I have a 506HS due to arrive today or tomorrow. It really seems like the perfect reel, after a few minor mods.
I've already ordered an old stock penn steel main/pinion set (with the slower gear ratio), and some EZO bearings. I intend to order Bryan's drag kit and a SS sleeve as soon as the reel arrives, and I'm sure a handle is in my near future.
At what point do I need to start considering the other aftermarket parts available? I know it's my reel to do with as I please, and all mods are optional. Supposedly the drag kit will push 25# of drag though I dont think I'll ever test that. But I may go up to 20# as needed.
At what point does a new SS bridge and dogs become a worthwhile addition? Same question for frame and sideplates, etc.
Do I want the fine or coarse thread sleeve if i wanna continue to use the factory star?
I'm thinking 50# braid. Reasonable?
The reel is fishable as is.
A SS gearsleeve, I prefer fine thread, keeps the gear sleeve deformation from happening and in my opinion a must have modification.
Drag washer kits would be the second best mod to start with.
50# braid is is a good choice, I usually use 60#.
If you want to fish it as a 50# reel a solid frame is a must have, a SS double dog bridge is also nice to have for pushing this reel beyond it's original design. Sideplates are the last thing I would change, I have several reels with upgraded sideplates but I prefer keeping the original sideplates on my reels. After market sideates are more ridged and will help if you plan on fishing the reel at or slightly beyond it"'s capabilities.
I personally fish my Jigmasters as 30#, the mods make them much smoother and ridgid reels. My favorite modification for Jigmaster reels is the 501N.
How come the switch to slower gears?
Quote from: Gfish on September 14, 2022, 04:08:25 PMHow come the switch to slower gears?
Because someone who didn't realize the Steel gears were more desirable sold me the set for $20 :d
Also more cranking power.
Here's a weakness in the 505/506 Ted and Bryan pointed out a while back...
" Check out the pro gear section thread now being discussed about increasing drag on a 505&506 and spool shaft flex when Bryan installed a 5 stack. Start by reading page 1.
The spool shaft flex is likely due to the extra long shaft on the 505&506. Bryan says the spool started rubbing at 15#"
-Mike
Here's some advice from Sal...
"You should be ok getting there at those numbers, but wouldn't stay there long. The 500 is rated at 15# max, your 505/506 has finer teeth therefore lower.
The latest heat treated gears from Alan C. do much better than both reels mentioned, but would give you other things to worry about. if you are installing Alan's gears in your 505/506, I wouldn't push it over 15#
The 500, loaded with all the options available today could be pushed to 20#, some might not agree, but I do believe it could handle it.
Sal"
And finally, here's something from Bloody Decks...
"I've been using a Penn 505(5-1 ratio) with the 500 gear set(4-1 ratio) for 5 years with no problems so far.
The lower ratio has added a much needed improvement in cranking power.
I've installed a 3 position Penn power handle on it.
Use it for bounce balling and codding with 80lb. spectra.
The 505 gears will not fit the 500 because the diameter of the main gear is too large.
The dia. of the pinion shaft on the spool of the 505 is smaller than the 500, but the pinon flats are of the same thickness.
The spool shaft pinion flats of the 505 are shorter than the 500's which was a concern in regards to strength, but it hasn't been an issue yet.
Be sure to use the pinion gear that has the pressed on reinforcement ring(all come with this these days?)"
I included this because I believe it to be true (I don't have a 505/506). I think I read it here first. It seems like the 500/501 has a larger pinion I.D. So, while the 500 pinion will fit over a 505 shaft, this 'slop' may allow the pinion to skew enough on the shaft to initiate the stripping process (or at least start jumping or skipping teeth). **This might become an issue if you push it to 20# of drag.
When I googled this I saw a link to Sal's fix for this but the link didn't work anymore.
I think the Penn 501 and 505/6 might only need the SS sleeve and a Bigger knob or maybe a longer handle with bigger knob than factory.
I dont want to stop you to go to the rabbit hole on this model but with the many mods available you can easily spend 200-300 dlls or more on this reel, it will be pretty and unique and stronger but you are now on grounds of accurate reels, new okuma reels as the Tesoro (I want one), etc. if you are into modify old reels up to the point of changing all parts until building a new reel with brand new parts and be able to re-build your old one with the "spare parts" and a new spool, then go for it.
that said, I had the 501 and also the 506HS, they were some of my 1st narrow reels that I used when I started fishing in saltwater around 15 years ago, I wasnt into modify reels so both were used with original parts and caught tons of local fish even few 15# WSB, both were sold when I started to fish on YT and groupers territory.
https://alantani.com/index.php?topic=6186.0
I forgot to mention a larger handle and longer arm, Alan's handles are nice and a Penn 24-49 arm is the longest Penn makes that will fit the gearsleve.
Interesting. Awhile back, for fun, I did some switching around of the gears between these 2 dif. Jiggy's. Don't remember any slop at the pinion/spool shoulder engagement area, which means nothing with my memory. I think if it was me, I'd try it, see how it feels, maybe the slop would enable it to go into gear easier.
506/505 advantages, IMO; 2-support rings on the tail-plate(only 1-on the 500/501); ball bearings over the bushings on the 500/501(I prefer bushings, though); comes stock with an aluminum spool; bar frame insteada the post frame on the 500/501.
500/501 advantages; bigger gear teeth; shorter(stronger?) spool shafts; more part/reel availability.
Lee (Keta) has given sound advice. Gear sleeve, drags, handle, frame in that order. Bill
Guys this is wonderful thank you. In fact exactly what I was hoping for. (another) Dumb question though: do you need to drill out a 505 pinion to fit on a 505, or is there just space in the 505 pinion to begin with? If the 501 shaft is snug in its own pinion but also fits the 506 then the 505 pinion needs to be the same (edit: inner) diameter as the 500 pinion. In my mind that space may be there between pinion and shaft but the shaft is riding on the bearing? I guess I'll open mine up and find out.
Assuming you have a 29l or after market aluminum spool and are not going to change the gears (I like the 500/501 gear ratio for my use) here are some minor corrections.
1. SS fine thread gearsleeve with a 10-505 star
2. Drag washer upgrade
3. Handle and 24-49 handle arm.
4. Frame.
5. Double dog bridge.
6. Metal sideplates.
Some of my modified reels are just gearsleve and drag washers but I have Surfmasters, Jigmasters, 113 and 114 Senators (both high and low speed and 349 reels in several configurations. I even have a all metal 349H with 7 metal drag washers, one of my longer handle arms with a AT handle. Going all out will never be cost effective but the "cool factor" is priceless. My 501N has a narrow frame, SS double dog frame, Pro Chalenger gears with Versa Drag style drag washers, a Max Out ecintric arm one of my handle arms with one of the latest run of MAX Out handles BTW The MAX OUT handles are extermly nice. I put black Penn sideplates on it but will be replacing them with a set of new old stock maroon ones eventualy.
Are they better than my modern reels, not really but they are cooler. I get a lot of comments when I pull out what looks like a discontinued in 1985 stock 349H when halibut fishing, more when they see it bring up butts. My sleeper 349H has a 113H gear sleeve a 7 metal washer drag and a single lever side plate and a modified SS AR dog.
Go into it knowing it will cost some $ but when you are done you will have a reel few will ever own and it is "yours".
If the pinon gear slides on the shaft but drags take a tiny bit of metal out of the boor of the pinion. If you can get the proper size drill bit or a ream use it but if not carefully file it with a small chainsaw file. I rarely, like never, mess with 505/506 reels so I can not give you a better answer.
So there's definitely a bit of play between the pinion and spool shaft in the stock 506 gears. I guess I'll have to wait til the one I ordered arrives to compare.
I don't think you need a frame for this. Get an aluminum seat from Cortez Conversions (Ted's design) and keep the stock bars- I have several like this and jig 50 lb braid without one thought about cage torque. This is lighter, lowers the reel on the rod and will not be your weak point, especially if you end up with stock gearing.
It really seems like the spool shaft is intended to not contact the inside of the pinion when in free spool, likely with the intent being to ride on the bearings and only on the bearings. This introduces an air gap which may not be problematic but definitely does NOT strengthen the setup.
If it comes down to it, if I can't fish it beyond 15# without a massive investment... Not the end of the world. I'll just fish it at 15# then.
Will the stock HT100s get me to that 15# or do I need Bryan's kit for that?
Just ordered a SS sleeve/star combo from Cortez. This is coming together nicely.
Quote from: JasonGotaProblem on September 15, 2022, 04:49:56 PMJust ordered a SS sleeve/star combo from Cortez. This is coming together nicely.
:0)
Wow what a striking comparison. There is definitely a strength difference between those teeth. But the inner diameter is the same. The height is the same. The height of the groove for the yoke is the same. There's no discernable difference in feel when wiggling the original pinion on ths shaft vs wiggling the 500 pinion on the shaft.
Am I missing something here? I may be on my way to a 506LS
We talked about this on the other hotrodding thread. In addition to the pinion hole size, the center distance of the shafts on the HS is greater than on the standard. That is why the edge of the HS bridgepate is beveled, and why the bridgeplates are not interchangeable. I never measured the pinion hole myself- it will take a set of pins gauges to find a smaller difference. Eyeballing is not too accurate.
Folks that have done the swap of standard gears into the HS have been satisfied with the result. But most folk think gears are just little wheels with teeth on them, and I don't think that many (any?) tested both to the point where the gears failed both winding and drag.
It is possible that swapping standard gears into a HS could be stronger than stock HS, but standard gears in a standard reel will be the strongest and smoothest 4:1 setup. Since standard Jigmasters are a dime a dozen, I just took the frames and gear sleeve off the high speed and stuck them on a 500 when I wanted a 4:1 reel.
I never bent a spindle on my 505 myself, and I pretty much spent all my time in the drag abuse zone. Grey spool, so maybe a better spindle. The narrower reel restricts the line leverage, so the risk should be lower.
I was able to get well north of 15 lbs with a stock dry carbon fiber stack (dry has a higher coefficient of friction), but I was willing to go extremely tight on the drag. I suspect that you will be able to hit 15 dry without pliers, but I could be wrong. And probably 12 when greased, especially on a 4:1 . You might have to mess with spacer height, and may not be able to go all the way down to zero drag if you want to get a high setting.
Load up a stock 506 with 20 lb mono (maybe upgrade the gear sleeve and add CF washers), and the reel makes a lot of sense dimension and performance wise. If I were you, I might just clean and lightly oil the bearings and take it for a test cast. Folks that are used to casting a reel with cast control may not prefer spending the time it takes to clear backlashes while the thumb gets educated. But if you get past that, these reels are a blast to cast. Sort of like going from automatic to a manual gearshift in your car.
As a side note- looks like the HS has a 12 tooth pinion vs 13 on the standard. You want prime numbers, or at least an odd + a prime, so that certain gear teeth don't mate more frequently- this causes the gears to wear unevenly.
-J
Thanks Dave, for another useful post. Mine has a grey spool too. Not sure what that implies.
I actually learned to cast a sideways spool using an abu 5000C (no magnets). And I've been casting my everol, my Mitchell 622, and my 27SH, and though I'm still no expert, I'm accustomed to doing it manually. Or digitally, as the case may be (told my friend the other day that unlike any other industry, the digital brake is the one we've had in use for the longest). I've since learned to like magnets but you lead me to wonder if people are just casting reels with good mag setups with no thumb-to-spool action and now I'm just confused. Are y'all using the magnets on full setting? How far are you casting? And further where's the fun in that? The difficulty of baitcasters is the fun part.
I've noticed that the main gear from my 506 is actually much taller than the 500 steel gear. The "business edge" of the gear is identical but there's a lip that sticks up higher so the drag "well" is deeper. Where I'm going with this is one could add an extra carbon and an eared washer to the stack in a stock brass gear but one could not do the same with the 500 steelie i got unless the washers got thinner. I shoulda taken a pic but did not.
And pin gauges would indeed be the most correct way to compare inner diameters. But I'm going by comparing feel as I wiggle the thing not what it looks like. I already know for a fact my eyes could not discern a quarter of a millimeter difference, but my hands would for sure be able to feel it on the wiggle. No doubt. If that were the only concern then my confidence is growing.
I gotta get this pin out of my brass sleeve if I'm gonna do anything. Im sure there's threads on here about that.
Pin came out with minimal blood loss. And my steel sleeve arrived today. Assembly is imminent.
It's not an immediate necessity or priority but I eventually wanna go to double dogs. So the consensus seems to be no go on a bridge from a 500 going in the 506. It was mentioned that the 506 bridge is beveled on the back. And indeed mine is. Is that the only difference? Could an enterprising fellow get the aftermarket DD bridge for a 500 and bevel the edge to make a one of a kind reel, or are there other issues?
Followup question, what about adding a second dog to my stock bridge? I noticed the aftermarket ones have the 2nd dog longer and bent, the stock bridge definitely has a hole for another dog, i believe so the same bridge can be used for a lefty reel but thats conjecture. So i assume the 2nd dog is bent because the stock dog just won't flip over and line up correctly. So I guess I'd have to make my own. Either my own new dog post in a location that would work, or a dog that would work. So no matter what, I'm modifying something. What's my best route forward here?
Don't say just get a 501. That takes all the fun out of it.
Finished for now. The above questions still stand.
My attempt at brilliance that I'm sure I'm the first and only person to think of was to throw an o ring on the sleeve to aid in assembly. It worked.
Yeah it's a 506LS
Quote from: JasonGotaProblem on September 19, 2022, 05:25:16 PMPin came out with minimal blood loss. And my steel sleeve arrived today. Assembly is imminent.
It's not an immediate necessity or priority but I eventually wanna go to double dogs. So the consensus seems to be no go on a bridge from a 500 going in the 506. It was mentioned that the 506 bridge is beveled on the back. And indeed mine is. Is that the only difference? Could an enterprising fellow get the aftermarket DD bridge for a 500 and bevel the edge to make a one of a kind reel, or are there other issues?
Followup question, what about adding a second dog to my stock bridge? I noticed the aftermarket ones have the 2nd dog longer and bent, the stock bridge definitely has a hole for another dog, i believe so the same bridge can be used for a lefty reel but thats conjecture. So i assume the 2nd dog is bent because the stock dog just won't flip over and line up correctly. So I guess I'd have to make my own. Either my own new dog post in a location that would work, or a dog that would work. So no matter what, I'm modifying something. What's my best route forward here?
Don't say just get a 501. That takes all the fun out of it.
Regarding multiple dog customizations, the following is not a popular opinion around here, but so far, I haven't seen any evidence to change my mind:
A pair of dogs that engage alternately can cut the handle backplay in half. Some people think this makes the mod worth it, but not me. There is a theory that a pair of dogs thst engage simultaneously will somehow double the dog load capacity, but this is not true, because the components are not elastic, and the fit is never perfect, so the one dog has to be in the act of failing before the second dog starts helping. Also, there usually isn't room to place the second dog in a spot where it will be the strongest, so the one of the two dogs will be weaker (and more likely to fail sooner). If the one of two dogs goes south it up has to blow out cleanly, otherwise you are screwed. So in general, no matter how you set them up, you are giving up some strength to go double dog, but at least with alternating dogs, you are getting something (minor) in return. And the dog usually blows out because it goes under the ratchet when the gear post goes out of alignment from load, so having more dogs doesn't even have a chance to help. Never seen a photo of a Penn saved by the second dog. And yes, that crooked dog is to accommodate a fit problem.
The bridge is different on a 500 vs a 505, the center distance for the shafts are different (I keep repeating this). Not sure if the bridge plate screws are in a different spot, but I doubt that you can cram a 500 bridge in there and get away with it, or at least end up with a better reel than when you started.
Load that puppy up with some 20 lb mono, and see if you like how it casts.
-J
My take on double dog is redundancy. If a spring were to fail, sticky grease, or anything that could cause a dog to fail, you would hopefully have a back-up dog (unless the failed dog is jammed under the ratchet.
After that, simultaneous or alternating are just the icing on the cake.
-Mike
Interesting. It's a good thing you keep mentioning it, because I didn't catch it before. We already knew I'm a dummy. Ok so no luck on the 500 bridge.
I also think of the 2nd dog as a redundancy thing. Sorta like a backup anti reverse on a spinner? I dunno. Ive had a dog go under the ratchet on my 8500SS but I would imagine (apparently incorrectly) that the frustrating pin in the sleeve would prevent such a thing.
A small push on the spool gets me 30 seconds of free spool. I suspect it'll cast pretty well. Big negative on the mono though. #teambraid
I think that Mike hit the nail on the head. The debate is really about the benefit of redundancy vs. increasing the risk of system failure. I am not on team redundancy myself.
The problem with the redundancy strategy is that the first failure has to be benign. The failure has to cleanly take the dog out of the way. The broken or partially engaged dog doesn't disappear, it usually gets jammed under the ratchet.
The second dog on most of these upgrades is substantially weaker than the first. You can look at my screeds here in threads on proper dog/ratchet design, or you can do what I did and read an old mechanical design textbook. So a second dog can make the initial failure more likely.
Alternating the dog engagement gives the weaker dog a greater chance to fail more fully and jam something up before the other dog starts helping. While it seems intuitive that two is better than one, you have to look at the odds of system failure, not just component failure. Sometimes duplication of a component does not provide a redundancy benefit.
If you don't mind a personal true life story as an example:
Strangely enough, I was on a small twin engine plane on 9/11 (don't worry- not another 9/11 thread :) ). We were flying over a remote part of Australia, got some engine trouble, and the pilot was looking for a dirt road to land on. I mentioned to the guy next me that at least we were in a twin engine. He was a pilot himself and noted that this plane couldn't fly on one engine, so we were just doubling the chance of failure. The plane was only as airworthy as the weaker of the two. The problem engine started running better- maybe a fuel filter problem, so we limped into the airport. I hung around in Australia for a couple more weeks until flights back to the USA resumed. Grateful to still be in one piece, plus as a bonus I now have a key mechanical design principle permanently etched into my brain.
-J
I have to ask , how does a dog go under the ratchet . Why can`t you make 2 dogs work simultaneously.
Do Dogs working 180 apart helps stabilize the bridge post ? Are we just assembling parts or is there some reel smithing involved ?
Quote from: oldmanjoe on September 21, 2022, 02:56:00 AMI have to ask , how does a dog go under the ratchet .
The post on the bridge tilts under load. The ratchet is built into the gear sleeve, so it tilts with the sleeve, that tilts with the post. See this post, but there are others as well:
https://alantani.com/index.php?msg=420717 (https://alantani.com/index.php?msg=420717)
The dog post does not tilt because it is separately attached to the bridge plate. With the angled point of contact, the ratchet can crawl over the dog. But the dog can just get chewed on the bridge side of the tooth and fail too. It probably depends on which way the bridge post is tilting.
QuoteWhy can`t you make 2 dogs work simultaneously.
You can. That is one of the two ways to do it. Alternating seems to be more popular as it reduces handle backplay. Simultaneous dogs will never engage exactly simultaneously, and the metal parts are not very elastic, so the first dog has to be starting to fail before the second dog kicks in. They don't recommend adding dogs to increased load capacity in the mechanical design handbooks that I have seen. It could help if the first dog fails a little, and the second dog starts load sharing. But the placement of the second dog may increase the risk of catastrophic dog failure.
QuoteDo Dogs working 180 apart helps stabilize the bridge post ?
I have heard this claim, but am skeptical. It is based on the assumption that the dog is levering the ratchet, so a dog on the other side will counter that leverage. But I believe that the helical gears are actually the main cause of the leverage. We see this in gears shredding when winding when the dog is not a factor. A portion of the rotary load gets translated into axial load and ramps the two gears apart. This is a known issue with helical gears.
Nobody knows 100% for sure.
QuoteAre we just assembling parts or is there some reel smithing involved ?
Nobody gets paid, or at least paid much to do this, so most folk try stuff based on intuition. That usually works, but not always. Testing some types of fixes has to be destructive, and repeated if it is reliable, and few of us are willing to trash half a dozen reels to find out for sure. Some fixes like alternating dogs can be validated to work well enough to be worth it. And some fixes are addressing a known common failure, so it is easy enough to validate a worthwhile improvement.
A fix like simultaneous double dogs is tricky, because you are addressing a downstream effect and not the root cause of failure (bridge post tilting -which also shreds gears BTW). So nobody knows for sure what will happen without some destructive testing - hence the debate.
BTW, I am not trained in this stuff. I'm just a hobby inventor/designer that likes to research. So I could be getting some of it wrong myself.
-J
Quote from: jurelometer on September 21, 2022, 05:08:27 AMQuote from: oldmanjoe on September 21, 2022, 02:56:00 AMI have to ask , how does a dog go under the ratchet .
The post on the bridge tilts under load. The ratchet is built into the gear sleeve, so it tilts with the sleeve, that tilts with the post. See this post, but there are others as well:
https://alantani.com/index.php?msg=420717 (https://alantani.com/index.php?msg=420717)
The dog post does not tilt because it is separately attached to the bridge plate. With the angled point of contact, the ratchet can crawl over the dog. But the dog can just get chewed on the bridge side of the tooth and fail too. It probably depends on which way the bridge post is tilting.
QuoteWhy can`t you make 2 dogs work simultaneously.
You can. That is one of the two ways to do it. Alternating seems to be more popular as it reduces handle backplay. Simultaneous dogs will never engage exactly simultaneously, and the metal parts are not very elastic, so the first dog has to be starting to fail before the second dog kicks in. They don't recommend adding dogs to increased load capacity in the mechanical design handbooks that I have seen. It could help if the first dog fails a little, and the second dog starts load sharing. But the placement of the second dog may increase the risk of catastrophic dog failure.
QuoteDo Dogs working 180 apart helps stabilize the bridge post ?
I have heard this claim, but am skeptical. It is based on the assumption that the dog is levering the ratchet, so a dog on the other side will counter that leverage. But I believe that the helical gears are actually the main cause of the leverage. We see this in gears shredding when winding when the dog is not a factor. A portion of the rotary load gets translated into axial load and ramps the two gears apart. This is a known issue with helical gears.
Nobody knows 100% for sure.
QuoteAre we just assembling parts or is there some reel smithing involved ?
Nobody gets paid, or at least paid much to do this, so most folk try stuff based on intuition. That usually works, but not always. Testing some types of fixes has to be destructive, and repeated if it is reliable, and few of us are willing to trash half a dozen reels to find out for sure. Some fixes like alternating dogs can be validated to work well enough to be worth it. And some fixes are addressing a known common failure, so it is easy enough to validate a worthwhile improvement.
A fix like simultaneous double dogs is tricky, because you are addressing a downstream effect and not the root cause of failure (bridge post tilting -which also shreds gears BTW). So nobody knows for sure what will happen without some destructive testing - hence the debate.
BTW, I am not trained in this stuff. I'm just a hobby inventor/designer that likes to research. So I could be getting some of it wrong myself.
-J
Jason, don't let Dave's nay-saying ;D put you off experimenting with double dogging your bridge - it can be a fun project and satisfying when it works plus the worst that can happen is it doesn't work. I'm in the alternating dogs to reduce backplay team - more dogs and more ratchet teeth are always a worthwhile improvement :). Jigmasters and other small reels won't benefit much from attempting simultaneous dogs for strength -single dogs are strong enough to stand up to the higher drag settings possible with custom drag kits/configurations available for jigmasters. Even DIY second dogs and dog posts withstood bench testing to around 30lb drag back in 2015 calculated using jurelometer's spreadsheets. https://alantani.com/index.php?topic=14241.30 (https://alantani.com/index.php?topic=14241.30)
Jurelometer - It's good see you haven't waived from your stance on simultaneous dogs being unachievable and I agree the individual components are effectively non elastic, but still think there would be enough flex in the 'system'. Have you got any ideas how 'we' could measure non-destructive strain or flex on the dog ratchet arrangement? I reckon there would be a few thou at least.
Mike
Quote from: oldmanjoe on September 21, 2022, 02:56:00 AMI have to ask , how does a dog go under the ratchet
that's what I was wondering. Though logically it must be possible or why would we talk about it.
QuoteAre we just assembling parts or is there some reel smithing involved ?
I suppose that depends on your definition. I'd like to picture myself as something of a reel Smith, but I'd also like to picture myself as wealthy and attractive. Reality doesnt always match.
One can hand fit double dogs so they engage at the same time.
I am in the alternate engagement and creating a smoother drag at or slightly above factory spec. camp. Drag on some reels can be safely increased, usually narrow reels, but post frames can twist under higher than designed loads. A half or solid frame will help.
You can invest more into building a custom reel than the cost of a modern reel and not get close to modern reel specs but the "cool factor" is not there.
Quote from: mhc on September 21, 2022, 10:14:07 AMbecause you are addressing a downstream effect and not the root cause of failure (bridge post tilting -
Forgive my apprentice approach, but what causes this? Is it a design flaw or a platform that was never designed to meet current expectations? I keep digging deeper into the abyss of discussions and this root cause remains constant. My observation is that a highly competent cottage industry family has evolved all around this root cause, but not ON it...always trying to address recurring symptoms of one known problem.
What, exactly, would theoretically solve the problem identified as
the root cause and allow the preferred platform to operate as desired??
All the effort and documentation archived about this is a textbook example of product development that has yet to directly attack the root cause.
Please don't misinterpret my observation as biased. Once the problem is solved, it will be literally surrounded by products that will shore up any initial weakness.
Quote from: mhc on September 21, 2022, 10:14:07 AMJason, don't let Dave's nay-saying ;D put you off experimenting with double dogging your bridge - it can be a fun project and satisfying when it works plus the worst that can happen is it doesn't work. I'm in the alternating dogs to reduce backplay team - more dogs and more ratchet teeth are always a worthwhile improvement :). Jigmasters and other small reels won't benefit much from attempting simultaneous dogs for strength -single dogs are strong enough to stand up to the higher drag settings possible with custom drag kits/configurations available for jigmasters. Even DIY second dogs and dog posts withstood bench testing to around 30lb drag back in 2015 calculated using jurelometer's spreadsheets. https://alantani.com/index.php?topic=14241.30 (https://alantani.com/index.php?topic=14241.30)
Jurelometer - It's good see you haven't waived from your stance on simultaneous dogs being unachievable and I agree the individual components are effectively non elastic, but still think there would be enough flex in the 'system'. Have you got any ideas how 'we' could measure non-destructive strain or flex on the dog ratchet arrangement? I reckon there would be a few thou at least.
Mike
Actually agree with (almost :) ) everything Mike said. And Mike definitely gets the reelsmith title, as he is one of the few that actually does some destructive testing, including multiple dogs in the thread that he linked, That thread is worth reading for folks interested on double (or triple, or quadruple) dogging. My thinking has not evolved much since then other than agreeing with Mike's statement above that even if a second simultaneous dog actually contributed to increasing load capacity, it doesn't buy much because of the other points of failure that are ahead of it in line.
So here is the math on the benefit of alternate double dogging a jigmaster: Assume about a 1.9 inch spool diameter after the cast, and a 3.9:1 gear ratio (don't remember the exact numbers) with the standard gear set. That gives of something in the neighborhood of 24 inches of retrieve per revolution.
Now divide that by eight teeth on a stock gear sleeve ratchet, and that gives you three inches maximum ( or 1.5 inches on average) line that goes back out before the dog engages. Doubling the dogs cuts that in half.
The other way to look at it is how much the handle arm backspins. 360 degrees /8 gives you 45 degrees max, or 22.5 degrees on average with a single dog. I think this is what bothers folk more than the amount of line moved, which is what matters most to the fish.
If you think it is worth it to cut this in half, than double dogging is worth it from a functional perspective, as long as the second dog is not so much of a hack that it introduces a failure risk greater than what is already there.
Or if you just want to try it for the challenge - who am I to argue? :)
-J
I think the root cause is we want to expose these reels to forces far greater than they were designed for, and seem to limit ourselves to mods that don't massively change the mechanisms we are upgrading lest we stop getting to feel like we're fishing vintage tackle.
Quote from: Shellbelly on September 21, 2022, 04:59:54 PMQuote from: mhc on September 21, 2022, 10:14:07 AMbecause you are addressing a downstream effect and not the root cause of failure (bridge post tilting -
Forgive my apprentice approach, but what causes this? Is it a design flaw or a platform that was never designed to meet current expectations? I keep digging deeper into the abyss of discussions and this root cause remains constant. My observation is that a highly competent cottage industry family has evolved all around this root cause, but not ON it...always trying to address recurring symptoms of one known problem.
What, exactly, would theoretically solve the problem identified as the root cause and allow the preferred platform to operate as desired??
All the effort and documentation archived about this is a textbook example of product development that has yet to directly attack the root cause.
Please don't misinterpret my observation as biased. Once the problem is solved, it will be literally surrounded by products that will shore up any initial weakness.
The bridge post design was the cheapest way to build a reel that worked within its required limits before the days of braid. Some of the newer expensive star drag reels that have some of the same flaws don't get a pass. Mechanical Design 101 to support shafts under load on both ends unless there is a good reason not to.
.
There are lots of threads on addressing the bridge post, but a summary here toward the end of post #27:https://alantani.com/index.php?msg=420737 (https://alantani.com/index.php?msg=420737)
This is the limit that we eventually push up against, but other fixes like the stainless gear sleeve and solid frames on the wider models allow us to reach that limit. Other fixes like alternating dogs, or smoother drag stacks also provide value.
Quote from: JasonGotaProblem on September 21, 2022, 05:38:48 PMI think the root cause is we want to expose these reels to forces far greater than they were designed for, and seem to limit ourselves to mods that don't massively change the mechanisms we are upgrading lest we stop getting to feel like we're fishing vintage tackle.
Exactly.
I think that if you attempt to replace the bridge post , there will not be enough of the original parts/design left to call it a Jigmaster. Sort of like a NASCAR machine with the shell resembling a street vehicle.
If the exercise is to end up with 30 lb drag/ 12 lb winding load star drag, then the answer is to buy a different reel.
The hotrodded reels are plenty capable, and some can be a joy to cast. Just have to accept that there is a limit.
-J
Quote from: jurelometer on September 21, 2022, 05:48:25 PMQuoteI think the root cause is we want to expose these reels to forces far greater than they were designed for, and seem to limit ourselves to mods that don't massively change the mechanisms we are upgrading lest we stop getting to feel like we're fishing vintage tackle.
Exactly.
I think that if you attempt to replace the bridge post , there will not be enough of the original parts/design left to call it a Jigmaster. Sort of like a NASCAR machine with the shell resembling a street vehicle.
If the exercise is to end up with 30 lb drag/ 12 lb winding load star drag, then the answer is to buy a different reel.
The hotrodded reels are plenty capable, and some can be a joy to cast. Just have to accept that there is a limit.
I suspected this was the case because there is this no-win scenario and elephant in the room feel to it. From a purist standpoint, I understand the delicate balance. Staying objective, though, we have to accept the fact that we don't want to destroy the model, but we will..and do destroy the reel by pushing it in the field.
I'm OK with that.
My OCD brain still wants to fix the problem.
Ok crazy idea #19747
I noticed the bearing cup on the tail plate is basically a cast control knob that can only be operated via flathead screwdriver. Is there any existing way to mod that to where I can operate it with my fingers? I notice there's about 3/4 a turn between no free spool and really free spool, so it may be better with a lever not a knob.
Is there a knurled knob from a different reel that could work in its place?
It is not really a cast control it is to adjust the spool thrust.
Quote from: Keta on September 22, 2022, 03:19:46 PMIt is not really a cast control it is to adjust the spool thrust.
That may well be what it is. But what I'm interested in is what it could become.
You will wear out the spool shaft and/or the bearing cap if you use it as a cast control.
A penny or a washer with a flattened edge can be used to adjust those in the field.
Other Penn's, such as the Levelmatic's or the Mag 10 have a ball-bearing/cast control adjustment system that bears looking at. I remember a nylon looking plunger dealie combined with some kinda rubber part on my reels outboard to the b.bearing. Look at the b.bearing cups on your HS, maybe you can come-up with something if there's enough room in there, that adds spring pressure to the spool shaft.
.....or just static mag that reel.
make some casts to check what would be the average weight you were using and static mag it accordingly, it works!!
Quote from: Keta on September 22, 2022, 03:19:46 PMIt is not really a cast control it is to adjust the spool thrust.
Forgive me I'm not being flippant i just don't understand: what's the difference between adjusting spool thrust and a cast control? What part of the spool shaft wears out? Thanks
Im not keta and also not an expert, but what I have seen on many reels I have open, a cast control knob/cap comes with many small parts as tensioners, felp pads, carbon pads, copper pads, etc that helps to put some presure on the tip of the spool shaft but not adding any or just a minimal friction.
A regular side plate screwcap with a bearing or bushing as on the penn 500/501/506 dont come with any small part that reduce the friction between the tip of the spool shaft and the metal in bottom of the screwcap of the sideplate.
imagine using the brakes of your car without the brakepads and just the metal behind the pads, even with a minimal speed when trying to brake your car after some time you will have your wheel discs with deep scratches and sooner or later will brake, same will happen if you keep using or thinng on using a regular cap as cast control.
when guys do this is not uncommon to find the tip of the shaft spool as mushroom and worn out until there is not space for adjustment, then you open the reel and its almost impossible to take out the spool from the bearing or bushing, you have to file the mushroomed shaft tip and shim the bearing in order to keep the spool centered, then repeat until there is no more room to even shim the spool shaft any longer.
Jason, you have opened up the rabbit hole. It's a fun place I regularly visit myself !!
If you want a super strong 506 with 4/1 steel gears, 113h spool shaft, 1 piece frame, and more drag than you'll ever need, I recommend a Pro Gear 545. All internals are Penn parts, and a 113h DD bridge drops right in
The spool shaft and bearing cap will wear out.
Quote from: Keta on September 21, 2022, 02:20:24 PMOne can hand fit double dogs so they engage at the same time.
I am in the alternate engagement and creating a smoother drag at or slightly above factory spec. camp. Drag on some reels can be safely increased, usually narrow reels, but post frames can twist under higher than designed loads. A half or solid frame will help.
You can invest more into building a custom reel than the cost of a modern reel and not get close to modern reel specs but the "cool factor" is not there.
I agree with Lee But i will say alternating dogs are also less fatiguing than simultaneous dogs on the same ratchet design in a stand up situation . Were as simultaneous dogs i feel better upping the drag pressure when the stick is in a rod holder .
Which bridge assembly would do better under a heavy load , both are the same diameter posts and sleeve diameter with the same ratchet radius . The one with .004 thousands gap or the .018 thousands gap ?
Quote from: oldmanjoe on September 22, 2022, 07:28:30 PMWhich bridge assembly would do better under a heavy load , both are the same diameter posts and sleeve diameter with the same ratchet radius . The one with .004 thousands gap or the .018 thousands gap ?
Sal used to do some micro-shimming to minimize that gap. I don't remember his theory as to why it would help.
I would wager that it doesn't matter much for preventing dog or gear failure. The farther the gears are from the plate, the more leverage they have to push the post out of alignment. A larger gap should mean that the gears are farther from the plate, and I am reasonably confident that it is the gears that are doing the levering. If you measure from the top of the plate to the center of the main gear and then add or subtract a 12 thousands of an inch, I don't think you will see much difference percentage-wise. Leverage will be about the same.
Note that the dogs floats on a loose fit on the dog post, so that there is not a very exact alignment. Once the ratchet is angling, it is going to start levering on the dog causing even greater misalignment. Angled dog tooth to angled ratchet. Nothing is mating flat down there when things start going south. This is why the dogs climb out of alignment, get chewed up and/or crawl under the ratchet.
Remember that "upgrading" the Jigmaster to a higher gear ratio also puts more force on the dogs for the same amount of drag. If you add 25% more gear ratio, you are adding 25% more leverage against the dog for the same load.
Not a long-ranger myself, but have read that back in the day, some of the old timers in the know preferred the standard Senator over the special Senator for this reason. If you are just soaking bait, better of with the lower gear ratio. The lower the gear ratio,the less axial load on the the gears to start angling the gear post, less force on the dogs, more drag for the same clamping load, and you more-or-less get the low gear of a two speed, so you can wind more easily and keep that big tuna's nose up. If I get only one gear of a two speed for a big fish, I want the low gear.
The high gear ratio is nice for working lures, but it is worthwhile to point out that there is a cost in terms of the stress on the reel innards, when you hook something. No free lunch.
-J
Lets break this down some . With .004 or less , the ratchet radius can act quicker to help stabilize the post verses .018 . Lets look at the cut of the main gear , when it`s under load which way is the gear heading toward the bridge or toward the handle ?
Quote from: oldmanjoe on September 23, 2022, 01:02:29 AMLets break this down some . With .004 or less , the ratchet radius can act quicker to help stabilize the post verses .018 . Lets look at the cut of the main gear , when it`s under load which way is the gear heading toward the bridge or toward the spool ?
Both. Depends on whether you are winding or taking drag. Shouldn't matter that much though. They will still push apart. There is a thread on a hotrodded 112H that shredded gears while winding where we actually calculated the axial load and direction. If I find it, I'll post the link. Don't remember the direction for each offhand.
I understand your argument on the shim, and maybe that was what Sal was trying to control with the shimming. but I don't think it is buying you much to mess with it. We are sort of just pushing the problem around without addressing the root cause. But I have been wrong before :)
The post is probably flexing along its length and then it springs back into place when the load is relieved.
If the ratchet were to provide much extra resistance, the little cross pin at the top of sleeve is bearing signifcant load. The sleeve/post part of the system was designed with the expectation that it would not be taking much of any axial load. There is a square track on the post with a round pin on the sleeve that has to allow for smooth rotation, so we don't want to overload it. And then if it does actually carry some load and without damaging the pin/track you are now basically transferring some of the load to pulling on the peen joint holding the post. And you are grinding the ratchet into the gear and/or bridge.
But either way, the system is being pushed past it's designed limits and we are not addressing the root cause. Hard for me to get too enthused.
The only way to know for sure is some destructive testing: get some shims, grind down some gear sleeves, and damage a few reels.
Or for about 50 bucks, you can get a used Shimano TLD star that has a fully supported solid main shaft, but where is the fun it that :)
-J
The fun of it all is can any of us really build the reel according the blue print . Can we check every part for the designed fit , not the production run fit , not the parts that come from 3-4 different manufacturers and think you are just going to assemble it with blue print tolerances.
I'm gonna take a crack at the root cause. The shaft isnt likely flexing that much. It looks to be steel. I think where it mates to the brass plate is where the flexing is happening. It's like bending a 4x4 sign post by repeatedly kicking it. Yeah you might be bending the post a little bit but youre more likely widening the hole in the ground to get the sign to lean over.
I cannot wait to fish this reel. I'm just like sitting here playing with it like a weirdo.
What if I scavenge some bits from the spool caps of one of my less interesting reels and put it behind the bearing? Am i just grasping at straws here?
Quote from: JasonGotaProblem on September 23, 2022, 04:16:24 AMWhat if I scavenge some bits from the spool caps of one of my less interesting reels and put it behind the bearing? Am i just grasping at straws here?
I'm not sure it would be that simple - the 505/506 spool shafts have a shoulder that contacts the inner race of the ball bearing. I could be wrong but I don't think applying side load to these plain roller bearings is a good idea - when they're adjusted to only minimise lateral movement, there isn't be any side load on the bearing.
If you want to apply pressure on the spool shaft as a cast control it should be applied to the end of the shaft, but the stepped down section on the shaft is only about 4.7mm long on the 506 spool I roughly measured;
(https://alantani.com/gallery/37/7995-230922085133-37148304.jpeg)
I think the roller bearings are about 0.1719" or ~ 4.4mm deep which doesn't leave much protruding through the bearing, around 0.3mm or ~ 8 thou.
The bearing cup on the same 506 is around 5.6mm deep and the bearing is set back ~ 0.3mm in from the face;
(https://alantani.com/gallery/37/7995-230922085142-371491791.jpeg)
Maybe a brass (or similar) disk about 1.0 - 1.5 mm thick would (5.6mm-(0.3 + 4.4)= 0.9mm) work but you will need to check all the measurements of you reel and bearing. and look at how the head plate end is supported as well.
Having said that you are probably not talking high loads to slow the spool down a bit and the bearings might handle it - I dunno :-\
Quote from: oldmanjoe on September 23, 2022, 03:25:10 AMThe fun of it all is can any of us really build the reel according the blue print . Can we check every part for the designed fit , not the production run fit , not the parts that come from 3-4 different manufacturers and think you are just going to assemble it with blue print tolerances.
Umm.....depends on the blue print I guess. ;D ;D
(https://alantani.com/gallery/37/7995-230922085118-371442417.jpeg)
Mike
You might be able to drill and tap the bearing caps and make something like a 43-109 (LW bearing cap) out of bronze. You would have to do both sides.
Quote from: steelfish on September 22, 2022, 04:16:50 PM.....or just static mag that reel.
make some casts to check what would be the average weight you were using and static mag it accordingly, it works!!
Somehow I missed this. I was thinking about doing that, it doesnt seem too hard. I believe Sal did it.
I think really my goal here is to maximize the capability of this reel without completely breaking the bank. I'm about $180 into this thing. For that I could get a used star drag fathom or add what i intend to drop on Bryan's kit and get a new fathom, and end up with a reel that claims 30# of drag stock and the CS model has a mag brake.
But dang it I want my hot rod '57 Chevy! I have 20 other rigs for when I need a honda civic or a F150. I got this because it's a reel I want to fish.
Another crazy idea that is far less practical or likely, would be an aftermarket lighter shallower spool for casting. I think such a thing would be more likely to have enough orders for a 501 spool than a 506 spool, but a fella can dream.
Contact Alan at Pro Challenger about having a run of spools made.
I have more $ in a all metal 349H than a new Penn FTH40NLD2 costs.... however the 349 is a much "cooler " reel.... ;0).
Quote from: Keta on September 23, 2022, 01:08:46 PMContact Alan at Pro Challenger about having a run of spools made.
I have more $ in a all metal 349H than a new Penn FTH40NLD2 costs.... however the 349 is a much "cooler " reel.... ;0).
Sure what the heck, I got nothing to lose by asking.
Yup, worse case would be no and you are only out a few minutes time. Alan lives relatively close to you too and is a good person.
Thinking only in the realm of spool speed for casting control. Given that the concern is wearing from blunt axial braking, wouldn't a collet-style method be a better line of thinking? It might have to occur on the clicker side of the world where there's more room and there is a surface to work from...the clicker gear. You won't eliminate the need for lateral adjustment in any application, but you might minimize it and the collet could be a multiplier in the equation.
Think of a dremel collet on a spool axle and what it would take to make it squeeze (and un-squeeze) without compromising the bearing into failure. Cast control usually doesn't involve much movement so you need to multiply what little adjustment is available.
Boondoggle??
Sorry to get all sciencey again, but if you want a spool that is better for casting, how much it weighs matters, but also where the weight is distributed. Weight farther from the axis means a longer moment arm. Flywheels are narrow to maximize the diameter/moment arm length for a given mass, trying to get as much inertia as possible. For casting, you want the opposite of a flywheel.
Braided line adds weight, but not as much as aluminum. I would expect that an unported shallow (large abor) aluminum spool would have more inertia than a stock spool.
If you are only going to fish braid, I would look to see if Penn made plastic spools for the HS Jigmasters. I know that they did for the standard models. The plastic spools had problems with mono, as the mono was so elastic that it would contract under load, and then would try to expand back on the spool when the tension was relieved. Lots of busted plastic spools. Braid does stetch a bit, but not like mono, so I would expect that a braid-only guy like you could get away with a plastic spool. The lighter plastic spools did cast better.
If you want a lighter aluminum spool, the stock cast aluminum spools should be slightly lighter than the aftermarket spools machined from solid bar stock, as the density of cast is usually around 5-10% lighter. Or maybe the machined spools have less material? You could weigh them and figure it out.
To make a machined spool lighter, it would have to be ported. But porting then filling with braid introduces a new problem: the diameter on braid is so small that is squishes into the gaps from the porting as the line is loaded up under tension. This happens a lot on ported saltwater fly reels, but is manageable, since you are not spinning the spool for casting and you are usually not winding under very heavy tension (still can't be great for the braid though...).
I can see why this porting would not be much of a problem with the ultralight baitcaster that are not applying much tension, but I would be more concerned on a bigger saltwater reel.
We were talking in another thread about designing a reel from scratch. To catch up with modern braid, it seems to me that a lightweight carbon fiber braid-only spool would be something pretty cool to investigate.
The test that everybody likes to do is see how long a spool spins, but this is not really the right test. The perfect casting spool would not only have zero static/dynamic friction, it would also have zero inertia. It would freely turn when you pulled line, and immediate stop when you stopped pulling. The only way to address inertia is to go lighter on the spool, and braid gives us a whole different set of opportunities.
-J
Getting fancy within a spindle braking system seems a bit counterproductive to me.
Just grease the bearings if you want more spool friction. Or even better, use your thumb. Skin on the thumb regenerates and your neuromuscular system makes a for a highly advanced cast control system. Sort of like AI without the A :)
If you do want to go into cast control, lots of threads on magging, and magnets have an advantage in that the braking force increases and decreases with the RPMS. Not too tricky to make your own adjustable mag system if you are handy.
Requires a conducting spool wall to do a magnet. Aluminum will work, plastic won't. A future carbon fiber spool might be conductive enough - not sure. A "guy I know" got shocked from an electrical short on a carbon fiber panel. :-X
-J
Agreed. I bit of micro-machining involved. I was in the rabbit hole of applying thrust. And yes, thumb skin grows back. Thumb wear has been known to prevent quick phone access, though. ;). Important to some, but not all.
"Requires a conducting spool wall to do a magnet. Aluminum will work, plastic won't. A future carbon fiber spool might be conductive enough - not sure. A "guy I know" got shocked from an electrical short on a carbon fiber panel. :-X"
I've used carbon fiber slats inside fiberglass tanks to ground the contents. This is to eliminate any potential that could cause a spark.
-Mike
Dave I was hoping you'd chime in. I'm sure there are other factors but I have a BFS spool for my blackmax which fits on many abu lopro reels of that category. I mention it because the weakest of those is designed for 30# braid and claims 15# of drag. I haven't taken it to a scale but those numbers probably aren't far off. And the arbors on that thing are remarkably thin, the sidewalls not super thick. It weighs 14g. And I've cranked the drag down a few times to break snags. That BFS spool seems pretty structurally sound at that range. Which is quantitatively quite similar to the forces a narrow jiggy would feel if you don't crank it up to 20#
Granted the 501/6 is a bit wider but maybe 30% tops. I feel like something a bit more robust to compensate for the wider spool, combined with maybe 300yd of 20-30# braid could be enough lighter to be worthy of consideration as a casting improvement. I mean they do this on baitcasters specifically to better throw lighter weights. I feel like that effect still would scale.
I'm just musing here. It'll fish just fine as is. This is entertainment.
Did I over fill?
With a supper short topshot it looks good to me.
Without having the reel in hand it looks like the line could be tighter on the spool to avoid it digging in. If you do not have a line winder take the rig to a park, tie it off to something, walk the line off then respool it tighter by cranking and walking toward your anchor point. Having the reel on short stiff rod helps. Winding the line tighter will give you room for a longer topshot if needed.
Jerry Brown recomends 10# of pressure but Alan recomends more. For the drag range this reel will be fished 10# will be enough.
I got to go out and test cast this fella a bit yesterday. Definitely a different animal, compared to casting a magged baitcaster for sure. Thowing 3oz I don't think I got past about 70yds, there's definitely room for improvement.
Logic tells me much of that room for improvement is in thumbing the line on retrieval so it releases from the spool better. But frankly it would be weird if I was already great at that with probably less than 20 conventional reel casts under my belt. And I guess that's part of the fun.
what length rod? past 70 yards that comes into play. a 12' with 20lb mono and 6oz will well north of a hundred.
Quote from: thorhammer on September 26, 2022, 01:36:25 PMwhat length rod? past 70 yards that comes into play. a 12' with 20lb mono and 6oz will well north of a hundred.
10' rod this time, my one and only surf conventional rod. Suspect user error is more of a factor though.
You are doing relatively good for a beginner, actually better than relatively good.
It's apples and orangutans here, I am getting 30-40 feet casting but I am casting a weightless 4" swim bait that weighs a bit less than 1/2 oz with a 6' rod and a JDM Shimanao Ocea Jigger reel getting ready for the 8 day LR trip. If we get into another wide open dorado bite like last year I plan on tossing these small weightless swimbaits with "C" hooks at them on a 7' 20# rod with a Okuma Komodo reel. I might even try it on YFT.
Quote from: JasonGotaProblem on September 26, 2022, 02:53:36 PMQuote from: thorhammer on September 26, 2022, 01:36:25 PMwhat length rod? past 70 yards that comes into play. a 12' with 20lb mono and 6oz will well north of a hundred.
10' rod this time, my one and only surf conventional rod. Suspect user error is more of a factor though.
Def takes practice, and certainly with braid and no magnets. That's still a decently large spool as far as inertia goes to sling 3oz on a ten footer tho- that's still in Abu 5500C class. I'd wager you'd actually pick up some yards at 5-6 oz providing the rod is rated for that. I'm thinking what I might get if I put mine on a 10' Spinfisher that I have rated what's 1-5, with 3oz lead. My sketti noodle calculus says....about 70 yards, maybe.
i just looked at 70 yds. that's a pretty good toss with your rig.
Don't tell me that. I'm better off thinking that sucks and I need to try much harder.
Quote from: JasonGotaProblem on September 27, 2022, 09:48:35 PMDon't tell me that. I'm better off thinking that sucks and I need to try much harder.
back in the days when guys wanted more distance outta their penn reels from the beach they left the jigmaster 505 on the trunk and used the mighty Squider
I also think that 70yds outta a normal reel with no mods and a heavy alum spool is pretty good.
70 yards , 3 oz and ten foot stick . You should be able to break windows two city blocks away and retrieve your sinker .. go ahead and ask me how i know ..
I went ahead and ordered Bryans drag kit. This oughta get interesting. I hope I actually get to catch something with this before baby is born in 12 weeks and fishing becomes a fond memory for a little while.
At what point (and by that i mean what drag setting) does the stock handle become inadequate?
Quote from: JasonGotaProblem on October 10, 2022, 01:28:03 PMAt what point (and by that i mean what drag setting) does the stock handle become inadequate?
After the 2nd fish
Quote from: Maxed Out on October 10, 2022, 03:12:40 PMQuote from: JasonGotaProblem on October 10, 2022, 01:28:03 PMAt what point (and by that i mean what drag setting) does the stock handle become inadequate?
After the 2nd fish
haha, I was going to say after the 1st fishing trip but you're right
Quote from: JasonGotaProblem on October 10, 2022, 01:28:03 PMAt what point (and by that i mean what drag setting) does the stock handle become inadequate?
Shorter arm length, small knob and counterbalanced are best for speed winding, or less effort in in general when winding under lighter loads, like working lures.
Handle arm length is the main thing. Try spinning your hand in a circle like you were winding an imaginary reel as fast as possible. The smaller the radius, the faster you can wind. A shorter handle arm also makes it harder to lever the gear post out of alignment when you are winding hard.
A smaller knob makes it easier to grip lightly with your fingertips, keeping the wrist loose. Try the previous imaginary reel winding exercise with the fingers holding a large or and small diameter knob, and then try tightening the grip to turn one of those big knobs. Much more effort/fatigue for winding fast with a big knob, even more so with those long multi finger cylindrical handles.
A long arm gives you leverage, just like a low gear ratio gives you leverage. A larger knob or handle that allows you to grip with the full length of multiple fingers also helps for winding under load.
If I am using a high speed Jigmaster, It will be for working lures, so my favorite handle was the later model stock counterbalanced handle arms that comes with with the thin rubberized flat knob. Still plenty of cranking force for a reel of this strength.
If I was trolling or drop jigging, I could see the value in a long arm and big knob, but would probably be more inclined to use a different reel for that.
Bigger round knobs make a nice compromise.
Probably not the popular opinion here on aftermarket arms and knobs, but it makes sense to me, and has served me well.
-J
Quote from: jurelometer on October 10, 2022, 05:55:51 PMProbably not the popular opinion here on aftermarket arms and knobs, but it makes sense to me, and has served me well.
-J
90% of fishermen fish with reels as they come from the factory and swear by them as the best thing in the world.
but I think its not all about puting big and large handles with Big knobs on every reel, it about whats more comfortable for you, with the hundreds for options of knobs you easily can find one that fits comfortable in your hands, whats big for some guys is small for others, also no need to spend a fortune to find a more comfortable handle-knob.
I was using the stock handle of the Penn 320gt for many time until asked the same question Jason is asking, our Boss Alan pointed me out for the 24-56 Jigmaster powerhandle, hole for the Jigmaster sleeve but 3 holes position and knob size is the same than 4/0 reels.
I swap the handles and it was day and night while fishing.
that stock square rubber knob feels weird after some time and doesnt help at all on a nice fish on the other hand, the 24-56 power handle gives just bit more power if you installed on the hole with 1/2" more than stock and the just bit bigger knob with round edges helps for a better and agronomical grip AND also you can go fancy with a custom aluminum power handle and a nice medium size acrylic knob
Alex, check yours isnt a 24-57. The 320 has a different sleeve than the 310, which WOULD accept a 24-56 (jig master sleeve type).
Jason, a 24-49 with flat paddle grip is also a nice upgrade- longer throw than your 24-66, but still counter balanced for speed retrieve if you're kingfishing (which is about a perfect application of a 505HS). I'm not a fan of any of any little torpedo knob. Get slippery and not ergonomic for me.
Quote from: thorhammer on October 13, 2022, 08:33:05 PMJason, a 24-49 with flat paddle grip is also a nice upgrade- longer throw than your 24-66, but still counter balanced for speed retrieve if you're kingfishing (which is about a perfect application of a 505HS). I'm not a fan of any of any little torpedo knob. Get slippery and not ergonomic for me.
Ooh...Didn't know about that one.
That would be a nice compromise. My favorite jigmaster handle/arm setup, but just a bit longer on the arm.
The nice thing about the flat paddle is that it really encourages the proper grip for working lures. Too many folk try to wrap their fingers around those torpedo knobs, which means that you have to do a lot of rotation with the elbow instead of just the wrist.
That jumbo that Alex likes is a good knob/arm style if you are more concerned with the ergonomics of winding against load than working lures- so a good style for his 320. But for speed winding, it would be near the bottom of my list. While there is personal preference and paw size to consider, the ergonomics are the same for all of us, barring some sort of injury.
-J
Quote from: jurelometer on October 13, 2022, 10:32:30 PMThat jumbo that Alex likes is a good knob/arm style if you are more concerned with the ergonomics of winding against load than working lures- so a good style for his 320. But for speed winding, it would be near the bottom of my list.
-J
I have never thought on the 320gti as a reel to work on lures so, the power handle works great for bottom fishing and light trolling and yes, you're right, to work lures and make 1000 casts is much better a short handle with counter balance.
that said, some lowprofile reels made for saltwater fishing come with a paddle handle with larger arm that gives you the best of both worlds, extra power/torque and retrieving speed
like the Daiwa coastal air Vs Abu Garcia Revo
so, in your case there are good handle options for speed on your 506hs reel
Compadre, please check that handle number to fact check me, so people don't order a wrong part on my bad direction.
Well, since the beginning I noticed we were talking about the same power handle 24-56, if you read again my comment, I never mentioned the 24-57 part (I dont know where you read it :o :P ), everything is ok John if someone want to order a power handle for the jigmaster sleeve but larger in length and bigger knob they are pointed out to the right direction, the 24-56 handle type
Quote from: steelfish on October 10, 2022, 08:00:51 PMI was using the stock handle of the Penn 320gt for many time until asked the same question Jason is asking, our Boss Alan pointed me out for the 24-56 Jigmaster powerhandle, hole for the Jigmaster sleeve but 3 holes position and knob size is the same than 4/0 reels.
..........., the 24-56 power handle gives just bit more power if ...........b
Quote from: thorhammer on October 13, 2022, 08:33:05 PMAlex, check yours isnt a 24-57. The 320 has a different sleeve than the 310, which WOULD accept a 24-56 (jig master sleeve type).
Finally got to do a drag test with Bryans kit installed. It is silky smooth at 15# which is what I really wanted. And cranked all the way down as far as i could without pliers it definitely crossed the 25# mark and was still smooth. Though I'll never fish it that high, even with my steel sleeve and gears.
Though I'm not sure about the other advertising claims though: I don't have 6pack abs yet and no beautiful women have thrown themselves at me. Oh well.
I finally got to do a drag test on a fish. My rod intended for this reel wasnt finished yet so I threw it on the rod I built for my 27SH. I floated out a bleeding mullet on a bobber in the high winds because I wasn't casting very well today I'll be honest. I walked away for a while and came back to find I was 3/4 the way to getting spooled.
Well I landed a 6' bull shark, and had to lock down the drag to do so. And snapped the rod in the process near the dock. The reel performed flawlessly, though I did feel a bit of binding with a locked down drag and a half empty spool. But that's I guess to be expected.
The animated gif below was actually of the moment the rod snapped as I tried to keep him out from under the dock. First time I've ever busted a rod fighting a fish. Usually its feet or car doors.
Come to think of it I wanna strip it down and look for any internal signs of trouble and if none, I'm gonna say it's good to go with these upgrades. Dragging in half a spool's worth of line with a locked down drag, winching the whole time to try not to break the rod (lotta good that did) against a 5-6' bull shark is about as good a test as I can get from shore, save for maybe a bigger bull shark.
I am.looking at the PC handle for it though. I assume it's longer. Cranking Bryan's drag locked down with a stock handle showed me the room for improvement.
Alrighty now. Keith gave me a 501. So i got to comparing spools and shafts and diameters. And we can talk about lack of pin calipers etc but per my $12 calipers and my generally decent eyes and sliding one into the caliper after sliding the other out: they're the exact same dang diameters. Different lengths, but diameter is identical.
It's the spool shaft that's different between the 501 (bushings) and the 506 (bearings) :fish
Quote from: MarkT on November 27, 2022, 04:49:51 AMIt's the spool shaft that's different between the 501 (bushings) and the 506 (bearings) :fish
Agreed but the difference is length and not diameter.
The collar wheee the pinion gear locks into the spool are also of different diameter. The 501 is wider than the 506. For this reason, one cannot easily change the 501 to make it faster but can change the 506 to make it slower.