alan tani @ alantani.com fishing reel repair rebuild tutorial 533 Conversion Standard vs Narrow
Reel Repair by Alan Tani
March 24, 2019, 03:02:26 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: 533 Conversion Standard vs Narrow  (Read 556 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
theyuckyone
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6


« on: January 05, 2019, 05:53:31 PM »

I was thinking about tweaking my Newell 533 (graphite spool). I know the tib 533NK has a heavier spool, does the weight of the spool affect casting? What are some other pro & cons I should consider on choosing either the 533 frame or the 533NK frame & spool?

Thanks
Logged
Swami805
Member
*
Online Online

Posts: 2378


« Reply #1 on: January 06, 2019, 06:41:08 AM »

I have both, I like the narrow 533 for yo-yo fishing and the stock width 533 for casting. It might just be me but I like a cube shaped reel better for casting,it seems more balanced and it's what I'm used too. The best freespool hands down on mine is the 533 width with the tiburon frame and graphite spool. I use both as 40-50lb reels.
Logged
Frank
Member
*
Online Online

Posts: 430


« Reply #2 on: January 06, 2019, 07:56:33 AM »

It might just be me but I like a cube shaped reel better for casting,it seems more balanced and it's what I'm used too.

I feel the same way. While I like narrow spool reels for jigging the wider reels seem to cast much better to me.

Frank
Logged

Frank. Retired. Life long fishing and boating fanatic.
vilters
Member
*
Online Online

Posts: 208



« Reply #3 on: January 06, 2019, 09:37:27 AM »

this brings to mind a discussion on another board some years ago regarding casting performance of newell 332 vs newell 338. one theory was the line diameter on the wider 338 spool would decrease slower than the narrower 332 spool, which means that for the same spool speed, more line will come off the wider spool (larger line diameter) than the narrower spool, which diameter decreases quicker = better/longer casting for the wider spool. fwiw. personally, i use the standard width 533 for #50 lb., and like the narrow for #40. i'm with swami, i like a "square" profile reel for casting, i have a jerry downie custom 533 that is in between the narrow and standard width reel that is ideal for me.
Logged
jurelometer
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 356


« Reply #4 on: January 06, 2019, 02:19:06 PM »

this brings to mind a discussion on another board some years ago regarding casting performance of newell 332 vs newell 338. one theory was the line diameter on the wider 338 spool would decrease slower than the narrower 332 spool, which means that for the same spool speed, more line will come off the wider spool (larger line diameter) than the narrower spool, which diameter decreases quicker = better/longer casting for the wider spool. fwiw. personally, i use the standard width 533 for #50 lb., and like the narrow for #40. i'm with swami, i like a "square" profile reel for casting, i have a jerry downie custom 533 that is in between the narrow and standard width reel that is ideal for me.

I also agree with the preferred ideal dimensions,   but I question the theory from the other board. 

Taller spool means more line comes off per revolution at first.   If more  line coming off the spool per revolution made the reel cast better, the best casting spool would be tall and narrow with a larger arbor.

I would guess that the benefit of a short-wide spool has to do more with inertia.    The theoretically best revolving casting spool would have zero coefficient of friction (static and dynamic), and zero inertia.  The line would come off the spool exactly at the speed it is pulled,  even during deceleration.  No energy siphoned off  to start rotation, and no over-rotating as the cast finishes.

A lighter spool weight means less mass which means less inertia.   So far, so good.  My recollection of physics is terrible,  but I seem to remember that radius also has an effect on inertia.  In other words,  if two rotating cylinders  of the same material had the same mass but different dimensions (one wide length with a short radius,  the other narrow with a long radius),  the cylinder with the longer radius would have the greater moment of inertia.   This is why flywheels on motors are tall and narrow (more inertia per unit of mass  is desirable), and casting reel spools are short and wide ( less inertia is desirable).

On a side note,  the popular how-long-does-the-spool-spin test can be misleading. The more inertia in the spool (from mass or radius),  the longer the spool will continue to spin after the load is discontinued.   So it may not be a very good predictor of casting ability when comparing one reel model to another.  On the same reel, a longer free rotation shows an improvement in coefficient of friction, which does tell us something useful.

-J

Logged
theyuckyone
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6


« Reply #5 on: January 11, 2019, 07:15:29 PM »

Thank you gentleman for everyone's input.......standard it shall be
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
Simple Audio Video Embedder
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.201 seconds with 19 queries.