Cover plate foundry markings

[JohnEboy]

Hi Mates
Please see attached image , I am unsure as to how it is possible for the 4 from "4190" foundry mark inside this cover plate to still be present within the circle and canted over ? In addition within the circle you can see part of the foundry mark from the other side of the circle .

best wishes
John

[JohnEboy]

For anyone interested , On another forum its has been suggested by two knowledgeable gentlemen with engineering experience that teh circles are made by ejector pins and that in this instance there was a foundry mark on the ejector pin itself .

kind regards
John

[GreatLaker]

John,
Your question far exceeds my level of Mitchell knowledge. To find this type of information I would think one would need to talk to some type of engineer that deals with vacuum molding aluminum alloy parts, specifically, French vacuum molding from the 1940's.

Mitchell 300 Collectors have long needed the input from metallurgists, manufacturing engineers, and experts on metal coatings and plating. If one could assemble all of these experts, and others, and let them study the Mitchell, so much could be learned and corrected.

Perhaps somewhere in Cluses France there might be people who worked in the old Mitchell plants who could help, if you could speak French.

Would any of the engineers who commented earlier have suggestions as to whom you could contact to find out more?

Kind Regards,
Bill

[JohnEboy]

John,
Your question far exceeds my level of Mitchell knowledge. To find this type of information I would think one would need to talk to some type of engineer that deals with vacuum molding aluminum alloy parts, specifically, French vacuum molding from the 1940's.

Mitchell 300 Collectors have long needed the input from metallurgists, manufacturing engineers, and experts on metal coatings and plating. If one could assemble all of these experts, and others, and let them study the Mitchell, so much could be learned and corrected.

Perhaps somewhere in Cluses France there might be people who worked in the old Mitchell plants who could help, if you could speak French.

Would any of the engineers who commented earlier have suggestions as to whom you could contact to find out more?

Kind Regards,
Bill

Hi Bill
The suggestions from the two engineers seems logical . When they mentioned ejector pins I did some research and much of what is written fits with what we see in the circles . A shallow depression with some flash around the edge . Its actually quite fascinating .

What really threw me is the suggestion that at some point there must have been a discussion ( at the foundry ?) where someone must have said the ejector pins are removing part of the Aluvac 4190 foundry mark and they tried to resolve this by putting the missing parts of the ejector pins .

Some early cover plates dont even have the foundry marks at all but potentially they must have felt it wasnt worth continuing with the missing marks of the ejector pins and it stopped ? This part is of course pure speculation , but its interesting trying to understand the various changes we see ?

Best wishes
John

[Bailarm]

In this case the ejector pin has rotated and mis-aligned the foundry mark.

Other dies had the foundry mark smaller and the ejector pins elsewhere.

I have an image of two first version side covers, one appears to have 4, the other 6 ejector marks...and both are different to yours as neither have the foundry marks on the pin face.

first version casting mark changes, right-hand ALUVAC is also smaller Forum size.JPG (337.26 KiB) Viewed 29497 times

The Aluvac foundry was in the suburbs of Paris on Rue de Bois, the site is now an estate of flats.

[JohnEboy]

In this case the ejector pin has rotated and mis-aligned the foundry mark.

Other dies had the foundry mark smaller and the ejector pins elsewhere.

I have an image of two first version side covers, one appears to have 4, the other 6 ejector marks...and both are different to yours as neither have the foundry marks on the pin face.


first version casting mark changes, right-hand ALUVAC is also smaller Forum size.JPG

The Aluvac foundry was in the suburbs of Paris on Rue de Bois, the site is now an estate of flats.

Thanks for sharing those cover plates Nobby , Fascinating to see all the variations . I also find it fascinating to think someone actually wanted to try putting the foundry marks back in by putting it on the ejector pins , I wonder how long that lasted as they tried to perfect the castings.
would we assume the cover plate to be an earlier casting before they moved the ejector pins to the more familiar place ?

Kind regards
John

[Rockape]

Carrying on from the foundry marks discussion in the 'Intersting 3rd' thread, I have photographed the internals of my recently acquired 2nd and early 3rd version reels, plus a couple of other interesting details.

[Rockape]

Other detail found in the second version were a transfer gear with a brass 'insert'? And two brass shims under each of the slider guide tabs.

[JohnEboy]

Hi Paul
Very good of you to share those excellent images of your new 2nd & 3rd . They really were nice clean reels with some very nice foundry marks etc
John

[Rockape]

No problem John, it was a facinating journey.

Here are the two reels in question:

[Rockape]

I forgot to add:
The 2nd version has a 1st version spool (I'm guessing this is quite normal?).

Ok, I'm off now to open up a delivery of lowly Intrepids (am I allowed to say that word here
) . Cheers!

[JohnEboy]

I forgot to add:
The 2nd version has a 1st version spool (I'm guessing this is quite normal?).

Ok, I'm off now to open up a delivery of lowly Intrepids (am I allowed to say that word here
) . Cheers!

I'm not an expert like some of the chaps here , but yes it would not be unusual to see a 1st spool on a 2nd .

They are a lovely couple of reels , very nice indeed .

Elites ? I like the look of Elites .

John

[Rockape]

Thank you John, though I may have been hasty in my claim of having a 1st version spool on the reel (maybe I should have said "what looks like a first version spool, from my internet observations"), but here it is anyway.

The spool feels (and sounds) like it's made from metal.

[Bailarm]

I have a couple of 'unridged' spool backs like that which came with my second version.

I did once wind on some line to an old Mitchell spool very tightly indeed and the spool back buckled backwards. I imagine this is why ridged spool backs, which appear stronger, were offered at the same time as the 808 half to full bail conversion kits.

Garcia seem to have felt that improved parts should be offered to anglers with no concern that it might affect reputation.

Here in the UK we got cross wind gears offered and ultra light spools, which are extremely rare, nothing like the offerings from Garcia who seem to have been a very switched on company, offering everything from gears, spool backs, longer handles, field service kits and specialised tools. I believe that attitude would have been a considerable part of the 300 reel's success in the US.

[Bailarm]

Oh, nice to see your clicker spring intact on that spool, Rockape. Usually one arm is broken off. I'd say I've had to repair more of those springs than I have found intact.

[Sandman]

Nice 2nd version John. Definitely a first version spool. I've attached Wallace's Transfer gear versions for further identification. Like Bailarm mentions, it's good to see the clicker spring intact. Mine has one arm broken.

Sandman

Screen Shot 2017-05-25 at 12.16.12 AM.png (589.1 KiB) Viewed 29369 times

Screen Shot 2017-05-25 at 12.16.32 AM.png (428.62 KiB) Viewed 29369 times

[Bailarm]

Since the 'first version' was made in such small numbers I can well imagine that the earliest 'second versions' had the same spool.


Just how many firsts are out there? About 50 I think.


Carpano et Pons didn't compile any production records until 1948 and the changes they made, as production continued, were numerous, but I am confident they didn't halt production to bring in a new modification, but rather brought them in as spares were used up on the production line.

For this reason the 'version' thing can cause confusion. If one is listing a number of changes and saying this is the next version, one is probably incorrect. The changes would have been gradual and there might be slightly different reels coming off adjacent production lines for several days.

mitchell factory building station.JPG (58.84 KiB) Viewed 29364 times

Here's one of the assembly lines. You can see various parts all jumbled up together, but it looks as though the lid is lifted and the parts allowed to tumble down to the tray below. I can well imagine new parts getting to the bottom before old ones are all used.

The eagle-eyed will spot that the shims are large diameter, but the paint on the spares boxes is the real clue here. It is Finnegans Hammerite which was sold to manufacturers all over the world from their Northumberland factory. It was available by mail order in the UK so the public could buy it, but only in a brushable form, not thinned for spraying, and the special thinner was not available to the public.


So I'm pretty confident this image is from the very late Sixties or very early Seventies which seems to be the only period that Hammerite was available to munufactureres..

[JohnEboy]

Just how many firsts are out there? About 50 I think.

An interesting question Nobby.

When I posted an image of my first with some seconds on a facebook group I received in invite to a european based Reel collecting group that had a bent towards early Mitchells . There were quite a few familiar names of known Mitchell collectors and experts.

Whist scrolling through I found a thread about the first I had bought , the comment were hugely scathing and ridiculing the price I paid and running down the reel itself and even questioning its authenticity .

I seem to recall some comments that around 40 of these reels had been found recently and they could be picked up around Cluses for five Euros.

Needless to say I didnt stay long due to it being so clicky , its a shame because there were some very interesting posts and reels.

Perhaps they are more common in some countries link France , but as you know it is still quite unusual for them to come up for sale on the open market .

Perhaps its also true that we will never know how many were made , and that just adds to the wonder and enjoyment of the early reels ?

John

[Altex]

The first spools are easily identified.

The clicker gear has 24 teeth as opposed to 20 on later spools.

The first spools were too short and a spacer ring had to be incorporated.

Collectors need to classify reels for the purpose of identifying rarity, desirability and value. The easiest way is to group reels into models, versions, marks etc. These classifications would have meant nothing to the manufacturer, but are an invention and tool of collectors. Mitchell reels were mass produced so inevitably there will be some variation between versions : parts were not used in strict rotation.

The version system gives collectors a very good idea of what a reel is. Inevitably there will be some variation during the transition from one version or mark to another, but this does not negate the usefulness of the system. As has been touched on the first style of trip spring can be found in early 3rd. reels and the second type in late 2nds. This sort of overlap is hardly surprising.

It will never be possible to know exactly how many of the first model were made or how many still exist. They are certainly quite scarce, but perhaps not quite as rare has been suggested in the past.

Production records began to be kept in 1948 when Carpano started making their own reels. It must be realized that patents could not be applied for retrospectively. If the Mitchell reel had been in the public domain before July 1948 (part of the State of Art), the French and UK patent applications would have failed.

To the owner of the first reel mentioned earlier, I would say don't be disheartened by others who try to rain on your parade. What matters is what you think.

[GreatLaker]

Altex, Welcome to the Mitchell Reel Museum Forum!!

I found your remarks on "Versions" to be right on the money. I would also add that knowing what version a reel is, helps determine the reel's characteristics or features when previously defined such as what Wallace Carney has done in his book "The Mitchell Classic 300 Spinning Reel". Wallace not only identifies each version of the Mitchell (300) reel with it's features and characteristics but also gives the manufacturing date range for each. This makes all the difference to my collecting of the Mitchell.

The first spools were too short and a spacer ring had to be incorporated.

I would add to your comment above that, I feel that some of the first version spools have the spacer ring you refer to but not all. I have several in my collection without the added spacer, yet include the narrow pawl design and raised spring end arches, along with the smooth spindle base and 24 tooth gear. Don't you agree?

Glad to have you with us and look forward to your input.
Kind Regards,
Bill

[JohnEboy]

The first spools are easily identified.

The clicker gear has 24 teeth as opposed to 20 on later spools.

The first spools were too short and a spacer ring had to be incorporated.

Collectors need to classify reels for the purpose of identifying rarity, desirability and value. The easiest way is to group reels into models, versions, marks etc. These classifications would have meant nothing to the manufacturer, but are an invention and tool of collectors. Mitchell reels were mass produced so inevitably there will be some variation between versions : parts were not used in strict rotation.

The version system gives collectors a very good idea of what a reel is. Inevitably there will be some variation during the transition from one version or mark to another, but this does not negate the usefulness of the system. As has been touched on the first style of trip spring can be found in early 3rd. reels and the second type in late 2nds. This sort of overlap is hardly surprising.

It will never be possible to know exactly how many of the first model were made or how many still exist. They are certainly quite scarce, but perhaps not quite as rare has been suggested in the past.

Production records began to be kept in 1948 when Carpano started making their own reels. It must be realized that patents could not be applied for retrospectively. If the Mitchell reel had been in the public domain before July 1948 (part of the State of Art), the French and UK patent applications would have failed.

To the owner of the first reel mentioned earlier, I would say don't be disheartened by others who try to rain on your parade. What matters is what you think.

Nice first post look forward to seeing more .
John

[Altex]

Dear Bill,

I agree with you entirely.

In my opinion the very first spools have a spacer and 24 teeth on the clicker gear and this is what I would expect to find with an early first reel. However, as you rightly point out other permutations can exist because we are talking about mass produced items which were never intended to be collectable. Put simply I would expect to find a spool with 24 gear teeth and a spacer on an early first reel and a spool with 20 teeth and no spacer on a late second reel; in between one could expect to see various combinations.

I have many early spools here, but I must admit I have never made a detailed comparison study. Perhaps I will when time permits.

I claim no credit for this information. A former member of this Forum, Dennis2149 if memory serves, figured out the spacer. Dennis Roberts publicised the clicker gear teeth situation many years ago.

[Rockape]

Some really interesting information everyone.
Thanks to you guys, I am fast learning a lot about these wonderful early Mitchells (just won another early 3rd version on ebay, so I am looking forward to opening that one up too when it arrives).

From all I have learned over the past year or so, I don't think there is any doubting your first version John, I would be very chuffed to own that.

Cheers all.

Paul

[Altex]

There is a lot of pleasure to be had from collecting and studying early Mitchell reels and I envy those new to the hobby : you have a lot of fun ahead of you.

I would just mention that the third edition of "The Early Years Of The Mitchell Fishing Reel" is now available in limited quantity. Any member interested can PM me for details of this UK publication.

This UK offering is an in-depth study of the first 10 years of the Mitchell. There is a detailed breakdown of the anatomy of the first reels in their different versions; photographic studies of 25 first models, several minty seconds, tournament reels etc. Translations of French literature and documents and a recently prepared comprehensive dating guide.

As one who is firmly fixed on the early reels this is the book I needed when I started out.

[JohnEboy]

There is a lot of pleasure to be had from collecting and studying early Mitchell reels and I envy those new to the hobby : you have a lot of fun ahead of you.

I would just mention that the third edition of "The Early Years Of The Mitchell Fishing Reel" is now available in limited quantity. Any member interested can PM me for details of this UK publication.

This UK offering is an in-depth study of the first 10 years of the Mitchell. There is a detailed breakdown of the anatomy of the first reels in their different versions; photographic studies of 25 first models, several minty seconds, tournament reels etc. Translations of French literature and documents and a recently prepared comprehensive dating guide.

As one who is firmly fixed on the early reels this is the book I needed when I started out.

It is enjoyable.
Respecting the studies and views of others with more experience is enormously helpful .

I take it this post above places you as the author ?

Kind regards
John

[Altex]

Yes, for my sins.

The book is 180 pages with 450 photos and illustrations. Limited to 25 copies, some of which are already sold. Inevitably the book has needed regular revision as new information has come to light. That said, I have no plans to print any more.

Returning to the question of spools, I made an audit of mine this morning and the conclusions of Bill are sound. The overwhelming majority fit the pattern of 24 teeth and spacer or 20 teeth and no spacer. There are a small number of oddities : 24 teeth no spacer and 20 teeth spacer.

There are 2 other identification points which I should have mentioned before.

On early spools the spool release button is slightly longer than on later spools and the end is only slightly rounded. Later spools have a shorter button with a more rounded end.

On early spools there is no fibre washer under the clutch spring : it sits in the recess. Later spools have a washer under the spring.

[JohnEboy]

Yes, for my sins.

The book is 180 pages with 450 photos and illustrations. Limited to 25 copies, some of which are already sold. Inevitably the book has needed regular revision as new information has come to light. That said, I have no plans to print any more.

Ah , I wondered if that was you , hope you are well ?

Perhaps no plans for further further books / revisions , bit you may get the urge at some point.

[Simone Baschirotto]

Rolands when writing a book, I believe it must be based on reliable information and supported by concrete evidence.
Some books are based on some information like "my cousin told me that ...".
I have read your book and I think it is an excellent guide for true collectors, many points have resolved inconsistencies that I have found in the past, comparing my collection with published and probably incorrect articles.
I am amazed at the information you have gathered in such a short time, I still think you are a brilliant person. You have certainly received help from special people who love or have experienced Mitchell firsthand.

[Altex]

Dear Simone,

Many thanks for the kind comments and I am pleased that you found the book useful.

Warm regards,

Rolands.

[Rockape]

Don't want to become a nuisance in this thread everyone, so please let me know, but I was keen to post a few images of my latest early 3rd reel.

The foundry marks are as expected I guess, but the cover plate does not have much of a mark in the central ejector pin circle (as with my 2nd version).
It has a plain baffle plate, brass(?) rotor gear and a loop spring, but the clicker pawl is a bit different to my other early 'non-heart shaped' versions, and so my question is: Is this the second version of the clicker pawl?

[Rockape]

Having a few issues with trying post photos, please bear with me.

It also has a very small 'V' stamp on the foot.

[JohnEboy]

Having a few issues with trying post photos, please bear with me.

It also has a very small 'V' stamp on the foot.

Cracking reel that one Paul

John

[Rockape]

Thank you John,

Yes I was very pleased with the overall condition of the reel when I unpacked it (the bail arm still has most of it's original shine too).

Having a LOT of fun collecting and studying these wonderful reels

All the best,

Paul