod shows its battle scars but that's fine. It sure looks much better now it has snakes on it and its final weight remained the same, 9 1/4 oz despite adding three extra snakes+6 whippings.

There's a thread here on the NAFFF with some photos if you're interested. Cheers.
 

gordy000

Member
Joined
Jan 13, 2013
Messages
15
Most rod manufacturers eye placements are generic and fine to use. But to get a optimum placement you could try static guide placement. There are how tos on the net. But it takes an annoying amount of time to do and I'm not sure if its really work the effort.
 

Lewis Chessman

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 16, 2008
Messages
1,985
Location
Isle of Lewis
Hi, Simon, Hope you're keeping well?
No, mate, I haven't - yet! I will today. Hadn't thought of it, to be honest. As there are so many 'nicks to the bone' on the old thing I was content to leave the varnish aspect as 'warts and all', but yeah, I could give it a polish. I will give it a polish. It's been T-Cut already, btw.

I must add that back in the summer codyarrow sent me some Sensi epoxy to try - and this is the first time I have used it. Anyone who has read my posts when I've been using FlexCoat will know how much trouble I've had with the stuff, the hours I've spent meticulously sanding flawed coatings flat. Well, this Sensi went on like a dream, mixed well in low amounts (2 x 0.5 mls) and cured in an unheated room overnight. I didn't need to touch the W&D once - and finally got the sort of result I've been looking for and with absolutely no hassle. Big thanks to codyarrow for his kindness.

@ gordy000. Too late to try a static guide placement on this thing I'm afraid. I know what you mean by 'generic placements' but I'm happy to trust Sage/Goren Andersson this time. Tbh, I suspect they'll know better than I! ;)
 

Cap'n Fishy

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 29, 2008
Messages
25,825
Location
Embra
Hi, folks. I have an old Sage double-hander, a 12' 6" #9 3 pc. from circa 1985, designed by Goran Andersson . It is a GFL 9126-3B, the 'B' denoting it was sold as a blank and custom-built - long, long ago. This 'GFL' is from Sage's first series of graphite composite.
It has a basic Weyland reel seat (like a Fuji) and ceramic-lined bridge guides.

While I can't be sure, the whippings are typical of Simpsons of Turnford who were importing Sage blanks into the UK back in the '80s and offered a building service.
What I've found odd about this rod is that it has been built with only 9 guides (excluding the tip ring) rather than the 11 Sage recommend. Why spend so much money on a state of the art American blank then skimp on the guides? And why the heavy bridge rings rather than snakes?

I don't know the answers but, having cast it a couple of times this season, I do feel that the eyes are too small. This is something I've found with several 1970s/80s rods rigged with single-leg ceramics - you can barely thread a WF line through them! I presume that when they were built DT lines were far more common than WFs, but I don't know if this is the case?

Anyway, enough pre-amble. I'm resolved to re-whip the rod with the right number of snake guides and put them in Sage's recommended spots so have stripped the old bridge rings from the blank. I'm left, as I'm sure you can imagine, with old epoxy residue. There are little ridges around where the feet sat and 'spiral tracks' where the thread once was.
Is there a means to remove this residue without damaging the Sage Brown rod varnish beneath? I'm happy to be painstaking if that's what it takes.
Thanks your your thoughts.

I think I've found my answer on this YouTube demo vid. A little heat, an ice lolly stick and a bit of ipa. I'll try that tomorrow.

If you need to try something less polar than ipa, James, you might like to try D-limonene. I find it a handy solvent for lots of jobs. It's great for taking glue reside off, when you peel off a sticky label and it leaves all backing paper and glue gunge on whatever it was. I have no idea what it would do to the varnish, however. But it's handy to have some in a box of tricks.

D-Limonene

Col
 
Top