LINE CAPACITY : Penn 114 HLW vs. Penn 114H with CHROME / BRASS Spool . . .

Started by ez2cdave, September 20, 2019, 07:33:14 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

ez2cdave



LINE CAPACITY : Penn 114 HLW vs. Penn 114H with CHROME / BRASS Spool . . .

I have a 114 HLW and a 114 H ( chrome over brass spool ) and I was curious one day.

The 114 H was empty and I was going to change the line on the HLW, so I used the 114H to strip the line off the HLW.

To my surprise, the 114 H held ALL of the line off the HLW, perfectly. 

The HLW had been completely filled with 50 lb-test Trilene Big Game monofilament.

This leads me to believe that Penn created the HLW, once they discovered that the Aluminum Spool reduced line capacity, significantly. I was astonished !

This is true for the 114 HLW and, I suspect that it may also be true for the 113 HLW ( 4/0 ).

Tight Lines !

Dave F.

Gfish

Sounds logical. I looked it up on Mystic Parts. If I'm lookin at the right reels they have the HLW with a 1/2 frame at 560 yds. Of 50 lb. mono. and the HL with posts at 450 yds. of 50 lb. mono...?
Fishing tackle is an art form and all fish caught on the right tackle are"Gfish"!

ez2cdave

Quote from: Gfish on September 20, 2019, 09:04:52 PM
Sounds logical. I looked it up on Mystic Parts. If I'm lookin at the right reels they have the HLW with a 1/2 frame at 560 yds. Of 50 lb. mono. and the HL with posts at 450 yds. of 50 lb. mono...?

These are the to reel models in question . . .

NOTE : The Arbor of the Chrome / Brass spool is much smaller in diameter than the Aluminum spool. Also, the contour of the walls of the spools are different ( wider on the Chrome / Brass vs Aluminum ).

SPOOL DIFFERENCES :

114H



114HLW



Internet pics first ( 2 ), then my reels.

114H



114HLW with Aluminum Frame




My Reels . . .

Tight Lines !

Dave F.