So i built a 501, a 99, a 1/0, now a Squidder 146:
I have a stock 146 with an aluminum spool
I ordered a Tiburon frame from Randy in silver
I am seriously considering a pair of Accurate plates from Randy in Red
New knob from Pro Challenger small EVA
New Carbon drags
Bearings seem fine
Left side bearing cup is a real bugger to get off and put back. Required a special tool...don't yell at me...vice grips! Yes I had to resort to a small pair vice grips. I just could not get it off or back in without them. Thinking of buying a new one but the description at Scotts said the new ones are tight and would require, pliers to put in???
From what I have read and been told, there is no faster gears, it would be nice to have steel gears, if any one has any???
What am I missing?
Thanks!
Andy
When you get that steel gear, mate it up with Bryan's drag stack and you will have one hell of a little Squidder. I just did this last week. The gear is really common, (I think mine was out of a Surfmaster). In my opinion the lower gears are more desirable in a Squidder anyway and Bryan's drag with the Tib frame will give it balls.
-Mike
I will look on line for the surfcaster gear, forgot about that one...
Well, I will let the cat out of the bag.
I have talked to Sal for awhile now. I have added the following item to my next project after the 113HSN is done, my resource will work on a Squidder that will use all Jigmaster 500 all parts in the right side plate with a one piece frame with the left side plate. This project will start around July.
There you go!
Thanks a big cat! :o :o
I wanted to tell you guys for some time, but Alan told me not to.
I wanted the Squidder Magnum before the 4/0 Super Narrow, but Alan said he had lots of inquiries about the 4/0 so he chose that one first.
We started talking about the Squidder Magnum over a years ago, I'm glad he's going forward with it.
Sal
I don't know how you guys keep these secret projects secret! Is there a blood oath? Is there a special meeting in the cellar of some old chateau, sipping adult beverages, exchanging special handshakes?
Alan,
How wide are you planning to make this top-secret Squidder?
-Mike
Quote from: PacRat on February 11, 2016, 02:18:56 AM
Alan,
How wide are you planning to make this top-secret Squidder?
-Mike
It will be same as the 146.
Quote from: steelhead_killer on February 11, 2016, 01:19:07 AM
I don't know how you guys keep these secret projects secret! Is there a blood oath? Is there a special meeting in the cellar of some old chateau, sipping adult beverages, exchanging special handshakes?
Once a year they all get together in the cellar of Chateau Rothschild in France and crack a few and talk reels.
I never been invited but this is what I heard, from a guy who knows a guy the used to fish.
I have a magnum Squidder like that but it says Pro Gear 255 on it. Ya know, one piece frame, all Jigmaster guts in the right sideplate and the size of a 146. Of course my old 146 had a cool purple frame and the 255 is all gunmetal. I have an extra 255 spool and I have a 251 frame and spool too so I can swap between them in about 15 seconds.
Quote from: Black Pearl on February 10, 2016, 11:38:58 PM
Well, I will let the cat out of the bag.
I have talked to Sal for awhile now. I have added the following item to my next project after the 113HSN is done, my resource will work on a Squidder that will use all Jigmaster 500 all parts in the right side plate with a one piece frame with the left side plate. This project will start around July.
There you go!
Good!
If I could make a request that you make extra spools and publish the dimensions for the spool/spindle.
From my earlier post on the "Squidmaster" and "open design".
http://alantani.com/index.php?topic=16802.msg175873#msg175873 (http://alantani.com/index.php?topic=16802.msg175873#msg175873)
Quote
Quote
Quote
Specific to the classic Penn star drag designs: The AR ratchet teeth, actually fit inside the spool lip. If you move the gears further apart, you also have to change the spool spindle, so that the ratchet teeth are no longer inside the spool lip, but actually past the end of the spool. This is accomplished by moving the bridge about .2 inches further out from the center of the spool (this would also be the width of an adapter plate that would allow you to use a jigmaster right sideplate and gear set with a squidder frame.)
I suspect that this is what the Accurate Magnum kits probably do (with the adapter plate and sideplate combined into one part). Others have also taken this design approach (Pro Gear, Newell), but using more proprietary parts.
To carry this to its logical conclusion:
With all the parts the members have made, we could actually make as complete reel that would be the modernized competitor of a squidder magnum, and a very nice reel for modern spectra and mono lines. Replacement parts would be widely available from Penn and aftermarket suppliers. The only thing missing is a standard sized spool with a slightly modified spindle, and an adapter plate that would allow a jigmaster right sideplate to bolt onto a squidder frame. Of course, a new sideplate that did not need an adapter could also be made, or even a complete reel kit.
I have brought this idea up with several of the usual suspects. My hope would be that if someone decides to make spools or full kits, we can publish the spool/spindle dimensions, so that parts from various members or outside suppliers could work together.
If folks are interested, I could start a new thread on an "open design" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_design (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_design)) reel that would be based on a squidder frame and spool size, with jigmaster compatible gears/parts). IMHO this could be a better reel than other star drags on the market (right size, competitive performance, proven design, and widely available parts).
-Jurelometer
Thanks!! Really informative 8)
Marc..
You're welcome.
Of course I realized that I just made a slight mistake :-[ : On a stock reel - the entire bridge plate fits inside the spool lip. so the spindle has to be extended so that a wider bridge plate clears the spool.
Hello Dave, I remember having a few conversations with you on this project over a year ago, are you still interested on making the plates? Your second idea on material choice was a good one.
I also remember you were not interested in quantity, but maybe just one that will work will do.
This project is easier said than done, but I believe it will happen.
Alan wants to be able to use his Jigmaster's guts, bridge, gears and everything else to make it a direct swap...we'll see.
No matter how hard this project will be, I'm sure it will be well worth it.
Sal
Hi Sal,
There are lots of other nice aluminum star drag reels around this size (and probably price range). The advantage to building off the squidder and jigmaster platforms is the potential for longer term availability of parts, and customization options for specific preferences. But this only works if the parts are standardized as much a possible. Using the jigmaster bridge plate/gears, etc. is a good start, but with a tiny bit more forethought, we can have a more valuable platform that shouldn't get in the way of Alan or others making a really nice full kit.
All we need is a a squidmaster spool/spindle specification that basically says-
1. spool diameter/ length/lip dimensions compatible with equivalent squidder model
2. Left side compatible with squidder left side plate (depth, bearing cup/clicker etc.)
3. Right side compatible with jigmaster (500 or 505?) sideplate (including trim rings -same as an accurate or cortez sideplate).
The final test would be to make an extension plate/adapter that would attach the jigmaster right sideplate to the squidder frame (basically a flat ring that has squidder hole pattern on one side, and jigmaster pattern on the other), and attach a squidder left sideplate to the other. The plate has to be wide enough to let the jigmaster bridge clear the squidder sized spool lip. Now there would be a working reel -a testable prototype of the concept. A good way to test the spool and the whole concept before building the rest of the kit IMHO.
Others could build their own parts spools, kits, off of this design/platfrom.
I think this makes the initial project more valuable, but then again, I am not the one doing all the work :) I am sure we will be happy with whatever Alan decides to do.
As for me,
I have moved on to some different reel designs. Don't know where it is going to take me yet. Right now the CNC mill is broken, so I am just designing/cutting Aluminum jig head molds on a CNC router. Trying to learn something about 3d machining and mold making.
Dave, it's nice that you're doing some jig head molds, but a man as you shouldn't be with a broken CNC machine for very long. :-\
Quote from: Black Pearl on February 10, 2016, 11:38:58 PM
Well, I will let the cat out of the bag.
I have talked to Sal for awhile now. I have added the following item to my next project after the 113HSN is done, my resource will work on a Squidder that will use all Jigmaster 500 all parts in the right side plate with a one piece frame with the left side plate. This project will start around July.
There you go!
I'm glad you decided to move forward with this Alan. July would give plenty of time to save up on this one.
Joe
Alan, we are talking about 4:1 gears here, right? Do we have a shot at 5:1? Thanks.
Mike
Quote from: mike1010 on February 14, 2016, 03:24:32 PM
Alan, we are talking about 4:1 gears here, right? Do we have a shot at 5:1? Thanks.
Mike
We are taking about both. It should not matter.
These reels will last a lifetime.
Quote from: jigmaster501 on February 14, 2016, 04:12:44 PM
These reels will last a lifetime.
They already do last a lifetime, actually more than our lifetime.
If everything goes according to plans, as the head plate accepting the Jigmaster's guts, you will have a choice for the 4:1 ratio or 5:1.
This is exciting, it will surely be a heck of a reel.
Sal
Quote from: Black Pearl on February 14, 2016, 03:39:15 PM
Quote from: mike1010 on February 14, 2016, 03:24:32 PM
Alan, we are talking about 4:1 gears here, right? Do we have a shot at 5:1? Thanks.
Mike
We are taking about both. It should not matter.
Agree. I was unclear. My real question is about finding 5:1 gears, which would make the reel much more appealing than 4:1.
Mike
Quote from: mike1010 on February 14, 2016, 09:29:28 PM
Quote from: Black Pearl on February 14, 2016, 03:39:15 PM
Quote from: mike1010 on February 14, 2016, 03:24:32 PM
Alan, we are talking about 4:1 gears here, right? Do we have a shot at 5:1? Thanks.
Mike
We are taking about both. It should not matter.
Agree. I was unclear. My real question is about finding 5:1 gears, which would make the reel much more appealing than 4:1.
Mike
I will have a new 5:1 gear set for the Jigmaster or 112h,
http://alantani.com/index.php?topic=6713.msg174426#msg174426 (http://alantani.com/index.php?topic=6713.msg174426#msg174426)
Is left hand an option?? This would be a killer tautog/striped bass/bluefish reel for the NE and would be very much appreciated in a LH version!
Quote from: Black Pearl on February 14, 2016, 09:42:54 PM
I will have a new 5:1 gear set for the Jigmaster or 112h,
http://alantani.com/index.php?topic=6713.msg174426#msg174426 (http://alantani.com/index.php?topic=6713.msg174426#msg174426)
That's great. Thanks.
Magnum Squidder will be a lot of fun. Any chances of a 145 sized spool fitting one?
That is the plan, so you could use existing spools, but things might changed along the way. We'll need to wait and see if they could make it work.
Sal
Quote from: Alto Mare on February 18, 2016, 11:05:04 PM
That is the plan, so you could use existing spools, but things might changed along the way. We'll need to wait and see if they could make it work.
Sal
Hi Sal,
I suspect that I am telling the master something that he already knows ;D but here goes...
I don't think you can use the existing Squidder spool/spindle and the Jigmaster guts. the jigmaster bridgeplate and gear center-to center spacing are are too wide to fit under the squidder spool lip -where they have to be in order for the pinion to spindle junction to be aligned. I guess it might be possible to make an adapter that pressed into the spindle and extended the pinion junction, but not sure how robust this solution would be and if it leaves enough room for pinion travel. Plus narrow spools are so rare now that new spools would still have to be part of any kit.
My suggestion would be to try new spools that matched all the original spool dimensions with an slight alteration on the right hand side to slightly extend just the spindle (including pinon junction) as noted in my previous posts. If done correctly, there would be options in the future to mix and match frames, side plates, and spools/kits, both using some existing and some new parts. From preliminary measurement and design, it seemed possible to not only reuse the jigmaster mechanical components, but also squidder compatible frames and left sideplates. (BTW- I'm not going further on a squidmaster project, just thought I might share my ideas).
Also there seems to be some market for replacement stock spools. This design makes it easier and more cost effective to supply aftermarket spools for stock squidders as well. Same aluminum parts, just a slightly different spindle pressed in.
One other thought: it might be possible to do all this and make the new spools compatible with the accurate squidder magnum kits. Never saw a squidder magnum, but wouldn't be surprised if they went along the same design route.
Open design is a pretty powerful concept. We are kind of doing this now for replacement parts, but this is a chance to do it for a whole reel.
-J.
Hello Dave, yes that is why I said IF they could make it work. I do know that Alan has some good guys working on his projects, we will just need to wait and see what they come up with.
There are a few ways you could go with this, but again, that is up to his guys to see if it is possible.
Here is a design that has really impressed me in the past, the 970 mag.
(http://i1101.photobucket.com/albums/g431/pescatore1/my%20narrow%20reels/20160218_204737.jpg) (http://s1101.photobucket.com/user/pescatore1/media/my%20narrow%20reels/20160218_204737.jpg.html)
As you could notice, the spool is pretty far from the late, a spool doesn't need to ride over the bridge and gear.
This spool that i'm showing above is actually smaller that the Squidder and the main gear is larger than the Jigmaster.
Penn engineers when really crazy on this one, and I mean that in a good way.Also, the left side shaft is the same thickness as the 114h.
By the way, here is one of the star that you made me a while back Dave
(http://i1101.photobucket.com/albums/g431/pescatore1/my%20narrow%20reels/20160218_204809.jpg) (http://s1101.photobucket.com/user/pescatore1/media/my%20narrow%20reels/20160218_204809.jpg.html)
I would love for you to make me some more, any chance of you making me some? I'm not in a hurry.
Back on this 146 project, I'm not sure which way they're going with this, I'm just glad that they are willing to give it a shot.
Sal
Hi Sal,
I agree. A smart move by Penn on the Mag series spindles.
In an ideal design, the bearings are close to the spool. This allows for more strength while keeping the bearings and shafts as small as possible. The design of the classic Penns does not really allow this (if you want to re-use most parts), so the next best thing is to make the spindles thicker up to the bearing seat. This could be done on a squidmaster or squidder replacement spool as well without breaking compatibility with existing parts and sideplates.
Re: Stars - glad you like them! I don't think I want to make the same stars again. I have an idea for a new star design that might have some functional merit. I will PM you for your feedback.
I really hate to profess my ignorance, but............In the search for torque multiplication a smaller pinion and larger main would do the trick. To increase the retrieval rate wouldn't you increase the pinion and decrease the main? Personally I want more line on the spool per revolution of the crank/handle for my Squidder. ie: 15p/30m = 2:1 ratio. 16p/30m = 1.87:1 ratio. Am I having a dyslexic moment here?
In which case there is plenty of room for another tooth on the pinion in the Squidder side plate. Maybe even two teeth with some minor massaging. The base circle remains the same. The over-all diameter increases. I don't know how the tooth depth and contact face would be effected. As for backlash. Well, it is Penn after all. The slop and flex in the stock Penn assembly has the backlash flopping around like a fish hitting the deck. An upgraded drag stack and alternating drop double dogs would cushion the back lash slam nicely. As for strength there is higher quality stainless with a higher nickle content on the market. Shouldn't be difficult.
By the way....what's up with the slotted crank arm and knurled thumb screw lock down. I think I need two.
Quote from: WOTHoyt on March 04, 2016, 05:40:14 PM
I really hate to profess my ignorance, but............In the search for torque multiplication a smaller pinion and larger main would do the trick. To increase the retrieval rate wouldn't you increase the pinion and decrease the main? Personally I want more line on the spool per revolution of the crank/handle for my Squidder. ie: 15p/30m = 2:1 ratio. 16p/30m = 1.87:1 ratio. Am I having a dyslexic moment here?
In which case there is plenty of room for another tooth on the pinion in the Squidder side plate. Maybe even two teeth with some minor massaging. The base circle remains the same. The over-all diameter increases. I don't know how the tooth depth and contact face would be effected. As for backlash. Well, it is Penn after all. The slop and flex in the stock Penn assembly has the backlash flopping around like a fish hitting the deck. An upgraded drag stack and alternating drop double dogs would cushion the back lash slam nicely. As for strength there is higher quality stainless with a higher nickle content on the market. Shouldn't be difficult.
Not ignorant at all- this topic seems to come up a lot here, and I think you touched on the possible issues of just messing with the number of teeth.
Changing the ratio of teeth is not really the point of the exercise. The pitch circle ratios need to change and new teeth have to be designed to accommodate the pitch circle ratio, center distance and various performance aspects. Then the tooth count takes care of itself.
A bit more detail based on my very limited knowledge of gear theory:
The gear ratio is defined by the ratio of the pitch circle diameters (about middle of the teeth). To go from 3.3:1 to 5:1, the pinion pitch circle needs to be about two thirds of its current size. You can keep the same base diameter and decrease the pitch circle diameter by going with smaller teeth, but that is not going to buy much of a change in pitch ratio before you start shredding gears because of tiny teeth.
Even if there was enough backlash space to harvest room or a tooth or two (I would guess not), slipping in a few more/less teeth is not really a great option. The sides of the teeth actually have a specific curve to them (an involute curve) - that allows the load to stay consistent as the gears rotate. There is a relationship between the curves on the pinion and main gear teeth such that the load follows a straight diagonal line (force line) between the base circles. The amount of angle on the force line determines how fat or skinny the teeth are. It all has to work together.
From: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c2/Involute_wheel.gif -author Claudio Rocchini
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c2/Involute_wheel.gif)
So once the gears are redesigned for the ratio, strength, etc. the tooth count takes of itself, other than needing some sort of prime/co-prime number to ensure that there is not pattern of engagement that leads to uneven tooth wear. (Fun fact- the prime number requirement is why most geared systems including fishing reels have such strange-looking gear ratios- like 4.73:1). There is gear design software out there that will figure all this out for you, but the stuff I have seen doesn't let you select a fixed center distance.
But you can actually estimate the current pinion pitch circle, and calculate what it would have to be to get the gear ratio you want. I would expect that you will find that there is not enough room.
I think the equation would be P=2*( C/(1+G)) where
P= Pinion pitch circle diameter
C= center distance between spindle and gear sleeve/post
G= gear ratio
There are other problems getting the pinion to spool junction to work, if you shrink the pinoin diameter as well.
Hence the call for a squidmaster! This changes the center distance - allowing for a larger gear ratio without smaller pinion and/or teeth.
Quote
By the way....what's up with the slotted crank arm and knurled thumb screw lock down. I think I need two.
Those things are cool! I have wondered if it is possible to come up with an updated version that is more quickly-adjusted, and counterbalanced in the short arm position. Haven't been able to figure out a good sturdy design. Any ideas?
-J
Great explanation there. Making simple sense..
Well as simple as...
P=2*( C/(1+G))
Of some of the mysteries of the simple gear.
& complete with an animation no less.
Thanks for sharing.
John
This is great stuff. Thanks.
Mike
Cool stuff, So the Squidmaster would be Almost like a newell 220 but with a stronger sideplate & 1 piece frame?
Another thing that proper gear design contributes to is smoothness. If the wrong curve is chosen for the side of the teeth they will never be able to be lapped smooth. In the military, gear train smoothness (which means quietness) is considered heavily in every part of design. It does seem like you can put points on a disk and have a gear, and you can, but it probably won't be a very good gear.
Ron
Quote from: noyb72 on March 05, 2016, 10:55:36 PM
Another thing that proper gear design contributes to is smoothness. If the wrong curve is chosen for the side of the teeth they will never be able to be lapped smooth. In the military, gear train smoothness (which means quietness) is considered heavily in every part of design. It does seem like you can put points on a disk and have a gear, and you can, but it probably won't be a very good gear.
Ron
Yep. Exactly.
If we take a look at the animation in my previous reply, it shows how the curve is defined. Think of the force line (with the moving arrow) as a string being unwound of the base curve of one gear and onto the other. The dot at the center of the arrow defines the shape of the curve for both teeth. A curve defined by a piece of string being wound on a circle is called an involute curve.
Around 1750, the mathematician Leonhard Euler figured out that this use of an involute curve on gears would provide a steady transfer of power without any jumps or hops. Still in use today.
This just inspired me to do a quick read of Euler's biography:
Euler was definitely a character- he was picked on unmercifully in the Prussian court for being the math dork that he was. The king took to referring Euler as Cyclops (Euler was blind in one eye) after Euler screwed up the engineering for a fountain. Voltaire (one of western literature's greatest satirists) happened to be hanging around the Prussian court, and was quite willing to torment Euler for a bit of extra sport.
So we should all throw a little positive karma Lenny Euler's way whenever we savor the smooth gearing on our favorite reels. Give him the last laugh. And support your local math dork!
-J
Good story, thanks.
mark
Quote from: surfcaster on March 05, 2016, 10:34:58 PM
Cool stuff, So the Squidmaster would be Almost like a newell 220 but with a stronger sideplate & 1 piece frame?
My ideal definition of a squidmaster would be a reel that could reuse as many squidder and jigmaster parts as possible. The only parts that would HAVE to be new is a slightly altered spool spindle to allow the bridge plate to be outside of the spool, and an adapter that would allow a jigmaster right sideplate to fit onto a squidder frame. This would be an
open design that any supplier could build parts for, and that existing jigmaster and squidder parts can be used!
This reel would be similar to the size/speed of the Newell 2xx reel with the option of a more rigid frame, and widely available replacement parts and customizations.
Now it sounds like Alan C is looking at going a bit further on this concept and making a fully integrated kit. My hope is that the
open design concept is embraced- but I am sure that folks will be pretty excited with whatever Alan comes up with.
-J
Quote from: surfcaster on March 05, 2016, 10:34:58 PM
Cool stuff, So the Squidmaster would be Almost like a newell 220 but with a stronger sideplate & 1 piece frame?
That's called a Pro Gear 255!
It is amazing how historical figures tend to come in groups of time. I'd never believe that Voltaire and Euler where contemporaries. I bet in a hundred years they will be talking about Alan and Sal as contemporaries.
Ron
Quote from: noyb72 on March 06, 2016, 04:25:43 AM
It is amazing how historical figures tend to come in groups of time. I'd never believe that Voltaire and Euler where contemporaries. I bet in a hundred years they will be talking about Alan and Sal as contemporaries.
Ron
Duh!
The best way to achieve your goal is to copy the accurate squidder magnums side plates. Utilize Alan's stainless sleeve and 5.1 gear set and bridge. Yes a custom spool is needed and possibly the frame. Also you can just buy a reel from someone who already builds something close. But this will truly be a custom Penn reel. With a selection of gear ratios and drag options and durability unmatched by any manufacture available.
Mike
Exciting stuff ! When will these become available ?
Nice, I just got me a 146 squidder in pretty good shape on my visit to Mexicali's flea market, paired with a original peen 20# stick