506HS project questions

[JasonGotaProblem]

So there's definitely a bit of play between the pinion and spool shaft in the stock 506 gears. I guess I'll have to wait til the one I ordered arrives to compare.

[thorhammer]

I don't think you need a frame for this. Get an aluminum seat from Cortez Conversions (Ted's design) and keep the stock bars- I have several like this and jig 50 lb braid without one thought about cage torque.  This is lighter, lowers the reel on the rod and will not be your weak point, especially if you end up with stock gearing.

[JasonGotaProblem]

It really seems like the spool shaft is intended to not contact the inside of the pinion when in free spool, likely with the intent being to ride on the bearings and only on the bearings. This introduces an air gap which may not be problematic but definitely does NOT strengthen the setup.

If it comes down to it, if I can't fish it beyond 15# without a massive investment... Not the end of the world. I'll just fish it at 15# then.

Will the stock HT100s get me to that 15# or do I need Bryan's kit for that?

[JasonGotaProblem]

Just ordered a SS sleeve/star combo from Cortez. This is coming together nicely.

[Keta]

Just ordered a SS sleeve/star combo from Cortez. This is coming together nicely.

:0)

[JasonGotaProblem]

Wow what a striking comparison. There is definitely a strength difference between those teeth. But the inner diameter is the same. The height is the same. The height of the groove for the yoke is the same. There's no discernable difference in feel when wiggling the original pinion on ths shaft vs wiggling the 500 pinion on the shaft.

Am I missing something here? I may be on my way to a 506LS

[jurelometer]

We talked about this on the other hotrodding thread.  In addition to the pinion hole size, the center distance of the shafts on the HS is greater than on the standard.  That is why the edge of the HS bridgepate is beveled, and why the bridgeplates are not interchangeable.  I never measured the pinion hole myself- it will take a set of pins gauges to find a smaller difference.  Eyeballing is not too accurate. 

Folks that have done the swap of standard gears into the HS have been satisfied with the result.  But most folk think gears are just little wheels with teeth on them, and I don't think that many (any?) tested both to the point where the gears failed both winding and drag.

It is possible that swapping standard gears into  a HS could be stronger than stock HS, but standard gears in a standard reel will be the strongest and smoothest 4:1 setup.  Since standard Jigmasters are a dime a dozen, I just took the frames and gear sleeve off the high speed and stuck them on a 500 when I wanted a 4:1 reel. 


I never bent a spindle on my 505 myself, and I pretty much spent all my time in the drag abuse zone.  Grey spool, so maybe a better spindle.  The narrower reel restricts the line leverage, so the risk should be lower.

I was able to get well north of 15 lbs with a stock dry carbon fiber stack (dry has a higher coefficient of friction), but I was willing to go extremely tight on the drag.  I suspect that you will be able to hit 15 dry without pliers, but I could be wrong.  And probably 12 when greased, especially on a 4:1 .  You might have to mess with spacer height, and may not be able to go all the way down to zero drag if you want to get a high setting.

Load up a stock 506 with 20 lb mono (maybe upgrade the gear sleeve and add CF washers), and the reel makes a lot of sense dimension and performance wise. If I were you, I might just clean and lightly oil the bearings and take it for a test cast.  Folks that are used to casting a reel with cast control may not prefer spending the time it takes to clear backlashes while the thumb gets educated.  But if you get past that, these reels are a blast to cast.  Sort of like going from automatic to a manual gearshift in your car.


As a side note- looks like the HS has a 12 tooth pinion vs 13 on the standard.  You want prime numbers, or at least an odd + a prime, so that certain gear teeth don't mate more frequently- this causes the gears to wear unevenly.
-J

[JasonGotaProblem]

Thanks Dave, for another useful post. Mine has a grey spool too. Not sure what that implies.

I actually learned to cast a sideways spool using an abu 5000C (no magnets). And I've been casting my everol, my Mitchell 622, and my 27SH, and though I'm still no expert, I'm accustomed to doing it manually. Or digitally, as the case may be (told my friend the other day that unlike any other industry, the digital brake is the one we've had in use for the longest). I've since learned to like magnets but you lead me to wonder if people are just casting reels with good mag setups with no thumb-to-spool action and now I'm just confused. Are y'all using the magnets on full setting? How far are you casting? And further where's the fun in that? The difficulty of baitcasters is the fun part.

I've noticed that the main gear from my 506 is actually much taller than the 500 steel gear. The "business edge" of the gear is identical but there's a lip that sticks up higher so the drag "well" is deeper. Where I'm going with this is one could add an extra carbon and an eared washer to the stack in a stock brass gear but one could not do the same with the 500 steelie i got unless the washers got thinner.  I shoulda taken a pic but did not.

And pin gauges would indeed be the most correct way to compare inner diameters. But I'm going by comparing feel as I wiggle the thing not what it looks like. I already know for a fact my eyes could not discern a quarter of a millimeter difference, but my hands would for sure be able to feel it on the wiggle. No doubt. If that were the only concern then my confidence is growing.

I gotta get this pin out of my brass sleeve if I'm gonna do anything. Im sure there's threads on here about that.

[JasonGotaProblem]

Pin came out with minimal blood loss. And my steel sleeve arrived today. Assembly is imminent.

It's not an immediate necessity or priority but I eventually wanna go to double dogs. So the consensus seems to be no go on a bridge from a 500 going in the 506. It was mentioned that the 506 bridge is beveled on the back. And indeed mine is. Is that the only difference? Could an enterprising fellow get the aftermarket DD bridge for a 500 and bevel the edge to make a one of a kind reel, or are there other issues?

Followup question, what about adding a second dog to my stock bridge? I noticed the aftermarket ones have the 2nd dog longer and bent, the stock bridge definitely has a hole for another dog, i believe so the same bridge can be used for a lefty reel but thats conjecture. So i assume the 2nd dog is bent because the stock dog just won't flip over and line up correctly. So I guess I'd have to make my own. Either my own new dog post in a location that would work, or a dog that would work. So no matter what, I'm modifying something. What's my best route forward here?

Don't say just get a 501. That takes all the fun out of it.

[JasonGotaProblem]

Finished for now. The above questions still stand.

My attempt at brilliance that I'm sure I'm the first and only person to think of was to throw an o ring on the sleeve to aid in assembly. It worked.

Yeah it's a 506LS

[jurelometer]

Pin came out with minimal blood loss. And my steel sleeve arrived today. Assembly is imminent.

It's not an immediate necessity or priority but I eventually wanna go to double dogs. So the consensus seems to be no go on a bridge from a 500 going in the 506. It was mentioned that the 506 bridge is beveled on the back. And indeed mine is. Is that the only difference? Could an enterprising fellow get the aftermarket DD bridge for a 500 and bevel the edge to make a one of a kind reel, or are there other issues?

Followup question, what about adding a second dog to my stock bridge? I noticed the aftermarket ones have the 2nd dog longer and bent, the stock bridge definitely has a hole for another dog, i believe so the same bridge can be used for a lefty reel but thats conjecture. So i assume the 2nd dog is bent because the stock dog just won't flip over and line up correctly. So I guess I'd have to make my own. Either my own new dog post in a location that would work, or a dog that would work. So no matter what, I'm modifying something. What's my best route forward here?

Don't say just get a 501. That takes all the fun out of it.

Regarding multiple dog customizations, the following is not a popular opinion around here, but so far, I haven't seen any evidence to change my mind:

A pair of dogs that engage alternately can cut the handle backplay in half.  Some people think this makes the mod worth it, but not me.  There is a theory that a pair of dogs thst engage simultaneously will somehow double the dog load capacity, but this is not true, because the components are not elastic, and the fit is never perfect, so the one  dog has to be in the act of  failing before the second dog starts helping.  Also, there usually isn't room to place the second dog in a spot where it will be the strongest, so the one of the two dogs will be weaker (and more likely to fail sooner).  If the one of two dogs  goes south it up has to blow out cleanly, otherwise  you are screwed.  So in general,  no matter how you set them up, you are giving up some strength to go double dog, but at least with alternating dogs, you are getting something (minor) in return. And the dog usually blows out because it goes under the ratchet when the gear post goes out of alignment from load, so having more dogs doesn't even have a chance to help.  Never seen a photo of a Penn saved by the second dog.  And yes, that crooked dog is to accommodate a fit problem.

The  bridge is different on a 500 vs a 505,  the center distance for the shafts are different (I keep repeating this).  Not  sure if the bridge  plate screws are in a different spot, but I doubt that you can cram a 500 bridge in there and get away with it, or at least end up with a better reel than when you started.

Load that puppy up with some 20 lb mono, and see if you like how it casts.

-J

[PacRat]

My take on double dog is redundancy. If a spring were to fail, sticky grease, or anything that could cause a dog to fail, you would hopefully have a back-up dog (unless the failed dog is jammed under the ratchet.

After that, simultaneous or alternating are just the icing on the cake.

-Mike

[JasonGotaProblem]

Interesting. It's a good thing you keep mentioning it, because I didn't catch it before. We already knew I'm a dummy. Ok so no luck on the 500 bridge.

I also think of the 2nd dog as a redundancy thing. Sorta like a backup anti reverse on a spinner? I dunno. Ive had a dog go under the ratchet on my 8500SS but I would imagine (apparently incorrectly) that the frustrating pin in the sleeve would prevent such a thing.

A small push on the spool gets me 30 seconds of free spool. I suspect it'll cast pretty well. Big negative on the mono though. #teambraid

[jurelometer]

I think that Mike hit the nail on the head.  The debate is really about the benefit of redundancy vs.  increasing the risk of system failure.  I am not on team redundancy myself.

The problem with the redundancy strategy is that the first failure has to be benign.  The failure has to cleanly take the dog out of the way.  The broken or partially engaged dog doesn't disappear, it usually gets jammed under the ratchet.

The second dog on most of these upgrades is substantially weaker than the first. You can look at my screeds here in  threads on proper dog/ratchet design, or you can do what I did and read an old mechanical design textbook. So a second dog can make the initial failure more likely.

Alternating the  dog engagement gives the weaker dog a greater chance to fail more fully and jam something up before the other dog starts helping.  While it seems intuitive that two is better than one, you have to look at the odds of system failure, not just component failure. Sometimes duplication of a component does not provide a redundancy benefit.

If you don't mind a personal true life story as an example:

Strangely enough, I was on a small twin engine plane on 9/11 (don't worry- not another 9/11 thread ).  We were flying over a remote part of Australia, got some engine trouble, and the pilot was looking for a dirt road to land on. I mentioned  to the guy next me that at least we were in a twin engine.  He was a pilot himself and noted that this plane couldn't fly on one engine, so we were just doubling the chance of failure. The plane was only as airworthy as the weaker of the two.  The problem engine started running better- maybe a fuel filter problem, so we limped into the airport.  I hung around in Australia for a couple more weeks until flights back to the USA resumed.  Grateful to still be in one piece, plus as a bonus I now have a key mechanical design principle permanently etched into my brain.

-J

[oldmanjoe]

   I have to ask , how does a dog go under the ratchet . Why can`t you make 2 dogs work simultaneously.
    Do  Dogs working 180 apart helps stabilize the bridge post  ?    Are we just assembling parts or is there some reel smithing involved ?