Reel Repair by Alan Tani

  I am not trying to be negative , the only thing I see positive is the second dog .

   A second ring gear to sandwich the rotor pinion , is only going to mask a worn ball bearing  and or the Oscillation slide and it`s shim .   Am I missing something ?

Quote from: oldmanjoe on January 21, 2025, 04:44:35 AMI am not trying to be negative , the only thing I see positive is the second dog .

   A second ring gear to sandwich the rotor pinion , is only going to mask a worn ball bearing  and or the Oscillation slide and it`s shim .   Am I missing something ?

My thinking is by surrounding the pinion by two gears 180° from each other, the axle has no option but to fall in line under heavy load.  One fail point for this reel's past has been axle deflection  under heavy loads (tarpon from piers).  I cannot attest to these since i have only used this reel for 8 years and have never landed anything over 20lbs..  It was a solution for a problem that was mostly based on hearsay.  But it definitely eliminates a potential weak point

Quote from: Johndixon177 on January 21, 2025, 05:51:55 AM

Quote from: oldmanjoe on January 21, 2025, 04:44:35 AMI am not trying to be negative , the only thing I see positive is the second dog .

   A second ring gear to sandwich the rotor pinion , is only going to mask a worn ball bearing  and or the Oscillation slide and it`s shim .   Am I missing something ?

My thinking is by surrounding the pinion by two gears 180° from each other, the axle has no option but to fall in line under heavy load.  One fail point for this reel's past has been axle deflection  under heavy loads (tarpon from piers).  I cannot attest to these since i have only used this reel for 8 years and have never landed anything over 20lbs..  It was a solution for a problem that was mostly based on hearsay.  But it definitely eliminates a potential weak point

I can visualize a scenario where some gear wear could actually create some binding and actually lock things up.

   What I did over looked was the second gear tooth to help take up shock load with simultaneous dog engagement , provided everything is shimmed properly .   
quote
I can visualize a scenario where some gear wear could actually create some binding and actually lock things up.

  Yes    there can be some gear climbing .

Quote from: Midway Tommy on January 21, 2025, 06:37:23 AM

Quote from: Johndixon177 on January 21, 2025, 05:51:55 AM

Quote from: oldmanjoe on January 21, 2025, 04:44:35 AMI am not trying to be negative , the only thing I see positive is the second dog .

   A second ring gear to sandwich the rotor pinion , is only going to mask a worn ball bearing  and or the Oscillation slide and it`s shim .   Am I missing something ?

My thinking is by surrounding the pinion by two gears 180° from each other, the axle has no option but to fall in line under heavy load.  One fail point for this reel's past has been axle deflection  under heavy loads (tarpon from piers).  I cannot attest to these since i have only used this reel for 8 years and have never landed anything over 20lbs..  It was a solution for a problem that was mostly based on hearsay.  But it definitely eliminates a potential weak point

I can visualize a scenario where some gear wear could actually create some binding and actually lock things up.

I can see with any reel with gear wear that binding could become an issue.  Using factory gear sets, that are basically good as new is any reels best bet. The ~3/8" left on the main drive shaft for the supplementary side is intentionally left to prevent binding. We can visualize anything, if it actualizes is another story

As expected, there are slight differences in my 3-reel collection. I have a '63 - 302, and James Peters(jgp12000), kindly sent me 2- reels with 302/402 parts probably from different era's, built by the Dearly Departed Keith(handi-2).

One that James sent me had a solid aluminum(alloy?)main gear with the built-in cross-wind knob. Prefect, right?, No. It probably would have worked, but I can't go with a steel rolled knob, pounded into the gear face. Probably a cheaper modern version. Don't know how much load is borne by the oscillating block/corresponding gear knob, but that rolled knob is unacceptable to me. I squeezed it with pliers and was able to eaisly work it out of the gear(picture). So, maybe go with the planetary oscillation system on the opposite side.

Other than that, gotta shave down the backside of the oscillation block as it is rubbing on the opposite-side main gear face. Onward...

I've read about this on a couple different forums. One guy did it with transparent side plates. The people who fished it seemed to really enjoy it.
The man

Quote from: Ron Jones on January 25, 2025, 03:37:39 AMI've read about this on a couple different forums. One guy did it with transparent side plates. The people who fished it seemed to really enjoy it.
The man

No doubt, as long as your components match manufacturing specs or excel them,  this will make your old coffee grinder into a a coffee mill.  I love it for casting, plugging and dunking baits for catfish.  Has a many places based on your mainline. Never bound, never broke. All the more stable than the original.  For those that find this years from now, do it and never look back 🤙

Quote from: Johndixon177 on January 21, 2025, 05:51:55 AM

Quote from: oldmanjoe on January 21, 2025, 04:44:35 AMI am not trying to be negative , the only thing I see positive is the second dog .

  A second ring gear to sandwich the rotor pinion , is only going to mask a worn ball bearing  and or the Oscillation slide and it`s shim .  Am I missing something ?

My thinking is by surrounding the pinion by two gears 180° from each other, the axle has no option but to fall in line under heavy load.  One fail point for this reel's past has been axle deflection  under heavy loads (tarpon from piers).  I cannot attest to these since i have only used this reel for 8 years and have never landed anything over 20lbs..  It was a solution for a problem that was mostly based on hearsay.  But it definitely eliminates a potential weak point

Quote from: Johndixon177 on January 26, 2025, 04:07:40 AM

Quote from: Ron Jones on January 25, 2025, 03:37:39 AMI've read about this on a couple different forums. One guy did it with transparent side plates. The people who fished it seemed to really enjoy it.
The man

No doubt, as long as your components match manufacturing specs or excel them,  this will make your old coffee grinder into a a coffee mill.  I love it for casting, plugging and dunking baits for catfish.  Has a many places based on your mainline. Never bound, never broke. All the more stable than the original.  For those that find this years from now, do it and never look back 🤙

Thanks to the OP for posting this mod.  It is definitely a fun idea.  But like Joe, I am struggling to see the benefit beyond improving dog load (which assumes that dog load is the weakest link, or at least leads to greater gear wear).

Here is how I see it:

From a mechanical engineering standpoint, you are not supposed to use gears to maintain shaft alignment.  That just destroys the gears.  Secondly, if the oscillation shaft is bending enough to apply force on the hole in the pinion, that means that oscillation is binding, and the sliding assembly at the end of the shaft is also in trouble, and probably the crosswind too.  We would be adressing the wrong problem.

On a spinning reel with this type of design, the pinion has its own hollow shaft that is supported by the frame, not much if any from the oscillation shaft.  If there is too much pinion shaft freeplay to maintain proper gear alignment under load, then trying to maintain alignment with a counter load (resistance from the idler main) only has the potential to help when the line load on the rotor is on the horizontal  plane.  When the line roller is up or down, you are not putting any load against the idler. This means that any potential benefit against load from the fish side will come  and go while you are winding, and would not be in effect when not winding if the roller on the bail is at the top or bottom of rotation. In fact in these positions you are more likely to be wedging the teeth and jamming them a bit, leading to wear.

In terms of load from the winding side, these type of gears will cause the main to tend to push the pinion up or down (depending on the rotational direction), and not outward against the idler main, unless there is too much freeplay in the handle shaft- which also  will only load the idler at for a small portion of the rotation.. So not much help here.

It is less likely but possible that there is some other benefit, such as load sharing  against dog resistance helping to keep the main gear better aligned.

The first step to knowing if a modification is useful is to determine if it is needed. Usually this means a track record of a common failure is given situation, or at least a very obvious design or manufacturing issue/limitation.

Once you have a modification, you don't really know it it addressed the problem without pushing the assembly past the point of the original failure.  And even then, there is the possibility of a new issue.

This type of testing tends to be destructive, so most of us don't do it, and that is mostly OK.  We are modifying fishing reels and not nuclear power plants.  But we might not want to get too enthusiastic about a modification when there is a shortage of important data.

Again, a really fun modification, and it sounds like it hasn't made the reel noticeably worse after a decent amount of usage. I would just argue thst the jury should still be out on the benefits.

-J

Ok, ok. The jury, mostly several "Nattering nabob's of negativism"(vice Pres. Spiro Agnew, 1970, my personal American political hero), is "still out on the benefits". But it sounds like J.D.177 has used his for 8 years(unless I interpreted his post wrong) and he really likes it.

So maybe a stress test is needed. Perhaps put some heavy line on it and then tighten the drag as far as I can without breaking something in that system, and see. Most of the work might be in securing the reel for the test. I have a lower 1/2 of a Penn Ugly Stick surf rod(BWS-1100) I found(guy prolly busted the tip section and tossed it, "one man's trash..."), that I can use.

More latter...

The rig.
I'm thinking; pound a spike type rod holder into the lawn, spool-up some 80lb. mono, and proceed. My digital scale only goes to 35lb., though.
I kept the right-side gear shaft and side-plate housing intact, not wanting to cut it in case of an earlier than anticipated failure.

I don't want to break the reel, but I have a complete 302 and 2-mix and match 302/402's. I know, it's pseudo-science, but it's the only kind I can do! JGP12000 if you're reading this what do you think? Are you ok with it? Would Keith approve?

Any guesstimates on what will fail first?

Quote from: Gfish on January 29, 2025, 06:21:49 PMOk, ok. The jury, mostly several "Nattering nabob's of negativism"(vice Pres. Spiro Agnew, 1970, my personal American political hero), is "still out on the benefits". But it sounds like J.D.177 has used his for 8 years(unless I interpreted his post wrong) and he really likes it.

So maybe a stress test is needed. Perhaps put some heavy line on it and then tighten the drag as far as I can without breaking something in that system, and see. Most of the work might be in securing the reel for the test. I have a lower 1/2 of a Penn Ugly Stick surf rod(BWS-1100) I found(guy prolly busted the tip section and tossed it, "one man's trash..."), that I can use.

More latter...

The laws of physics are what they are.  Hard earned mechanical engineering best practices are what they are.  They don't care if you find them a downer.

The OP has a clever mod, and I think it is worth exploring how effective it might be.

 Lots of folk here do modifications that they believe in, but haven't tested enough to provide a high level of confidence that there is an actual net benefit. The whole double/triple dogging adventure comes to mind.

Sal was the only custom modder here who did much of this kind of testing, since it  often requires breaking reels.  Unexpected results were not uncommon.

I think we should encourage folks that want to share their modifications with us. It would be unreasonable to expect destructive testing.  All modification sharing is good as long as we can also have a respectful discussion on potential issues.

———

If you personally want to test this particular modification, you would need to find something that was not working as desired on the stock reel and then show an improvement with the modification, along with some general testing to help verify that there are no undesirable side effects.

As the OP has highlighted, we do not exactly have a solid example of any undesirable behavior, just some unverified general claim of "axle deflection" without a specific damage description.

So your first step is to find something that needs fixing. If it the undesirable behavior turns out to be part failure or excessive wear (which is the usual case), you will have to bust a few reels or at least a few parts in this process.

If you check with Fred, he might have seen enough 302s that came in broken or worn to have an opinion on what a potential problem area is on these reels other than general corrosion. That will give you an idea of where to start.

Next step is to duplicate the failure, preferably more than once.

Now you can test again to find out if the modification addresses this issue, hopefully without having to destroy a few more reels in the process.

Again, I don't think that the OP is obligated to do any of this.  I really appreciate that they took the time to share an interesting mod with us.

-J

No matter the result, i am excited to see anyone testing the mod. No joke, love the dedication in this thread.  I sent the internal mods and specs to my older brother who is a marine/mech engineer for a giant cruise line to get his opinion.

Ok, Dave. The scientific method you've outlined sounds right to me. However, I don't have the resources or the DESIRE to break parts in several stock and modified reels. So I'll do something I'm kind of leary of doing anyway and see what happens, once. I'm interested in how much stress relative to the real fishing world, it can take and which part(s) will fail.

I have NO political hero's, not even historically. That was(vailed I guess?) sarcasm. VP S.A. Was accused of kick-back bribery that took place before he was VP and pushed into resigning from the Nixon Administration. He was latter convicted. He had a great speech writer though. That triple "n" statement was my favorite. Political genius IMO to gain attention and notoriety using statements like that.
So I'm kidding about the "nattering nabob's of negativity" on this thread. I should have at least used one of those emoji's.

This thread maybe should go into the spinning reel tutorial section.

Nice of you to offer Greg.

I'm not sure that there is a useful way to proceed with testing without a known pattern of failures. And not sure that a  somewhat more robust version of this old and somewhat large reel design is something that many folk would get excited about.  The basic design kind of limits its ultimate potential.

If you decide to keep going, you might want to consider drag at different oscillation and rotational positions in addition to winding against load (and what ratio of winding load to drag load to use)

If you like your 302s, I hesitate to encourage you to beat them up.

-J