Bantam 100

[oc1]

Shimano had been making bicycle parts and broke into the fishing tackle industry in 1970 with rods and spinning reels.  They started a joint effort with Lew Childre, LMB GOB, from Alabama and introduced their first conventional reel, the Lew's Speed Spool, in 1975.  That relationship dissolved in 1978, Childre moved his production to Ryobi, and Shimano introduced the Bantam 100.  The Bantam 100 is said to be a classic, enough so that Phil White (2008) wrote a book about their first fifteen years of evolution.

I wasn't paying attention at the time (Penn and ABU guy) but finally became interested forty years later.  Some worn-out Bantam 100's were picked up for $20 to $25 each at the usual auction site.  This isn't organized enough to be a tutorial so we'll call it an idle musing:

The Bantam 100 is compact with a capacity of about 150 yards of 10 lb mono.  The overall size is smaller than the Speed Spool predecessor and smaller than the ABU's of the day.  The housing design was radical, but less radical than the Speed Spool.  The long, low profile was necessary to move the disengaging level wind guide out away from the spool.

It seems the rosewood knobs were popular at the time but they were replaced with Speed Spool style paddle knobs after four years.  In the five worn-out parts reels I bought, four have intact rosewood knobs but three have stripped threads in the hole for the small screw that secures the handle nut retaining clip.  Two have bent handles. One reel has a replacement Calcutta style handle.  Evidently, the aluminum used in the handle is not strong enough to withstand heavy use.

In my opinion, the three-point star drag was a really bad idea inherited from the Speed Spool.  If you are used to fishing with a light drag and flicking the star with your index finger to add pressure as necessary, the star can become lost when two of the points are hiding behind the handle and the third point is up.  

The clutch push-button is reminiscent of ABU.  It predates the "quick fire" type of clutch release seen today but anyone that used the ABU style button long enough found that you could let your thumb slide off the button after it was depressed and stop the spool before the lure could fall more than a couple of inches.  This saves a lot of time but the shortcut disengages the pinion while there is pressure on the spool (from the hanging lure) so there is more wear and tear on the pinion gear threads.  Bantam 100 are said to be prone to premature pinion wear and this is probably a contributing factor.

http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(b).jpg

There are three ABU style thumb screws on the headplate for quick access.  Both bearings can be serviced and the large hole in the black portion of the headplate allows inspection and lubrication of the main gear.  Note the headplate bearing is in a metal disc that fits snuggly into the frame. This maintains spool alignment, allows the rest of the headplate to be lighter, and creates a tight fit between the spool and frame so lighter lines can be used without having them caught in the crack.  The frame is very solid with no warping on the five examples I have, even though the frame components are just pressed and dimpled together.

http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(c).jpg

It has ABU style centrifugal brakes but the pin and brake shoes are more robust.  I have only seen these blue brake pads and do not know if there were other sizes

http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(d).jpg

The tail plate is plastic.  The sharp angle at the upper right corner of the tail plate seems prone to being bumped and cracked (three out of five in my examples are broken).  This sharp angle is also uncomfortable in the hand.  Phil White says that a popular customization back in the day was to grind down the frame and tailplate to round off that sharp angle.  But, the tailplate has little function and you could take the reel fishing with no tailplate installed.

http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(e).jpg

Under the tailplate all you find is a weep hole behind the left bearing and a screw to secure the levelwind worm and bushing.  Also, the forward tailplate screw secures the line guide stabilizer bar.

http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(f).jpg

There are not many surprises under the headplate.  Again, it reminds me of ABU reels of the day except for the plastic yoke.  Plastic parts are always a concern but the ABU metal yoke integrated with the clutch button are probably more prone to hanging up when poorly lubricated.
Do note the tubular extension on the pinion gear.  

http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(g).jpg

The tubular extension on the pinion gear rests inside a plastic bushing under the cast control knob.  This was probably designed to reduce friction as the spool shaft spins inside the pinion when casting.  In the picture below you can see that when the pinion is disengaged the tubular extension reaches the outer edge of the plastic bushing.

http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(h).jpg

http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(i).jpg

The headplate bearing rides closer to the spool and is held in place by a familiar wire clip.

http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(j).jpg

The tailplate bearing rests on a brass disc and is held in place by another wire clip (the disc and bearing are at the upper left in the photo but the wire clip is not shown).

http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(k).jpg

Here is the cast control knob, a familiar square sacrificial shim that contacts the spool shaft and the plastic bushing that supports the tubular extension of the pinion gear.

http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(m).jpg

Here's a shot of the drag stack and three point star.  They're out of order though as the small fiber washer should be above the metal drag washer.  I was disappointed to find only one large fiber washer and a couple of small composite washers.  Sure it would be OK for 12 lb mono, but not very smooth if you wanted to overload the reel with heavy braid.  I think the frame, spool, dog and gears could handle being overloaded and abused.

http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(n).jpg

The levelwind is a little tricky to install in the confined space and a dry pawl is difficult to remove.  The inside of the pawl barrel is threaded though so you can put a small screw in it to give you something to grab.  On this particular example, the previous owner put an extra pawl spacer and the cut-off head of a copper tack between the pawl and pawl cover in an attempt to prevent the worn out pawl from slipping.

http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(o).jpg

The screw that secures the worm and plastic worm bushing in place is reverse thread.
I'm actually somewhat impressed with these reels.  They will probably outlive a modern Korean reel although parts have not be available for decades. My examples of this reel are rough, but you get what you pay for and I have plenty of spare parts now.  
-steve

[nelz]

I've had a couple of 400's, pretty much the same reel only wider. I found the drag and gearing very smooth and strong, robust frames, love the stainless steel components, love the larger 400 handle... but the rest is all bad.

The plastic side plate inevitably cracks around the screw holes; what's it doing on an otherwise all-steel reel anyway??? The gear sleeve wore out prematurely and Shimano practically laughed when I inquired about parts. The level wind is the worst I've ever encountered, it also wears prematurely and starts to hang up. But even in daily use, the design causes the line to lay in a pattern that will cause maximum criss-crossing under drag, so heavy drag settings is not a good idea if you target fish that can pull it.

This reel could have been designed to target bigger fish, but instead is an overly heavy, best suited for freshwater bass reel. My remaining 400 sits on a display shelf and is used only to change line on other more deserving reels. Oh, and recently I used the drag spring washer on an Abu Ambassadeur, they are the same size, and the handle went to a Daiwa Millionare.

[johndtuttle]

Thanks very much for that look at a Classic.

We have to remember that this was the infancy of low profile reel design, a revolution that has led to their domination of casting reels in freshwater to this day.

We can quibble about the parts and such now but this was the cutting edge of its day. The emphasis in future designs has been lowering weight and increasing performance and the modern reels are remarkable successes in that regard.

Nice to see nylon yokes have only been used for more than 40 years with success. 

[nelz]

Even the much older Record/Ambassadeurs were superior in many ways except for the drag. The Bantam's big single disk works very well.

With that in mind, I removed the level wind system of the Bantam and did use it successfully like that for a while. That way, I was able to take full advantage of the strong drag and high torque, landing even mid size Tarpon and Snook. But then the gear sleeve wore out. Game over.

[oc1]

Hello Nelz.  Did your Bantam levelwind guide look like the one on the left in this photo:

http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(q).jpg

The reel on the left is date stamped December 1978 (the first year of production).  The reel on the right is date stamped November 1979.  They are identical except for the levelwind guides.  The 1978 levelwind guide is painted plastic.  Big mistake because the plastic would wear where it slides on the line guide stabilizer bar and worm guard.  Then it would start to wobble and the worm and pawl would deteriorate.  Also, the plastic threads would strip when the pawl cap was screwed off and on.  Easy to do in the tight quarters.  The 1979 levelwind guide on the right is solid brass plated with something gray.  With that modification, the levelwind system was strengthened significantly and it was all metal except for the plastic bushings where the worm penetrates the frame.

I have always had a love-hate relationship with levelwind mechanisms.  To me, there is nothing more comfortable and sensitive than a palming reel on a well balanced two-handed rod.  You can cast all day without fatigue and feel every bump on the bottom.  That's true using a Penn Peerless, an old round Ambassadeur or more modern reel.  Fishermen have been palming reels since knuckle-buster days; long before they were called palming reels.  But to get a comfortable grip you need a levelwind to free your thumb or index finger from the task of manually laying line on the spool.  That's the love part.  

The hate part of the equation is the loss of casting distance imposed by the levelwind.  There are a lot of frictional losses going on.  Supporting the worm on ball bearings instead of bushings helps some but there are still losses from the meshing gears, the pawl rubbing on the worm, the line rubbing on the wire guide, the wire rubbing on the crossbar, etc.  It takes a lot of lure weight to get the spool moving and overcome the frictional losses of a non-disengaging levelwind.  For me, that was roughly 1.5 ounces for a Penn Peerless and 3/4 ounce for an early ABU.  It used to be necessary to go to a spinning (ugh) outfit to get distance with smaller lure weights.  

Disengaging levelwind mechanisms improved the situation considerably The important frictional losses are one loop of line scraping against other loops as it moves laterally toward the levelwind guide and the losses to dampen line galloping as it moves through the small guide hole.  If I'm not mistaken, the Shimano Speed Spool and Bantam are responsible for this advancement.  But, a reel with disengaging levelwind will still not cast as far as the same reel with no levelwind at all (a CT).

Since I have these Bantams to play with, I tried to quantify the difference.  A Bantam 100 was cleaned, lubricated, loaded with 20 lb Power Pro and put on an eleven foot medium action rod with a one ounce lead sinker.  After being dialed in it cast a measured 54 yards (average of the best half-dozen casts).  The levelwind guide was removed and the same set-up cast 61 yards.  Less difference than I anticipated but it is what it is.  The cast control knob had to be tightened a bit to prevent backlash without the levelwind.

Looking for a compromise, the level wind eye was cut off and various crude modifications were tried.
http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(r).jpg
http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(s).jpg
http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(t).jpg
http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(u).jpg
The long flexible wire was way to cumbersome and did not lay the line very well but it cast as well as no levelwind at all.  The narrow brass one was not much improvement over the stock levelwind but laid the line well  The brass ring was intermediate between the two at 58 yards but the wide ring laid more line toward the center of the spool.

Here is the last iteration, a tip top guide serving as a levelwind guide.  The eye of the tip top is 5 mm while the eye of the stock levelwind guide is 3 mm.  The larger eye means less line is laid at the side of the spool so there is a slight hill in the center of the spool.  These reels have quite a bit of clearance between the spool and frame so it's not a problem.
http://www.raingarden.us/snap/Bantam100(v).jpg
Alright, you can stop laughing now.  This is for proof of concept only.  I put the reel on a lighter rod and went fishing with 3/8 and 1/2 ounce jigs.  It really doesn't get in the way and I sort of forget about it when concentrating on fish.  It will eventually get bumped and screwed up though.  This is definitely not something you would want to be seen with in public.

You already knew the take-home message.  A disengaging levelwind will cost you distance but is probably not worth worrying about.  
-steve

[Alto Mare]

Very clever using the rod tip. Those must be nice reels, I purchased one or two for Wallace, using his money. If that man likes those, they have to be good, Wallace knows his reels.

Sal

[nelz]

Steve, I have the metal guide. The problem was always worm/pawl related. As you know, unlike modern low-profile reels, the guide moves when drag is pulled. This causes really bad criss-crossing under drag, unless you happen to luck out and sync with the spool, which hardly ever happens. So, this extreme side pressure against the guide no doubt contributes to premature level wind failure, either that or it's just made from cheap material (maybe both).

Nice job with your McGyver'ing those reels, somebody has alot of time on their hands, lol.

Btw, I think the smaller Daiwa Millionaires and Lunas also have the same level wind system, but don't know if they fail as much. At the very least though, the criss-crossing will cause the line to bind under pressure and lost fish. *Note, the 300 sizes and the Blue Backer Millionaires have sync'd level wind like the Abu's.

[oc1]

Oh, I get what you're saying now Netz.  The disadvantages of a disengaging levelwind becomes magnified as the width of the spool and/or the size of the fish increases.  Both put more lateral pressure on the levelwind guide making the pawl eat into the worm.  That seems like something Shimano could have overcome if they put better metal in the guide, pawl and worm.  Guess the guys at Shimano never met a tarpon or a snook.

You'll get a chuckle out of this....  Phil White in his 2008 book quoting the Shimano catalog of the day...
Shimano cataloged the Bantam 400 as the perfect reel for "light tackle saltwater, muskie amd northerns".  They expanded on that description by stating that it was "Quite possibly the finest reel ever designed for the salt water plug fisherman."
White also notes, This reel only had limited listings in catalogs of the time, and thus is a bit harder to find for the collector today.

I wouldn't want Phil White to feel like I am stealing his very hard-earned research and will note that his book is a valuable and informative 198 page reference for reel collectors available at:
http://www.oldreels.com

-steve

[Ruffy]

Just a thought but if you were to change the cast control bushing for a bearing then wouldn't you have a bearing supported pinion aka superfree? Maybe these reels were a long way ahead of the times!

[johndtuttle]

Just a thought but if you were to change the cast control bushing for a bearing then wouldn't you have a bearing supported pinion aka superfree? Maybe these reels were a long way ahead of the times!

There is no question that the Low Profile reel started a revolution to this day in conventional casting reels for light tackle applications.

It has continued to evolve nearly every year since this original design by Lew Childre with the original intent (I believe) to improve casting of very light baits when (generally) low capacity is really needed ie freshwater Bass. We can quibble about design flaws in this revolutionary reel geometry but it was the first and in the intervening decades has been refined enormously. The endpoint to this evolution has been reels like the Shimano Tranx or Abu Garcia Revo Toro Beast which really have to be used to grasp how incredibly refined they have become.

Since their introduction LP reels have steadily and nearly completely taken over conventional casting in freshwater and are now making serious inroads in saltwater. Smaller, lighter spools for better casting, no need for a synced level wind mechanism and larger gears (for strength and allowing larger drag disks) etc have led to their outselling round reels by probably 100 to 1 for your typical freshwater fisherman<<<----represents the largest market for fishing gear in the world.


best

[oc1]

I don't know what a superfree is but I want one.  I looked at that bushing too Ruffy.  Trouble is, when the pinion disengages from the spool, it does not fully disengage from the main gear.  So, there's no way for the pinion to spin on a bearing even if there was one.  Modern baitcasters are all the same way as far as I knew, so I want a superfree.  It seems like having the pinion ride on a bearing would require that the bearing be on the inside of pinion gear.  That would be difficult or expensive because there is so little room to work with.  If the pinion diameter is doubled to make room for an internal bearing then the diameter of the main gear would also have to double in order to maintain the gear ratio.

John, I agree completely.  Once you try a low profile you are unlikely to go back to round reels for fresh or saltwater casting.  They're just too comfortable with too many modern conveniences.  Sound and bay anglers are getting hip to it but I wonder if the manufacturers may be missing an opportunity by not designing for and marketing them to surf and jetty pluggers.  Don't know about offshore.

.... but one more rant about levelwind mechanisms if you will allow.  Then I'll shut up.  Since they can make a freaking digital cast control system, then why can't they make a better levelwind mechanism?  It hasn't changed in forty years.  Why can't a disengaging levelwind fully disengage so the guide is free to move when line is playing out?  Why can't the pawl disengage instead of the worm gear?  Or better yet, why can't the levelwind guide flip up or drop down out of the way completely when casting and then catch the line again when retrieving?  Maybe the whole pawl and worm concept needs to be scrapped in favor of a toothed belt and gear.  Maybe the reel and its levelwind should be built into the rod.  ... oh, sorry; went to far there.
-steve

[johndtuttle]

I don't know what a superfree is but I want one.  I looked at that bushing too Ruffy.  Trouble is, when the pinion disengages from the spool, it does not fully disengage from the main gear.  So, there's no way for the pinion to spin on a bearing even if there was one.  Modern baitcasters are all the same way as far as I knew, so I want a superfree.  It seems like having the pinion ride on a bearing would require that the bearing be on the inside of pinion gear.  That would be difficult or expensive because there is so little room to work with.  If the pinion diameter is doubled to make room for an internal bearing then the diameter of the main gear would also have to double in order to maintain the gear ratio.

John, I agree completely.  Once you try a low profile you are unlikely to go back to round reels for fresh or saltwater casting.  They're just too comfortable with too many modern conveniences.  Sound and bay anglers are getting hip to it but I wonder if the manufacturers may be missing an opportunity by not designing for and marketing them to surf and jetty pluggers.  Don't know about offshore.

.... but one more rant about levelwind mechanisms if you will allow.  Then I'll shut up.  Since they can make a freaking digital cast control system, then why can't they make a better levelwind mechanism?  It hasn't changed in forty years.  Why can't a disengaging levelwind fully disengage so the guide is free to move when line is playing out?  Why can't the pawl disengage instead of the worm gear?  Or better yet, why can't the levelwind guide flip up or drop down out of the way completely when casting and then catch the line again when retrieving?  Maybe the whole pawl and worm concept needs to be scrapped in favor of a toothed belt and gear.  Maybe the reel and its levelwind should be built into the rod.  ... oh, sorry; went to far there.
-steve

Daiwa is working on a "disengaging levelwind" in their T-wing design. The guide "opens up" wide to let the line be free, and then when engaged it narrows down to normal width to guide the line lay.

Other reels leave it engaged and then add bearings to the worm to make it spin easier, but this increases maintenance. Unfortunately with very narrow reels it has to cycle so much it still hurts distance.

The Abu Garcia Revo Toro Beast uses a disengaging pinion from the spool shaft (Infinii Spool) so that the spool only spins on the spool bearings and then with braid (very slick) casting distance is excellent.

[Ruffy]

Hi Steve,
You are correct, in reels with superfree the inside of the pinion rides on a bearing. This was first brought out (with Shimano) on one of the earlier Chronarch iterations (I think). Abu also had it on there round Pro Max range. Here is a link to a tackletour review of that Shimano reel (is linking another site kosher? I am not sure? - http://www.tackletour.com/reviewcuradosf.html), they said the addition of a pinion supported bearing gave 4 times the freespool, a pretty big difference. Recently Shimano has gone one up again and brought out a dual bearing supported pinion (x-ship) which you can see in the schematic for the new Curado I (attached, #3927 & #4194). I am not sure of how much difference this will make, time will tell though!

Cheers,
Andrew

[Robert Janssen]

I wouldn't want Phil White to feel like I am stealing his very hard-earned research...

Good work, man. Thanks for giving credit where credit is due. Many people seem to forget that.

Looking for a compromise, the level wind eye was cut off and various crude modifications were tried.

Cool!

... why can't they make a better levelwind mechanism?  It hasn't changed in forty years.  Why can't a disengaging levelwind fully disengage....

Oh, jeez... they have, and have again in many ways. ABU and Arjon for instance had a split-gate levelwind that split apart and moved to either side of the spool when the button was pressed, and came together on the retrieve. Penn and Ardent had the spiral wind. Other variations have been gates / eyes that folded down, or reels that had pivoting seats for example. (Me, i used to wonder why big-game reels don't have levelwinds, and the few that did used the same puny junk that they use on baitcasting reels, when it can easily be seen that heavy-duty levelwinding mechanisms are used in a variety of industrial applications. How hard can it be?)

So really the question is not so much why they can't build a better levelwind, because they already have, but rather why they seem to have forgotten this. The answer, i think, is that all told, the ubiquitous infinity screw and pawl mechanism actually works very well, and can do so for many years.

.

[oc1]

Thank you very much for that John, Andrew and Robert.  When finished here I will check out all of those.  I just bought a used reel with X-Ship and did not know what that or Infinii Spool meant until now.

Robert, I'm sort of embarrassed to know that you are reading this.  I have admired your machine work.  A freehand hack is the best I can do.

This reminds me that I also monkeyed around with the drag stack on a Bantam.  To be honest, I have yet to try the stock Bantam 100 drag with a carbontex washer.  It was only prejudice that made me think the stock drag was going to be inconsistent and jerky. Small groves were cut on the inside of a main gear even though there is almost no material to work with there.  A little flux-core wire feed welder was used to tack small dog ears on a generic stainless washer like you would find at the corner hardware.  That was not supposed to work because of dissimilar metals and improper shielding.  It was ground down enough to catch the new groves in the main gear and lapped on a belt sander.  0.5 mm carbontex washers were cut with scissors.  An extra Belleville was added and the plastic spacer was shortened to make it all fit.




It's all very sketchy with the compromised main gear, dissimilar metals on the dog ears and limited contact between the two, so a stress test was done.  The reel (without a levelwind) was loaded with about 40 yards of 40 pound braid (less than half spool), the reel was tied to a tree, the drag locked down and a Ford pick-up used to simulate an unstoppable fish.  The line parted several inches from the knot.  The reel felt and sounded the same before and after.  By the way, it's a feel and sound reminiscent of Sal or Richy's old pencil sharpener.  The dog ears did not slip from their groves and the main gear did not crack open.  Before the stress test it would pull about ten to twelve pounds of drag, but afterward it would only pull about eight to ten pounds.  Either the Bellevilles were flattened or the carbontex was smoothed.  Less than four pounds of drag would be needed for the intended use so my confidence was restored.  The reel was loaded with a full spool of twenty pound braid for fishing.
-steve