Fly Fishing Forum banner
81 - 100 of 175 Posts
We don't need to, they are crap.
I bought a few reels made by them about 20/25 years ago and they're still as good as gold, they're the Pflueger Trion (big and smaller), they've never let me down and theyre still as smooth as the day I bought them.

I bought them cheap as they were being discontinued by YGA, I believe you had one for sale a while ago
they were made in S. Korea.
 
It might be 90% of the quality of a Western made item, but the cost is so low because of several factors:
1. the raw materials have been obtained by duping some thrid world country into trading their resources for some infrastructure developments, or financial loans that lock them in for years.

2. The design has been copied from someone else that paid for the R&D.

3. the labour used is forced labour, or sweat shop labour. Prisoners forced to work in factories, sleeping under the machine benches or in a dormitory next door.

Personally, while the cheap, Chinese product might appeal financially, it doesn't sit well to support the enemy who is waging an economic war against the rest of the world. Stealing our designs, then selling them at below cost to undermine Western manufacturing in a long term strategy of domination.
Well said . And let's not forget the environment . You can bet you bottom dollar ,that when a reel is made in Canada , the waste cutting fluids are recovered , the degreasing and etching baths have fume extraction and absorption, with no emissions to air and the anodising plant isn't emptied straight to drain . You can almost guarantee that the Chinese model of production which uses local subcontractors to batch process is an EHSQ nightmare . But who cares eh , it's not getting dumped in British watercourses and the end product is functional …
 
I've never spent much money on fly reels, preferring 'bang for buck' rather than bling and names. I'd rather spend money on the rod than the reel, and put the money saved towards fishing. That's my personal choice, and I can work that way as I don't fish for marlin or something that's going to strip 150m of line off the reel in 10 seconds, so a cheaper but functional drag system will do me just fine. I don't fish saltwater either, so I've no need to spend money on corrosion resistant metals, etc.

As for not buying from the far east, try and avoid it, either directly or indirectly! I recently bought a 'top-spec' Panasonic microwave and it had Made in China on the box when it arrived. So what's the point of me avoiding buying direct from China if big name international companies don't? And they'll be spending a lot more money there than I will!

I've just bought a 6' 6" Greys GR80 Streamflex rod, and that was made in South Korea; I bought a Scierra Traxion 1LW 2four click pawl CNC alloy reel to balance my new rod and that has 'made in China' on the box. Should I have sent these back and spent ÂŁ1500+ instead of ÂŁ300 on a rod and reel just to get something that wasn't made in the far east? Having said that, where does the carbon fibre come from? Or, for that matter, the bamboo if I spent ÂŁ2,000+ on a new British-built split cane rod?

I don't criticise anyone for spending a lot of money on a reel or rod, but I don't expect them to tell me I'm in the wrong for going down a more economical route. It shouldn't come as a shock to learn that not everyone can afford the likes of an Abel reel, but it may come as a shock to some to learn that not everyone actually wants one!
 
" A narrow arbour can contain more line and backing."

No. A narrow arbour will contain less line and backing. You are using ambiguous and confusing terminology. Narrow refers to the width of the spool not the diameter of the arbour.

" A small (diameter) arbour can contain more line and backing."

You are still propagating your myth that die-castings cannot be anodised. It is utter cohones, there are plenty of anodised cast aluminium wheels driving around the worlds roads.

 
Discussion starter · #88 ·
" A narrow arbour can contain more line and backing."

No. A narrow arbour will contain less line and backing. You are using ambiguous and confusing terminology. Narrow refers to the width of the spool not the diameter of the arbour.

" A small (diameter) arbour can contain more line and backing."
I'll reword so that it's clearer.
You are still propagating your myth that die-castings cannot be anodised. It is utter cohones, there are plenty of anodised cast aluminium wheels driving around the worlds roads.

I know nowt about anodising, hence my RFI for it, the comment was from an article on reel finishes. An example of an anodised die-cast reel would prove it if you have one.

I'll take your word for it atm.
 
It's quite simple, simply delete your untrue statement that castings can't be anodised - aha you seem to have done!

"Here molten aluminium is poured into moulds under pressure. " I have no expert knowledge in this area but I think it may be either/or. It's either poured or it's injected but not both.
 
You could extrapolate the section on reel volume (capacity).

It's one of my pet peeves that most manufacturers don't do it. I'm 100% sure the design engineers start out with a useable volume remit and work from there.

Vision are the only current manufacturer that I know of to give volume in cc. Leeda/BFR used to do it by stealth, that is the number represented the volume. E.g. Rimfly/Dragonfly etc 50, 60, 80 & 100. Dragonfly 120, Concept 355, 375 & 395, Magnum 140 and 200 etc

As a rough guide - based on my experience and floating lines

50cc sized reels good for WF3's & 4's.
60cc WF5's and DT3s and DT4s depending on backing requirements.
70/80's - that's a decent WF 5/6/7 capacity, also good for DT5's.
95s/100+ - WF#7-#9. Light switch lines, 18g-23g ish.
120 - heavy pike and salt lines WF#10s and above. Heavier switch lines 25-30g 33' heads.
140 - #8-#9 short to medium head Spey lines and very heavy salt #11+backing
200 - the largest DT or long belly salmon lines approx #10+

Knowing the useable volume really helps reel selection as you've already posted the drawbacks in manufacturers ratings. I have measurements for all my reels and take a vernier into tackle shops when buying.
 
Discussion starter · #92 · (Edited)
That's interesting but if volume isn't given on the reel I'm not sure it's particularly useful? Off hand, I can't think of a simple way of measuring spool volume either.

Isn't the main issue knowing how much backing to put on? I haven't found a reel that says 5-7 that won't take a #7 yet. (With the exception of an Airflo thing that was 120' long!) Generally you want to fill the reel up regardless of the need to have enough backing to let a fish run.

I'm currently pondering the requirement for 200 yards of backing on a salmon reel, I don't know any method that works other than putting the line on backwards, rewinding and then putting it back on again. (And, yes to whoever complained about that method earlier, I do know that it's not perfect either - the backing beds into the fly line. But, maybe masking tape over the fly line?)
 
You could extrapolate the section on reel volume (capacity).

It's one of my pet peeves that most manufacturers don't do it. I'm 100% sure the design engineers start out with a useable volume remit and work from there.

Vision are the only current manufacturer that I know of to give volume in cc. Leeda/BFR used to do it by stealth, that is the number represented the volume. E.g. Rimfly/Dragonfly etc 50, 60, 80 & 100. Dragonfly 120, Concept 355, 375 & 395, Magnum 140 and 200 etc

As a rough guide - based on my experience and floating lines

50cc sized reels good for WF3's & 4's.
60cc WF5's and DT3s and DT4s depending on backing requirements.
70/80's - that's a decent WF 5/6/7 capacity, also good for DT5's.
95s/100+ - WF#7-#9. Light switch lines, 18g-23g ish.
120 - heavy pike and salt lines WF#10s and above. Heavier switch lines 25-30g 33' heads.
140 - #8-#9 short to medium head Spey lines and very heavy salt #11+backing
200 - the largest DT or long belly salmon lines approx #10+

Knowing the useable volume really helps reel selection as you've already posted the drawbacks in manufacturers ratings. I have measurements for all my reels and take a vernier into tackle shops when buying.
Here's my current in use list - I've probably a dozen of so other models measured and calculated somewhere.

CCReel
48​
Piscifun sword 3/4
53​
Battenkill BBS II
55​
Dragonfly Concept 355
58​
Battenkill Disc II (current model)
62​
Uniqua 3.25
66​
Orvis Hydros SL II
70​
BBS III
79​
Battenkill Disc III (Current model)
80​
Snowbee Onyx, Prestige, Spectre Cassette 5/6*
83​
System Two 7/8L
91​
Hardy Ultralite 8/9
94​
JW young 1530
95​
Dragonfly Concept 395
100​
Snowbee Onyx, Prestige, Spectre Cassette 7/9*
101​
System Two 7/8
104​
Battenkill Disc IV (Current model)
106​
Battenkill Disc 8/9
113​
Vison Koma 7/9
116​
Battenkill mid arbor V
123​
System Two 8/9
141​
Battenkill Disc V (Current model)
149​
Piscifun Sword 9/10
150​
System Two 10/11
162​
Battenkill large arbor V
*Approx. Other reels identical spools - Stillwater DNS, Airflo switch, Maxcatch cassette (7/9), Traper cassette, Aventik cassette and many others.
 
That's interesting but if volume isn't given on the reel I'm not sure it's particularly useful? I can't think of a way of measuring spool volume either.

Isn't the main issue knowing how much backing to put on? I haven't found a real that says 5-7 that won't take a #7 yet. (With the exception of an Airflo thing that was 120' long!) Generally you want to fill the reel up regardless of the need to have enough backing to let a fish run.

I'm currently pondering the requirement for 200 yards of backing on a salmon reel, I don't know any method that works other than putting the line on backwards, rewinding and then putting it back on again. (And, yes to whoever complained about that method earlier, I do know that it's not perfect either - the backing beds into the fly line. But, maybe masking tape over the fly line?)
A Vernier can measure dimensions to calculate volume. I know If I'm buying a new reel for a particular purpose I want something in the range of X-Y and then look for something to match.

Even those manufacturers with systems such as Orvis have inconsistencies, e.g. The Battenkill MA V is 116, yet the Access MA V is 140. That's probably another 100m+ of backing! The Orvis SLII can squeeze a WF#6 as it's 66cc, the Battenkill II's cannot.

Another example - look at the difference between the BK Disc 8/9, the Ultralite 8/9 and the System Two 8/9 - it's big enough to make a duff purchase.
 
Just to completely balls up the line capacity question, as we know lines vary massively in true weights, +/- #2 some running lines can be double the thickness of others and we have lengths anywhere from 80 feet to 130 feet nowadays. Not to mention the variability with backing section, Kevlar braid can be very thin, soft Dacron, pretty thick in diameter. Add in the different permutations of reels and it’s a nightmare.
 
It would be a wonderful world if reel makers published the volume capacity of their reels, if fly line and backing makers published the volume of their products and there were standard "waste space" percentages. Who's holding their breath?
If only. What else can you purchase where capacity is important but not provided in SI units?
Experience sorts the differences in backing and line volumes, but it's all obviously deliberate, especially with reels where the design brief has to include volumes.
Maybe Sunray can do it with their lines and be a genuine first in the industry...
 
81 - 100 of 175 Posts