29-155 plastic spool

[Shellbelly]

I have a 100 with this 29-155 spool.  Confused, I went to the catalogs looking for 155P, 100P...nothing.  I searched this site and found a little but perhaps I didn't ask the right question.

The obvious, maybe pointless questions:  Why 29-155?   This spool has nothing to do with a 155 unless you modify your 155...and make it a 100!   I looked at catalogs 21 to 40 and didn't see it in the spreadsheets.

When did this part show up and what reel model is its intended target?  How long were these made?  Is it in any known catalog?

Head's-a-spinnin! 

[foakes]

Methinks you might have a 155 with 100 Surfmaster plates?

Photos would be good so the experts on here could help out.

Best, Fred

[Maxed Out]

 Correct me if I'm wrong, but the 155 spool also fits a monofil 25 and Surfmaster 200.
 
 The Surfmaster 100 spool also fits monofil 27 and 180,185

[Wompus Cat]

Don't know that much about Penn's but
The only part numbers I have for the Surfmaster 100 are
29M-100 (Metal ) and 29L-100 (Aluminum ) prob was a 29P-100 but don't see it right now .I am sure the plastic is no longer in the  part books I have .

 
Is  the Spool you have Stamped 29-155 as I don't see that number anywhere but have not dug through all my stuff yet.

[thorhammer]

Ted is correct.

Agree with Fred, you have a widened Surfmaster. I've never seen a plastic 100 spool, but the plastic 180 Baymaster spool would fit, and I'd think Penn would've used that existing platform if they wanted one.

[Shellbelly]

Here is a 100 (49 width) and the wider (200 width) 155 for reference.  155 uses a 200 spool and I can't find a 155 in the catalogs that uses a 155 spool.  So my "Pennundrum" is why call this a 155 spool.  The bay has this spool and several other types for the 100.  Some are boxed and marked 29P-100.  These parts had to be marketed somewhere so where are they listed? 

[Wompus Cat]

I think you have a Narrowed 100 with  some other spool .
Like someone used  Beach master 85  or other model parts to make it .

[Shellbelly]

Very possible.  The catalogs, up to 40, do not show this part#.  They do show that the 100 is a 49-width reel that started out with a 30-49 stand and then changed to a 30-100 stand but did not change the spool.  That makes me believe the reel has always been 49-width.  That's probably as narrow as it gets for even a field-modified Penn.

I guess what this all boils down to is:  Is the spool itself a collectible and to what year model(s) does it belong in order to make that model correct???  Does that matter?  Maybe not if this spool came out as an accessory or option.  Maybe so if these were a short-run product..say, like the 29-130 3-piece spool.

OR is it just an inconsequential piece of plastic?  

[Wompus Cat]

Put some measurements on here so  we can actually understand what you have as  compared to ACTUAL KNOWN variances . 

[Shellbelly]

I only have this reel as an example of a 100.  Spool is 1-5/8"W X 2" tall.  Arbor is about 11/16".  Inside of frame is 1-5/8"W.  The height of the reel frame is 2-3/4".  Width of reel at top of plates is 2-5/16".  Stanley measurements, not Starrett, so apply the appropriate fudge factor.

Internal parts and brightwork are correct and consistent with catalogs.  The side plates aren't numbered inside.  The gear cover plate is correct for the model#.  The clicker side plate is consistent with the models in the catalogs...lastly, it's not a Bridge City

[Gfish]

Interesting; the 155 BM has a 29-200 spool. The BM 160 & 165 have 29-150 size spools.

[Shellbelly]

Yep, it's a weedy rabbit hole.  If you look down the "29" catalog columns you won't see a #155 spool.  I don't have a catalog after #40, so it might show up later.  I also don't have the 29P or M 100 spools (YET!) to compare with.  The model 100 stopped in '41, came back in '49 renamed Surf Master, and ran until 2001...according to a popular spreadsheet.  5 decades of possible undocumented meddling by Penn.

[foakes]

3 things —-

Penn was/is a thrifty manufacturer —-

They used left over parts from other reels —- and did not take the time or expense to change or document every part number..until the excess inventory was used up.

Plus, many parts are interchangeable with other reel models —- here again, they just used the old part numbers.

Plus, part numbers were not used until the early 50's.

And lastly, as long as the reels went together and we're capable of catching fish properly —- Penn wasn't concerned about future collector details.

All good ideas, in my opinion.

A SurfMaster in 100, 150, 200, or 250 was considered a poor man's Squidder in the day.  The Squidder had ball bearings instead of bushings & a little stronger frame due to the extra rings, plus the "reverse-in-gear" control.

Surfmasters are just as capable in my opinion —- and will actually require less maintenance and service.  Great reels.

Best, Fred

[jurelometer]

Since this thread got resurrected... Sal to the rescue!  See posts 38 and 39:

https://alantani.com/index.php?msg=202642

In at least one instance (Jigmaster), Penn used the same mold to make two different spools by pressing in a different spindle.  So the part number molded into the spool is not always going to be definitive. 

Perhaps similarly in the Surfmaster situation, Penn was reusing some of the mold making to manufacture different width plastic spools.   So we end up with three different spools with presumably three different official part numbers, but the same number molded into the side of the spool.  The number on the spool might not be the official part number for any of the flavors.

-J

[Shellbelly]

Sal to the rescue!  See posts 38 and 39:

Yep!  Same conundrum, different time.