pull up the schematic and follow along with me....
http://mikesreelrepair.com/schematics/schematic.php?url=Ambassadeur,%20Cardinal/Ambassadeur%20Record%2060%2015%2000.pdf
every once in a while i get something new. that was the case here. this box arrived from alaska. hmmmm, carbon matrix drags? i wonder what this is all about?
(http://www.yourfishpictures.com/data/500/medium/102_0608.JPG)
i pulled it out of the box and the first thing i noticed was the weight. it's heavy! much heavier that a normal ambassaduer. i ran into the house and grabbed my camera. i've done an ambassaduer post already, but i knew this one would be different.
(http://www.yourfishpictures.com/data/500/medium/102_0609.JPG)
this one had a very nice live bait handle. the levelwind assembly is basically the same as all the other ambassaduers. i fix alot of penn levewind assemblies, but not many abu's.
(http://www.yourfishpictures.com/data/500/medium/102_0610.JPG)
the spool design was interesting as well. i'm not quite sure why it would be beveled like this.
(http://www.yourfishpictures.com/data/500/medium/102_0611.JPG)
the left side plate should not be removed. just back out one left side plate screw (key #199) at a time, grease the hole, zip the screw back in, and move on to the next one.
(http://www.yourfishpictures.com/data/500/medium/102_0613.JPG)
back out the three right side plate screws (no key #), remove the right side plate assembly and the spool.
(http://www.yourfishpictures.com/data/500/medium/102_0614.JPG)
(http://www.yourfishpictures.com/data/500/medium/102_0615.JPG)
add a little corrosion x to the left side plate bearing (key #5230), the idler gear (key #1117079), the worm gear (key #5205), and the click plate assembly (key #12642).
(http://www.yourfishpictures.com/data/500/medium/102_0616.JPG)
now for the spool. remove the spool shaft (key #1117122).
(http://www.yourfishpictures.com/data/500/medium/102_0617.JPG)
lube the right spool bearing.
(http://www.yourfishpictures.com/data/500/medium/102_0618.JPG)
pull the white nylon sprocket gear (key #23403) and lube the left spool bearing (key #19843).... HEY, WHAT'S THIS!!!!!! SOME CHEAPSKATE PUT A BRASS BUSHING INSIDE INSTEAD OF A BEARING!!!!!! WHAT A BUNCH OF CROOKS!!!!! well, i guess i shouldn't say that because i don't really know for sure. it could have been an honest mistake, or they could have intended it to be that way, it which case, it might still be an honest mistake (right?).
(http://www.yourfishpictures.com/data/500/medium/102_0619.JPG)
i have whole box full of extra bearings, so i'll just switch it out and lube this bearing with corrosion x as well.
(http://www.yourfishpictures.com/data/500/medium/102_0620.JPG)
and back into the frame it goes.
(http://www.yourfishpictures.com/data/500/medium/102_0621.JPG)
now for the right side plate. remove the set screw (key #14868) and retaining collar (key #20944).
(http://www.yourfishpictures.com/data/500/medium/102_0622.JPG)
remove the handle nut (key #5327).
(http://www.yourfishpictures.com/data/500/medium/102_0623.JPG)
remove the c - clip.
(http://www.yourfishpictures.com/data/500/medium/102_0624.JPG)
remove the handle (key #1117097), the spring (key #5115), the star (key #1117091) and both spring washers (key #5131) and line everything up.
(http://www.yourfishpictures.com/data/500/medium/102_0626.JPG)
remove both bridge screws (key #13369).
(http://www.yourfishpictures.com/data/500/medium/102_0627.JPG)
separate the right side plate cover (key #1117131) from the baseplate assembly.
(http://www.yourfishpictures.com/data/500/medium/102_0628.JPG)
line up all the components of the gear cluster. interesting, it looks like ambassaduer has switched over to dry carbon fiber drag washers (key #1116906) inside the gear and a hard fiber washer (key #13169) underneath the gear.
(http://www.yourfishpictures.com/data/500/medium/102_0629.JPG)
i'm going to substitute a penn ht-100 drag washer for the hard fiber washer (key #13169).
(http://www.yourfishpictures.com/data/500/medium/102_0630.JPG)
this penn washer is a penn ht-100 #6-965. this washer has been cut down from 24mm down to 15-17mm. it fits nicely under the gears of the ambassaduers and the smaller shimano bait casters.
(http://www.yourfishpictures.com/data/500/medium/102_0631.JPG)
because this penn washer is thicker than the stock ambassaduer fiber washer, it is necessary to remove the small brass thrust washer (key #5189) underneath the gear sleeve (key #22079). i am quite certain that these carbon fiber drag washers will have the same high failure rate as penn ht-100's following water or oil intrusion. i highly recommend a thick coat of shimano drag grease and then rebuild the drag stack.
(http://www.yourfishpictures.com/data/500/medium/102_0632.JPG)
pull the anti-reverse roller bearing sleeve (key #22001).
(http://www.yourfishpictures.com/data/500/medium/102_0633.JPG)
install it on the gear sleeve with a little grease (they get stuck easily).
(http://www.yourfishpictures.com/data/500/medium/102_0634.JPG)
grease the bridge screw holes.
(http://www.yourfishpictures.com/data/500/medium/102_0635.JPG)
grease the side plate screws (no key #).
(http://www.yourfishpictures.com/data/500/medium/102_0636.JPG)
lube the right side plate bearing (key #5230) with corrosion x.
(http://www.yourfishpictures.com/data/500/medium/102_0637.JPG)
slide the right side plate cover (key #1117131) straight down on top of the base plate assembly and install the two bridge screws (key #13369).
(http://www.yourfishpictures.com/data/500/medium/102_0638.JPG)
hold the thumb bar in the "up" position and the right side plate assembly should match up perfectly with the frame.
(http://www.yourfishpictures.com/data/500/medium/102_0639.JPG)
zip down the frame screws until they seat, then cinch then down a little extra until they are snug. use good mechanical judgement and don't snap off any heads.
(http://www.yourfishpictures.com/data/500/medium/102_0640.JPG)
install the spring washers (key #5131) in the "()" position.
(http://www.yourfishpictures.com/data/500/medium/102_0641.JPG)
install the star (key #1117091) and the spring (key #5115) with a little grease.
(http://www.yourfishpictures.com/data/500/medium/102_0642.JPG)
install the handle (key #1117097) and c-clip (key#4490).
(http://www.yourfishpictures.com/data/500/medium/102_0643.JPG)
add a little grease and install the handle nut (key #20944).
(http://www.yourfishpictures.com/data/500/medium/102_0644.JPG)
install the handle nut collar (key #20944) and set screw (key #14868).
(http://www.yourfishpictures.com/data/500/medium/102_0645.JPG)
clean off the excess grease and you're done!
(http://www.yourfishpictures.com/data/500/medium/102_0646.JPG)
Thanks for that post, Alan. It's really helpful for newbies like me :)
Hey, just wanted to add my $.02 to this post. Just worked on one of these for a customer and the little brass bushing is actually there on purpose. With the way that this reel functions, it does not affect freespool or casting. It is an odd design, but the anti-reverse bearing is in the middle of the spool, so when you are in freespool/casting, the spool is actually using the left&right side plate bearings for spin. It only uses the inner spool bearings while being reeled in. So while it might add some smoothness, it won't give you any better casting or spin...or at least not in the direction that matters.
Aaron
gawd, this is an old post. did i ever mention that this was translated into russian?
http://vlad.mi.ru/txt/alan/abu/rec60/record60.htm
Quote from: alantani on May 12, 2011, 08:27:10 AM
gawd, this is an old post. did i ever mention that this was translated into russian?
http://vlad.mi.ru/txt/alan/abu/rec60/record60.htm
Alan Tani in cyrillic, awesome!!!
Nice review, thanks Alan.
I just purchased this reel (a record 61, non high capacity) and took it out for the first time today just to make a couple of cast. I own(ed) an old 6000 model which I gave to my brother for sentimental reasons (used to belong to my dad) and this reel is the replacement.
It was short fun. I lost the cap which is over the bearing because is had not properly fastened it in the first minute. Of course it fell in 30ft of water. Secondly I had to much line on the spool and it came between the spool and the housing. I'll post pictures if it later.
So I had to take the reel apart. Thank god for Alan's tutorials. Now if I only would take the time to read properly I would not have overlooked: quote "the left side plate should not be removed" quote end
Besides, I have a lefty so it's not my fault :-\
Now I have a challenge with installing the clickerplate. I do have the schematic but it is not clear how to instal the clickerplate. I'm quite sure that I can find the solution in the end but I'm a little carefull as the reel is brandnew
Could someone give me directions?
Edit: found it. As I have a slightly different model I will post some pictures
that nice handle is the same as the one on my ambassaduer ld b/c.and i hate it.i want to replace it.i used it yesterday for a good bag of table fish,2/3kg,and the reel worked loverly except for the handle.fingers cramped.age may have something to do with that.abu power handle that mackeraljoe mention,no, your daiwa one alan,no,any more i could look at.thanks for all the help and cheers.
I'm curious on this reel what is the advantage of having the two anti-reverse roller bearings? (sideplate and in the spool, in particular the one located in the spool?) I have a friends reel that he uses for musky fishing, which when he was reeling in big lures and doing figure eights at the boat the anti reverse(s) would slip and let out line. The roller bearing in the spool only allows the spool to spin in the direction that doesnt matter when casting/retrieving, any ideas what the advantage is? It seems like the only thing the spool IAR bearing is doing is adding another potential failure mode...
In writing this post I think I pinned the failure to the IAR in the spool, as if the sideplate bearing failed the reel would go knucklebuster, and I'm pretty sure it just let out line as if the drag was to loose. Still not at all impressed with the anti-reverse design on this reel..
Thanks a bunch for any input,
Zane
i have this reel and after looking into it deeply (disecting) i really don't see any advantage or any use for the spool AR bearing because it only functions when the sideplate AR bearing is engaged. if the sideplate AR bearing seizes there goes your fish...gone! :) tight lines...
I'm really confuse about this spool anti-reverse bearing and need clarification. Got the same exact reel and performed tear-down and rebuild several times and did not notice any difference with my old 6000c other than an anti-reverse bearing and it has the abu anti-reverse pawl. What is the spool anti-reverse bearing looks like? Appreciate any clarification.
Joe
hi joe! first remove the entire centrifugal brake assembly and then the right spool bearing, you will see the spool AR bearing inside the right side of the spool. hope this answers your question. tight lines...
Quote from: Mel B on April 03, 2012, 11:10:52 PM
i have this reel and after looking into it deeply (disecting) i really don't see any advantage or any use for the spool AR bearing because it only functions when the sideplate AR bearing is engaged. if the sideplate AR bearing seizes there goes your fish...gone! :) tight lines...
While I mneither have really understood why the reel is constructed as it is there is still a logical explanation to the ARB in the spool.
The ARB in the spool forces the rotation (during casting) to use the side plate bearings, without an ARB in the spool rotation would use both side plate bearings and the spool bearing/bushing. In what way this would be better than the standard UltraCast design I don't know, but despite not quite understanding I still find the RCN to be a pretty nice BC.
Thanks Mel B, appreciate the clarification.
Quote from: mackereljoe on April 05, 2012, 06:18:21 PM
Thanks Mel B, appreciate the clarification.
no problem, glad to help...tight lines.
While I mneither have really understood why the reel is constructed as it is there is still a logical explanation to the ARB in the spool.
The ARB in the spool forces the rotation (during casting) to use the side plate bearings, without an ARB in the spool rotation would use both side plate bearings and the spool bearing/bushing. In what way this would be better than the standard UltraCast design I don't know, but despite not quite understanding I still find the RCN to be a pretty nice BC.
[/quote]
i agree with you a 100%. there is always a logical explanation for it, also you are right it forces the use of the side plate bearings. but in what way is this an advantage? IMO, it is a disadvatage when you are casting because of this reason, just like how the Calcutta 400BSV. my C4 casts better than my RC-60HC and Calcutta 400BSV because the C4 uses the spool bearings for casting just like most of the "castable" LD reels. anyways that's just my real world experience. BTW also sometimes i think engineers do this things just to be different even though they know it does not have real advantages. that's just my honest opinion, tight lines.
The spool ARB locks to spool shaft with outgoing rotation which makes the "fine adjust" bearing cap functional against spool shaft and spool for lure weight adjustment. On retrieval the spool ARB "unlocks" allowing retrieve without having to crank against "extra" tension of the "fine" adjust....spool rotates freely on shaft. Interesting engineering solution to a minor extra retrieve cranking resistance....I would imagine it may be more noticeable with heavier lures and settings of the "fine adjust" bearing cap.
Currently awaiting ABEC 7 Bearings for Abu Garcia Record 60. I am not sure how you go about removing the center braking piece from the spool.
Has anyone changed out the bearings on this reel before?
Quote from: jfred36 on June 16, 2013, 07:13:58 PM
Currently awaiting ABEC 7 Bearings for Abu Garcia Record 60. I am not sure how you go about removing the center braking piece from the spool.
Has anyone changed out the bearings on this reel before?
Hi, Unsure why you want to remove the one way clutch needle bearing in the spool....That's what takes the Record into the bearings in the side plates. If you remove the one way, you no longer have a record.
Part number 5230 bearing anybody know the size ? I need to replace this on a friends reel.
Thank you all.
Quote from: SNAPS on November 24, 2013, 01:07:31 PM
Part number 5230 bearing anybody know the size ? I need to replace this on a friends reel.
Thank you all.
They are 3x10x4 mm.
Might be hard to find rounded style bearings.
I hate to resurect an old post like this but...is there any way to increase the drag on this otherwise fantastic reel?
(http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j292/yota924x4/Mobile%20Uploads/20160401_204942_zpsvyhbrevr.jpg) (http://s83.photobucket.com/user/yota924x4/media/Mobile%20Uploads/20160401_204942_zpsvyhbrevr.jpg.html)
(http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j292/yota924x4/Mobile%20Uploads/20160401_205011_zpsadgmbe7s.jpg) (http://s83.photobucket.com/user/yota924x4/media/Mobile%20Uploads/20160401_205011_zpsadgmbe7s.jpg.html)
Looks like the newest versions of the records have a dog
How new are the latest versions? ???
Quote from: yarddogs on May 24, 2016, 12:50:39 AM
How new are the latest versions? ???
Came out 2 or 3 years ago. Slight color change for the Record. New design sideplate rims, removal of the handy thumb screw sideplate nuts in lieu of the new small screws. Lighter line guide and allegedly better cut gears.
In reply to Dwbuzzard's ancient post ???
You may be able to get slightly more drag by increasing the diameter of the cf washers. You want a snug fit in the main gear (same diameter as the eared washers). From the photos the cf doesn't occupy the full width of the gear. Also by going with .5mm thick cf and stainless washers you may get a 5+1 stack. That can give over 50% increase in drag. Measure the sizes and see what Dawn has. The cf is easy - but the stainless washers may be a problem ;)
Quote from: Tiddlerbasher on May 24, 2016, 10:10:51 AM
In reply to Dwbuzzard's ancient post ???
You may be able to get slightly more drag by increasing the diameter of the cf washers. You want a snug fit in the main gear (same diameter as the eared washers). From the photos the cf doesn't occupy the full width of the gear. Also by going with .5mm thick cf and stainless washers you may get a 5+1 stack. That can give over 50% increase in drag. Measure the sizes and see what Dawn has. The cf is easy - but the stainless washers may be a problem ;)
This used to make sense to me, but then I read http://tocatchafish.blogspot.com/p/blog-page.html (http://tocatchafish.blogspot.com/p/blog-page.html), and looked at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friction (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friction) (Amonton's 2nd Law), and (for now) it seems drag diameter (for a solid disc drag washer) is (by simplistic analysis) of no importance. The physics is complicated by the fact that rotary motion/lever arm length is involved, but basically the star nut determines the force that is applied, and spreading it over a smaller, or larger, sized disc is not supposed to matter. The fact that with a larger diameter washer some of the force is at greater distance from the axle and should enjoy greater leverage (like having a larger disc on your car's disc brakes), must be offset by the fact that the force per sq in is less since the total force (limited by the screw strength of the star nut) is now spread over larger area. So, longer lever arm, but also less force. The corollary then should be - for greater drag, beef up the threads on the drive shaft so it can be screwed down harder. If the drag washers were annular bands, then I guess there would be something to using a larger diameter.
But if Amonton's 2nd Law applies, how would adding more washers to a stack make for higher drag? The only thing that I can think of is that there must be some kind of non-simplistic friction behavior at higher psi loads -lock up, deformation of materials that changes the friction coefficient, change in heat dissipation - so that it still makes sense to spread the force over more surface area. So then, maybe larger diameter offers the same improvement. Hmmm.
It is a nice article Spoolin01, but some things need a little clarification.
The two criterion which greatest affect the sum total of drag are 1) the number of sliding surfaces, and 2) distance from center of rotation to center or mean diameter of friction surface.
Increasing the number of discs will give more drag.
Increasing the diameter of those discs will give more drag.
Increasing the pressure upon those discs will give more drag.
Increasing the surface area of those discs by utilizing the full face of the disc as a frictional surface as opposed to utilizing only a smaller peripheral portion of said disc as a frictional surface, will not increase drag.
Possibility of misunderstanding: Increasing the number of discs or their diameter will in fact likely also increase the sum total of the surface area, but this is secondary to the primary two criterion as per above.
For more fun, see http://alantani.com/index.php?topic=15510.0
.
Hi Robert - I can bet that this is a complicated and contentious topic, because it pits theory against the real world and people's experiences and expectations. It's not always easy to bring those all together. The simplest way to get something useful out of it would be to do bench testing. I thought I recalled seeing some testing, or at least a claim of it, that supposedly confirmed that standard drag washer stacks did not benefit from increased diameter, but that was just one site and one claim.
If Amonton's law holds, then if you put say 10 lbs of force on a drag stack, it shouldn't matter how many washers or what size they are, you've got 10 lbs of force, and according to that "law", that's all that matters (this is a direct analogy to the brick-dragging example, aside from the rotary motion aspect). The force is applied by how tight you screw the star wheel. That's the force maintained by the wheel and shaft threads, and independent of what lies under the wheel, the same as the frictional force of the dragged brick depends on it's weight, not on what the shape or size of the face is.
In the few discussions of Amonton's Law I've looked at I've never seen it qualified for rotary motion, so I presume it must apply there or that exception would be discussed. If that's the case, then the lever arm aspect must not be important - you gain some increased lever arm with a larger dia drag, but lose force over the closer-in diameter areas, since the total force is now spread out over a larger surface area. Net result must be no change, or the law isn't valid. IF it is the case that a larger automobile disc makes a better disc brake, it must be because the frictional zone is only annular, so you really are applying the same caliper force at a longer lever arm, for more stopping power. If the caliper swept the entire diameter of the disc instead of just an outer band, presumably diameter would no longer matter.
I have to agree, most of what you said seems right to me at a gut level (not the part about using the whole disc instead of just the peripheral portion - if I understood what you meant, I think that's backwards), but it does seem to contradict Amonton's 2nd law. I remember when I read the brick-dragging example the first time, it seemed wrong that the force needed didn't depend on which face was down.
If both of you are right, then some assumption underlying the law must either be misunderstood or not in effect. The law really just relies on two factors - weight and frictional coefficient. If either of those two things change as a result of drag stack engineering, then that could explain the apparent disagreement. To me though, it's not obvious how either of those would change as a result of diameter or washer count.
It seems like it would be a simple experiment to take a reel and weight and test the washer count effect. If the weight takes a certain time to drop to the ground, then you change the washer count in the stack, does the drop time change? Does that seem like a good way to test it? The hard part might be making sure the star wheel force was a constant - how to measure that?... maybe by turning the wheel using a spring scale? Maybe I'll try that, I'm servicing a bunch of Ambassadeurs today.
There are many sources of information on how this works, and it has been discussed and explained numerous times here on this forum by myself as well as others. Lastly just a few days ago I think; johndtuttle and hafnor were talking about it.
Have a poke at the forum search button, or look into engineering texts concerning for example automotive or motorcycle clutches. You are obviously an intelligent guy; you'll find whatever it is you're looking for.
http://alantani.com/index.php?topic=7817.30
After some poking around, it's clear data is sorely lacking. The link and recent discussion as you say are but a couple out of many iterations of the same discussion - theory on one side, on the other lots of assertions about the role of drag washer diameter, surface area, and count, most of which directly contradict the theory, but nothing to hang a hat on.
I've looked at some brake discussions in other contexts that similarly try to come to grip with this 2nd Law, express the same confusion at the counter-intuitive nature of the law, and suffer from the same lack of data. Aside from undocumented claims by the Dragenstein guy - who claims to confirm the 2nd Law applies to reel drags - I haven't found an actual demonstration of anybody's point of view about the subject.
In the same vein, none of the "theoretical" discussion sites for drags, clutches, or brakes that I've found address any conflicts with that 2nd Law. Some of the brake sites mention the law, and ascribe secondary benefits to increased contact area, not increased braking power per se. Of course that could just be a feature of how much clutter there is on the internet. Who knows.
You can always take the practical view - if the reel does the job, who cares? But considering how much interest there is in washer size and count, it would be nice to see some actual data showing whether those factors are central to drag force, or more of importance for usable range, heat dissipation, fine adjustment, or other usability aspects.
I used to be a proponent of "bigger isn't better," but then I read a piece that made it clear that diameter matters but surface area does not. In other words, if your star was in a particular spot that gave you 10#s of drag and you opened up the drag stack and made all of your disks look like Swiss cheese, assuming your disks were still strong enough to not fall apart and you left the outer edge intact, you would still have 10#s of drag when you reassembled the stack and put the star in the same spot. This is why Alan's new 500 and 113H drags work even with the big hole in the middle for the 500. The outer circumference is the same.
I'm not going to start Swiss cheesing my drag disks, so for me bigger and more is always better.
Ron
I've read that too but my question is: is the drag just as smooth with less surface area?
I can only theorize, but it seems to me that as long as both disks have no holes then they should be similar in smoothness. One of the advantages noted over and over on here about adding disks is getting adequate drag that is silky smooth. For instance, A 5+1 113H can produce way more drag than needed for 40# mono. A 3+1 can produce adequate drag for 40# mono. If you adjust the 5+1 to slightly more drag than the 3+1 is capable of, you have more than adequate drag that is very smooth because you are not running it at max. Bigger disks provide more drag but if you don't use it all you get more smooth drag.
Best I can give you.
Ron
Quote from: alantani on December 07, 2008, 04:52:43 PM
i pulled it out of the box and the first thing i noticed was the weight. it's heavy! much heavier that a normal ambassaduer. i ran into the house and grabbed my camera. i've done an ambassaduer post already, but i knew this one would be different.
so, what was the main reason of the weight difference on the record 60 and regular abu c3/c4?
I know the record feels more sturdy but it was reinforced on every single part in general or which parts were reinforced to gain that much weight?
I just got a used Record 60 in really good shape and I can clearly feel the difference in weight compared to my c3, I havent weighted on a balance but feels maybe as heavy as my abu 7000c
So the unique thing about this reel is when the spool is adjusted for optimal casting , there is still left/right travel on the spool.
Does that create any issuers in use...like eating line?
Also...is it worth it to go the full magilla
And add a ball bearing level wind?
This is going to be my off the beach reel...(no Jetties!!)
Still haven't spooled it up......
Never had onea these in-hand. But I'd think that adjusting the centrifical brake weights would be the best way to control the cast after getting the spool adjusted.
The bushing; I have an old Ambassadeur 5000 and there's brass lookin bushings on both sides(with spool adjusting caps for both sides/bushings) and it casts great. To me, the Record 60's bushing would be one less ball bearing to get corroded and have to service or replace.