|
Sorry...I just haven't been on in awhile.
Not sure exactly how to answer the question, but I'll offer this...Leaving aside the personal preferences of builders and the particular advantages of different sizes, there are several realities that constrain us.
The first is the model of Struble reel seat itself. Since we're Struble, we're only interested in bringing Struble models back to market (not that we wouldn't offer new ones at some point), and the four models we have brought back are available in their original configurations. Of those currently offered, the only models Struble made in a downlocking option are the Model 20 and Model 27s (which is a smaller version of the original 27-- same size as the D2s). The 24 and 15LX3 did not have downlocking options; despite this, we are considering a DL option for the 24.
There are also market realities. The simple fact is uplocking reel seats are significantly more popular than downlocking. I think it's safe to say downlocking has enjoyed a bit of a renaissance in the last 7-10 years or so, so we're happy to offer downlocking options; however, with limited finances available (at least for us), the lion's share will go toward uplocking.
The other market reality concerns the diameter. The .640 diameter has become pretty standard-issue, not to mention, again, it was the diameter of the original Struble models we offer (with the exception of the 27s). The .687 diameter is pretty rare and I imagine that is because its popularity with builders/manufacturers waned in favor of the .640 for trout-sized rods years ago.
The other market reality is the inserts. It's hard to make any seat without some kind of plan to make the inserts as well. When considering making seat skeletons in a .687 (or so) size, you also have to ask yourself where will people get the inserts? Overall, inserts are fairly difficult to find in abundance for the .640 models; off the top of my head, I can only think of a few places you can get .687 and they are in short supply and limited wood offerings. I recently shipped 20 old .687 inserts to Japan because a builder there couldn't find any; whereas .640 inserts are in comparative abundance and available from numerous sources in a large variety of wood. Right now, all the old stock .687 inserts we have fit in a shoebox with plenty of room to spare, so not only would making a .687 seat require an investment, but quality inserts would require significant time, planning, and money to prepare as well.
The Struble project has been an interesting one, to say the least; we have learned on the fly, made plenty of missteps, and I don't consider myself an expert on these matters, but have probably thought more about and have more experience on the market side of this than most. We are still only a couple guys in my garage (actually, half my garage)-- and that's not a hipster tagline, it's the truth. We are slowly expanding our offerings but both my partner and I have real jobs (I'm a pastor) and live 800 miles apart; we are pushing the limits of our time, especially now that we've added Trout Smiths (which we have yet to fully launch).
It's definitely not a money-making venture at this point; we do it because we love fly rods and because we've met some incredible people along the way and have yet to have a truly negative interaction with someone (well, maybe one or two), even when we've screwed up. We wish we could offer everything people want, but there simply isn't enough money or time available to us at this point...That said, we have a couple special seats on our minds if the models we've re-introduced do well and one is a .687...We are also exploring some other plans that would materially increase our time and efficiency for both Struble Components and Trout Smiths rods.
Hope this answers your question, at least from our perspective. Thanks for the interest!
|
Posted: 15 Jan 2024, 16:22 • 
