It is currently 04 Aug 2021, 23:31


Previous  1, 2, 3  Next New Topic Add Reply
Author Message
Post 07 Jan 2019, 07:39 • #26 
Guide
Joined: 09/22/14
Posts: 203
Location: Charlottesville-VA
paveglass wrote:
Since I frequently hike some distance to fish small streams, I wish I could find a “line holder” that was very light.

A plastic, one sided, line holder with no winding mechanism would be fine. I’d use maybe a half a DT line with no backing and manually adjust turns for the distance I wanted. It would be adequate for most small streams and would be light enough to carry on long, or through hikes.


Check evil-bay for ice fishing reels. Lots of small, cheap, sub 2oz options.

Bob


Top
  
Quote
Post 07 Jan 2019, 11:06 • #27 
Glass Fanatic
Joined: 02/12/16
Posts: 3956
Location: USA-CO
Almost all my reels are small-arbor clickers, and increasingly of vintage origin. Exceptions are a couple of Orvis Battenkill mid-arbors, a TFO Prism, and a little Ross Evolution 1, the last to tame those torrid 8" brook trout. ;-)


Top
  
Quote
Post 07 Jan 2019, 14:55 • #28 
Guide
Joined: 09/11/13
Posts: 153
Location: Houston, TX
I go vintage reels on vintage glass. I have a Fin-Nor A/R #3 that pairs really nicely with a SA System 11. That System 11 came with 2 removable fighting butts that could turn it into a 2-hand rod, I cut one down to be the size of a typical fighting butt. And I have a Hardy-made System 10 reel (spooled with 9wt line) on a Fenwick FF98. I also have a 7wt Wonderod with an old JW Young Beaudex reel. For a more modern flavor I like my Cabelas CGR with a Fin Nor FR8.

I'm a sucker for those Fin Nor reels and the whole Scientific Angler line- I have a System 5 combo a System 7 combo and the System 10 reel came with the System 11 rod from the gent I bought it from.

But seeing Ron's Sea Venture reels I may have to dive into that world. Those are beautiful reels.


Top
  
Quote
Post 07 Jan 2019, 17:15 • #29 
Glass Fanatic
Joined: 02/27/16
Posts: 1756
Location: US-IL
Yes,sometimes you need some stopping power.Black bass love jump and fight but typically dont make long runs.We don't have pure stripers here much any more but the hybrid "wiper" is a handful on any tackle.And they are generally stocked in bigger impoundments to control shad.Mostly power plant cooling lakes around here with warm water year round.They will fight themselves to death.Carp,especially grass carp can go on some good runs too,you never know when you throw into a pod if your gonna hook a 10 pounder or a 50.The last one i fought last year had me into my backing in 10 seconds and broke the hook.The hardy clone reel performed well.Gotta love the hot sauce.


Top
  
Quote
Post 07 Jan 2019, 23:09 • #30 
Sport
Joined: 07/25/18
Posts: 73
Location: South central IL
I like vintage reels on vintage rods, I even like some of my vintage reels on modern rods. Martin reels are nice on my Steffen Rods, and I have an Ocean City 35 I like on my Kabuto 803. I try a lot of reels on different rods until I find one that just feels right.


Top
  
Quote
Post 10 Jan 2019, 17:36 • #31 
Guide
Joined: 08/21/18
Posts: 125
Location: West Yellowstone and Atlanta
I am new to vintage rods and reels: own one Fenwick FF 79, with an 806 on the way. I have two Medalists going out soon for refurb.

To what extent do folks try to match the "vintage" of rod and reel.

I believe my Medalists 1494DA and 1494 1/2DA with made in usa on the edge of the reel are likely 70's versions? And as such "match" the vintage of the 806 but not the 79? And i believe the Medalists with Diamolite on the left and Akron on the right are probably 60's versions?


Top
  
Quote
Post 10 Jan 2019, 17:51 • #32 
Global Moderator
Joined: 04/20/07
Posts: 8172
Location: US-ME
It would be hard to find a more authentic match than a Fenwick-Pflueger pairing. They were often pictured that way in Fenwick advertising.

Wthorpe, your query is so close to another, that I think they will be even more fun and interesting if combined, so I moved and attached your post to the earlier discussion in progress.


Top
  
Quote
Post 10 Jan 2019, 20:48 • #33 
Master Guide
Joined: 06/28/16
Posts: 930
Location: Northern WI
I’ve never liked the looks of large arbor reels. Nowadays all my reels are beat up Hardy Lightweights.


Top
  
Quote
Post 10 Jan 2019, 20:50 • #34 
New Member
Joined: 12/28/18
Posts: 19
Location: Da U.P.
No, I do not.


Top
  
Quote
Post 10 Jan 2019, 23:03 • #35 
Glass Fanatic
Joined: 08/25/08
Posts: 1465
Location: Delton, MI
For you guys that think the extra weight of one reel over another affects how tired you get in your hike to go fishing, just get a haircut or take a pee before you start walking. It will make a bigger difference. For those that think large arbor reels make a difference in how many fish you catch, I’d like to see you fish, because you must be catching a thousand fish a day for it to make a difference.


Top
  
Quote
Post 11 Jan 2019, 00:48 • #36 
Glass Fanatic
Joined: 06/21/06
Posts: 2616
Location: Orygun
I use both....both in the salt, both in fresh, both for big fish, both for little fish.

the only absolute is that there are no absolutes...


Top
  
Quote
Post 11 Jan 2019, 01:06 • #37 
Master Guide
Joined: 02/14/15
Posts: 684
Location: NM
I don’t care too much, but I definitely don’t mind modern reels on vintage rods. There is a thread on here about a guy who caught a great muskie on a Fenwick with a modern reel. Looked great. I don’t own a vintage rod for that kind of fishing but if I did I’d still use a modern reel, simply because I have some. I certainly wouldn’t go looking for a 1498 just because I’m using a system 10, which btw I’d love to cast.


Top
  
Quote
Post 11 Jan 2019, 02:46 • #38 
Guide
Joined: 04/04/13
Posts: 137
Location: Central Maryland
I think that large arbor reels are too ugly to use on any rod, vintage or not, but I guess they make vanilla and chocolate for a reason.


Top
  
Quote
Post 11 Jan 2019, 10:39 • #39 
Global Moderator
Joined: 04/20/07
Posts: 8172
Location: US-ME
Always a fun topic, no matter which forum or when.

viewtopic.php?p=178176#p178176

viewtopic.php?p=85236#p85236


Top
  
Quote
Post 11 Jan 2019, 10:41 • #40 
Piscator
Joined: 08/10/05
Posts: 17338
Location: downtown Bulverde, Texas
borrowing and paraphrasing Bull Durham, disc drags are fascist.


Top
  
Quote
Post 11 Jan 2019, 11:01 • #41 
Master Guide
Joined: 06/24/11
Posts: 979
Location: Belgium
I don't really worry about the vintage but I do prefer relatively small diameter reels on trout rods. The compactness translates into less inertia - something I can feel on any non - straight cast - pretty much what I use all the time when fishing for trout in moving water. It's the closest thing you can have to the much touted center axis reel (and the idea behind Christian Horgren's special offset reel seat). 2 7/8 to 31/4 inch reels with low profile reel feet that keep the reel body close to the rod are in my sweetspot.

But if a large arbor was the only thing available I wouldn't let it bother me one bit.


Top
  
Quote
Post 11 Jan 2019, 11:35 • #42 
Global Moderator
Joined: 04/20/07
Posts: 8172
Location: US-ME
You know, somebody can describe the history better than me, but winches, wheels, and axles, aren't really "modern," and LA reels aren't that "modern" either. Some are sort of like Frank Lloyd Wright designs. They look fascinating for a week or two, but eventually somebody actually lives in the place and has to look at it every day and the "modern" appeal kind of wears off. At least people stop crashing off the road gawking at the place, having seen enough of it and not wanting to have to look at it again.

LA reels do reflect some "new" technology in terms of production economy and CNC machining, but machining metal isn't new either. It just became more affordable for mass production. Some "brake" materials have been around since the plastics revolution, and cork came a little before that. I forget who invented cork.

What is "modern" is the idea of a "brake" that stops a fish because the graphite rod lacks the shock absorption to do that--in the rare instance where it is desirable to. The "vintage" method was to manage the fish's runs and surges so it could have its way to a degree, using up energy and tiring in the process. Fish aren't usually landed by being stopped, but by confusion and fatigue of pulling against adeptly applied resistance. Reels combined with the angler's manipulation, feathering the spool or rim, have always been able to do that.

More "modern" to a degree is the idea that equipment catches fish.

Also "modern" is awkwardly sized reels with minimal line capacity for their cumbersome diameter. Some models offer a bit more capacity by exceptionally wide arbors, making them clumsy in two dimensions. All that hardware produces weight, and if weight to line capacity is compared, the LA reels are generally heavier than any number of "old" "vintage" reels. As far as I know, none of the various metals used to produce fly reels have gotten lighter except, possibly, for slight changes in strength to weight of some alloy. Gosh, I don't think elements get lighter just because of a new pastel color fishing shirt. I don't think you can even vote to change atomic numbers.

Better to just refer to "conventional arbor" or conventional fly reels. There are many good ones made today by modern methods, and they offer the same good characteristics of good ones made decades ago. Even the venerable Pflueger is a midarbor reel.

For "modern" reels, the most significant development is in the range and types suitable for heavy duty saltwater fishing and various othe "modern" fisheries that were much more limited three decades ago or more, such that a smaller range of high quality reels--and fewer highly functional modestly priced reels--were available.

The most "modern" reel of recent times that intrigued me was the Backwinder, but I never got to check one out so I'm not certain its design was modern, not evolutionary, or just something Buckminster Fuller had already thought of.

If I ever run across one at a yard sale in Millinocket, I am going to snap it right up. But in the meantime, I'd enjoy an account from any user of this reel, which I wouldn't hesitate to try on any rod, new or old. Noting Giogio's very sharp points posted just as I had about finished this post, I think the Backwinder may have the advantageous feel of the inherently more compact conventional reel.


Top
  
Quote
Post 11 Jan 2019, 12:29 • #43 
Piscator
Joined: 08/10/05
Posts: 17338
Location: downtown Bulverde, Texas
Fast pick-up rate is of course the argument for large arbor, and to make up for small capacity, they created a market for "gel-spun" backing, aka spectra and dyneema braid.
I've definitely been deep into the 350 yds backing on my Lamson LP3.5 catching kings.
There's a bit of faddish to the whole thing, though large arbors have been here since Scarborough wooden reels c. 1840.


Top
  
Quote
Post 11 Jan 2019, 12:56 • #44 
Glass Fanatic
Joined: 11/06/17
Posts: 1943
Location: South of Joplin
It's all about marketing, there is more profit in rebranding than in R&D.

Not sure what makes a reel modern or what constitutes 'large arbor' but some perspective on the newness of the ideas; The wheel invented in Iraq about 3500 BC. Winches were described by Greeks ~480 BC. " In 1651, English literature first reported a “wind” installed within two feet of the lower end of the rod. This is usually accepted as the earliest known written reference to a reel." ORCA
Just guessing I'd say that 1641 "wind" was very probably a "large arbor" just to get the job done simply and with no regard to aesthetics

I used my 1498 on many rods and it always worked whether the rod was 7' or 9.5' , 3oz or 6oz; but I do increase the arbor size with as much Greenspot as I can fit and still load the line nicely. I don't think I have ever had or used a "balanced" rig. I possibly have never seen one.


Top
  
Quote
Post 11 Jan 2019, 15:40 • #45 
Glass Fanatic
Joined: 06/09/05
Posts: 2260
Location: US-CO
CrustyBugger wrote:
For you guys that think the extra weight of one reel over another affects how tired you get in your hike to go fishing, just get a haircut or take a pee before you start walking. It will make a bigger difference. For those that think large arbor reels make a difference in how many fish you catch, I’d like to see you fish, because you must be catching a thousand fish a day for it to make a difference.


Hahaha! No wonder we call you Crusty!

However...last summer as I trudged up the Continental Divide Trail at 12,500 ft...I would have dropped every ounce I could. I have decided that my smallest Teton reel will serve me well. If I am going to that much trouble to get someplace...I think I deserve to use a decent reel when fishing there.

With some shrewd purchases and adjustments to my gear I have saved some weight. My pack/tent/sleeping system weighed 14 lbs last summer, now I have it down to 8 lbs. ...which should allow me to enjoy a fine reel that weighs 1/4 lb. ;-)

I have never been much of a large arbor reel person. If I need a setup to take up line in a hurry, I use an old Martin multiplier that works well for that purpose.


Top
  
Quote
Post 14 Jan 2019, 10:49 • #46 
Guide
Joined: 10/19/17
Posts: 102
Location: West of the east and east of the west
I know some of these large arbor reels are huge, but I've never understood why a large arbor would pick up line any faster than a standard one with backing wound on to make it the same size?


Top
  
Quote
Post 14 Jan 2019, 11:41 • #47 
Piscator
Joined: 08/10/05
Posts: 17338
Location: downtown Bulverde, Texas
well, no, if they're the same diameter, pick-up rate is identical.
A Martin multiplier will put 70' back on the spool in about 2-3 seconds, and this is a fairly light click-pawl, about 5 oz (as opposed to the much heavier M72 disc drag version) - I like it on 8' glass
Image


Top
  
Quote
Post 14 Jan 2019, 17:54 • #48 
Guide
Joined: 10/19/17
Posts: 102
Location: West of the east and east of the west
bulldog1935 wrote:
well, no, if they're the same diameter, pick-up rate is identical.


Yeah, so what's the supposed advantage of the large arbor? Cool reel, by the way!


Top
  
Quote
Post 14 Jan 2019, 18:24 • #49 
Piscator
Joined: 08/10/05
Posts: 17338
Location: downtown Bulverde, Texas
thanks - I think the idea is a 3-3/4" large arbor easily holds a big WF line with 150 yds gel-spun backing
A small arbor 3" will hold this with dacron backing, and the large arbor pick-up is faster, and possibly lighter overall.
I've given my examples on the thread and the one time I do have a need for fast pickup (white bass), I go to my multiplier.
I've probably made it clear I don't see great advantage to large arbor, and gave my one disadvantage where it was harder on the drag.

The Valentine planetary multiplier is also a neat idea (from the 1905 Eton Sun patent), with 1.4x pickup-rate built into the mechanism - in the 375, that's equivalent pick-up to a 5-1/4" diameter.
Image Image
These were a great buy in the '80s at $120, and have more than doubled in value.


Top
  
Quote
Post 14 Jan 2019, 19:21 • #50 
Glass Fanatic
Joined: 11/06/17
Posts: 1943
Location: South of Joplin
Larger the diameter of the arbor the longer the line picked up in each revolution- basic arithmetic from iirc 3rd grade, 1' spool arbor on a 3' spool times 3.1416 = 3.1416' of line on each turn; 2' arbor on a 3' spool times 3.1416 = 6.2832' of line picked up on each turn.
Easy as pi.
Of course we aren't going to use a three foot spool on a fly rod but the math applies to what ever size circle is used.

>this doesn't translate directly to greater speed of pickup because the spool can be turned at varying speeds.


Top
  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  

Previous  1, 2, 3  Next New Topic Add Reply



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Google
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group