Ridiculous Reel Engineering or Design

[Dave Peros]

Let me preface this with the recognition that what I consider ridiculous or over-engineering might be just right for some folks. That said, I am interested to hear what some folks have been frustrated by in reel design or simply scratched their heads over what the folks in the design/engineering department were thinking. It might not be considered a flaw since a reel might function just fine, but rather something that really wasn't necessary. Of course, feel free to add in any flaws that you might have come across. 

I'll get this started with the long, thin screw that Shimano used in many of their spinning reels to hold the rear protector or bump guard in place, the one that comes down from where the reel stand begins, sort of under the rotor. I have had these become "salt welded" in place to the point where I had to drill them out to get the rear protector or bump guard off to access side plate screws to work on the internals. 

Look forward to hearing what others think; in all honesty, I need a good b - - - -  session and a few laughs right now!

Thanks in advance for humoring me. 

[recoil]

In the "not necessary" department I wonder what Penn engineers were thinking when they included a switch on the back of the bailed Torque which let you go from manual to auto-trip bail.  This just added another place for water and sand to enter a "sealed" reel and why would anyone want to have the bail auto trip.  Auto trip leads to line loops which can cause wind knots and this on a reel that is a wind knot machine to start with.  I owned a few Torques and tried to like them, never did.

[Mike Mendez]

High end conventional reels with markings on the side like "more," "less," "strike," "preset" and so on.  A person buying that type of reel already knows how to configure and operate the reel.

 

Old Penn level winds used to have an extra pawl stored in the side plate.

 

Some older spinners used to have a plastic tab on the bail for one finger casting.  It was useless.

 

It is fashionable nowadays to only have an anti-reverse bearing and no manual anti-reverse dog.  The extra weight is minimal and I've had ARBs fail in the past.

 

Some may disagree, but I think the extra hardware to synchronize a levelwind is not necessary and takes energy away from casting.  I've used many unsynchronized baitcasters without issue.

 

I haven't noticed any difference in reeling a swept handle versus straight.  In fact, I've banged my knuckles on the star of some baitcasters with swept handles.

[puppet]

In general most japanese reels, i would consider over engineered. To be fair, it might have started with japanese design but has cascaded to most modern reels.

 

If you look at vanstaal, zeebass, avet, and the early penn designs like the 704z etc....you will find that the entire parts list may be between 1/4 to 1/2 that of shimano or diawa.

 

In short, the trend is to improve the feel and easy of the retrieve over the ease of maintenance. Really smooth retrieve, has low value in my book especially when compared with ease maintenance.  If one part goes on a shimano it can have a cascading effect on more parts.  I stopped using these modern reels as the plastic and cheap components seemed designed for obsolescence.

 

A reel should be gearing that turns a cylinder.  Essentially most fly reels have it right....hahaha.

 

How many parts do we need to wrap line around a spool?

 

 

Edited May 29 by puppet

[EricL]

I don't think there's a such thing as over engineered if it's meant to make something better. Especially if it works well.

 

However, I believes there is a too simplistic of design which becomes too unrefined, chunky, overweight. 

 

And there's a straight out bad design or finishings due to laziness which also ties in to point above.

[EricDice]

Imagine all the parts in the machines that make these parts.
 

It’s really impressive that it can be done well for some of these Japanese spinners which often come in at $100-250 for some really capable models. 

 

 

[EricDice]

But if we’re strictly speaking on head scratchers….

 

There is no real valid reason to make millions of spinners enabled for both left and right hand retrieve. It’s unnecessary and fine to have limited models with lefties in mind.
 

Besides, any time I jump on a party boat, I remember immediately to crank right handed on the boat conventional reels.  

[Dave Peros]

Thanks so far for the interesting observations. I would like to add in another of mine: the clip that is used on the non-side plate of a Daiwa reel to hold the main gear in. Apparently, it is done to keep the gears aligned and avoid having to use shims like Shimano and others do - although I think I have to look again because I believe Daiwa also might use shims on the side plate side of the drive gear. 

I agree with the points about over engineering vs. simplicity, but I have been working on a Shimano Stradic CI4+ and still can't get it to stop grinding. I have had many helpful suggestions about proper shimming; matching/new gear sets as opposed to doing something like matching an old drive gear and a new pinion, as well as making sure to use a new idler gear as well as the two new main gears; using a new oscillation gear, although that isn't any issue with the CI4+ I have since it has worm gear oscillation. Those two little shims/spacers on both ends of the worm gear are so small that you need a tweezer to place them; in fact, when I opened the package for these parts, there were both white and black shims, no no clear instructions about which to use or when to use one over another. Some of the tiny parts in a Shimano are certainly impressive when you consider the manufacturing involved, but older guys like me with challenged eyesight find some springs like those on the anti-reverse cam; the click on the roller side of the bail, etc. really tough to deal with - pun intended.

As far as the CI4+ goes, I might heed the advice of others and send it back to Shimano and let them work their magic. 

[recoil]

50 mins ago, Dave Peros said:

As far as the CI4+ goes, I might heed the advice of others and send it back to Shimano and let them work their magic. 

This is exactly what Shimano wants.  The more they over engineer, the more we over pay for service and parts!

[Mangomania]

Line rollers on spin reels with a bushing rather than bearing (original Daiwa BG) didn't require constant maintenance to keep smooth or a bearing replacement if they got dunked.

[scoobydoo]

The biggest head scratcher is 

 

WHY did Van Staal redesign the VR50 and subsequent 75 so that the foot doesn't fit reel seats that one would normally use that size reel with.....

 

Early iterations of the VR50 fit just fine....the NEW and IMPROVED versions, you have to jamb it in.  And even still it only really inserts up to the corners.

 

NOTE:

The VSX 2 50 fits as it should.

 

Fuji size 16 seats don't fit the VR50....Which is the most popular reel seat size found on inshore rods and rods that you would most commonly pair with a 2000-4000 sized spinning reel which is where the vr50 sits.

 

 

No excuse for this oversight.....

[EricL]

1 hour ago, recoil said:

This is exactly what Shimano wants.  The more they over engineer, the more we over pay for service and parts!

You pay for the design and warranty coverage legit or not, factored in.  No one makes a product for free.

[Ba Ba Buoy]

Shimano's parallel reel feet made me sell off (and swear off) Shimano for a little while. I think they ditched them all at this point, I hope so anyway. What a humongous blunder!

 

[BrianBM]

I'm not sure if it's still true, but in the moderately distant past, I felt that Shimano reels were more complex than Daiwa.

[EricL]

31 mins ago, BrianBM said:

I'm not sure if it's still true, but in the moderately distant past, I felt that Shimano reels were more complex than Daiwa.

Shimanos are still more complex. Daiwa only has a mag bearing as a special part. But everything else is the same as year 2005. Lol.

 

Daiwa doesn't even use a worm drive anymore.