US113 Handle Going Backwards

[Keta]

It' still helps the discussion.  A Tank (and all 113H's) has large AR dogs (dog), deep AR ratchet teeth and stronger AR dog springs (spring).  They do not have this problem.

Last night I drew up a 16T AR ratchet and as soon as I get a reel I will draw up matching AR dogs.  Then I'll have to either make springs or find ones that work in my parts pile.

[Alto Mare]

It' still helps the discussion.  A Tank (and all 113H's) has large AR dogs (dog), deep AR ratchet teeth and stronger AR dog springs (spring).  They do not have this problem.

Yes! You are correct on that Lee.

[steelfish]

Last night I drew up a 16T AR ratchet and as soon as I get a reel I will draw up matching AR dogs.  Then I'll have to either make springs or find ones that work in my parts pile.

You never rest Lee,
The ratchet you sent me looks pretty strong, I think you just need to cut new dogs and more reliable and stronger springs.

[johndtuttle]

Sal, after some quick thoughts I believe your idea of a better ratchet gear is going to be the ultimate fix.

Meanwhile I think shimming with washers will help greatly. In the pic you can see there is plenty of room for washers & the dog is flush with top of pin.

Edited, I just looked at mine and your ratchet is on right.

[johndtuttle]

Due to the diameter of the spool on most reels of today, manufacturers don't have much choice but to give their reels high gear ratio.
The older guys at Penn had it right going with a taller spool, but no one is following .
I'm starting to open up a few lever drag reels lately and not crazy about what I'm seeing. Reels with small diameter spools work 3-4 time harder than their big brothers. Heat builds up fast when you're working that hard to retrieve the same amount of line, but at the very least...they're quiet .
Again, that's another story.

We are still trending in the right direction Sal.  Penn needs to fix the problem with this good production reel....if I could sneak one past the boss I'd have one but she inventoried my gear and is watching with a sharp Bobbitt knife. 


I don't think it's using a cast dog, the AR dog is too small, the ratchets are rounded from stamping and the springs are not well designed.  It might also be the wrong SS alloy.

No :Lee, we are comparing reels and that's not what Rivverrat was asking for, I apologized because I started it with my first answer to him.

Sal, the reason they are going to smaller spools is because you then can use a smaller frame---weight savings and a stiffer and stronger reel and more comfortable in the hand. With braid you get more capacity than those older reels.

Yes, they also use higher gear ratios to get a serviceable "inches per turn" that guys want (ie 36" IPT).

In conjunction with far larger main gears to spool height the modern 6:1 reel has more cranking power than a tall 4:1 reel. By far.

[Alto Mare]

Due to the diameter of the spool on most reels of today, manufacturers don't have much choice but to give their reels high gear ratio.
The older guys at Penn had it right going with a taller spool, but no one is following .
I'm starting to open up a few lever drag reels lately and not crazy about what I'm seeing. Reels with small diameter spools work 3-4 time harder than their big brothers. Heat builds up fast when you're working that hard to retrieve the same amount of line, but at the very least...they're quiet .
Again, that's another story.

We are still trending in the right direction Sal.  Penn needs to fix the problem with this good production reel....if I could sneak one past the boss I'd have one but she inventoried my gear and is watching with a sharp Bobbitt knife. 


I don't think it's using a cast dog, the AR dog is too small, the ratchets are rounded from stamping and the springs are not well designed.  It might also be the wrong SS alloy.

No :Lee, we are comparing reels and that's not what Rivverrat was asking for, I apologized because I started it with my first answer to him.

Sal, the reason they are going to smaller spools is because you then can use a smaller frame---weight savings and a stiffer and stronger reel and more comfortable in the hand. With braid you get more capacity than those older reels.

Yes, they also use higher gear ratios to get a serviceable "inches per turn" that guys want (ie 36" IPT).

In conjunction with far larger main gears to spool height the modern 6:1 reel has more cranking power than a tall 4:1 reel. By far.

John, I respectfully disagree!

[johndtuttle]

Due to the diameter of the spool on most reels of today, manufacturers don't have much choice but to give their reels high gear ratio.
The older guys at Penn had it right going with a taller spool, but no one is following .
I'm starting to open up a few lever drag reels lately and not crazy about what I'm seeing. Reels with small diameter spools work 3-4 time harder than their big brothers. Heat builds up fast when you're working that hard to retrieve the same amount of line, but at the very least...they're quiet .
Again, that's another story.

We are still trending in the right direction Sal.  Penn needs to fix the problem with this good production reel....if I could sneak one past the boss I'd have one but she inventoried my gear and is watching with a sharp Bobbitt knife. 


I don't think it's using a cast dog, the AR dog is too small, the ratchets are rounded from stamping and the springs are not well designed.  It might also be the wrong SS alloy.

No :Lee, we are comparing reels and that's not what Rivverrat was asking for, I apologized because I started it with my first answer to him.

Sal, the reason they are going to smaller spools is because you then can use a smaller frame---weight savings and a stiffer and stronger reel and more comfortable in the hand. With braid you get more capacity than those older reels.

Yes, they also use higher gear ratios to get a serviceable "inches per turn" that guys want (ie 36" IPT).

In conjunction with far larger main gears to spool height the modern 6:1 reel has more cranking power than a tall 4:1 reel. By far.

John, I respectfully disagree!

Where to begin....I'll just say it is odd to me that you continually bash one of the last great Made in USA reels. You owe Penn an apology too.

There are people there working in that factory that you insult in this thread. You do not know how to make a better reel than they do.

You have modded one of their most basic reels to be a different reel. Nothing more.

When it comes to fishing reels, by their example, they have taught you everything you know.

[Keta]

I don't see it, it's all about mechanical advantage and there is no "free lunch".   I prefer a reel in the 4:1 to 5:1 range for most of my fishing but have been using small 3:1 Surfmaster 100 and a Monofil 27 lately and they work well for my use, shallow inshore rockfish and lingcod.

I want a Baja Special and will eventually have one but we are seeing problems that the old Penn reels never had.  Hopefully Penn will correct the problems soon.

[johndtuttle]

I don't see it, it's all about mechanical advantage and there is no "free lunch".   I prefer a reel in the 4:1 to 5:1 range for most of my fishing but have been using small 3:1 Surfmaster 100 and a Monofil 27 lately and they work well for my use, shallow inshore rockfish and lingcod.

I want a Baja Special and will eventually have one but we are seeing problems that the old Penn reels never had.  Hopefully Penn will correct the problems soon.

Mechanical advantage is precisely what larger diameter gears, longer handles and smaller spools give you.

Every single company is going to bigger and bigger main gears in proportion to the spool or rotor width for this reason: Mechanical Advantage.

Mechanical advantage is simple math, levers and gears. These companies know what they are doing with real engineers designing their reels.

Braid makes all this possible.

[Tightlines667]

 Power


Cranking power is a function of spool diameter, main gear diameter, gear ratio, and handle arm length.  Intuitively, greater power should be achieved with a lower gear ratio, and longer handle arm.  The relationship between spool diameter, and the diameters of the main and pinion gears and their cooresponding effect on power are not always so intuitive.

It seems that larger spools, and a larger main gear should result in more cranking power, but I am not so sure this is actually the case.  

Greater cranking power can be thought of as taking less force applied at the handle to generate more force at the spool.  

In order to consider the effects of differing spool, pinion gear, main gear diameters, and handle arm length on cranking power...consider a simple low 1:1 gear ratio.  If a reel is designed with a spool diameter to pinion diameter ratio exactly equal to the ratio of handle arm to main gear diameter, then the amount of force applied at the handle will be exactly equal to the amount of force generated at the spool.  In order to gain a mechanical advantage, in terms of applied force, one must either"
1)Decrease the ratio of spool:pinion diameters, or
2)Increase the ratio of Handle arm length:main gear diameter

Further...
1) can be acomplished by either decreasing spool diameter, or increasing pinion diameter (or both), and...
2) can be accomplished by increasing handle arm length, or decreasing main gear diameter (or both).  

Inherently reels with larger spools will have a larger spool to pinion diameter ratio, and correspondingly larger handle arm length to main gear diameters.  And smaller reels will inherently have smaller ratios.  It is the relationship between these two ratios that affects 'power' not the absolutes.  Larger reels tend to have larger ratio 1), and smaller reels tend to have larger ratio 2).  

Of course by playing with the 4 different diameters, and the gear ratio it is possible to come up with equal power ratings on both large and small reels.  

Into the mix comes the force on each component and corresponding strength requirements on each, as well as the actual inches/crank at the spool compared to the distance (which could be expressed in inches/crank) the handle travels.  

Further, the gear ratio will dictate the rpms of each of the 2 sets of components in relation to one another.

Simple machines that are not necessarily so simple.

Intuitively, I like to believe that larger reels with bigger arms, and spools are more powerful (and stronger), but simple physics dictates that this is not necessarily the case.  

Too bad manufacturers don't provide us with standardized power ratings to keep it simple for us.  

Now I am digressing from the origional topic of the post.

[Keta]

Mechanical advantage is precisely what larger diameter gears, longer handles and smaller spools give you.

Longer handles help but the radius is an issue, higher gear ratios do not change no mater how large the gears are, 6:1 is still 6:1.  You can not create matter or energy.

BTW, I love the small modern reels.

[johndtuttle]

Anyone can tell you that at the bottom of the spool (with the line nearly gone) the reel has more cranking power and more drag.

Line Height on the spool is the critical factor and is variable on all reels.

But most of the fishing is done with a nearly full spool. This is why very tall spools are going the way of the Dodo except for very specialized uses.

Lower and lower base spool height is achievable by smaller and smaller lines (braid) as you simply do not need Penn Mariners filled with braid.

This is also why there is such hue and cry for a smaller "baby baja" so that people can fish it with less than 600 yards of 60lb braid that the big one holds.

Regardless, as main gears grow and grow and spools get smaller and smaller the overall output force increases. The gear ratio has been increased to give good IPT....but still have more cranking better than 4/0 size reels with full spools.

This is why they are so popular: Guys are getting smaller and lighter reels that catch big fish.

[johndtuttle]

Mechanical advantage is precisely what larger diameter gears, longer handles and smaller spools give you.

Longer handles help but the radius is an issue, higher gear ratios do not change no mater how large the gears are, 6:1 is still 6:1.  You can not create matter or energy.

BTW, I love the small modern reels.

The physical size of the main gear in proportion to the small spool size creates mechanical advantage. The smaller spool has less leverage over the gears.

Keta, I am sure you have noticed that your reel has more cranking power with little line on it as compared to a full spool. This is changing the ratio of spool height to main gear size. Many people fish their Senators for rock fish with reels only half full for this very reason.

Conversely and in the same exact way the reel makes more drag the less line on the spool.

[Keta]

Power


Cranking power is a function of spool diameter, main gear diameter, gear ratio, and handle arm length.  Intuitively, greater power should be achieved with a lower gear ratio, and longer handle arm.  The relationship between spool diameter, and the diameters of the main and pinion gears and their cooresponding effect on power are not always so intuitive.

To make it simple think of it as a lever, the large diameter spool moves the load further from the "fulcrum" making it harder to move the load.  A lower gear ratio and/or a longer handle arm moves the lever toward the motive force making moving the "load" easier.  There is no free lunch.

It's harder to bring up a large halibut with my loved 3.25:1 349H reels than my 4:1 113H Tank.

[Alto Mare]

Where to begin....I'll just say it is odd to me that you continually bash one of the last great Made in USA reels. You owe Penn an apology too.

There are people there working in that factory that you insult in this thread. You do not know how to make a better reel than they do.

You have modded one of their most basic reels to be a different reel. Nothing more.

When it comes to fishing reels, by their example, they have taught you everything you know.

No John, I do not owe Penn or anyone else any apology, I don't believe I insulted anyone, that's not who I am.
I'm simply giving my opinion and you're giving yours that's all.
Later buddy.
Sal