Mitchell Reel History

[Wallace Carney]

Hello Mates,

I have just completed the full story on the history of Mitchell and it's live on this site. See https://mitchellreelmuseum.com/mitchell ... l-history/ and tell me what you think.

Regards, Wallace

[Ted Lanham]

Wallace,

Ted Lanham

[Wallace Carney]

Thanks Ted!

[one4adv]

I read this post yesterday. I found it very informative, and interesting. You did a great job. Thank you.

[Wallace Carney]

Hello Mate,

Thank you so much for your kind words. Sometimes I wonder if anyone appreciates all the work that I put into this and other articles. You lift my spirits back up so I can keep going.

Kindest Regards,
Wallace

[Bailarm]

Wallace, as you know many of us doubt the Mitchell reel production so early, particularly after the Italian surrender when so many young men disappeared off into German factories to the North. Over 60,000 is thought to be the number. One poor local reel maker ended up in Lyon with the Gestapo under Klaus Barbie. He was not seen again, either.

I doubt there was much aluminium for the alloy castings to spare too.

I'm not convinced 'first' versions are pilots, or as we would say in the UK, prototype reels. One feller has found more than a dozen of them so far. He may re-join this forum soon, I imagine. To my mind his finding so many in such a short space of time ( I think it was less then six months!) suggests there are a lot of them out there if you are prepared to work at it....and if you can speak French....


Consequently, I believe all the other versions happened later than is stated there too....though I try to avoid 'versions' as the various changes happened over a period of time, not lots at once, I believe.


He and I did once agree a 'timeline' for Mitchell production, backed up by various quotations and observations made at the time by people and publications.

I could put a copy of it on here...it's been seen in the UK for years now....but I fear the quotations and other proofs would only be understood if you were familiar with British angling publications. However, many of the proofs are US in origin and simpler to follow.

[Wallace Carney]

I could put a copy of it on here...it's been seen in the UK for years now....but I fear the quotations and other proofs would only be understood if you were familiar with British angling publications. However, many of the proofs are US in origin and simpler to follow.

Your condescending statements will not win any points with me kind sir. I will address this later!

In the mean time: (here we go again)

What would you think if the inventor of the Mitchell reel said the first production started "in the late 1930s"?

[Bailarm]

I'm sorry if you chose to find my remarks condescending Wallace, that was not my intention.

The document I referred to contains a number of abbreviations and notations that would be confusing to many anglers, particularly if they were not familiar with British angling publications. I certainly wasn't implying that you alone would be confused, but that most would.

I think it was about four years ago you offered to let us all know the evidence you had for 'pre war production' and I hope one day you will indeed offer it up.

I know you are familiar with a certain Mdm. Florence Pourier and I'm sure you know she co-wrote a book about Arve valley fishing reel production during the war years, some years ago. I don't believe it mentions the Mitchell as being produced at that time?

Let's put the matter aside once more then, I don't want to start an argument, but I was disappointed you basically repeated your early article on the Mitchell history without regard for all the evidence that has been gathered by dedicated Mitchell fans in the interim.

[Wallace Carney]

I think it was about four years ago you offered to let us all know the evidence you had for 'pre war production' and I hope one day you will indeed offer it up.

I know you are familiar with a certain Mdm. Florence Pourier and I'm sure you know she co-wrote a book about Arve valley fishing reel production during the war years, some years ago. I don't believe it mentions the Mitchell as being produced at that time?

I know what I said a few years ago and it was conditioned on me being shown proof of your findings. I was then given "MY" study and a few things were changed, now calling it his own. It was pure BS! Bailarm, you need to get your story straight mate.

Of course I know Florence Pourier! Look at the credits in my history study. Her help was invaluable and things were shared with me both to be written and especially, not to be written. There were a couple things she did not want me to publish including a conversation I had with the Mayor of Cluses!

You failed to answer a question I asked of you and that was; What would you think if the inventor of the Mitchell reel said the first production started "in the late 1930s"? Cheers, Wallace

[Bailarm]

I'm sorry Wallace I have no recollection of you asking me for my proof and I have no knowledge of someone returning your study to you altered, nor of someone calling it his own.

Are you perhaps confusing me with someone else?


My name is Roger Clark. I am a retired policeman, engineer and chef from England. I have been called Nobby most of my life, as most Clarks are. I was a member on MRM about the time of the London get-together having been introduced to the MRM by Roy Allett. I don't recall my username at that time, but I used a kingfisher avatar.
I am a member of a British fishing forum called The Traditional Fisherman's Forum, as I believe you were yourself briefly. I am known as Nobby there. It was on that forum, at that time, that you offered to prove pre-war production.

We have discussed this issue on TFF many, many times and whilst not proving there was no pre-war or wartime production ( How do you prove a negative?) We concluded it unlikely. Particularly since the castings were made by Aluvac in an occupied city.

As to your question, if Maurice Jacquemin was to say it happened I would of course ask him to tell me how, since it seemed practically impossible.


Since I alluded to it so often I thought I should attach our timeline. Since it was put together I no longer think full bails were made in 1952....more like late '53.

Timeline image.png (80.85 KiB) Viewed 3570753 times

[Wallace Carney]

Bailarm, Now I understand why you think you know, or more like that you believe. You've made the same rookie mistake I made when I first started studying "timelines" in 2000 based on advertisements, patents, publications, and much more. This cannot happen and I urge you to redo your study.

If we would base our study on advertisements, then what would you conclude on the following ads from 1952?

Mitchell 300 1952 1 .jpg (189.62 KiB) Viewed 3570729 times

Mitchell 300 1952 2.jpg (212.9 KiB) Viewed 3570729 times

Mitchell 302 1952 1.jpg (160.6 KiB) Viewed 3570729 times

Mitchell 302 1952 2.jpg (172.51 KiB) Viewed 3570729 times

Looking forward to your response, Wallace

[cshannon772]

Well Mates,
You can scratch "FACT" # 14 off the list.

New 1954 Model Mitchell.jpg (154.07 KiB) Viewed 3570694 times

This is a NIB 1954 Mitchell Ser# 090713 which I purchased from a 98 year old gentleman in New Hampshire, USA (the original owner) a number of years ago and I still have the hand written note that accompanied it "Glad that it's going to a good home" These banners were a marketing strategy by Mitchell and the early Executives of Garcia - Although no Garcia markings on the box or reel.
While we're at it scratch "FACT" # 15 off the list too

Blk-Slvr 300.jpg (150.83 KiB) Viewed 3570694 times

Blk-Slvr 301.jpg (147.65 KiB) Viewed 3570694 times

These are both very nice in the box Mitchell's with the Black and Silver labels (300 and 301) Ser# 173775 (301) and Ser# 198367 (300). So around 100,000 reels were made in between - How many Mitchells were made in 1953?? By the way, the Black and Silver labeled Mitchell (301) is a Unicorn. I've only ever seen two and both of them are in my collection.

I have no "dog in this fight" I'm only a Mitchell collector and enthusiast.
Nobby, I have no problem with you or what you believe to be Mitchell history...I don't necessarily agree with it, but to each his own. We have conversed and I know you're a good man...I hope the rest of the Mates realize that too. Our mutual "Friend" however, I do have a problem with. Our mutual "Friend" had a theory before he even received his 1st Version Mitchell or as he likes to term it the Mk 1.0. He has repeatedly "Cherry Picked" facts, molded what he determines evidence and theorized without merit to fit his agenda - whatever that is. I have the emails. Only when I questioned it did it become a problem. He then decided to move on to CAP's/304s and that's when it really got outlandish based on his extensive research over a few months and several reels.

I guess my bottom line is until I (or anyone else) can prove without any doubt when Mitchells started production and date the significant variations within their history........Maybe we should just leave it alone - We can argue for years if Wallace is right or wrong but until someone can factually and without a doubt prove him wrong - Well, then he's right. Only my two cents, but I'm bored with this topic and would really like to bury this bone.

Kind Regards,
Chris

[Bailarm]

I feel I have hijacked this thread too much already and agree with Chris that it's time to leave it alone.

But I do want to thank you all for you your input.

I'll continue to address the issue on the UK forum as and when more information comes to light, but it's my understanding that Garcia moved to Fourth Avenue in 1953, so any publication using that address is likely to be from that year or later. It seems unlikely it would be earlier.

[Wallace Carney]

Chris, When I first started studying all things Mitchell, it was and still is my intent to, "preserve the History and Integrity of Mitchell Reels and the company who started it all" and if I wasn't 95% positive of what I claim to be the truth, I would quit. It does bother me to know there are some who believe I'm intentionally misleading Mitchell lovers. For this reason I really feel that this thread should continue as long as everyone, including me, remains civil to each other.

Bailarm, The 1952 ads I show are from a 1952 Garcia annual so you may want to consider changing your beliefs. As far as what I'm telling people about the 1st through the 3rd versions, this information was from several sources, two of which have given me statements and/or permissions on the years in question, 1939 to 1948. You can look under "About Us" tab to find out who these men are and why I would believe them...

Jean-Pierre Gumprich (JP) and I became friends after Mike Read went to meet him in France to buy a Mitchell reel from him, see below. We had numerous conversations. He was fascinated that I would even care about the history of Mitchell, who, what when and where so to speak. We talked at least once per week for several months. The last Time I spoke with JP he was going to the hospital for heart problems. He was calling his son and daughter in so I knew it was serious. I could never reach him again, and I had to assume the worse. Anyway, in his own words:

"The Mitchell reels came out in the open just prior to WW 2 (1st Version), the engineer and his staff worked on it during the war years (2ndVersion)...and right after the war they displayed their handiwork in the form of a spinning reel (3rd Version) “moulinet à anse de panier” with an egg shaped body. Could have designed by Christopher Columbus! A very sober machine, well made – after all they were clockwork manufacturers - with a handsome coating of black satin paint, also as anglers over the world were to discover: a very wide spool, made for distance and easy casts."

Sorry Mates

I'll divulge more once I receive

Kind Regards, Wallace

SEE:

1957 Mitchell Gumprich 1.JPG (252.14 KiB) Viewed 3570649 times

1957 Mitchell Gumprich 2.jpg (393.97 KiB) Viewed 3570649 times

[Bonanza]

Thanks Wallace.

[Wallace Carney]

Does anyone want me to continue?

[cshannon772]

Wallace, Please do continue! Not only am I interested in the history of the Mitchell, I would also just like to end the speculative arguments that have gone on for far too long. I have studied the CAPs / 304s for a number of years and have a little over 100 reels in my collection, literature, advertising etc. which leads me to some pretty strong opinions based on the evidence I have acquired. Absolutely nothing that I can provide a definitive conclusion which can be defended...Which, as you well know, you have to do forever after.

Kind Regards,
Chris

[Ted Lanham]

Wallace,
Though it will add to your workload, I agree with Chris.

Regards,
Ted Lanham

[Wallace Carney]

Chris, I'm looking for things on my computer to share with you but in the meantime, I'll share this for your records:

SEE:

1955 Mitchell 300 with 55' Tag.JPG (42.78 KiB) Viewed 3570375 times

Thanks Ted, I'll do my best but as you know, I have several irons in the first so my productivity is slowed down quite a bit. But what's the rush, right?

Cheers,
Wallace

[Ted Lanham]

Wallace,
Plenty of time, so no hurry.

Ted

[Wallace Carney]

First of all, read About Barrie Welham under About Us. Then read this, a letter to me from Barrie:

Wallace

Herewith a first stab at my involvement with the Mitchell reel.   You can
re-write it in your own style so I have purposely not written in the 1st
person   Over to you   Let me know what you think

Barrie Welham

Birth date: 2/14/1930

Barrie Welham took on the responsibility of selling Mitchell reels to the U. K. market in 1967. As an 18 year old he had been a successful tournament caster with several world records to his credit.   In the early 1960's he joined the tackle trade as Sales Manager to J.W. Young and Sons of Redditch the reel makers who built a big range of fly reels, centre-pins and the Ambidex fixed spool. From there he went  to K.P. Morritt who made the INTREPID range of inexpensive fixed spools where he became Sales Director in charge of the home market as well  as exports. But he had the ambition to be his own boss and when the chance to represent MITCHELL occurred it was his chance to have his own business.

Jules and Jean-Pierre Gumprich owned the Ets Impecco Company in Paris and they were responsible for Mitchell worldwide sales outside of France. Barrie was known to them from his days with Intrepid and they recognized him as someone who might expand Mitchell sales in the U.K. For some years Barrie had fished and shot in the counties of both Hampshire and Dorset and had visions of eventually retiring there so he took the opportunity to leave London and established his new business in Southampton -the sea port where the consignments of Mitchell reels would arrive.

Barrie Welham had been a close personal friend of Tom Lenk, President of the Garcia Corporation in America, from his days at J.W. Young whom Garcia represented for fly reels in the US. Barrie had attended Garcia sales conferences in the U.S so he knew most of the key staff and also the innermost workings of the company. Elsewhere in the world, Mitchell reels were sold under various vendor names but in America and Canada, Mitchell was prefaced with Garcia to bond it into their wide range of fishing tackle products including the Garcia Conolon fishing rods.

Garcia Mitchell reels had superior packaging and finer sales literature to the Mitchell reels sold anywhere else in the world. Barrie felt he needed something similar to get him going in England. He spoke to the Impecco owners and they jointly approached Tom Lenk who had no ambitions to enter the European market but liked the idea of having someone in the U.K. who could look after any Garcia visitors be they company or private friends of Tom Lenk. Tom doubted if the Garcia name could be registered, as they had once tried for this, but Barrie was successful and he registered the name and the new company was born but not as a Garcia subsidiary but as a fully independent company in 1967 in London but in 1968, he moved his new business to Southampton -the sea port where the consignments of Mitchell reels would arrive.

From then on all reels coming into U.K. were in Garcia U.S. boxes with Garcia U.S. literature but with a U.K. Guarantee card with Barrie’s picture (the man in the trilby hat) together with a welcoming message. Up until 1967 the Millard Wholesale Company (Milbro) had been the Mitchell U.K. agent but they had chosen to import some cheaper reels from a company in Japan who later became the Diawa brand that is famous to this day.

Barrie retained Millards as a wholesale distributor but also widened the distribution network to include other large wholesalers such as Forshaws of Liverpool, Pegley Davies and several others. Records show that Millards top ever year for sales was some 32,000 Mitchell reels with an average of around 28,000. In 1967, when Garcia U.K. (London) came on the scene they had sold some 19,000 with 4 months to go. In Barrie's next full year U.K. sales totaled over 50,000 and within three years, 100,000 and topped out at over 164,000. Most of these were fixed spools like the famous 300, but not all for the Mitchell multipliers also earned an important place in the saltwater market and the auto-rewind 710 fly reel also had a strong following with trout fishers. In 1971 Barrie received the silver Mitchell presented to National Agents to commemorate the worldwide sale of 20 million Mitchell reels. At the time it was as if nothing could stop the Mitchell brand.

Every angling schoolboy aspired to owning a Mitchell, every match angler certainly had at least one and many had more. Richard Walkers British Record Carp was caught using a Mitchell 300. Many of the largest and most talked about coarse fishing competitions were won by anglers using Mitchell reels. The heaviest weight ever to win the All England match was taken on a Mitchell. These outstanding achievements were recognized by the U.K. Garcia Company with a top quality, beautifully engraved, laurel wreath medal that are still highly coveted by tackle collectors today.

When Tom Lenk died from a brain tumor the U.S Garcia Corporation was reestablished under the Pure Fishing label. They wanted a world exclusive on the Garcia name and Barrie sold it to them in 1981

He then needed a name which was not too noticeable different and LEEDA was the choice. It was short and ended in an A and was outlined by a red box similar to the Garcia red wedge. The LEEDA name lives on to this day as a major U.K. fishing tackle wholesaler. In 1991 Barrie sold the Leeda Company, along with subsidiary companies such as British Fly Reels and a share in Steades of Sheffield to Porter Chadburn, a venture capitalist company.


I AM NOT SURE WHAT HAPPENED TO MITCHELL FROM HERE ON IN

Trust all this rough type means something

Best wishes
Barrie

I know this means more to our UK mates, but it means a lot to me as a historian. The picture below is of the Mitchell reel Richard Walker used as Barrie mentioned, and others have mistakenly said this was a 2nd version Mitchell reel. Not True Grasshopper

See:

Richard Walker Presentation Reel.jpg (127.92 KiB) Viewed 3570336 times

More to Come, Wallace

[Bailarm]

Wallace, he reel you have illustrated is indeed a reel presented to Dick Walker, but it's not the reel he caught the record carp with, which was indeed a 'second version'. It has recently changed hands here in the UK.

The reel shown was actually presented to Walker by the Angling Times magazine in 1953 and was for winning a match which became known as the 'Walker Sails' match.

I do have several image of it here, including the plate, I'll just have to seek out permission to post them here.

It was a bit of a sales promotion to be frank ... a sort of head-to-head between a match angler and a specimen angler. There's a bit about it here:

https://fishingmagic.com/forums/threads ... 358/page-2

And a lot more here for MRM forum who are this UK forum as well:

https://www.traditionalfisherman.com/vi ... 8&start=10

[Bailarm]

There is a lovely rumour, which I've yet to confirm with Barrie, that his decision to take over the Mitchell franchise from Milbro, on behalf of Garcia was due to his employer K.P.Morritts taking advantage of a Government Enterprise Scheme to take work to poor employment areas


They moved from the edge of the Greater London Area, from Sutton in Surrey to Cornwall! Some 300 miles away and at that time only really accessible from the road through Exeter in Devon which was notorious for traffic jams.

I remember those terrible jams to get to the West Country myself as a lad.

The story is that Barrie made the journey down there just once and knew he needed another job immediately.

[Wallace Carney]

Bailarm, I really don't have time to try to figure out your point. The only thing I ask from you is the evidence you claim to have; "Evidence Richard Walker acquires2nd version reel" as that would answer a lot of questions.

In the meantime, here's another article from Barrie Welham I Should have posted this first, so anyway:

They also rely on a patent on the Mitchell reel dated August 3, 1948 therefore it must have been first made in 1948!? But wait a minute; besides this patent being in English and not French (an obvious giveaway) what about our soldiers returning from WW2 in 1945 with a 2nd version Mitchell? What about Mitchell showing a 3rd version Mitchell reel dated 1946 in a 1990 catalog? I have so many "what about" responses, for now I'll just post the below article received by my good friend, Mr. Barrie Welham who is helping me nail these facts.

Barrie had a very long history with Carpano & Pons, Impecco, Tom Lenk and especially the man who invented the first Mitchell and his good friend, Maurice Jacquemin. If you don't want to believe my 21 years of hard research, try not believing these words from a man who knows and I have to say, try asking him if he is possibly wrong and you will get a sharp response just like me when I first questioned him!

The Early Years of Mitchell
By Barrie Welham, Retired CEO
Garcia Tackle UK
Southampton, England

"I became closely involved with Mitchell reels in 1967 when I was approached to take on the Mitchell Distribution for the U.K. from London. I formed Garcia Tackle U.K. and in 1968 I set up an office in Southampton near the port of entry.

At that time my friend Maurice Jacquemin, the designer of the reels, told me that the first fishing reels to be produced by Messrs Carpano & Pons were the disc shaped bodied CAP in 1937. Carpano & Pons made these reels for Canne a Peche, a major French wholesaler, which was where the name CAP came from. He also told me that the egg-shaped body Mitchell reel he had designed was first produced in 1939.

Alternative second versions were produced between 1939 and 1945. Volume production got started in 1946 where the product was sold on the French market and by 1947 was expanded to export.

The American GARCIA Company was a business selling natural products such as flax and hemp for string and rope making and silkworm gut to the fishing tackle trade for casts and hook lengths. Otto Gumprich was the President of the U.S. Company and his brother, Jules Gumprich, was in France. Jules sent a Mitchell reel to his brother with the suggestion it would make a saleable product.

The reel was shown to Dick Wolff, an assistant in a New York tackle store, for appraisal. His report was favourable. Garcia got the agency and Dick Wolff joined the Company and rose to the position of a Vice President. Tom Lenk, who had worked for Garcia back in 1938, returned from the 1939-45 conflicts and took to running the company alongside Otto Gumprich with their focus on these fishing reels.

By 1948 Millard Bros – a major wholesaler in Britain – also took the Mitchell agency for U.K., Albatros for the Netherlands, Arca for Belgium and later on, Balzer for Germany. The Canne a Peche Company assisted in sales in France throughout the years.

Initially the first reels made and owned by Carpano & Pons were only made with the Mitchell name engraved but starting in the early 1950s the range grew with models covering both fresh and salt water of various sizes. These began with the Mitchell Salt Water, the Mitchell Otomatic and the Mitchell Rapid.

By the mid-1950s with even more reels in the planning stage, Mitchell saw the need for assigning model numbers for each series. Using their old Codes, the Mitchell became the 300, The Salt Water became the 302, the Otomatic became the 330, and the Rapid became the 350. After Mitchell acquired the rights to the CAP reel in 1954, it was changed to the Mitchell 304.

By 1958 the Mitchell 308 (ultra-light) and the Mitchell 306 (intermediate) series reels were also being marketed worldwide. Many other models evolved throughout the years from these original seven, too numerous to mention.

The engineering quality, for which Carpano & Pons were famous, and the quality of Mitchell reels has never been surpassed. They went on and built many millions of reels and there has never been a range of any other major item of fishing tackle, be it rods, reels, lines, that has achieved anything like the same quantity for a single brand and producer."

Mates, Sorry for the very long post but this information is a must to know. The lines in red show why we're having this discussion!

Bailarm, If you are talking with Mr. Welham, I'm sure he told you about these early years of Mitchell so what happened?

Best Wishes, Wallace

[Bailarm]

Hi Wallace, "my point" was that the reel you illustrated was not the reel that Richard Walker broke the carp record with in 1952. It was the reel presented to him for winning a match set up by the magazine Angling Times in 1953. I have sought permission to upload images to illustrate the point.


Your reference to "Evidence Richard Walker acquires2nd version reel" seems to be referring back to the timeline issue.

The rest of your post harks back to the early Mitchell production issue on which I said I wouldn't post any further. I'm not trying to be rude when I write this, it's just that I don't think we will get anywhere and it will, as always, descend into an argument. There's been enough of those in the past, wouldn't you agree? I recall you writing 'Here we go again' recently, when I first raised the issue......

[Bailarm]

I now have permission to put up and image that helps identify the reel with the plate on better.
Incidentally, Wallace's image is thought to have been taken at a Redditch UK tackle fair..the letter beneath refers to a different reel. I'm told Wallace and Mike Read were both there.

Walker reel 2.jpg (170.16 KiB) Viewed 3570277 times

[Bailarm]

You can see that Richard Walker changed the handle knob. He seems to have fabricated a knob that matches that of Hardy's Altex reel, another that he wrote he was assessing to use for carp, but plumped for the Mitchell due to its perfect line lay.

Wallace's image shows it perfectly.

Another shot of the reel, this time being used on the upper River Ouse on a very light rod indeed:

Walker presentation reel at Redmire 1954.jpg (205.51 KiB) Viewed 3570277 times

To US anglers all this fuss about carp must seem absurd with them now regarded as an invasive pest in the US. But in the UK they were thought totally uncatchable. Dick walker and a few friends decided to have a serious try for them, he even designing and building a split cane rod to do the job...the famous Mark IV rod.

No manufacturers were interested in helping him, but he managed to get hold of some cane in the raw from Allcocks in Redditch and set about making his own rods, with the first three types being rejected.

One he'd broken the record with a 44lb fish everybody copied the dimensions....by everybody I mean every tackle maker in the UK made a version of his Mk.IV rod. Notably he allowed B.James of Ealing to make them under his approval he hand writing his name on the first couple of dozen.

The Mitchell reel he used for the record carp he gave to a neighbouring young lad who showed an interest in fishing, eventually teaching him to split his own cane and taking him fishing to many locations. The reel finally came to light a couple of years ago.


.

[Wallace Carney]

What the heck???

[Bailarm]

Not really Wallace, you put up an image of reel saying it was the reel the original owner set a fish weight record with.

I pointed out that you were sadly in error and have now backed it up with proof with a photograph from Chris Ball here in the UK. In fact isn't your image of the reel a photo you took of his table at the Redditch Tackle Fair?

At what point did I hijack the thread, please?

Can you not accept that you are only human and made an error?

We all do it. And a man accepts when he has done so. I'll go first:

It seems that the real record breaking fish reel may indeed be a third version, not a second version as I stated earlier. I've now seen it and it has a 'boomerang' anti-reverse switch. I made a mistake and I'm owning up to it.


What's more I have done a little research to see just why some people thought it was a second version. My conclusion is this image which it was thought portrayed a second version is the culprit. It is taken from Walker's book Drop Me A Line and is a photo of his reel in use:

dmal 7 RW's second version half bail.JPG (91.42 KiB) Viewed 3570251 times

It does look like it might be a second version, but it's not conclusive. He's using an open bail and a noisy spool as a bite indicator...a method used for carp.....but also for other fish. Look at the reel....sure looks like the Walker-Sails Match reel to me! And that is from 1953, whereas the record fish was taken in 1952 and has, therefore, to have been taken with a different reel.

The full history of the record taking reel has now been identified....by, not surprisingly.....Chris Ball.


It turns out that by 1953 Richard Walker possessed at least three Mitchell reels because as well as the record taking reel, he was given yet another by The Daily Mirror newspaper for catching the carp ( this one being engraved on the rotor) ... and of course he got given the Walker-Sails match reel as well.

[Simone Baschirotto]

Thank you Wallace for this umpteenth work of yours, very interesting and completed with beautiful original images.

[Wallace Carney]

The picture below is of the Mitchell reel Richard Walker used as Barrie mentioned, and others have mistakenly said this was a 2nd version Mitchell reel.

Not True Grasshopper

See:Richard Walker Presentation Reel.jpg

"Many of the largest and most talked about coarse fishing competitions were won by anglers using Mitchell reels." That is what I was referring to so stop twisting words with me and everybody else from what I hear. Honestly, I'm sorry to say, I'm too busy to try to learn about British anglers and their accomplishments. My point and what this thread is supposed to be about is Mitchell Reel History.

You've hijacked this thread for the last time! It seams that your sole purpose in all things Mitchell is to do nothing but try to discredit me and my 21 years of study! I've been attacked by the best and you, my friend, are not amongst the best. What everybody else knows, I will never stop trying to educate Mitchell lovers, whatever their interest in Mitchell may be.

Regards, Wallace

[Wallace Carney]

Hey Simone, Looks like we posted at the same time my friend. Thank you for your kind words.

Best Wishes, Wallace

[Bailarm]

Wallace your last post is most confusing, it quotes yourself and then seems to be having a go at...I presume this....me!

Are you turning this into a personal attack when all I have tried to do is point out, politely, that you may have made an error?

And you go on to suggest that 'from what you hear' I am doing this elsewhere. I'm not. I'm in contact with many other Mitchell fans, but we find ourselves basically, in agreement.

I'm not sure why you are getting so het up over this.

I am being polite. I am not criticising you, I just want an adult discussion.

Is that too much to ask .................. ?

[Wallace Carney]

Dear Mitchell Mates,

I've got several other things to help understand why I'm so convinced of Mitchell development through the early years, mainly 1939 to 1948. This one goes into detail in my book, so trying to keep it short:

Lawrence Harvey, Jr 1945 Mitchell 2nd Version.JPG (224.56 KiB) Viewed 3570139 times

There are many documented cases where servicemen came home bearing gifts. The one I'm most interested in is about Lawrence Harvey, Jr, who served in France's liberation in 1945. He came home with a very special fishing reel, a Mitchell 2nd version in the first known of "brown" box.

Dad Basic Training 1944.jpg (246.58 KiB) Viewed 3570139 times

I have completely documented this "package" as made in 1945 (at the latest). I'm finishing up my Mitchell 2nd version study and will be posting it here on this site ASAP. In the meantime, pay attention to the 2nd Version leaflet in English, printed in France.

Lawrence Harvey, Jr 1945 Mitchell Leaflet in English 1.jpg (165.81 KiB) Viewed 3570139 times

Lawrence Harvey, Jr 1945 Mitchell Leaflet in English 2.jpg (165.28 KiB) Viewed 3570139 times

All the Best,
Wallace

[Wallace Carney]

Hello? or is case closed?

[don309]

My head is spinning now with all the information.

[Wallace Carney]

Hey Don, Mine too my friend

[Simone Baschirotto]

Dear Mitchell Mates,

I've got several other things to help understand why I'm so convinced of Mitchell development through the early years, mainly 1939 to 1948. This one goes into detail in my book, so trying to keep it short:

Lawrence Harvey, Jr 1945 Mitchell 2nd Version.JPG

There are many documented cases where servicemen came home bearing gifts. The one I'm most interested in is about Lawrence Harvey, Jr, who served in France's liberation in 1945. He came home with a very special fishing reel, a Mitchell 2nd version in the first known of "brown" box.

Dad Basic Training 1944.jpg

I have completely documented this "package" as made in 1945 (at the latest). I'm finishing up my Mitchell 2nd version study and will be posting it here on this site ASAP. In the meantime, pay attention to the 2nd Version leaflet in English, printed in France.

Lawrence Harvey, Jr 1945 Mitchell Leaflet in English 1.jpg


Lawrence Harvey, Jr 1945 Mitchell Leaflet in English 2.jpg


All the Best,
Wallace

This fact is interesting, I continue to gather conflicting information and I hope one day to have a definitive answer, now I am reading the book by Ronald Babulis which remains in line with Caminade's theories.
I find every book interesting, I'm still waiting for your Wallace, I'm ashamed not to have it but it was promised to me by a friend in England and I trust him, it's nice to receive a gift from a friend and reciprocate.
I haven't found a Brown box for my collection yet but I'm looking for it.
I have some 2nd version I noticed that mine has a press-fit reel case, no screwing on.
I wonder if these are changed during the 2nd half bail version. Mine has a brass gear, I try to put photos of the reel and no screwing spool case.

[Wallace Carney]

Dear Simone,

That is a beautiful reel, almost looks too good to be true... For your information, the Mitchell that came in the brown box was like your reel including the brass transfer gear. I have done a study on the evolution of transfer gears. I am always happy to share my findings with anyone and everyone. The attached images are the results of my findings...

ALL 1-4.jpg (346.76 KiB) Viewed 3569931 times

and the rest:

ALL 5-8.jpg (352 KiB) Viewed 3569931 times

The first one was on all 1st versions I studied and a couple 2nd versions. The last one, or # 8, came on 3rd version half bails. I hope this helps you in your endeavors.

Best Regards, Wallace

[piscesman]

Hey guys quick question. In Wallace's pictures of the serviceman bringing home the 2nd version I noticed the metal spare spool case the lid is screwed on. But in Simone's pictures the case simple slides onto the container. Any idea when the change took place?? One would think the slide on container would be much rarer than the screw on one???
Kim

[Simone Baschirotto]

Dear Simone,

That is a beautiful reel, almost looks too good to be true... For your information, the Mitchell that came in the brown box was like your reel including the brass transfer gear. I have done a study on the evolution of transfer gears. I am always happy to share my findings with anyone and everyone. The attached images are the results of my findings...


ALL 1-4.jpg



and the rest:

ALL 5-8.jpg



The first one was on all 1st versions I studied and a couple 2nd versions. The last one, or # 8, came on 3rd version half bails. I hope this helps you in your endeavors.

Best Regards, Wallace

Thanks Wallace, I'm waiting for your complete study on 2nd version.

[Simone Baschirotto]

Hey guys quick question. In Wallace's pictures of the serviceman bringing home the 2nd version I noticed the metal spare spool case the lid is screwed on. But in Simone's pictures the case simple slides onto the container. Any idea when the change took place?? One would think the slide on container would be much rarer than the screw on one???
Kim

This was also my question, I found that case that closes with pressure together with this 2nd version.
the spools (small and high capacity) are in exceptional condition, eliminating old classic lubricants and keeping a reel in the dark allows you to preserved it

[Wallace Carney]

Hey guys quick question. In Wallace's pictures of the serviceman bringing home the 2nd version I noticed the metal spare spool case the lid is screwed on. But in Simone's pictures the case simple slides onto the container. Any idea when the change took place?? One would think the slide on container would be much rarer than the screw on one???
Kim

Hi Kim, The containers with the press on lids are rarer but that's all I know. There's not enough evidence to support any more that that. I have seen several early Mitchell 3rd Versions in their boxes with the press on lids, but the rest were screw on. Wish I could answer this but maybe someone else can? Regards, Wallace

[Simone Baschirotto]

Hey guys quick question. In Wallace's pictures of the serviceman bringing home the 2nd version I noticed the metal spare spool case the lid is screwed on. But in Simone's pictures the case simple slides onto the container. Any idea when the change took place?? One would think the slide on container would be much rarer than the screw on one???
Kim

I believe that the first aluminum spool boxes were with a cap that closed by pressure and then closed by screwing.
1st-2nd version pressure
2nd-3rd version screwing.
I have no doubt that pressure caps are much harder to find.
I have seen that the interior in the former is of 2 types
1 in pure clear aluminum
2 in darker aluminum, seems to have a slight coating (like mine, I think this came out after but still before the screw cap)
I can be wrong, Today Wallace was certainly 300 older than me.

[Simplex]

Hello Wallace,
Vast subject for which I am one of the people who have no opinion on the different theories. In France, Mitchell documents for this period are virtually impossible to find. Even fishery journals from this period do not mention Mitchell.
The first document that I found is from June 1949 with an article on a pike caught with a Mitchell reel, unfortunately we cannot make out the reel in the photo.
So I read everything you write carefully.
Concerning the photos that you put on the site, the one with the Salt-Water is of the same type as a document of the "Canne à Pêche" indicating in novelty 1953 the Mitchell full bail with aluminum handle and the "Mitchell Mer" (no indication Salt-Water)
Best regards
CL

[Simplex]

NOTICE 4M SALTWATER0001.jpg (336.34 KiB) Viewed 3569826 times

NOTICE 4M SALTWATER0004.jpg (299.18 KiB) Viewed 3569826 times

[allansharkey]

Wallace, I have followed your site for ten years and have your book and as stated before used it, for the same period as identification of the reels I restore, part numbers and pictures to keep the reels I acquire close to as possible when they are completed. All the information I see and use, is to the best of your knowledge correct as you have stated many times, the work you and others do on the site is remarkable and greatly appreciated by me and I am sure many others, its hard to research the past when records were either lost or destroyed and the information some time passed on by memory which plays tricks. I find it fascinating the Mitchell made reels during the war, especially in France, I had a German buy a reel from me some years ago, as he was given one by a British solider it was a Mitchell half bail reel, he did not say what version it was, I am sure he did not know or recall but it made him happy to have another one, keep up the work and I hope the site gets back to its former glory, time permitting, it is a pure tribute and labour of love for Mitchell reels, regards Allan

[caminade]

My name is Bernard Caminade
Those who know my book, (Le Grand Livre des Moulinets Français) know that I am not a specialist in Mitchell. I devote 11 pages out of the 270 of the book to it.
The content of these pages owes a lot to French collectors specializing in Mitchell.
My main contribution consists in the compilation of production lists held by hand by Emile Pugeot. I come back to what I was able to learn later.
I must admit having a passion for creating a book on a collector's subject and ensuring its promotion.
I immediately followed up on Rolands Babulis's suggestion to edit and distribute its book (in English). It took all my passion to complete the business! Nothing is ever perfect, and no book fully satisfies its creator.
However, I think I can safely say that it cannot be absent from the libraries of Mitchell enthusiasts.
It is essential in terms of its content and here it is involved in the controversy over the date of birth of the Mitchell 300.
I will say here that I have no final opinion. I can, however, make my contribution.
About the fabrications during the war:
The magazine Au Bord de l'Eau contains the following advertisements:
LUXOR from January to May 1940 - from July 1941 to April 1944
PECOS from January to May 1940 - "Model 41" from March to November 1941 - "Model 1942 from February 1942 to August 1944
SILENTREEL by Pezon & Michel in May and June 1940 - February 1941 - February, April, June and September 1942 - July and August 1943 - June and August 1945
MEPPS SUPER VAMP - March to August 1941 - BABYVAMP in January and April 1946
FELTON in June, July October and November 1941
HELIFX (from VMC) in June, July, September and October 1941
PERROT LP2 from May to December 1945 and January and September 1945 November and December 1945
EXCELSIOR of MARGOU in July, August 145
REXOR de BAZIN in August, September and October 1946
Obviously reels were made during the war.

My first book Identifiation et cote des moulinets français dates from 1994.
I had met Emile Pugeot at Mitchell Sports who had given me production lists held by hand since 1946. I therefore said about the 300 "production can not begin until after the war ".

This turmoil over this topic brought me back to the field.
Here is what emerges from a text of an interview made in 1992 by an agent of the municipal archives service of Cluses on June 9, 1992.
Mr. Emile Pugeot, born in 1921, joined Carpano and Pons in August 1938 as a freshly graduated mechanical technician.
"We already made reels (?)"...including parts for the CAP and Pecos at the initiative of. MM Eugène Sulzer, Pépin and Carpano.
I 1939 the war mobilizes many foremen.
Pugeot started in 41, 42 returned in 43 and left for the STO. Pons got his return as "special assigned" and appointed him machining foreman. Innovations: electric razors, lighter and "Mitchell 300 reel in 46".
We therefore remember that industrial production began in 1946. But Emile Pugeot was not involved in the reel sector until then and "there were 150 to 200 employees". A pre-series of 300 therefore remains possible in the movement of Cap and Pecos.
The original of the report is available in pdf in French …
At your disposal for Rolands' book The EarlyYears Of The Mitchell Fishing Reel.
And sorry for my English.
Bernard

[Simone Baschirotto]

Thanks for your intervention Bernard, I believe all collectors know your name, quoting what is written about you ..

"Expert, investigator, researcher, historian, publisher, fisherman ... Bernard Caminade is all of these at the same time. This insatiable curious is one of the most renowned experts in ancient fishing equipment. Indispensable when it comes to exhuming, identifying, establishing a quotation, this discreet man watches over our fish heritage with almost scientific rigor. "

I am very happy to see another experienced person join and participate in these discussions,Wallace,Christian,Clark,Bernard ecc

I also take this opportunity to thank you for the new book I received and I am fully satisfied with the contents.

DISTINTI SALUTI
Simone Baschirotto

[caminade]

Thanks Simone,
I needed this encouragement - I continue on the same line.
With my message I annoyed Rolands who accuses me of not having liked the book!
A development is therefore necessary!
I did not participate in his book as Michell Specialist. I would be very unfounded to take a position on this point of the Mitchell 300's date of birth. However, I am continuing what I started by communicating what I know with an opinion limited to these precise points.
The patent for the 300 dates from July 1948.
Taking into account the fact that Carpano & Pons had previously filed more than 200 patents, one can think that this filing is prior to the first placing on the market.
This is indeed what can be found on the INPI website.

Mandatory condition for a patent filing
The invention must be new, that is to say it must not relate to an innovation which has already be made accessible to the public, whoever the author, the date, the place, the means. and the form of this presentation to the public.
...
If your invention or an equivalent technique has already been disclosed before the filing date of your patent application, you will not be able to obtain protection.
...
Suppose, for example, that an engineer has developed a non-polluting fuel. He unveils its composition in a scientific journal and, the day after publication, he files a patent application. Its deposit is then made too late! His invention is no longer new and the fact that he was the source of the disclosure does not change that.

We can therefore think that the prototype or pre-series reels remained hidden in Mr. Jacquemin's laboratory ... No reel would therefore have been released.
Unless the risk of seeing the contested patent was taken with full knowledge. Who would dare risk a clash with such a powerful company?
A question: were there copies between 1948 and 1968? If so, were there any procedures?
As an appendix to my previous message, I attach the original of the interview of M. Pugeot.
I dare not pretend a translation of it. May be later...
One more thing ... Rolands' book is not limited to the date of manufacture of the first 300. I believe its content places it among the top performing books written on those "Early Years ...". This controversy hides the essential - it is a reference work!
Amitiés
Bernard