Silstar Tradition SL Canal 330 rod

Mixin123

Active member
Joined
Apr 22, 2018
Messages
74
I have just obtained one of these & it looks hardly used. It came in a cloth bag with Ian Heaps printed on it.

I used to have one of these years ago, and the rod blank had "Ian Heaps" printed on it just like the image I took off google below.

Was there any counterfeit versions of this rod doing the rounds, because my rod is without the Ian Heaps signature.

I'm also concerned about the short distance between the tip ring & the 2nd rod ring because it's about half the spacing of the distance between the other rings.

Look below to see the difference between rods & the short distance between tip guide & the next guide.
 

Attachments

  • 20191021_125242.jpg
    20191021_125242.jpg
    702.2 KB · Views: 35
  • Fine-Silstar-Ian-Heaps-Traditional-Sl-Canal-330.jpg
    Fine-Silstar-Ian-Heaps-Traditional-Sl-Canal-330.jpg
    15 KB · Views: 40
  • 20191021_130558.jpg
    20191021_130558.jpg
    599.6 KB · Views: 35
  • 20191021_124315.jpg
    20191021_124315.jpg
    803.3 KB · Views: 35

Sam Vimes

Regular member
Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 27, 2009
Messages
5,532
There's one on ebay now that you can compare it to.

With regards to the signature, I'd not worry. The chances of there being counterfeit rods of this ilk are pretty slim. Far more likely that Ian Heaps joined/left Silstar part way through the production run and his name added, or removed, as appropriate. Ian Heaps definitely had a deal with D.A.M. in a similar time period. Chances are he just moved from one company and signed for the other.

As for the tip ring, on a fast actioned or spliced tip rod of the era, I'm usually more concerned when the last few spacings aren't a bit shorter than the rest. I see far too many on ebay with ring spacing that is not correct. The snag is that you really need to have an original, undamaged, example to come close to being certain. Even then, vagaries in production can produce inconsistencies through a production run.

This is a cracking example of a rod that I'm pretty sure is wrong. I have mine (bought new by me and never had a repair) in front of me now. The tip to second ring is about two inches. The second to third ring is four inches. There's also no coloured whipping anywhere along the spliced tip section. The whipping thing could easily be a production run change, but I doubt that the ring spacing is. Perhaps I'm doing the seller a disservice, but it also looks to me like some effort has been made to hide the tip section a little. It certainly has alarm bells ringing for me.
 

Mixin123

Active member
Joined
Apr 22, 2018
Messages
74
Nice post & I agree on that Daiwa rod not looking at all right from what I can see of the images.

The spacing looks huge.

There's a fair few unscrupulous chancers on eBay, & I've fallen foul of them in the past.

You've definitely got to be vigilant & hit them were it hurts with feedback & PayPal protection if they attempt to offload damaged & fettled rubbish.

Looking at that Silstar rod on eBay, the spacing on mine looks identical so it looks like all's good.

I just fitted a reel onto mine, threaded the line through the guides, & had my Wife hold the line while I reeled & checked the action.

The rod would be great for bits with its spliced flick tip, but the middle and lower section will definitely come into play with bigger fish - a bit like a light spinning rod.

I think it's going to be fun using this.
 
Last edited:

Ken the Pacman

Regular member
Site Supporter
Joined
Aug 24, 2015
Messages
3,451
Ian Heaps sponsorship time with Silstar was fairly short so it would not surprise me to see either a pre or post sponsorship model without his actual signature but it does not matter as a light float rod it will be fine either way.
 
Top