|
|
| |
Wonder how they work? Heres the
skinny on fat reels . . .
By Ted Leeson
from Fly Rod & Reel March/April 1999
From a mechanical standpoint, a fly reel is not just a
simple machine—it’s positively primitive. For the
purposes of retrieving line, storing it and fighting
fish, using a fly reel is like riding a unicycle in the
Tour de France. But I think that’s one of the reasons we
love reels—they are a material reminder of the
self-imposed limitations at the heart of our sport that
set it a little apart from other types of fishing. But
within those limits, there’s nothing wrong with seeking
functional efficiency, and there’s the rub: The very
simplicity of a fly reel makes it difficult to improve
upon. Drag systems aside (they are optional, not
intrinsic), change comes slowly to flyreel design
because there just isn’t that much to work with.
It’s surprising, then, that in 1995 both Jon Bauer and
Ted Juracsik independently introduced (or more
accurately, “reintroduced”) a design approach—the
large-arbor reel—that offers a number of performance
advantages over conventional reels. It’s a simple idea
that applies straightforward geometry instead of complex
mechanics. In fly-fishing of course, as in all human
folly, there’s really nothing new under the sun.
Large-arbor reels quite likely pre-date us all. Hardy,
I’m told, used some version of the design in the early
part of this century, and I wouldn’t be surprised to
learn that other early reel makers tried it as well. A
more recent, and certainly more revolutionary,
version—the Swedish Loop reel—appeared in the mid 1980s.
But only in very recent years has the design really
caught on with manufacturers and anglers alike.
What, exactly, are we talking about?
The term “large-arbor reel” can be a little deceptive,
as it often refers to two separate, but related, design
approaches. Since they differ, particularly in their
angling benefits, it’s worth taking a closer look at
them both.
In its first and strictest sense, “large arbor” means
just what it says: The arbor—the core of the spool to
which the backing is attached—is larger in diameter than
that of a conventional reel. Increasing the arbor size,
with no other modifications to the spool, does one thing
and one thing only—it reduces the overall spool
capacity. Though this may not sound terribly useful, it
can have advantages, and a number of reels—discussed
below in the section, Convertibles—takes exactly this
approach.
More often, however, the term “large arbor” is used in a
second sense, as a kind of shorthand that refers to a
group of coordinated design parameters—arbor diameter,
outside spool diameter, spool width and overall reel
weight—that, properly engineered and harmonized, offer
some significant advantages.
In addition to increasing the arbor size, some reel
makers also increase the outside spool diameter and so
alter reel performance in a number of ways. First,
increasing the diameter of the spool—and thus the length
of line represented by one wrap around the
circumference—restores some of the line capacity lost by
using a large arbor. And in fact capacity is often
further increased by widening the spool, thereby adding
extra volume without further increasing spool diameter
or decreasing the arbor diameter.
Second, a large-diameter spool helps reduce coiling due
to line memory. Line pulls off the reel with fewer
corkscrews, which improves casting and handling.
Third, retrieve rate is improved, as each turn of the
reel handle picks up a greater amount of line. This
efficiency is particularly noticeable when the reel is
nearly empty. When you’re close to the bone of a
conventional spool—say, one with a 3/4" arbor—a single
turn of the reel handle picks up roughly 2 1/2" of line;
a comparable reel with a large arbor—say 1 3/4"—will
pick up 5 1/2" of line. Less, and less furious, cranking
is required to take up slack—an obvious virtue with
long-running species like bonefish, but a godsend as
well to light-line anglers who, in the interests of
balanced tackle, are often forced to use tiny reels with
abysmal retrieve rates.
Fourth, the large spool circumference is also an
advantage in the outgoing direction. As a running fish
takes line, a large-diameter spool will spin at a lower
rpm than will a small-diameter one. It’s easier to palm
a reel and control a fish when the spool is turning more
slowly. I also find large-diameter reels—with their
bigger rims a little farther from the rod grip—generally
more convenient for palming, and most large-arbor reels
are manufactured with generous palming rims.
Last, as a rule a large-arbor reel will maintain more
consistency in drag pressure as a fish takes more line.
Where drag pressure is concerned, what you set is not
always what you get. If you’ve ever stripped the backing
off your reel, you’ve probably noticed that it’s far
easier to pull line from a full spool than from one
that’s nearly empty. Similarly, as a running fish takes
line, the effective diameter of the spool (that is, the
diameter measured across the remaining line) decreases,
and the effective drag (the resistance the fish actually
experiences) increases. It’s a matter of decreasing
leverage and a corresponding increase in the force
necessary to continue pulling line from the spool. The
effects can be significant; run all the line off a 4"
standard-arbor spool, and the increase in effective drag
force can be 300 percent or more.
The key to maintaining drag consistency, then, is to
make the change in effective diameter from a full spool
to an empty one as small as possible. That is, you build
a reel with a large arbor to make a relatively shallow
spool that places the total volume of line and backing
close to the perimeter of the spool.
One advantage, by the way, that large-arbor reels do not
offer—though the idea gets repeated in conversation and
print—is lower start-up inertia. As most of us know, it
takes more force to start a reel spool turning that it
does to keep it turning. The difference between the two
levels of force is “start-up inertia,” and it cannot be
reliably correlated with spool diameter.
Large-arbor/large-spool reels have a few drawbacks. They
are, obviously, somewhat bigger and bulkier (though not
necessarily heavier) than conventional reels. They also
tend to be more expensive. Large-arbor spools can
require a significant amount of extra machining, which
drives up the cost. Third, because large-arbor spools
are often wider and shallower, it’s easier to bunch up
line on the spool during the retrieve and jam it against
the frame. You must use a finger on your rod hand to
traverse the line from side to side across the spool
face to distribute it evenly. Mark Farris, of
Waterworks, suggests you can achieve the same effect by
rotating the wrist of your rod hand from side to side as
you retrieve, which causes the line to lie uniformly
across the spool.
From a functional/mechanical standpoint (ignoring
matters of tradition, aesthetics and cost—which
admittedly is ignoring a lot), large-arbor reels with
large-diameter spools are, I think, pretty much superior
to conventional types. Virtually all the reel makers I
spoke with agreed with this assessment. Yet in making
this kind of comparison, it’s worth bearing in mind
that...
Continue
|
|
|
