I'm trying to understand what benefit Mitchell gained by selling the 320/324, 304 and 204. The 320 and 324 were a lower cost product, the 304 was an older up-market product, so why the 204? I own a 204 and like it, just wondering where it fell in the product line.
Can you post some pictures of the 204 I've never seen one
Here's a pic from this morning in Charlotte Harbor FL
And here's an advertisement I found on the web. Shaped a lot like a 320 but nicer, traditional Mitchell style handle and more substantial-looking A/R lever.
I think I might have just answered my own question. On the mitchellreelmuseum site it looks like the classic 304 went out of production around 1973, which dovetails with the introduction of the 204. So, perhaps the 304 really was NOT an upmarket reel, and was sold as a less costly option instead of a 300, and the 204 was a more modern interpretation of that role. The 320/324 were the REALLY low budget ones I suppose.
If you ever strip your 204 down CD, I'd love to see what the internals look like.
You're pretty much on the money. The 304 really wasn't an UL, It was considered an economical light model. Since they already had the 308 & 408 they decided to come out with an economical UL, hence the 204. It's quality is well above the 320 & 324. My dad used one for years and fished the heck out of it until he switched over to his Cardinal 3s. I still have it, in really good shape, with its original box, extra spools & a couple of extra drag knobs.
Great pix! I have to ask where you got your Eagle claw rod, classic look for vintage reels? I can't find local anymore, only online.
On the subject of the Eagle Claw rod, believe it or not I get "points" internally at work that I can buy stuff with. The Eagle Claw comes as a rod and reel combo but the reels are so awful I just throw them away but like the retro look of the rods.
Bass pro and EC both have yellow whips with cork handles for under $25 bucks- I prefer them for my Michell 410's, 240, Quick Mixcrolites and Zebco 6010's for panfishing.
I never cease to be amazed at the guys on the pier who stop and want to talk about my reel(s). With the exception of one Penn Pursuit IV, my reels are all "retro". I'm more of a reel geek who fishes periodically, but I enjoy it.
Quote from: Gfish on January 30, 2023, 03:06:05 PMIf you ever strip your 204 down CD, I'd love to see what the internals look like.
Here is one I found out in the storage container this morning while looking for other things.
Alloy pot metal main gear, plastic sideplate and rotor.
This was about the time most reel manufacturers of formerly quality reels started to use less expensive materials to compete with Asian reel offerings.
Opened it up for a look-see.
The 204 was an ultralite made in France.
Although a decent little reel —- there are few similarities to a Cardinal 3, a Mitchell 308/408, DQ Microlites, or Penn 716/714's.
Not knocking the reel —- it is fine if fished within its target range.
Best, Fred
That's cool you get with them points, I just found one on Amazon that has a conflicting description. It has a Picture of rod but is called a 7/0 circle hook in the header, but the description is a 5'6" gold rod with the correct p/n. It's prime so if it don't work out I can return. I am curious what I will receive, because the last rod I ordered from them came broken.
update:
forgive me for hijacking your topic, I just like EC rods. The one from Amazon arrived today per the p/n, unharmed in a stouter box than before.
Thanks fer the photos Fred! I am curious just how much did they actually save by building with lower grade components, was it to increase profits,or was the thinking built to break, so you just buy another reel?
JP
Quote from: jgp12000 on February 01, 2023, 06:47:31 PMThanks fer the photos Fred! I am curious just how much did they actually save by building with lower grade components, was it to increase profits,or was the thinking built to break, so you just buy another reel?
JP
Since there is no guarantee you would buy another of their products —- after the first one broke —- however, there is a sure thing that they would make a little extra $$$ with cheaper materials.
May not seem like much to you and I on just one reel.
But if they saved $4 per 300,000 reels —- that is 1.2 Million $$$ — 50+ years ago.
When it is a choice between Principle, Integrity & saving Money —- most folks on our site will go with Principle & Integrity.
9.5 out of 10 corporations will always go with saving money.
Typically, here on our site —- when we see a reel needing a part —- it is a prematurely worn alloy pot metal gear, or almost anything made out of plastic.
Best, Fred
I find myself wondering if this was the beginning of a different trend in reel worsening: intentionally using lower grade materials, at a moderate price point, to make the original materials at a higher price point seem worth it.
Like with rods: a given blank with crap guides and not much decor goes for $50. Same blank with fuji LY guides is $100. Same blank with KR guides is $200. Now there's like a $8 difference between crap guides and fuji LY and another $10 difference across the whole set between LY and KR guides. And they don't take any more effort to wrap. But the lower grade rod makes it not seem like a total rip for the KR guided rod. And they can say "well you don't wanna pay that much we have an economical option" knkwing damn well many want the good option. And will pay for it. And feel like they got a good deal.
My comment is why don't they just make the good guides and no crap guides...
I guess for different budgets,a yugo or
A mercedes both get from a to b,one is throw away one isn't.However,I read once most millionaires drive fords,I have only owned ford trucks,but aint no millionaire.
thanks for the pictures Fred..
my first ever reel was a 324, looked much like that 204 internally. It actually worked pretty well but I never used it again after getting a 308 for my 15th birthday..