Shimano had been making bicycle parts and broke into the fishing tackle industry in 1970 with rods and spinning reels. They started a joint effort with Lew Childre, LMB GOB, from Alabama and introduced their first conventional reel, the Lew's Speed Spool, in 1975. That relationship dissolved in 1978, Childre moved his production to Ryobi, and Shimano introduced the Bantam 100. The Bantam 100 is said to be a classic, enough so that Phil White (2008) wrote a book about their first fifteen years of evolution.
I wasn't paying attention at the time (Penn and ABU guy) but finally became interested forty years later. Some worn-out Bantam 100's were picked up for $20 to $25 each at the usual auction site. This isn't organized enough to be a tutorial so we'll call it an idle musing:
The Bantam 100 is compact with a capacity of about 150 yards of 10 lb mono. The overall size is smaller than the Speed Spool predecessor and smaller than the ABU's of the day. The housing design was radical, but less radical than the Speed Spool. The long, low profile was necessary to move the disengaging level wind guide out away from the spool.
It seems the rosewood knobs were popular at the time but they were replaced with Speed Spool style paddle knobs after four years. In the five worn-out parts reels I bought, four have intact rosewood knobs but three have stripped threads in the hole for the small screw that secures the handle nut retaining clip. Two have bent handles. One reel has a replacement Calcutta style handle. Evidently, the aluminum used in the handle is not strong enough to withstand heavy use.
In my opinion, the three-point star drag was a really bad idea inherited from the Speed Spool. If you are used to fishing with a light drag and flicking the star with your index finger to add pressure as necessary, the star can become lost when two of the points are hiding behind the handle and the third point is up.
The clutch push-button is reminiscent of ABU. It predates the "quick fire" type of clutch release seen today but anyone that used the ABU style button long enough found that you could let your thumb slide off the button after it was depressed and stop the spool before the lure could fall more than a couple of inches. This saves a lot of time but the shortcut disengages the pinion while there is pressure on the spool (from the hanging lure) so there is more wear and tear on the pinion gear threads. Bantam 100 are said to be prone to premature pinion wear and this is probably a contributing factor.
http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(b).jpg (http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(b).jpg)
There are three ABU style thumb screws on the headplate for quick access. Both bearings can be serviced and the large hole in the black portion of the headplate allows inspection and lubrication of the main gear. Note the headplate bearing is in a metal disc that fits snuggly into the frame. This maintains spool alignment, allows the rest of the headplate to be lighter, and creates a tight fit between the spool and frame so lighter lines can be used without having them caught in the crack. The frame is very solid with no warping on the five examples I have, even though the frame components are just pressed and dimpled together.
http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(c).jpg (http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(c).jpg)
It has ABU style centrifugal brakes but the pin and brake shoes are more robust. I have only seen these blue brake pads and do not know if there were other sizes
http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(d).jpg (http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(d).jpg)
The tail plate is plastic. The sharp angle at the upper right corner of the tail plate seems prone to being bumped and cracked (three out of five in my examples are broken). This sharp angle is also uncomfortable in the hand. Phil White says that a popular customization back in the day was to grind down the frame and tailplate to round off that sharp angle. But, the tailplate has little function and you could take the reel fishing with no tailplate installed.
http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(e).jpg (http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(e).jpg)
Under the tailplate all you find is a weep hole behind the left bearing and a screw to secure the levelwind worm and bushing. Also, the forward tailplate screw secures the line guide stabilizer bar.
http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(f).jpg (http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(f).jpg)
There are not many surprises under the headplate. Again, it reminds me of ABU reels of the day except for the plastic yoke. Plastic parts are always a concern but the ABU metal yoke integrated with the clutch button are probably more prone to hanging up when poorly lubricated.
Do note the tubular extension on the pinion gear.
http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(g).jpg (http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(g).jpg)
The tubular extension on the pinion gear rests inside a plastic bushing under the cast control knob. This was probably designed to reduce friction as the spool shaft spins inside the pinion when casting. In the picture below you can see that when the pinion is disengaged the tubular extension reaches the outer edge of the plastic bushing.
http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(h).jpg (http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(h).jpg)
http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(i).jpg (http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(i).jpg)
The headplate bearing rides closer to the spool and is held in place by a familiar wire clip.
http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(j).jpg (http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(j).jpg)
The tailplate bearing rests on a brass disc and is held in place by another wire clip (the disc and bearing are at the upper left in the photo but the wire clip is not shown).
http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(k).jpg (http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(k).jpg)
Here is the cast control knob, a familiar square sacrificial shim that contacts the spool shaft and the plastic bushing that supports the tubular extension of the pinion gear.
http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(m).jpg (http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(m).jpg)
Here's a shot of the drag stack and three point star. They're out of order though as the small fiber washer should be above the metal drag washer. I was disappointed to find only one large fiber washer and a couple of small composite washers. Sure it would be OK for 12 lb mono, but not very smooth if you wanted to overload the reel with heavy braid. I think the frame, spool, dog and gears could handle being overloaded and abused.
http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(n).jpg (http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(n).jpg)
The levelwind is a little tricky to install in the confined space and a dry pawl is difficult to remove. The inside of the pawl barrel is threaded though so you can put a small screw in it to give you something to grab. On this particular example, the previous owner put an extra pawl spacer and the cut-off head of a copper tack between the pawl and pawl cover in an attempt to prevent the worn out pawl from slipping.
http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(o).jpg (http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(o).jpg)
The screw that secures the worm and plastic worm bushing in place is reverse thread.
I'm actually somewhat impressed with these reels. They will probably outlive a modern Korean reel although parts have not be available for decades. My examples of this reel are rough, but you get what you pay for and I have plenty of spare parts now.
-steve
I've had a couple of 400's, pretty much the same reel only wider. I found the drag and gearing very smooth and strong, robust frames, love the stainless steel components, love the larger 400 handle... but the rest is all bad.
The plastic side plate inevitably cracks around the screw holes; what's it doing on an otherwise all-steel reel anyway??? The gear sleeve wore out prematurely and Shimano practically laughed when I inquired about parts. The level wind is the worst I've ever encountered, it also wears prematurely and starts to hang up. But even in daily use, the design causes the line to lay in a pattern that will cause maximum criss-crossing under drag, so heavy drag settings is not a good idea if you target fish that can pull it.
This reel could have been designed to target bigger fish, but instead is an overly heavy, best suited for freshwater bass reel. My remaining 400 sits on a display shelf and is used only to change line on other more deserving reels. Oh, and recently I used the drag spring washer on an Abu Ambassadeur, they are the same size, and the handle went to a Daiwa Millionare.
Thanks very much for that look at a Classic.
We have to remember that this was the infancy of low profile reel design, a revolution that has led to their domination of casting reels in freshwater to this day.
We can quibble about the parts and such now but this was the cutting edge of its day. The emphasis in future designs has been lowering weight and increasing performance and the modern reels are remarkable successes in that regard.
Nice to see nylon yokes have only been used for more than 40 years with success. ;)
Even the much older Record/Ambassadeurs were superior in many ways except for the drag. The Bantam's big single disk works very well.
With that in mind, I removed the level wind system of the Bantam and did use it successfully like that for a while. That way, I was able to take full advantage of the strong drag and high torque, landing even mid size Tarpon and Snook. But then the gear sleeve wore out. Game over.
Hello Nelz. Did your Bantam levelwind guide look like the one on the left in this photo:
http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(q).jpg (http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(q).jpg)
The reel on the left is date stamped December 1978 (the first year of production). The reel on the right is date stamped November 1979. They are identical except for the levelwind guides. The 1978 levelwind guide is painted plastic. Big mistake because the plastic would wear where it slides on the line guide stabilizer bar and worm guard. Then it would start to wobble and the worm and pawl would deteriorate. Also, the plastic threads would strip when the pawl cap was screwed off and on. Easy to do in the tight quarters. The 1979 levelwind guide on the right is solid brass plated with something gray. With that modification, the levelwind system was strengthened significantly and it was all metal except for the plastic bushings where the worm penetrates the frame.
I have always had a love-hate relationship with levelwind mechanisms. To me, there is nothing more comfortable and sensitive than a palming reel on a well balanced two-handed rod. You can cast all day without fatigue and feel every bump on the bottom. That's true using a Penn Peerless, an old round Ambassadeur or more modern reel. Fishermen have been palming reels since knuckle-buster days; long before they were called palming reels. But to get a comfortable grip you need a levelwind to free your thumb or index finger from the task of manually laying line on the spool. That's the love part.
The hate part of the equation is the loss of casting distance imposed by the levelwind. There are a lot of frictional losses going on. Supporting the worm on ball bearings instead of bushings helps some but there are still losses from the meshing gears, the pawl rubbing on the worm, the line rubbing on the wire guide, the wire rubbing on the crossbar, etc. It takes a lot of lure weight to get the spool moving and overcome the frictional losses of a non-disengaging levelwind. For me, that was roughly 1.5 ounces for a Penn Peerless and 3/4 ounce for an early ABU. It used to be necessary to go to a spinning (ugh) outfit to get distance with smaller lure weights.
Disengaging levelwind mechanisms improved the situation considerably The important frictional losses are one loop of line scraping against other loops as it moves laterally toward the levelwind guide and the losses to dampen line galloping as it moves through the small guide hole. If I'm not mistaken, the Shimano Speed Spool and Bantam are responsible for this advancement. But, a reel with disengaging levelwind will still not cast as far as the same reel with no levelwind at all (a CT).
Since I have these Bantams to play with, I tried to quantify the difference. A Bantam 100 was cleaned, lubricated, loaded with 20 lb Power Pro and put on an eleven foot medium action rod with a one ounce lead sinker. After being dialed in it cast a measured 54 yards (average of the best half-dozen casts). The levelwind guide was removed and the same set-up cast 61 yards. Less difference than I anticipated but it is what it is. The cast control knob had to be tightened a bit to prevent backlash without the levelwind.
Looking for a compromise, the level wind eye was cut off and various crude modifications were tried.
http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(r).jpg (http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(r).jpg)
http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(s).jpg (http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(s).jpg)
http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(t).jpg (http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(t).jpg)
http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(u).jpg (http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(u).jpg)
The long flexible wire was way to cumbersome and did not lay the line very well but it cast as well as no levelwind at all. The narrow brass one was not much improvement over the stock levelwind but laid the line well The brass ring was intermediate between the two at 58 yards but the wide ring laid more line toward the center of the spool.
Here is the last iteration, a tip top guide serving as a levelwind guide. The eye of the tip top is 5 mm while the eye of the stock levelwind guide is 3 mm. The larger eye means less line is laid at the side of the spool so there is a slight hill in the center of the spool. These reels have quite a bit of clearance between the spool and frame so it's not a problem.
http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(v).jpg (http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(v).jpg)
Alright, you can stop laughing now. This is for proof of concept only. I put the reel on a lighter rod and went fishing with 3/8 and 1/2 ounce jigs. It really doesn't get in the way and I sort of forget about it when concentrating on fish. It will eventually get bumped and screwed up though. This is definitely not something you would want to be seen with in public.
You already knew the take-home message. A disengaging levelwind will cost you distance but is probably not worth worrying about.
-steve
Very clever using the rod tip. Those must be nice reels, I purchased one or two for Wallace, using his money. If that man likes those, they have to be good, Wallace knows his reels.
Sal
Steve, I have the metal guide. The problem was always worm/pawl related. As you know, unlike modern low-profile reels, the guide moves when drag is pulled. This causes really bad criss-crossing under drag, unless you happen to luck out and sync with the spool, which hardly ever happens. So, this extreme side pressure against the guide no doubt contributes to premature level wind failure, either that or it's just made from cheap material (maybe both).
Nice job with your McGyver'ing those reels, somebody has alot of time on their hands, lol.
Btw, I think the smaller Daiwa Millionaires and Lunas also have the same level wind system, but don't know if they fail as much. At the very least though, the criss-crossing will cause the line to bind under pressure and lost fish. *Note, the 300 sizes and the Blue Backer Millionaires have sync'd level wind like the Abu's.
Oh, I get what you're saying now Netz. The disadvantages of a disengaging levelwind becomes magnified as the width of the spool and/or the size of the fish increases. Both put more lateral pressure on the levelwind guide making the pawl eat into the worm. That seems like something Shimano could have overcome if they put better metal in the guide, pawl and worm. Guess the guys at Shimano never met a tarpon or a snook.
You'll get a chuckle out of this.... Phil White in his 2008 book quoting the Shimano catalog of the day...
Shimano cataloged the Bantam 400 as the perfect reel for "light tackle saltwater, muskie amd northerns". They expanded on that description by stating that it was "Quite possibly the finest reel ever designed for the salt water plug fisherman."
White also notes, This reel only had limited listings in catalogs of the time, and thus is a bit harder to find for the collector today.
I wouldn't want Phil White to feel like I am stealing his very hard-earned research and will note that his book is a valuable and informative 198 page reference for reel collectors available at:
http://www.oldreels.com (http://www.oldreels.com)
-steve
Just a thought but if you were to change the cast control bushing for a bearing then wouldn't you have a bearing supported pinion aka superfree? Maybe these reels were a long way ahead of the times!
Quote from: Ruffy on February 22, 2016, 09:45:55 AM
Just a thought but if you were to change the cast control bushing for a bearing then wouldn't you have a bearing supported pinion aka superfree? Maybe these reels were a long way ahead of the times!
There is no question that the Low Profile reel started a revolution to this day in conventional casting reels for light tackle applications.
It has continued to evolve nearly every year since this original design by Lew Childre with the original intent (I believe) to improve casting of very light baits when (generally) low capacity is really needed ie freshwater Bass. We can quibble about design flaws in this revolutionary reel geometry but it was the first and in the intervening decades has been refined enormously. The endpoint to this evolution has been reels like the Shimano Tranx or Abu Garcia Revo Toro Beast which really have to be used to grasp how incredibly refined they have become.
Since their introduction LP reels have steadily and nearly completely taken over conventional casting in freshwater and are now making serious inroads in saltwater. Smaller, lighter spools for better casting, no need for a synced level wind mechanism and larger gears (for strength and allowing larger drag disks) etc have led to their outselling round reels by probably 100 to 1 for your typical freshwater fisherman<<<----represents the largest market for fishing gear in the world.
best
I don't know what a superfree is but I want one. I looked at that bushing too Ruffy. Trouble is, when the pinion disengages from the spool, it does not fully disengage from the main gear. So, there's no way for the pinion to spin on a bearing even if there was one. Modern baitcasters are all the same way as far as I knew, so I want a superfree. It seems like having the pinion ride on a bearing would require that the bearing be on the inside of pinion gear. That would be difficult or expensive because there is so little room to work with. If the pinion diameter is doubled to make room for an internal bearing then the diameter of the main gear would also have to double in order to maintain the gear ratio.
John, I agree completely. Once you try a low profile you are unlikely to go back to round reels for fresh or saltwater casting. They're just too comfortable with too many modern conveniences. Sound and bay anglers are getting hip to it but I wonder if the manufacturers may be missing an opportunity by not designing for and marketing them to surf and jetty pluggers. Don't know about offshore.
.... but one more rant about levelwind mechanisms if you will allow. Then I'll shut up. Since they can make a freaking digital cast control system, then why can't they make a better levelwind mechanism? It hasn't changed in forty years. Why can't a disengaging levelwind fully disengage so the guide is free to move when line is playing out? Why can't the pawl disengage instead of the worm gear? Or better yet, why can't the levelwind guide flip up or drop down out of the way completely when casting and then catch the line again when retrieving? Maybe the whole pawl and worm concept needs to be scrapped in favor of a toothed belt and gear. Maybe the reel and its levelwind should be built into the rod. ... oh, sorry; went to far there.
-steve
Quote from: oc1 on February 23, 2016, 06:13:28 AM
I don't know what a superfree is but I want one. I looked at that bushing too Ruffy. Trouble is, when the pinion disengages from the spool, it does not fully disengage from the main gear. So, there's no way for the pinion to spin on a bearing even if there was one. Modern baitcasters are all the same way as far as I knew, so I want a superfree. It seems like having the pinion ride on a bearing would require that the bearing be on the inside of pinion gear. That would be difficult or expensive because there is so little room to work with. If the pinion diameter is doubled to make room for an internal bearing then the diameter of the main gear would also have to double in order to maintain the gear ratio.
John, I agree completely. Once you try a low profile you are unlikely to go back to round reels for fresh or saltwater casting. They're just too comfortable with too many modern conveniences. Sound and bay anglers are getting hip to it but I wonder if the manufacturers may be missing an opportunity by not designing for and marketing them to surf and jetty pluggers. Don't know about offshore.
.... but one more rant about levelwind mechanisms if you will allow. Then I'll shut up. Since they can make a freaking digital cast control system, then why can't they make a better levelwind mechanism? It hasn't changed in forty years. Why can't a disengaging levelwind fully disengage so the guide is free to move when line is playing out? Why can't the pawl disengage instead of the worm gear? Or better yet, why can't the levelwind guide flip up or drop down out of the way completely when casting and then catch the line again when retrieving? Maybe the whole pawl and worm concept needs to be scrapped in favor of a toothed belt and gear. Maybe the reel and its levelwind should be built into the rod. ... oh, sorry; went to far there.
-steve
Daiwa is working on a "disengaging levelwind" in their T-wing design. The guide "opens up" wide to let the line be free, and then when engaged it narrows down to normal width to guide the line lay.
Other reels leave it engaged and then add bearings to the worm to make it spin easier, but this increases maintenance. Unfortunately with very narrow reels it has to cycle so much it still hurts distance.
The Abu Garcia Revo Toro Beast uses a disengaging pinion from the spool shaft (Infinii Spool) so that the spool only spins on the spool bearings and then with braid (very slick) casting distance is excellent.
Hi Steve,
You are correct, in reels with superfree the inside of the pinion rides on a bearing. This was first brought out (with Shimano) on one of the earlier Chronarch iterations (I think). Abu also had it on there round Pro Max range. Here is a link to a tackletour review of that Shimano reel (is linking another site kosher? I am not sure? - http://www.tackletour.com/reviewcuradosf.html), they said the addition of a pinion supported bearing gave 4 times the freespool, a pretty big difference. Recently Shimano has gone one up again and brought out a dual bearing supported pinion (x-ship) which you can see in the schematic for the new Curado I (attached, #3927 & #4194). I am not sure of how much difference this will make, time will tell though!
Cheers,
Andrew
QuoteI wouldn't want Phil White to feel like I am stealing his very hard-earned research...
Good work, man. Thanks for giving credit where credit is due. Many people seem to forget that.
QuoteLooking for a compromise, the level wind eye was cut off and various crude modifications were tried.
Cool!
Quote... why can't they make a better levelwind mechanism? It hasn't changed in forty years. Why can't a disengaging levelwind fully disengage....
Oh, jeez... they have, and have again in many ways. ABU and Arjon for instance had a split-gate levelwind that split apart and moved to either side of the spool when the button was pressed, and came together on the retrieve. Penn and Ardent had the spiral wind. Other variations have been gates / eyes that folded down, or reels that had pivoting seats for example. (Me, i used to wonder why big-game reels don't have levelwinds, and the few that did used the same puny junk that they use on baitcasting reels, when it can easily be seen that heavy-duty levelwinding mechanisms are used in a variety of industrial applications. How hard can it be?)
So really the question is not so much why they can't build a better levelwind, because they already have, but rather why they seem to have forgotten this. The answer, i think, is that all told, the ubiquitous infinity screw and pawl mechanism actually works very well, and can do so for many years.
.
Thank you very much for that John, Andrew and Robert. When finished here I will check out all of those. I just bought a used reel with X-Ship and did not know what that or Infinii Spool meant until now.
Robert, I'm sort of embarrassed to know that you are reading this. I have admired your machine work. A freehand hack is the best I can do.
This reminds me that I also monkeyed around with the drag stack on a Bantam. To be honest, I have yet to try the stock Bantam 100 drag with a carbontex washer. It was only prejudice that made me think the stock drag was going to be inconsistent and jerky. Small groves were cut on the inside of a main gear even though there is almost no material to work with there. A little flux-core wire feed welder was used to tack small dog ears on a generic stainless washer like you would find at the corner hardware. That was not supposed to work because of dissimilar metals and improper shielding. It was ground down enough to catch the new groves in the main gear and lapped on a belt sander. 0.5 mm carbontex washers were cut with scissors. An extra Belleville was added and the plastic spacer was shortened to make it all fit.
(http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(w).jpg)
(http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(x).jpg)
(http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(y).jpg)
It's all very sketchy with the compromised main gear, dissimilar metals on the dog ears and limited contact between the two, so a stress test was done. The reel (without a levelwind) was loaded with about 40 yards of 40 pound braid (less than half spool), the reel was tied to a tree, the drag locked down and a Ford pick-up used to simulate an unstoppable fish. The line parted several inches from the knot. The reel felt and sounded the same before and after. By the way, it's a feel and sound reminiscent of Sal or Richy's old pencil sharpener. The dog ears did not slip from their groves and the main gear did not crack open. Before the stress test it would pull about ten to twelve pounds of drag, but afterward it would only pull about eight to ten pounds. Either the Bellevilles were flattened or the carbontex was smoothed. Less than four pounds of drag would be needed for the intended use so my confidence was restored. The reel was loaded with a full spool of twenty pound braid for fishing.
-steve
Quote from: oc1 on February 24, 2016, 07:46:16 AM
Thank you very much for that John, Andrew and Robert. When finished here I will check out all of those. I just bought a used reel with X-Ship and did not know what that or Infinii Spool meant until now.
Robert, I'm sort of embarrassed to know that you are reading this. I have admired your machine work. A freehand hack is the best I can do.
This reminds me that I also monkeyed around with the drag stack on a Bantam. To be honest, I have yet to try the stock Bantam 100 drag with a carbontex washer. It was only prejudice that made me think the stock drag was going to be inconsistent and jerky. Small groves were cut on the inside of a main gear even though there is almost no material to work with there. A little flux-core wire feed welder was used to tack small dog ears on a generic stainless washer like you would find at the corner hardware. That was not supposed to work because of dissimilar metals and improper shielding. It was ground down enough to catch the new groves in the main gear and lapped on a belt sander. 0.5 mm carbontex washers were cut with scissors. An extra Belleville was added and the plastic spacer was shortened to make it all fit.
(http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(w).jpg)
(http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(x).jpg)
(http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(y).jpg)
It's all very sketchy with the compromised main gear, dissimilar metals on the dog ears and limited contact between the two, so a stress test was done. The reel (without a levelwind) was loaded with about 40 yards of 40 pound braid (less than half spool), the reel was tied to a tree, the drag locked down and a Ford pick-up used to simulate an unstoppable fish. The line parted several inches from the knot. The reel felt and sounded the same before and after. By the way, it's a feel and sound reminiscent of Sal or Richy's old pencil sharpener. The dog ears did not slip from their groves and the main gear did not crack open. Before the stress test it would pull about ten to twelve pounds of drag, but afterward it would only pull about eight to ten pounds. Either the Bellevilles were flattened or the carbontex was smoothed. Less than four pounds of drag would be needed for the intended use so my confidence was restored. The reel was loaded with a full spool of twenty pound braid for fishing.
-steve
One thing I have learned is that the old drags were very smooth at low settings and some makers of top reels still use felt, cork or delrin with excellent performance...in specific applications.
Oiled felt is very smooth on the low end allowing small adjustments in the 1-8lb range. Shimano still feels it is the best for such reels.
Cork is...well, I have no idea why anyone uses it :). But I bet someone here knows why. ;D. Studio Ocean Mark of Japan still uses it in very expensive reels.
Delrin and the like, are also good for modest drags and incredibly durable. But no sense in greasing them so you lose some corrosion protection.
Greased carbon fiber is just the best of all worlds for heavier drag loads and especially in SW reels, smooth and when greased protect the drag from corrosion. But in your Bantam 100 you may lose some range at the lowest end.
best
hi oc1
my bantam is the 500+spare(orginal)
(http://i1200.photobucket.com/albums/bb326/wallacewt/IMG_2540_zpslqlwzeyo.jpg) (http://s1200.photobucket.com/user/wallacewt/media/IMG_2540_zpslqlwzeyo.jpg.html)
i love it, why?ss frame &handle,wide spool with big line capacity,shoulders on the spool for your thumb when you cast,dont have to touch the line.this was my go to surf reel.just remove the worm and pawl gear.piece of electrical tape on the inside kept the water out.2 thumb screws,comes apart in 3 pieces.bushes,plenty of freespool,nothing to rust.easy maintenence.most of the inside is ss+12 tooth ratchet
(http://i1200.photobucket.com/albums/bb326/wallacewt/IMG_2541_zpsjdond4ze.jpg) (http://s1200.photobucket.com/user/wallacewt/media/IMG_2541_zpsjdond4ze.jpg.html)
upgrades,handle knob,i need another,drag-delrin under gear,c/f,keyed,c/f,thick metal keyed washer
there is room for 2 more c/f washers+2 thin metal keyed
above the main gear you can see plastic spacer+thin plastic spacer.this allows for extra washers
or extra bellevilles.i prefer single belleville and max 6lb drag ,there is only1 dog.
(http://i1200.photobucket.com/albums/bb326/wallacewt/IMG_2542_zpsm4akgtb1.jpg) (http://s1200.photobucket.com/user/wallacewt/media/IMG_2542_zpsm4akgtb1.jpg.html)
can you see the glued in stopper next to the dog post.
this was my 1st ever baitcaster,lotsa fish,its better now ,can still improve it,buy em for $25 bucks i just dont go over 5lb drag .40 yrs old,wonder if the you beauts will last.
I'll try the stock drag John. Thank you. Have lots of pieces and parts to work with.
Your reel must a beast Wallace. It just looks wider than the 100 in our photos but they are much taller too. About 2.5 times as much line capacity I read. Made 1979 to 1982. Did you have trouble with the dog jumping off the gear or is the stopper for just-in-case?
I was amazed that I actually caught something with this reel in just a few outings. The law of averages indicated to was going to take much, MUCH longer. It was a bonefish (aka o'io) with 24 inch fork length, not very thick, probably male, probably less than six pounds. The Bantam is on a light rod rated for four to ten pound line, 3/16 to 3/8 ounce lure. His first run was fifty to sixty yards and the canoe was towed another ten to fifteen yards. The drag was very smooth; as good as any reel I own. The second run was about half that distance. By the fourth little run he was worn out but swam around a coral head and fouled the line. I spend some long and anxious minutes maneuvering and finagling but could not get the line loose. The fish was not moving around much but I could feel the coral sawing away at the braid. Was about to grab the line just give it a hard tug to see what happens when the fish caught his breath, took off and freed the line himself.
(http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam-oio.jpg)
I like to think that the fish and I were both winners. The fish was released unharmed except for a sore lip, he did not end up in some creature's stomach, he did not have to drag around twenty yards of broken tackle for the foreseeable future, and he learned an important life lesson about the dangers of eating bucktail. I got my photo (you know, they're like notches on a gunstock) and I get to go back to using a comfortable modern reel with high speed gear ratio, fast cast button, contoured palming tailplate, and all the rest.
-steve
Nice catch Steve, cool colors on that oio..
Thanks Chad. Weird how the camera made his eye shine gold.
-steve
hi steve
you in hawaii? 1400 k,s to a bonefish for me
never seen one.little speedsters
stopper is -just-in-case
cheers
wallacewt: so how does that "glued in stopper" work, I'm not getting it from the pics?
Nice Oio Steve. I love fishing and eating them. My friends have been consistently catching 5-8# Oios lately...I'm so envious. So much fun, especially on their first run until they turn around...oh snap, many times I just cannot keep up with the fish and they come unbuttoned.
(http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(w).jpg)
I have a bit of a problem with this drag stack. You would still only have one drag surface The eared washer will spin with the main gear, thereby rendering the Carbontex under the eared washer useless as a drag surface.
(http://i1200.photobucket.com/albums/bb326/wallacewt/IMG_2541_zpsjdond4ze.jpg)
Likewise, in this photo, you will also only have one drag surface, between the main gear and the keyed washer. The Carbontex between the first metal keyed washer and the second metal keyed washer will be spinning together making the Carbontex between the two keyed washer useless as a drag surface.
Oh, wow..... Of course you're correct Bryan. The eared washer needs to the one on top. Thank you very much.
Forget what I said before John, I think I already tried using one washer and found it to be sufficient.
-steve
hi oci
its a thin, flat piece of ss to
substitute for a spring.l shape(ell)
its to stop the dog retracting to far
i glue it in position just enough for the dog to disengage
there is no pressure on the stopper.
i was thinking of taking the dog post out of the spare reel
and double dogging.but my other reels are so much better
andros,exo,etc;and im no rothmar
but there is a 12 tooth ss ratchet
jts my fav reel but not my best, memories ;)
cheers
hi bryan
not quite useless bryan
still better than spacers and washers to take up the slack
and cut out the back play.
drag is very smooth and passes alan,s drop test
with flying colours ;D
cheers
Useless as a drag surface. I think I said that. If not, I'm sorry. That is what I meant.
hi bryan
gotcha! bit hard to find metal eared washers
i cant make em
cheers
bit hard t
".. A little flux-core wire feed welder was used to tack small dog ears on a generic stainless washer..."
Clever! Manual 3D printing! (at work we call it reverse milling)
Actually, i like your way of getting things done. Not perfect, but done!
.
Robert, I've never been able to justify a TIG welder for myself but one of our kids is mildly interested in them now. He graduates Cal Poly this year and I tried to convince him that a TIG would be a better graduation present than that trip he's planning. He doesn't agree. However, he made his own 3-D printer for plastics and is working on a CRC router for metals so maybe there is hope for the future.
-steve
As noted, the predecessor to the Shimano Bantam 100 was the Shimano Lew's Speed Spool BB1.
(http://www.raingarden.us/snap/BB1(a).jpg)
The example I have is date stamped January 1977. The levelwind and drag did not work and the medallion is missing so it was cheap.
Given its predecessor, the Bantam 100 was aptly named as it is physically much smaller.
(http://www.raingarden.us/snap/BB1(b).jpg)
(http://www.raingarden.us/snap/BB1(c).jpg)
(http://www.raingarden.us/snap/BB1(d).jpg)
(http://www.raingarden.us/snap/BB1(e).jpg)
The Bantam 100 weighs about one third less; 7.7 ounce versus about 12.6 ounces for the BB1. The BB1 spool has a larger arbor, larger diameter and is slightly narrower, but the line capacity is about the same as the Bantam 100.
The BB1 was the most unusual looking reel of its time. Many thought it was just ugly. Even after forty years of further deviation from the traditional round reel it is still just ugly.... in my opinion. The odd shape of the BB1 is at least partially due to moving the disengaging levelwind guide out away from the spool as much as possible. The tail plate is about a quarter inch shorter than the headplate but it still feels as large as an ABU 5000 in the hand. The faux leather grain pattern embossed into the plastic tailplate is strange. If I'm not mistaken, the BB1 was the first low profile reel (although they didn't call it that) because the side plate dropped down about a quarter inch below the foot.
The Bantam side plates do not drop below the foot but, overall, it is more stylistic. It has an elongated shape that is very different from a typical round reel, but is not much more radical than some of the older direct drive reels such as the Shakespear President. The uncomfortable sharp corner on the upper rear portion of the tailplate and frame is stylistic, but not ergonomic. The Bantam rosewood knobs are another example of Shimano's attention to aesthetics but they failed to make the handle strong enough. Then, there is the European style coat of arms emblem on the tail plate. The Ambassadeur's coat arms is weird enough, but to put similar coat of arms on a Japanese reel? Having "Designed for Professionals" engraved on both side plates seems a unusual too.
I purchased my last ABU during this period and both the Speed Spool BB1 and Bantam 100 were probably there in the display case too. I must have dismissed them and went straight to the ABU out of habit and prejudice without evaluating or understanding the potential advantages of the Bantam 100 and Speed Spool BB1. If I was forced (either then or now) to choose the Bantam or Speed Spool based on looks, weight and feel alone, I would choose the Bantam.
Looking inside the BBI......
-steve
Quote from: oc1 on March 03, 2016, 10:34:36 AMThe odd shape of the BB1 is at least partially due to moving the disengaging levelwind guide out away from the spool as much as possible.
Nice to see they did that, as it was really needed in order to compensate for the severe line-lay criss-crossing that this and the Bantam reels suffered from. (Too bad they shortened the Bantam.) Btw, have you noticed the current Daiwa Lexa also extends the line guide out further than usual? Good, especially with the high drag numbers and non-synced wind on those reels.
Hi Netz. I had a beef with Diawa way back and swore I would just ignore them forever. Same with Sears Roebuck. But, I finally went back to buying some stuff at Sears because it is so convenient and should probably bury the hatchet with Diawa too.
oh yeah.... .... three thumb screws separate the headplate on the original Lew's Speed Spool BB1 to reveal an ABU style centrifugal brake.
(http://www.raingarden.us/snap/BB1(f).jpg)
Like the Bantam, the tail plate is plastic. But, unlike the Bantam, the left-side bearing is mounted in the plastic plate rather than the metal frame. I don't now what kind of plastic it is or whether it is prone to warping or instability. The bearing is held in place by an internal retaining C clip. It's the kind of clip that requires a tool (looks like a pair of pliers with pointed tips) to compress the clip and remove it. It was a struggle to get the clip out without the tool and the thing shot across the room. Since I clean bearings often this would never be acceptable to me. But, the C clip can be replaced with the familiar pentagonal wire clip.
(http://www.raingarden.us/snap/BB1(g).jpg)
(http://www.raingarden.us/snap/BB1(k).jpg)
The spool is plastic and has a large arbor. There is a pin that secures the plastic spool to the metal shaft but I would be afraid to try to remove it.
(http://www.raingarden.us/snap/BB1(h).jpg)
Under the cast control know is the familiar square shim that that the tip of the spool shaft contacts. There is a brass bushing with a compression tab but I don't think the shaft actually touches the bushing. Below the bushing is a ball bearing.
(http://www.raingarden.us/snap/BB1(i).jpg)
The spool disengages with a thumb button. The yoke is an extension of this push button. The mechanism looks very much like that of an Ambassadeur. Its almost a knock-off, but built a bit stronger. There are no plastic parts here. The Bantam has a plastic yoke and the pinion disengages more like modern baitcasters. The BB1 main gear is really heavy duty magnetic metal but I don't know what kind of steel.
(http://www.raingarden.us/snap/BB1(j).jpg)
No surprises in the dog. The drag stack includes a thick stainless bushing/spacer and a plastic spacer. There is one large fiber drag washer and a washer under the main gear. The example I have may have been modified because the washer under the main gear looks like carbontex and there is no belleville.
(http://www.raingarden.us/snap/BB1(m).jpg)
The levelwind has a heavy gear that is pinned to the worm. The levelwind guide appears to be aluminum (its silver and relatively soft metal) but it has brass or bronze inserts that ride on the worm cover and guide bar.
(http://www.raingarden.us/snap/BB1(l).jpg)
Forgot to mention that the BB1 handle is larger and much stronger than the Bantam and the BB1 has hard plastic knobs.
My understanding is that the innovation in the BB1 is the disengaging levelwind. The narrow spool helped optimize the disengaging levelwind since it reduces lateral movement of line as it peels off the spool. But with the large arbor the spool also had to be tall (large diameter) to retain the line capacity. I was always led to believe that wide spools started up quicker and, therefore, cast further; hence the squidder and similar shapes. If true, this would create a conflict and a need for a compromise between width and diameter. I don't know if the large spool arbor is required to make the plastic spool strong enough or if is to designed to further reduce weight and increase start-up speed. Despite the plastic tailplate, weight did not seem to be a major concern in the BB1. It seems that weight savings in the plastic spool and tail plate were offset by sturdy, heavy components elsewhere.
I have not yet cast this reel. That would be the acid test since casting is/was what it's all about with these things.
-steve
I'm mostly a bass fisherman and use a 100 several times a week. Like you I buy them on ebay or friends give them to me. The shaft that's staked to the right side plate sometimes needs re-staking as it breaks loose. I use carbon drag washers under and in the main gear as the original ones are very jerky.
This is a very interesting thread, especially the modification of the level wind. I had no idea that at one time Lew's and Shimano were affiliated.
Today I worked on a similar Shimano (1987 BantamProMag 100X SG) and got the anti-reverse going again.
I always like hearing about the old '80s Bantams as they are the primary baitcasters I've used for bass fishing for the past 34 years. I was into some schools of hotly feeding lake stripers this past Saturday with a Bantam Mag Plus 250SG XHS and a 714Z.
No idea Shimano made some Lew's...coincidentally I have at this moment a Lew's open for repair on my bench that I picked up at a yard sale for $5. It's a Ryobi-made BB-1., which is basically a V-Mag3. Bantam 100 was my first baitcaster; I still have it.
I recently nailed a VGC Lew's BB1NG (Gold version) on a basically new BPS Classic IM8 rod at a pawn shop, $20 for the combo. score.
John, I can take or leave the Ryobi BB-1 because they feel a little clunky and larger than they need be. But I think the V-Mag 3 is one of the coolest little reels ever. They both hate the saltwater though.
-steve
I also have a Vmag, I guess it would be a "1", the tiny one, I've been sort of hunting a drag star for, for some time. These guys will only go sweetwater bass fishing.
I inherited an early Lew's speed spool from my grandfather. This was his best reel ever, and he took great care and pride in this reel. I continued to fish the reel as my baitcaster throughout my youth. I tried Shimano, and Diawa, but preferred the high quality/solid feel of the Lew's. I used ambassador for musky and trolling, and Cardinals as my spinners. I still consider 8t one of the great leap forward in freshwater reel design.
John
Quote from: wfjord on September 19, 2017, 06:20:35 PM
I always like hearing about the old '80s Bantams as they are the primary baitcasters I've used for bass fishing for the past 34 years. I was into some schools of hotly feeding lake stripers this past Saturday with a Bantam Mag Plus 250SG XHS and a 714Z.
l got this Bantam Mag Plus 250SG for 8 bucks a couple weeks ago. Does anyone know the difference between it and the Bantam Mag Plus 250SG XHS?
l think this is a 1982 model. Does anyone know the off the shelf price of a Mag Plus in the early 1980s? This reel is really smooth and quiet and casts very well to be 35 years old.
Quotel got this Bantam Mag Plus 250SG for 8 bucks a couple weeks ago. Does anyone know the difference between it and the Bantam Mag Plus 250SG XHS?
l think this is a 1982 model. Does anyone know the off the shelf price of a Mag Plus in the early 1980s? This reel is really smooth and quiet and casts very well to be 35 years old.
The Mag Plus 250SG has a 4.7:1 gear ratio. I believe the Mag Plus 250SG XHS is 5:1.
Don't know the cost of the 250SGs back then, but I do have a receipt for a Bantam 1000SG I bought in 1984 for $60.
John, I have a V-Mag 3 parts reel that may still have a star. It is the tiny one. I'll check tomorrow.
-steve
Steve !
Just a test. Trying to fix all my photos.
-s
Quote from: oc1 on February 22, 2016, 08:48:57 AMOh, I get what you're saying now Netz. The disadvantages of a disengaging levelwind becomes magnified as the width of the spool and/or the size of the fish increases. Both put more lateral pressure on the levelwind guide making the pawl eat into the worm. That seems like something Shimano could have overcome if they put better metal in the guide, pawl and worm. Guess the guys at Shimano never met a tarpon or a snook.
You'll get a chuckle out of this.... Phil White in his 2008 book quoting the Shimano catalog of the day...
Shimano cataloged the Bantam 400 as the perfect reel for "light tackle saltwater, muskie amd northerns". They expanded on that description by stating that it was "Quite possibly the finest reel ever designed for the salt water plug fisherman."
White also notes, This reel only had limited listings in catalogs of the time, and thus is a bit harder to find for the collector today.
I wouldn't want Phil White to feel like I am stealing his very hard-earned research and will note that his book is a valuable and informative 198 page reference for reel collectors available at:
http://www.oldreels.com (http://www.oldreels.com)
-steve
I have wanted a copy of this book for years. I have been searching, but no luck yet. If anyone here has one they are willing to sell, or know how I can get a copy, please let me know. Just borrowing a copy to read would be awesome too if possible.
I love these little old reels. My grandfather gave me his that is like new. Ever since then I have been reading about them, and even got another to use so I don't ruin the one that means so much to me. I'm hooked on these little Shimanos