Improving the modern Fixed Spool Reel

[dezza]

Makes me think you dont know how to adjust your clutch or play a fish Mr Clay, a 150lb tarpon would destroy the gears on any reel if that reel wasnt used correctly
Remind me next time we meet to show you how with my Mitchells 300s ,410s
__________________

After I had consigned my 410s and 300s to the skip, I changed to ABU Cardinal 55s. If I hadn't given them away I would most likely still be using them. I never had a problem with the ABUs, no not one and I used them not only on freshwater species up to nearly 50 lbs but occasionally for estuary fishing for things that take off with 60 to 100 yards of line at high speed.

In March this year I fished with my old mate Bill Steele. He loaned me a Cardinal 55, purchased way back when that had been through goodness how many wars. Other than a slight bail arm wobble, it coped easily with a number of Yellowfish which are the freshwater equivalents of bonefish!

Around 1987, I purchased a Shimano Sea Spin, again a far superior reel to anything that Mitchell ever made. I caught numerous estuary species with this reel as well as pike, barbel and carp. I would still be using it if I hadn't given it away ca 1994.

Seriously a lot of the Mitchell madness is due to people looking at these reels through rose tinted spectacles. In their day they might have been the best around, but not today.

---------- Post added at 23:40 ---------- Previous post was at 23:38 ----------

Among other admirers by the way of Cardinals is Tony Miles. I think he still uses them.

 

[sam vimes]

The second disadvantage with modern reels is that they are too heavy. Not a problem if the rod is sitting in rests but in holdng the rod situations, a serious disadvantage. Show me a modern reel with a spool as wide as the Mitchell 300, that's as light as the Mitchell, I'll buy it.

I'm struggling a bit with this. I recall the Mitchells as being relatively heavy. Other than the outsize baby/big pit reels pretty much every reel I own is lighter than I recall a Mitchell being. In fact, one reel I've got is bordering on too light, making rods feel a little more tip heavy than I'd like.

TWIN POWER CI4 RA

The Shimano reels that use Ci4 material in their construction are stupidly light for their size.

 

[barbelboi]

I believe the Mitchell 300 weighed in around 316grms and the 308 around 220grms.
Jerry

 

[sam vimes]

I believe the Mitchell 300 weighed in around 316grms and the 308 around 220grms.
Jerry

Jerry,
damned impressive. I don't suppose you've got the weight of the 440a "Match"(??) to hand? Was the 308 a little tiddler of a reel?

 

[barbelboi]

Jerry,
damned impressive. I don't suppose you've got the weight of the 440a "Match"(??) to hand? Was the 308 a little tiddler of a reel?

Afraid not Sam, never owned one, the 308 was classed as an ultralight spinning reel but I don't remember it it being much different in size to the 300. Afraid they would be lurking away in the depths of the loft somewhere.
Jerry

---------- Post added at 13:27 ---------- Previous post was at 13:05 ----------

Comparison pics here Sam
Jerry

VINTAGE GARCIA MITCHELL 308 And 300 Reels-L@@K---- | eBay

 

[Mark Wintle]

The Match weighs pretty much the same as the 300. The 308 is smaller, with smaller spools.

The ABU Cardinals weren't much good for light float fishing - spools too narrow.

 

[dezza]

The reels I used most of all in the 60s for light float fishing were probably my Match Aerial centre pin and my Mitchell 308.

As for weights, with line loaded on it, My Daiwa TDX 3012 weighs 225 gms as against a Mitchell 300 at 316 gms. These are for similar reels in terms of line capacity.

Oh and the Daiwa has a larger diameter spool, making for better casting performance and less line twists.

---------- Post added at 06:20 ---------- Previous post was at 06:17 ----------

Oh and I seem to remember Ray Webb landing a 20 pound pike using a Mitchell 308.

---------- Post added at 06:25 ---------- Previous post was at 06:20 ----------

The flipside is that smooth running reels suffer from intertia which can lead to overruns if the reel runs backwards, which it can, sometimes. I used to be able to tackle up with a Mitchell 300 by pulling line from the reel with a closed bail arm, backwinding in effect. Try that with a modern reel, you'll then be sorting out the mess that is an overrun.

You can't be serious! I suppose the mis-spelling of inertia is not deliberate.

 

[Morespiders]

The reels I used most of all in the 60s for light float fishing were probably my Match Aerial centre pin and my Mitchell 308.

As for weights, with line loaded on it, My Daiwa TDX 3012 weighs 225 gms as against a Mitchell 300 at 316 gms. These are for similar reels in terms of line capacity.

Oh and the Daiwa has a larger diameter spool, making for better casting performance and less line twists.

---------- Post added at 06:20 ---------- Previous post was at 06:17 ----------

Oh and I seem to remember Ray Webb landing a 20 pound pike using a Mitchell 308.

---------- Post added at 06:25 ---------- Previous post was at 06:20 ----------



You can't be serious! I suppose the mis-spelling of inertia is not deliberate.

Practising his Polish, he's gone there teaching English Mr Clay, and he doesnt use a spellchecker like you do.
Cheap shot anyway just because he's right, oh by the way, I still have two 308s

 

[dezza]

"Smooth running reels suffer from inertia".

Oh come on, stop being daft!

All matter, be it still or in motion, is subject to inertia, which is the resistance of any body to a change in its state of motion, whether that state be still or moving, and is a function of mass.

ALL matter possesses inertia.

Many modern reels are indeed very smooth running, this is because of the use of roller and ball bearings, and the type of gearing involved. These are things the early fixed spool reel did not use. Many modern FS reels use double handles which balance the running of the reel to perfection. In addition they have an "infinite" anti-reverse which possesses zero backlash. And when threading line through the rings I do one of two things. I put the anti-reverse on and slacken off the drag or put the reel on bait run if it has that facility.

Or I take off the bail arm and thread the line through the rings whilst standing up and well away from the water.

But with two piece rods I do tend to have my rod allready rigged before I reach the water. In any event, I never have a problem with my reel being too free running. To have such a problem denotes lack of understanding of the mechanical aspects of FS reels and to want a reel that is less smooth is the desire to go into a retrograde state.

Oh and I NEVER use spellcheck for forum posts.



---------- Post added at 22:54 ---------- Previous post was at 22:19 ----------

Show me a modern reel with a spool as wide as the Mitchell 300, that's as light as the Mitchell, I'll buy it.

Daiwa TDX 3012, and it's lighter by about 25%.

For my money it's the best FS reel in non-baitrunner mode available today. I would like to see this reel produced with a bait runner (Bait feeder) facility. It would make an ideal general big fish reel to use with lines up to 12 lbs and of course the commercial carp match feeder boys would love it.

 

[chub_on_the_block]

Many modern FS reels use double handles which balance the running of the reel to perfection. In addition they have an "infinite" anti-reverse which possesses zero backlash.

I wondered why these were so fashionable - presumably for the self-hooking carp fishing approach. However, to really balance things up, why not have double handles on both sides of the reel?.

 

[sam vimes]

I wondered why these were so fashionable - presumably for the self-hooking carp fishing approach. However, to really balance things up, why not have double handles on both sides of the reel?.

I think you may have got the wrong end of the stick, or I have. Double handles really pay when quiver tip fishing. When setting a delicate quivertip to the ideal tension, double handles stay where they are put as they balance each other out. Singles have a nasty habit of dropping under their own weight depending on where the end up as you apply tension. ****** all to do with self hooking and the balance on the other side of the reel don't matter a toss.

 

[dezza]

think you may have got the wrong end of the stick, or I have. Double handles really pay when quiver tip fishing. When setting a delicate quivertip to the ideal tension, double handles stay where they are put as they balance each other out. Singles have a nasty habit of dropping under their own weight depending on where the end up as you apply tension. ****** all to do with self hooking and the balance on the other side of the reel don't matter a toss.

Thank you Sam, some common sense at last.

I cannot imagine why a significant number of anglers want to handicap themselves, especially with reels. They may succeed in spite of their tackle, but how much better it would be if they would succeed because of their tackle.

 

[chub_on_the_block]

I think you may have got the wrong end of the stick, or I have. Double handles really pay when quiver tip fishing. When setting a delicate quivertip to the ideal tension, double handles stay where they are put as they balance each other out. Singles have a nasty habit of dropping under their own weight depending on where the end up as you apply tension. ****** all to do with self hooking and the balance on the other side of the reel don't matter a toss.

Thanks Sam - i take on board the quivertip point and do see this as a disadvantage of my "veteran" reel choices. I suspect that the drag felt by a running fish (pike/carp etc) would be smoother and more even with a double handled reel - hence there apparent superiority as bait runners etc. My suggestion to have double reel handles on each side of the reel is somewhat tongue in cheek. I had considered suggesting a treble handled reel for even smoother operation. However, as i dont like the look or feel of the things i will stick with my old fogey gear thanks.

---------- Post added at 04:26 ---------- Previous post was at 04:17 ----------

Thank you Sam, some common sense at last.

I cannot imagine why a significant number of anglers want to handicap themselves, especially with reels. They may succeed in spite of their tackle, but how much better it would be if they would succeed because of their tackle.

Ron - i was being tongue in cheek. However, in the scheme of things, reading the water, end tackle, feeding correctly, not using a mallet to set up camp, luck and various other things easily outweigh the advantages of using the latest reel technology or whatever fad is in vogue at the time.

 

[dezza]

the drag felt by a running fish (pike/carp etc) would be smoother and more even with a double handled reel - hence there apparent superiority as bait runners etc

The smoothness of the bait running facility has got nothing to do with whether the reel has a double handle or not. When the bait runner is working, only the spool spins.

mg:mg:mg:mg:

 

[sam vimes]

I suspect that the drag felt by a running fish (pike/carp etc) would be smoother and more even with a double handled reel - hence there apparent superiority as bait runners etc.

Nope, whatever else you may think, tongue in cheek or not, you've got the wrong idea here. Double handles may be fitted to some baitrunner type reels but they have no effect whatsoever on the baitrunner function. I also suspect that your impression of what the carp fraternity are using is behind the times too. I suspect that when you see "baitrunner" you think along these lines. However, many modern carpers (and some barbel anglers on big rivers) will be more likely to be using something along these lines. It's still has a baitrunner function, but not in the way that many think of them.

However, as i dont like the look or feel of the things i will stick with my old fogey gear thanks.

Nothing wrong with that. I was once a big fan of double handles. Now I use them for some applications but not others. I'm certainly not suggesting that you do anything other than stick to whatever you have or like. I couldn't give a monkey's what anyone else does.

 

[chub_on_the_block]

I stand corrected on that point!

Thanks

 

[Morespiders]

Ron my boy, I see on Mr Roberts Septemer blog theres pictures of you with some pasty carp, plus your trusty Mitchell 300s, can see by the look on your face you were in love with them, cant be them small carp

 

[dezza]

Some of those "carp" were in fact Vaal River Mudfish of quite a decent size. Vaal Dam carp have not changed, they are still of a small size, a good one is 10 lbs and I caught about 50 of them in March.

The fish in the landing net is a very good smallmouth yellowfish of about 5 1/2 lbs.

The reels were Mitchell 410s, fine for small and medium sized fish but pretty awful when you got stuck into something that really pulls.

But I was only in my late 20s in those pictures. These were catches made when we were just learning about the bolt rig and are historic.

 

[Morespiders]

The 300s I have must be good then Ron, use them every year on Grand Bahama with the Bonecollector shrimping for bonefish, had lots upto 12lbs on them, only trouble with them is you cant winch them in like you can with a Shimano Calcutta multiplier

 

[watatoad]

A photo of 1960's and 1970's Mitchell Reels if it works as I am not very great at putting photo's up.

View image in gallery​

---------- Post added at 17:11 ---------- Previous post was at 16:21 ----------

If anyone wants a copy of the full sized photo which can be enlarged to see details of any of the reels, I am happy to E-mail it to you just pm me with your E-mail. No problem.