|
|
Location: varies | As I debate the brand,gearing of this years reel purchases, I find the "inches per crank" a bit confusing. A tranx pg with4.6:1 has 30" and a NAcl hs has 30" with 6.4:1 gearing. How is inches per turn calculated? Is the spool diameter the factor? is it calculated with a full spool of line? logic tells me the less line on the spool, the less inches per turn of the crank. the full spool would give more per turn, right?  |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1638
Location: Minnesota | You got it |
|
| |
|
Posts: 532
| +1
Once you understand IPT and crank handle length are the two biggest players in how a reel pulls in a bait you will realize gear ratio means nothing when comparing different reels.
IPT can be changed by how full your spool is, think of it as a tire. Put big tires on a car and it rolls further per revolution, or a tiny donut spare and it goes little distance per revolution. One revolution is one revolution but tire size (spool dia) changes how far it travels.
IPT is the result of gear ratio and spool dia. You can have a huge IPT with a low gear ratio and you can have a low IPT with a huge gear ratio and viseversa.
Spool diameter is also constantly changing, say you wind up and lob a cast 250' you are cranking in less IPT at the end of you cast than a when the bait is 10' from the boat. Dia in constantly changing |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1084
Location: Aurora | Uhh.. gear size can be a factor too.
Here's the Tranx vs. the Revo.
Attachments
----------------
 Tranx&Revo.JPG (39KB - 419 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 750
Location: Minneapolis, MN | Gear size and IPT work together to determine how a reel will preform. Using your examples above, both feels have an IPT of 30, but the Tranx has a lower gear ratio, which typically means it will be easier to bring baits in with then the NACL. The reverse of this is the Tranx and the Toro Winch. Both have a gear ratio of 4.6:1, but the Winch has an IPT of 22 compared to the Tranx's 30. So while they will both work well with hard pulling baits, making yourife easier, the Tranx is going to bring those baits in a lot quicker. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 532
| dami0101 - 3/12/2015 8:31 AM
Gear size and IPT work together to determine how a reel will preform. Using your examples above, both feels have an IPT of 30, but the Tranx has a lower gear ratio, which typically means it will be easier to bring baits in with then the NACL. The reverse of this is the Tranx and the Toro Winch. Both have a gear ratio of 4.6:1, but the Winch has an IPT of 22 compared to the Tranx's 30. So while they will both work well with hard pulling baits, making yourife easier, the Tranx is going to bring those baits in a lot quicker.
Gear size is negligible in the equation, and IPT of 30" requires the same input force whether the gear ratio is 1:1 or 10:1. You are doing the same amount of work ,moving the bait 30", per revolution of the handle. Gear ratio does nothing to change the force required to move that bait if the IPT is 30" on both said reels
Reason why the tranx is easier than a NACLin the given example is handle length. You have more leverage with a longer handle. Put the same length handle on a NACL that a tranx has and you will have very close to the same effort. That does not mean the NACL would be my choice for hard baits, other factors come into play, but for the effort to reel in this example is IPT and crank handle length is the same, then you will have same effort to pull the same bait |
|
| |
|
| anzomcik - 3/12/2015 8:25 AM dami0101 - 3/12/2015 8:31 AM Gear size and IPT work together to determine how a reel will preform. Using your examples above, both feels have an IPT of 30, but the Tranx has a lower gear ratio, which typically means it will be easier to bring baits in with then the NACL. The reverse of this is the Tranx and the Toro Winch. Both have a gear ratio of 4.6:1, but the Winch has an IPT of 22 compared to the Tranx's 30. So while they will both work well with hard pulling baits, making yourife easier, the Tranx is going to bring those baits in a lot quicker. Gear size is negligible in the equation, and IPT of 30" requires the same input force whether the gear ratio is 1:1 or 10:1. You are doing the same amount of work ,moving the bait 30", per revolution of the handle. Gear ratio does nothing to change the force required to move that bait if the IPT is 30" on both said reels Reason why the tranx is easier than a NACLin the given example is handle length. You have more leverage with a longer handle. Put the same length handle on a NACL that a tranx has and you will have very close to the same effort. That does not mean the NACL would be my choice for hard baits, other factors come into play, but for the effort to reel in this example is IPT and crank handle length is the same, then you will have same effort to pull the same bait it's inaccurate to minimize the role of gear ratio so much. because, physics.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 532
| M Winther, please read this line again in my post above
"Gear ratio does nothing to change the force required to move that bait if the IPT is 30"
Note the word "if". I completly understand gears and ratios and leverage.
If two different reels have the same IPT, and the same handle length the effort is the same. Because the same amount of work is being accomplished.
Please answer me this:
if you turn the handle on reel A one rev and move the bait 30" it would be any easier or harder if you turn reel B one rev and move the same bait 30" given both handle lengths are the same?
30 IPT is the result of gear ratio and spool dia. if the combination of gear ratio and spool Dia equals 30IPT as a result the gear ration in this example means nothing.
I know where you were going with the bike example (before you edited it out of your post), where that fall apart in the world of fishing reel is that spools (your example tires of the bike) are not the same dia, where your bike example they are, so that means circumference is the different.
I will agree using the same spool dia, gear ratio effects IPT, perfect example is tranx pg and tranx HG. But we are talking different reels having the same IPT, and thats why i say gear ratio doesnt matter much because the end result is the same |
|
| |
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F8y-qy9N01I
for reels with the same inches/turn:
- a lower gear ratio will be easier to turn but harder to speed up
- a higher gear ratio will be more difficult to turn but more responsive to input speed
- a longer handle will increase torque transfer for both reels, but decrease your ease of speeding it up due to greater travel distance
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 532
| M Winther, i will try again
Please answer me this:
You have 2 reels but different gear ratios both handle lengths are the same.
1.turn the handle on reel A one rev and move the bait 30"
2.turn reel B one rev and move the same bait 30"
Which reel would be easier to turn? Here is a hint...they are the same.
Show me how physics proves this wrong
Because if your saying that it takes less effort to do the same work (30 IPT) with a different gear ratio you found a way to create a perpetual motion machine. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 349
| IPT = (spool diameter)*(3.14)*(gear ratio)
Anzomcik is correct in saying 30 IPT is 30 IPT whether you get there with a large spool or high gear ratio, it's the same amount of work to be done. Also that the amount of force (not work) the angler has to put on the reel handle is dependent on the handle (lever arm) length.
The one thing that hasn't been brought up is "efficiency"... How efficiently does the reel transfer the work you put in to the bait. Efficiency is not really quantifiable in this situation but is basically dependent on how well the reel is built and the materials used to build it. The less flex and friction of internal parts, the more efficient a reel is going to be. Efficiency is the reason a 400TE > 400B > 400 Cardiff > 400 Corvalus when all of these reels have very similar IPT and handle lengths.
Generally speaking, in the muskie reel world, reels with large spools/gears and low gear ratios are more efficient than reels with small gears/spools and high gear ratios. I.E. a Tranx PG will require less force on the handle than a NACL HS even IF they have the exact same handle length and IPT. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 532
| M Winther - 3/12/2015 11:00 AM
for reels with the same inches/turn:
- a lower gear ratio will be easier to turn but harder to speed up
- a higher gear ratio will be more difficult to turn but more responsive to input speed
- a longer handle will increase torque transfer for both reels, but decrease your ease of speeding it up due to greater travel distance
#1 wrong
#2 wrong
#3 correct |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2097
|
Based on physics:
if you run or walk up a flight of stairs it is the same amount of work.
It takes more power to run up a flight of stairs than by walking. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1828
| tswoboda and anzomcik get it. I always get a kick out of people's discussions on how "easy" certain reels make the act of retrieving lures.
How much actual work you do to retrieve a lure all comes down to power transmission efficiency and reel/handle ergonomics. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2894
Location: Yahara River Chain | What is heavier a pound of nails or a pound of feathers? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1828
| muskie! nut - 3/12/2015 11:28 AM
What is heavier a pound of nails or a pound of feathers?
Which side of the equator are we talking? |
|
| |
|
| #1 wrong #2 wrong #3 correct when you think about "inches per turn" i assume you're correctly identifying it as turns of the crank and not spins of the spool.
reels with varying gear ratios also have varying spool sizes, and may accomplish similar inches/turn by different means - ie., their gear ratio. so, in real world applications, when comparing reels with the same inches/turn and different gear ratios, the difficulty to turn that crank is most often quite different. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 357
Location: Duluth, MN | Just buy the tranx already |
|
| |
|
Posts: 532
| M Winther - 3/12/2015 12:31 PM
when you think about "inches per turn" i assume you're correctly identifying it as turns of the crank and not spins of the spool.
reels with varying gear ratios also have varying spool sizes, and may accomplish similar inches/turn by different means - ie., their gear ratio. so, in real world applications, when comparing reels with the same inches/turn and different gear ratios, the difficulty to turn that crank is most often quite different.
No need to assume I have said it many times in previous posts, 1 rev of the crank handle.
You are correct differing spool dia and gear ratios can achieve same IPT, we established this with the OP first statement.
Your last statement is only true if your crank handle length is different, however if the length of the reels handle is the same the difficulty is the same regardless of ratio of gears. Crank handle length is easily changed.
So you are taking a stance that with the same IPT the reel with a lower gear ratio is easier to turn when compared to a same IPT reel with high gear ratio (same handle length ). So a 6:1 (6 turns of the spool to one turn of the handle ) is harder than a 4:1 (4 turns of spool to 1 turn of handle ), so a 1:1 ratio is even lower making it easier yet, how about .1:1 (1/10 spool rev to one crank of the handle ) At what point does the gear ratio become so easy that just tapping the crank handle with your finger the bait reels itself in with no effort? It doesnt work that way, same effort every example. Keep in mind every ratio i gave above kept the same 30 IPT.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 2687
Location: Hayward, WI | I've been in on these conversations too, and tend to share the same view as anzomcik. Others have compared gear SIZES before, claiming bigger gears pull easier, regardless of the ratio.
I'm guessing bigger gears are just more durable, and maybe smoother based on how many teeth are meshing together at 1 time. Seems a bigger gear would allow more teeth to lock together, and put less stress on each tooth since the force is more distributed. Might lead to a smoother reel, and would probably lead to a reel feeling smoother, for longer, as the teeth are less likely to get rounded or bent over.
In my mind, 30 inches per crank is 30 inches per crank. The amount of work needing to be done is the same. The only major difference in feel is handle length, though I think sometimes a smooth reel gives the perception of being easier than a gritty rough one.
It might not seem true, but I believe it burns a similar number of calories to walk a mile as it does to run a mile. Often "feels" harder to run a mile, but the amount of work needed is the same.
Tucker |
|
| |
|
Posts: 349
| curleytail - 3/12/2015 12:07 PM It might not seem true, but I believe it burns a similar number of calories to walk a mile as it does to run a mile. Often "feels" harder to run a mile, but the amount of work needed is the same. Tucker Fact: Running 1 mile burns more calories than walking 1 mile.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 325
Location: Otsego, MN | FALSE: Running or walking 1 mile burns the same number of calories. The rate at which you burn those calories is different but total calories lost will be equal. |
|
| |
|
Location: varies | well. Im looking at running a mile with walking effort in a reel. The tranx is appealing other than it seems like a VW Beetle strapped to the rod. Sure would be nice if that new ABU would be released sooner. Ill probably get a tranx . |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1000
| Anz is right in that it requires the same amount of force regardless. What he's trying to explain is that force and actual effort are different. Think of the handle as a lever, the gear is the fulcrum. The longer the handle, the less effort it takes to generate the same amount of force.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 349
| Muskers - 3/12/2015 12:39 PM FALSE: Running or walking 1 mile burns the same number of calories. The rate at which you burn those calories is different but total calories lost will be equal. In an effort to get this post as far off track as possible... search "running 1 mile vs walking 1 mile". Or were you saying that the statement you posted is false, and are actually agreeing with me? Either way here's the first 5 results... All support the fact that running burns more calories PER MILE.
http://www.runnersworld.com/weight-loss/running-v-walking-how-many-calories-will-you-burn http://www.cnn.com/2011/HEALTH/expert.q.a/09/23/run.walk.mile.jampolis/ http://www.weightwatchers.com/util/art/index_art.aspx?tabnum=1&art_id=10561 http://walking.about.com/od/calorie1/a/calorieswalkrun.htm http://www.fitday.com/fitness-articles/fitness/walking-vs-running-which-one-is-best.html
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 357
Location: Duluth, MN | And lifting burns more calories than running!  |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2097
| tswoboda - 3/12/2015 2:05 PM
Muskers - 3/12/2015 12:39 PM FALSE: Running or walking 1 mile burns the same number of calories. The rate at which you burn those calories is different but total calories lost will be equal. In an effort to get this post as far off track as possible... search "running 1 mile vs walking 1 mile". Or were you saying that the statement you posted is false, and are actually agreeing with me? Either way here's the first 5 results... All support the fact that running burns more calories PER MILE.
http://www.runnersworld.com/weight-loss/running-v-walking-how-many-calories-will-you-burn http://www.cnn.com/2011/HEALTH/expert.q.a/09/23/run.walk.mile.jampolis/ http://www.weightwatchers.com/util/art/index_art.aspx?tabnum=1&art_id=10561 http://walking.about.com/od/calorie1/a/calorieswalkrun.htm http://www.fitday.com/fitness-articles/fitness/walking-vs-running-which-one-is-best.html
Scientifically speaking you perform the same amount of joules regardless of running or walking. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2687
Location: Hayward, WI | Yikes - okay forget about my running example! I admit to not having researched that fact, and it's a probably a bad example anyway as walking/running, and reeling are two very different things.
What about gear size? Are physically larger gears only better because they are possibly more efficient, smoother, and more durable, but don't actually translate to easier reeling? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1828
| cave run legend - 3/12/2015 1:34 PM
Scientifically speaking you perform the same amount of joules regardless of running or walking.
No one's debating the amount of work performed, but the calories burned.
Running will burn more calories because of the loss of muscular efficiency when you shift from aerobic to more anaerobic exercise.
And that actually does relate to the discussion of reels. Ergonomics will make one reel "feel" easier than another if it causes your body to work more efficiently. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1828
| If this doesn't settle this discussion, then nothing will. But you guys seem to have enough mechanical/physics understanding to follow. M Winther, this is mostly for you.
Reel A:
4:1 gear ratio
30 inches/turn (of the handle)
2.387" spool diameter with line (this is the diameter it MUST be to get that 30in/turn)
2" handle (from center of drive gear to center of finger grip, arbitrarily chosen)
100% efficiency (for discussion’s sake)
Reel B:
6:1 gear ratio
30 inch/turn
1.592" spool diameter with line (again, this HAS to be the diameter to make the gear ratio result in that line retrieve rate)
3" handle
100% efficiency (for discussion’s sake)
Let’s say you want to burn a bucktail with each reel, such that the drag of the bait in the water is 3 pounds. Line tension is 3 pounds. (3 pounds is an educated guess of the resistance of some mid-sized bucktail when retrieved relatively fast)
Reel A:
3 pound line tension * 2.387 inch spool diameter / 2 = 3.581 in-lb torque on the spool (and spool gear)
3.581 in-lb * 4 (gear ratio) = 14.324 in-lb torque REQUIRED on drive gear (thus, on handle) (remember, 100% efficiency, and remember principles of conservation of power transmission)
14.324 in-lb / 2 inch handle = 7.162 lb FORCE REQUIRED ON REEL HANDLE
7.162 lb * 2 inch handle (radius) * 2 * pi = 90 inch-pounds of energy expended in one crank of the handle (this is the number we HAVE to arrive at, by the way)
Reel B:
3 pound line tension * 1.592 inch spool diameter / 2 = 2.388 in-lb torque on the spool gear
2.388 in-lb * 6 (gear ratio) = 14.328 in-lb torque on drive gear
14.328 in-lb / 3 inch handle = 4.776 lb force required on reel handle
4.776 lb * 3 inch handle * 2 * pi = 90 inch-pounds of energy expended in one crank of the handle
When you see that Reel B only requires 4.776 lb driving on the handle vs. Reel A requiring 7.162 lb driving force, you think Reel B is the “easier” reel. But you have to consider that it requires less driving force because the handle is longer. Longer handle, means longer path for full crank.
Bottom line, they each require the same amount of work (energy), assuming equal efficiency. If you want to burn a lure 5 mph, or roughly 90 inches per second, then you have to crank three revolutions per second with EACH reel. It takes the same driving torque on each reel. Thus you need the same power input for each reel.
BUT… in this case, Reel B, with the longer handle, might feel better to you, ergonomically. You’re making a larger circle with your hand/wrist/arm, and not pushing as hard tangentially through that circle of cranking motion. So, in my opinion, your body is probably going to perform this work more efficiently.
Again, you’re doing the same WORK and inputting the same POWER with the high-speed, long-handle reel, but it might feel better for your body.
Make sense?
|
|
| |
|
| Again, you’re doing the same WORK and inputting the same POWER with the high-speed, long-handle reel, but it might feel better for your body. Make sense?
you can devise a mathematical proof, yes, but it makes no practical sense to argue that gear ratio doesn't matter. gear ratio (along with other variables such as handle length and spool size) matters immensely for how it feels when i'm turning the crank. i totally get it that you geek out on the math, but a fishing reel is not something that exists on a chalkboard.
what everyone wants is a good way to predict which one will accomplish the desired task with the least amount of perceived effort. ie., give me the one that feels better in my hand every freaking time...oh yeah, that's right, it's the one with the longer handle and lower ratio...at least until i try to change the speed because then that reel becomes way less efficient and i want the one with the shorter handle and/or higher gear ratio and/or larger spool and/or the perfect combination of those three factors. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 532
| You are still not seeing that in the case of comparing two reels where IPT are the same,the gear ratio has no effect on ease of retrieve. None what so ever. I am not saying it isn't a critical part of the equation but once you figure IPT that number has real world value. If given a gear ratio and only a gear ratio it has no meaning to the ease of reeling same goes for spoil dia. That number only matters when the other is also known. Because you can have a gear ratio of 10:1 that brings in 20 IPT and a gear ratio of 2:1 that brings in 50 IPT. Same can be said on spool Dia. The number that can be used to gauge the speed of a reel is IPT. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 10
| man there is a lot of bad info in this thread. |
|
| |
|
| IPT is a measure of speed. however, speed does not adequately or fully describe the function of reel as IPT tells you relatively little about the efficiency of the machine.
ie., when i apply more force to the crank, what occurs? while the IPT remains constant, the pace of those turns increases. gear ratio relates to the "cost" of that additional pace...which shows up as "feel."
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 865
| It took me five weeks ,and four tries 0n a very,very accurate Digital scale to get these test results. So here we go and I am very proud to say that I finally have conclusive results. OK The pound of nails NOW actually weigh more than the pound of feathers. They were the same, but when rust started forming on the nails this week it actually caused them to weigh more than a pound. So a pound of nails does weigh more than a pound of feathers........For sure.... But wait what if the feathers are wet???? Oh No back to the laboratory |
|
| |
|
Posts: 532
| Jaultman
Great work on the equations.
I want to Shed some light of the value on the drive gear. Both reel A and reel B have practically the same torque value of 14.328 and 14.324 inch pounds. Pretty dang close. That value is important because that proves that the force to turn these two different gear ratio and dpool dia reels is practly equal between them. Only reason the final force was different was due to crank handle length. If the reels used same handle length the users input force would be the same.
Well done. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1084
Location: Aurora | -tyler - 3/12/2015 5:51 PM
man there is a lot of bad info in this thread.
Amen brother.. Gear size is negligible???
My gawd..
PIKEMASTER... HELP!!! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 532
| Explain more of this "cost" and "feel". I understand that IPT doesn't paint the picture of how the shape of a reel feels in one hands. Where are you going with this? This discussion was was about force to turn reels with same IPT. it seems when you realized that what you were saying could not be proven you have gone to almost opinion base debate of feel. Help me understand
Side jack explain how the size of gear is not negligible. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 10
| Sidejack - 3/12/2015 6:02 PM
-tyler - 3/12/2015 5:51 PM
man there is a lot of bad info in this thread.
Amen brother.. Gear size is negligible???
My gawd..
PIKEMASTER... HELP!!!
gear size may relate to durability but gear ratio on its own doesn't mean anything
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 90
| anzomcik - 3/12/2015 7:04 PM
Explain more of this "cost" and "feel". I understand that IPT doesn't paint the picture of how the shape of a reel feels in one hands. Where are you going with this? This discussion was was about force to turn reels with same IPT. it seems when you realized that what you were saying could not be proven you have gone to almost opinion base debate of feel. Help me understand
Side jack explain how the size of gear is not negligible.
Meaning we will generally spin said handles at the same pace, It hurts more to spin a high ratio handle at the same pace as low ratio handle with a hard pulling put attached at the other end
I think...
Gear Ratio is certainly applicable to how your hands and arms are going to feel at the end of a 12 hour day chucking tens |
|
| |
|
Posts: 532
| This whole thread is about how gear ratio in combination with dpool dia will result in how many inches of line is brought in per 1 revolution of the crank (IPT inches per turn).
If two different reels have two different gear ratio can bring in the same IPT. That is because the spool dia is different. If these two reels have the same IPT then force or "hurt" is the same. The equation at the bottom of page one proves this.
A correct statement would be a reel with a lower value of IPT requires less force to crank than one with a higher value of IPT. That is not always true when speaking about gear ratio by itself.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1901
Location: MN | anzomcik - 3/12/2015 6:55 PM
A correct statement would be a reel with a lower value of IPT requires less force to crank than one with a higher value of IPT. That is not always true when speaking about gear ratio by itself.
There you go.
|
|
| |
|
| Even with two otherwise identical reels, different amounts of required force would result from having different length crank arms. That must be included in any full discussion. The Tranx seems superior (requires less effort) to many simply because it has a longer crank arm. Suppose it takes 1 in-lb of torque to turn your reel's crank. You could do it with one pound of force at the end of a one inch long crank, or with one ounce of force at the end of a 16 inch crank. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2378
| Unless the handle on that Toro is proportionately longer than the one on the Tranx to overcome the difference in gear ratio and spool diameter it will require more force applied to the handle. I don't care about work, I am talking linear (tangential) force applied at the handle. That's the feel part of it.
Math is cool, you can prove lots of stuff that doesn't apply to the real world. The blanket statement that gear ratio doesn't matter is simply not true in the real world. Sure it doesn't matter...if I can make the handle long enough to make up for the difference, but that isn't real life in most cases is it? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2378
| A correct statement would be a reel with a lower value of IPT requires less force to crank than one with a higher value of IPT. That is not always true when speaking about gear ratio by itself. Another blanket statement that is not necessarily true. My Curado 300 pulls in 28 per turn compared to 30 for the Tranx. The Tranx is easier to reel in a double ten with for multiple reasons.
This statement is correct in some instances. Take the Tranx for example...
The PG pulls 30 per turn, and the HG pulls 47 per turn I believe. The PG requires much less force applied at the handle with the same bait than the HG does.
These two reels are identical except for...the gear ratio.
But gear ratio doesn't matter does it? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2687
Location: Hayward, WI | BALDY - 3/12/2015 8:10 PM
A correct statement would be a reel with a lower value of IPT requires less force to crank than one with a higher value of IPT. That is not always true when speaking about gear ratio by itself. Another blanket statement that is not necessarily true. My Curado 300 pulls in 28 per turn compared to 30 for the Tranx. The Tranx is easier to reel in a double ten with for multiple reasons.
This statement is correct in some instances. Take the Tranx for example...
The PG pulls 30 per turn, and the HG pulls 47 per turn I believe. The PG requires much less force applied at the handle with the same bait than the HG does.
These two reels are identical except for...the gear ratio.
But gear ratio doesn't matter does it?
Comparing two identical reels in everything but gear ratio, the higher gear ratio picks up more line per crank. The argument is that inches per crank is what makes the difference, more so than gear ratio.
I believe all else being equal, that theory is true. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2097
| BALDY - 3/12/2015 9:10 PM
A correct statement would be a reel with a lower value of IPT requires less force to crank than one with a higher value of IPT. That is not always true when speaking about gear ratio by itself. Another blanket statement that is not necessarily true. My Curado 300 pulls in 28 per turn compared to 30 for the Tranx. The Tranx is easier to reel in a double ten with for multiple reasons.
This statement is correct in some instances. Take the Tranx for example...
The PG pulls 30 per turn, and the HG pulls 47 per turn I believe. The PG requires much less force applied at the handle with the same bait than the HG does.
These two reels are identical except for...the gear ratio.
But gear ratio doesn't matter does it?
The HG actually pulls in 43" IPT with a full spool. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2378
| curleytail - 3/12/2015 8:14 PM BALDY - 3/12/2015 8:10 PM A correct statement would be a reel with a lower value of IPT requires less force to crank than one with a higher value of IPT. That is not always true when speaking about gear ratio by itself. Another blanket statement that is not necessarily true. My Curado 300 pulls in 28 per turn compared to 30 for the Tranx. The Tranx is easier to reel in a double ten with for multiple reasons.
This statement is correct in some instances. Take the Tranx for example...
The PG pulls 30 per turn, and the HG pulls 47 per turn I believe. The PG requires much less force applied at the handle with the same bait than the HG does.
These two reels are identical except for...the gear ratio.
But gear ratio doesn't matter does it? Comparing two identical reels in everything but gear ratio, the higher gear ratio picks up more line per crank. The argument is that inches per crank is what makes the difference, more so than gear ratio. I believe all else being equal, that theory is true.
That is simply not true. All things (spool size, handle length, etc) being equal the only thing that can cause the difference is gear ratio.
Gear ratio is the cause, inches per turn is the effect. Not the other way around. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 149
| BALDY - 3/12/2015 8:10 PM
A correct statement would be a reel with a lower value of IPT requires less force to crank than one with a higher value of IPT. That is not always true when speaking about gear ratio by itself. Another blanket statement that is not necessarily true. My Curado 300 pulls in 28 per turn compared to 30 for the Tranx. The Tranx is easier to reel in a double ten with for multiple reasons.
This statement is correct in some instances. Take the Tranx for example...
The PG pulls 30 per turn, and the HG pulls 47 per turn I believe. The PG requires much less force applied at the handle with the same bait than the HG does.
These two reels are identical except for...the gear ratio.
But gear ratio doesn't matter does it?
If you put the Tranx handle on the Curado, wouldn't D10s pull easier with the Curado than with the Tranx.
If you short spooled the HG to get 30" IPT, then it should feel exactly the same as PG. Gear ratio shouldn't make any difference in the feel. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 532
| It seems people conviently leave out the part "If IPT are the same" when I say gear ratio doesn't matter. Leading the audience to believe that I feel gear ratio isn't inportant. That is not the case gear ratio is important but in this discussion that started at the first post gear ratio does not matter.
I thought by now the discussion of handle length being equal had been a given. It has been brought up so much I though anyone who has read every reply would understand where that stood. But one more time for baldy. Put the same handle on your curado that your tranx has and tell me which reel is easier. Also read my post on page one. I used the tranx HG and pg already.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 532
| Six bowls you are correct in the curado and if you partly dpool a HG you can make a lessor IPT. That's why I tell everyone who ask which tranx to buy get the HG because you can make a pg from a HG but not the other way around. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 532
| Ok everyone think of this and answer this question.
Two reels tranx HG and tranx pg.
The HG is partly spooled to bring in 30 IPT
The PG is fully spooled bringing in 30 IPT.
Which reel is easier to crank? Answer they are the same. The lower gear ratio in this example did not make a difference because the spool dia was small enough to slow the IPT of the HG. That why I said gear ratio doesn't matter In this discussion.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 2687
Location: Hayward, WI | BALDY - 3/12/2015 8:17 PM
curleytail - 3/12/2015 8:14 PM BALDY - 3/12/2015 8:10 PM A correct statement would be a reel with a lower value of IPT requires less force to crank than one with a higher value of IPT. That is not always true when speaking about gear ratio by itself. Another blanket statement that is not necessarily true. My Curado 300 pulls in 28 per turn compared to 30 for the Tranx. The Tranx is easier to reel in a double ten with for multiple reasons.
This statement is correct in some instances. Take the Tranx for example...
The PG pulls 30 per turn, and the HG pulls 47 per turn I believe. The PG requires much less force applied at the handle with the same bait than the HG does.
These two reels are identical except for...the gear ratio.
But gear ratio doesn't matter does it? Comparing two identical reels in everything but gear ratio, the higher gear ratio picks up more line per crank. The argument is that inches per crank is what makes the difference, more so than gear ratio. I believe all else being equal, that theory is true. That is simply not true. All things (spool size, handle length, etc ) being equal the only thing that can cause the difference is gear ratio. Gear ratio is the cause, inches per turn is the effect. Not the other way around.
Every time this discussion comes up nobody agrees, so not sure why I jump in but:
I should have said all else being equal as far as reel efficiency and handle length, if ALL was equal, there would be nothing different to compare...
Anyway, take two reels with the same handle length. One does 20" per crank and they other 45. Which is going to pull harder?
The one with a higher IPT, and I don't care HOW the one with a higher IPT got there, whether it was a higher gear ratio or a bigger spool diameter.
The fact is, the best way to find out how easy or hard a reel is on one's body for a particular use can only be learned by actually using it. IPT and handle length all factor into it - there is not just one variable to compare any reel to another. The way the reel and handle fits an individuals hands can make a difference.
With all that said, I still believe that handle length and IPT can give a pretty good educated guess when comparing reels before buying. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1084
Location: Aurora | anzomcik - 3/12/2015 8:25 AM
Reason why the tranx is easier than a NACLin the given example is handle length. You have more leverage with a longer handle. Put the same length handle on a NACL that a tranx has and you will have very close to the same effort.
Stock Tranx & NACL power handles are about the same.
In fact, the NACL power handle has two mount holes and the outer one makes it a longer throw than the Tranx. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2687
Location: Hayward, WI | anzomcik - 3/12/2015 8:58 PM
Ok everyone think of this and answer this question.
Two reels tranx HG and tranx pg.
The HG is partly spooled to bring in 30 IPT
The PG is fully spooled bringing in 30 IPT.
Which reel is easier to crank? Answer they are the same. The lower gear ratio in this example did not make a difference because the spool dia was small enough to slow the IPT of the HG. That why I said gear ratio doesn't matter In this discussion.
Blindfolded, they will feel the same. Without the blindfold, I think some will say the HG will be harder to crank.  |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1828
| Great final example anzomcik. If there is STILL an argument concerning the ORIGINAL topic in question, then all arguers are hopeless.
M Winther I'm sorry that the very simple math that clearly proves my point is so hard for you to follow. Chalk it up to "geeking out", though, and you can feel better about your real world knowledge.
How about someone proves how gear ratio makes a difference? Again, for the thousandth time, when IPT is the same for the reels in comparison.
No one is trying to argue that gear ratio is irrelevant altogether. But with regard to the original question, it doesn't matter. |
|
| |
|
| anzomcik - 3/12/2015 8:58 PM Ok everyone think of this and answer this question. Two reels tranx HG and tranx pg. The HG is partly spooled to bring in 30 IPT The PG is fully spooled bringing in 30 IPT. Which reel is easier to crank? Answer they are the same. The lower gear ratio in this example did not make a difference because the spool dia was small enough to slow the IPT of the HG. That why I said gear ratio doesn't matter In this discussion. nice, except that if you manipulate spool diameter to counteract gear ratio in this way, then it's equally true to say that the gear ratio made ALL of the difference. it explains WHY in that situation they require equal force in spite of being a different machine. it's also true that tireless chalkboard robots aren't turning the cranks. we could make 3' long reel handles to make them easier to turn, right? but then of course they'd be impossible to turn for different reasons entirely. most people's hands are hand-sized, and most people's wrists are wrist-sized...this is what shapes the size of the handles, not a mathematical formula.
so a general guide for the real world:
- speed: look for higher ratio, larger spool, shorter handle
- ease: look for lower ratio, longer handle
- durability: look for one that says "Shimano" on the side
|
|
| |
|
| jaultman - No one is trying to argue that gear ratio is irrelevant altogether. anzomik - Once you understand IPT and crank handle length are the two biggest players in how a reel pulls in a bait you will realize gear ratio means nothing when comparing different reels.
well, that's weird.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1828
| M Winther - 3/12/2015 9:39 PM
jaultman - No one is trying to argue that gear ratio is irrelevant altogether. anzomik - Once you understand IPT and crank handle length are the two biggest players in how a reel pulls in a bait you will realize gear ratio means nothing when comparing different reels. well, that's weird.
The paragraph from which you took my sentence had another statement that you seem to keep ignoring.
The weird thing is, we're not even arguing. You keep saying the same things, agreeing with my points, and then reiterating that gear ratio matters, gear ratio matters.
OF COURSE IT DOES. That was never the whole question.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1828
| By the way, M Winther's "general guide for the real world" a couple posts up is accurate.
Still waiting for an explanation for how gear ratio changes work input WHEN IPT IS THE SAME. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8845
| The only way that gear ratios make a difference exclusively is when you're comparing different models of the same exact reel, with the same diameter gears, the same diameter spool, the same handle and the same amount of line. Take the Revo Toro series for example. Throw a double 10 with the 6.2:1, the 5.4:1 and the 4.2:1 The difference in effort required to reel that lure is certainly noticeable. Use those same reels for a pull/pause retrieve where you have to reel up slack line. Try each with a WTD lure, and try to get the cadence right. THEN tell me gear ratios don't matter. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2097
| The ipt is all different for each model. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1084
Location: Aurora | jaultman - 3/12/2015 10:04 PM
Still waiting for an explanation for how gear ratio changes work input WHEN IPT IS THE SAME.
It doesn't until you add the resistance of a bait.
Since most folks tie bait to the end of the line, reel manufacturers offer different gear ratios for the same reel with the same spool size and market & label them as "power gear" or "high speed" models.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 8845
| cave run legend - 3/12/2015 10:44 PM
The ipt is all different for each model.
It would have to be, all other things being equal.
That said, I don't see why musky reels have such narrow spools. Most of the line capacity is backing that never sees the light of day. 60 -70 yards of braid would be all you would need. One could easily thumb the spool if it were larger. I see no reason why the levelwind couldn't be set 1/2" higher without major modifications in design. That alone would increase your IPT without changing the design of the reel much. If you could tuck the reel in closer to the rod you'd eliminate the need to modify the rod guides...
I'm sure the reel manufacturers and rod manufacturers know a **** lot more than I do, but it doesn't seem like too much of a stretch to make a comfortable lightweight reel that fits on a musky rod that is better than what's out there now without weighing 16 oz and being impossible to palm. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 532
| Sidejack - 3/12/2015 11:59 PM
jaultman - 3/12/2015 10:04 PM
Still waiting for an explanation for how gear ratio changes work input WHEN IPT IS THE SAME.
It doesn't until you add the resistance of a bait.
Since most folks tie bait to the end of the line, reel manufacturers offer different gear ratios for the same reel with the same spool size and market & label them as "power gear" or "high speed" models.
Side jack it seems you are not following what is being said. Of corse if everything the same but change gear ratio IPT will change. I gave an example in my last post with the tranx models showing a HG can have the same retrieve as a PG. The people who can understand my last example understand the relationship gear ratio and spool dia. Once you have a grasp of that relationship you will know why when it is said "if you know the IPT gear ratio doesn't matter". Looking back I probably should have chose better wording like
"Once IPT is know the concern from knowing gear ratio becomes less important"
Reason for a lessened concern is because IPT is a product of gear ratio and spool dia. So IPT represents what the gears do to the spool and what the spool does to the line.
Don't worry the gears are represented but in a different number.
|
|
| |
|
Location: varies | It is fair to say you will get the same result using a tranx pg and a revo HS but with less effort using the tranx pg. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1828
| rodbender - 3/13/2015 6:49 AM
It is fair to say you will get the same result using a tranx pg and a revo HS but with less effort using the tranx pg.
If (and only if) the Tranx has a longer handle it will take less driving force. The actual work is the same, though, unless it's more efficient. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1828
| Sidejack - 3/12/2015 10:59 PM
jaultman - 3/12/2015 10:04 PM
Still waiting for an explanation for how gear ratio changes work input WHEN IPT IS THE SAME.
It doesn't until you add the resistance of a bait.
Since most folks tie bait to the end of the line, reel manufacturers offer different gear ratios for the same reel with the same spool size and market & label them as "power gear" or "high speed" models.
You don't have a clue what you're saying. You obviously haven't read the initial question. Or, you have, and just totally don't understand the concept.
I could explain it another way, but being that you haven't followed along the many examples and many proofs so far, it wouldn't do any good.
I shouldn't care that people spew nonsense, but the fact is that it affects other people's choices, and also influences others' understanding of these concepts. |
|
| |
|
Location: varies | Then why offer different gearing? Just for IPT gain? The winch is named for its slow speed and not cranking ease? |
|
| |
|
Location: Contrarian Island | so what is the best reel for double 10s? bwwwwahahhhahhaahaaha. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1828
| rodbender - 3/13/2015 7:18 AM
Then why offer different gearing? Just for IPT gain?
Exactly.
rodbender - 3/13/2015 7:18 AM
The winch is named for its slow speed and not cranking ease?
If you want to burn a double cowgirl at exactly 5 mph with all three Revo Toro size 60 reels, all spooled the same and each with the same handle:
- The winch will require the most RPM of the handle, but less driving force.
- The 5.4:1 will require more driving force than the winch, but less RPM of the handle than the winch.
- The 6.4:1 will require the least RPM of the handle, but the most driving force.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 299
| jaultman - 3/13/2015 7:40 AM
rodbender - 3/13/2015 7:18 AM
Then why offer different gearing? Just for IPT gain?
Exactly.
rodbender - 3/13/2015 7:18 AM
The winch is named for its slow speed and not cranking ease?
If you want to burn a double cowgirl at exactly 5 mph with all three Revo Toro size 60 reels, all spooled the same and each with the same handle:
- The winch will require the most RPM of the handle, but less driving force.
- The 5.4:1 will require more driving force than the winch, but less RPM of the handle than the winch.
- The 6.4:1 will require the least RPM of the handle, but the most driving force.
60 some posts and finally we have something that sums it up. I think "work" and "force" are being used incorrectly througout this discussion, but those college courses are too long ago.
The NACL power handle is actually longer than a TranX handle. The best add-on out there for a TranX HG. Reel balances better and keeps from twisting with the NACL handle being so much lighter than the standard handle. |
|
| |
|
| I shouldn't care that people spew nonsense, but the fact is that it affects other people's choices.
i should probably check the gear ratio on my potato peeler. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2687
Location: Hayward, WI | rodbender - 3/13/2015 7:18 AM
Then why offer different gearing? Just for IPT gain? The winch is named for its slow speed and not cranking ease?
CORRECT! If you were a reel manufacturer, would you rather have 3 different sets of reel bodies and 3 sets of spool diameters, or would you rather change the IPT of a reel by having everything else be the same, but only having 3 different sets of gears?
All else being equal, the gear ratio will change IPT. But, the work required boils down to IPT.
Efficiency and stuff might have something to do with it, but that's harder to prove or measure. Gear size might even have something to do with it, but then again, you could have two reels with 5.4 gears, but they are different size. If there is a difference between those two reels, it would have to do with gear size, not gear ratio.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1828
| M Winther - 3/13/2015 7:53 AM
I shouldn't care that people spew nonsense, but the fact is that it affects other people's choices. i should probably check the gear ratio on my potato peeler.
What's with you and potatoes? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1828
| NickD - 3/13/2015 7:52 AM
60 some posts and finally we have something that sums it up. I think "work" and "force" are being used incorrectly througout this discussion, but those college courses are too long ago.
Actually the original poster answered his own questions, but wanted clarification. Two posts later, he had his clarification. Then a bunch of nonsense came into play. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1084
Location: Aurora | jaultman - 3/13/2015 7:12 AM
I could explain it another way, but being that you haven't followed along the many examples and many proofs so far, it wouldn't do any good.
I shouldn't care that people spew nonsense, but the fact is that it affects other people's choices, and also influences others' understanding of these concepts.
We've all talked ourselves into a corner before but there's no sense in getting whipped up about it.
anzomik, curleytail, jaultman, if you guys didn't contradict yourselves or offer up incorrect info (see below quotes) so often you'd probably get more buy-in:
"Gear ratio does nothing to change force.."
"The Tranx handle is longer than the NACL handle.."
"..gear ratio has no effect on ease of retrieve. None what so ever. "
"No one is trying to argue that gear ratio is irrelevant altogether. But with regard to the original question, it doesn't matter."
Even the Tranx HG partly spooled & PG fully spooled example is flawed in that after the initially turn of each handle, the HG will begin building more line on it's spool, changing the IPT thus the HG will slowly become harder to crank.
Talk about nonsense.. sheesh |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1638
Location: Minnesota | Never thought it would go this long just buy the Tranx and be happy. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1828
| Sidejack - 3/13/2015 8:53 AM
jaultman - 3/13/2015 7:12 AM
I could explain it another way, but being that you haven't followed along the many examples and many proofs so far, it wouldn't do any good.
I shouldn't care that people spew nonsense, but the fact is that it affects other people's choices, and also influences others' understanding of these concepts.
We've all talked ourselves into a corner before but there's no sense in getting whipped up about it.
anzomik, curleytail, jaultman, if you guys didn't contradict yourselves or offer up incorrect info (see below quotes ) so often you'd probably get more buy-in:
"Gear ratio does nothing to change force.."
"The Tranx handle is longer than the NACL handle.."
"..gear ratio has no effect on ease of retrieve. None what so ever. "
"No one is trying to argue that gear ratio is irrelevant altogether. But with regard to the original question, it doesn't matter."
Even the Tranx HG partly spooled & PG fully spooled example is flawed in that after the initially turn of each handle, the HG will begin building more line on it's spool, changing the IPT thus the HG will slowly become harder to crank.
Talk about nonsense.. sheesh
It's easy to take partial quotes out of context to misrepresent someone's case. No self-contradiction took place there, and it was clear to see if you read fully.
Maybe someone mistook the handle lengths of those reels, I must have missed it. Good catch though!!!...
Are you a politician? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2687
Location: Hayward, WI | Sidejack - 3/13/2015 8:53 AM
jaultman - 3/13/2015 7:12 AM
I could explain it another way, but being that you haven't followed along the many examples and many proofs so far, it wouldn't do any good.
I shouldn't care that people spew nonsense, but the fact is that it affects other people's choices, and also influences others' understanding of these concepts.
We've all talked ourselves into a corner before but there's no sense in getting whipped up about it.
anzomik, curleytail, jaultman, if you guys didn't contradict yourselves or offer up incorrect info (see below quotes ) so often you'd probably get more buy-in:
"Gear ratio does nothing to change force.."
"The Tranx handle is longer than the NACL handle.."
"..gear ratio has no effect on ease of retrieve. None what so ever. "
"No one is trying to argue that gear ratio is irrelevant altogether. But with regard to the original question, it doesn't matter."
Even the Tranx HG partly spooled & PG fully spooled example is flawed in that after the initially turn of each handle, the HG will begin building more line on it's spool, changing the IPT thus the HG will slowly become harder to crank.
Talk about nonsense.. sheesh
The problem is taking those quotes out of context makes them sound incorrect, but there's no sense in getting whipped up about it.
|
|
| |
|
Location: varies | My whole point to the inquiry was to get the most speed with the least force, work, etc... sorry, didn't mean to kick the Hornets nest. I believe the tranx pg is the best choice for this combination. (Although I may be wrong).
please continue with the debate. I'm still waiting for ice out. Thanks to all. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1828
| Buy them both and try them out in the "real world" because apparently that's the only way to know how they might perform.
Also, be sure to attach "a bait" to the end of your fishing line while you are testing the reels. I was recently informed that most fishermen do this and it coincidentally, or maybe circumstantially, changes how hard it is to reel. Who knew that it would be harder to reel in a bait than just plain, practically weightless and frictionless fishing line? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 993
| this thread is excellent reading material. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1828
| rodbender - 3/13/2015 9:35 AM
My whole point to the inquiry was to get the most speed with the least force, work, etc...
If you want speed to pull a certain bait, the word you're looking for is 'power'. Power comes from... you. Not the reel.
The makeup of the reel determines what it feels like to expend that power. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 532
| Sidejack it is very easy to say we are contradicting ourself when its plain to see you do not understand the topic being discussed. Rather than trying to understand the topic and why what we are saying is correct and how it pertains to the discussion you will deflect or cherry pick the words from a quote to present them to be wrong. You may think your correct by doing this but it come across as foolish.
Also my "flawed" tranx example and your way of correcting it by saying the hg will pick up line making it harder to reel, you never mentioned that the PG will also be picking up line also making it harder to reel. I understand it will not be at the same rate of growth to the diameter. The PG will increase its dia at a rate of 2/3 of that of the HG (I am sure you figured all the math out already with how many wraps wide the spool is and how the doesnt lay perfectly level with line depending on how the line nests to itself), so you got me. I mis lead the public by not supplieing the full information.
Here is the corrected example Side Jack please tell the world how this example is not correct.
Ok everyone think of this and answer this question.
Two reels tranx HG and tranx pg.
The HG is partly spooled to bring in 30 IPT
The PG is fully spooled bringing in 30 IPT.
Holding the rod (same rod for both reels) in a vise perfectly level 60" off the ground with a 5# weight off the end of the line. Weight sitting on the floor, which reel is harder to crank the handle 1 revolution. This elimates the spool dia change, or human error of possiblly holding rods not pointing the bait causeing friction rubbing on eyelets or water in the line... any other BS that can be used to say the experiment is flawed.
By the way every example spool dia changes I said that from the beginning
Which reel is easier to crank?
Answer they are the same. The lower gear ratio in this example did not make a difference because the spool dia was small enough to slow the IPT of the HG. That why I said gear ratio doesn't matter In this discussion. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1828
| anzomcik, your example is flawed because the HG setup moved into a new gravity field so the weight changed. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 532
| Crap I forgot about those gravity fields... Oh and the handles of both reels were set at 12 noon. This is because the weight of the handle could have fatigued the person turning it and if they were set at different positions the end results would not match |
|
| |
|
Location: varies | jaultman - 3/13/2015 9:50 AM
rodbender - 3/13/2015 9:35 AM
My whole point to the inquiry was to get the most speed with the least force, work, etc...
If you want speed to pull a certain bait, the word you're looking for is 'power'. Power comes from... you. Not the reel.
The makeup of the reel determines what it feels like to expend that power.
I agree with that to a point. Look at a 500hp semi and a 500hp corvette. Both have the same power (angler) but the transmission (gearing) is vastly different. A semi can pull 40 tons (bait) with 500 hp and lower gearing with less stress on the motor (angler), while a corvette has no chance of moving 40 tons because the (gearing is different or higher). Would that motion not apply to a reels gearing ? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1084
Location: Aurora | anzomcik - 3/13/2015 10:15 AM
Here is the corrected example Side Jack please tell the world how this example is not correct.
Ok everyone think of this and answer this question.
Two reels tranx HG and tranx pg.
The HG is partly spooled to bring in 30 IPT
The PG is fully spooled bringing in 30 IPT.
Holding the rod (same rod for both reels) in a vise perfectly level 60" off the ground with a 5# weight off the end of the line. Weight sitting on the floor, which reel is harder to crank the handle 1 revolution. This elimates the spool dia change, or human error of possiblly holding rods not pointing the bait causeing friction rubbing on eyelets or water in the line... any other BS that can be used to say the experiment is flawed.
By the way every example spool dia changes I said that from the beginning
Which reel is easier to crank?
Answer they are the same. The lower gear ratio in this example did not make a difference because the spool dia was small enough to slow the IPT of the HG. That why I said gear ratio doesn't matter In this discussion.
This one's wrong too because the gear ratio of the HG's spool causes it to travel more revolutions in one crank than the PG, thus requiring more effort.
More effort = harder to crank, regardless of whether the original poster is fishing for muskies or kettle bells in their basement.
P.S. All sarcasm aside, I love you guys and I love this thread!!!
(tumblr_mf6h8c3Xry1s06yhjo1_500.jpg)
Attachments
----------------
tumblr_mf6h8c3Xry1s06yhjo1_500.jpg (70KB - 324 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1828
| rodbender - 3/13/2015 10:38 AM
I agree with that to a point. Look at a 500hp semi and a 500hp corvette. Both have the same power (angler) but the transmission (gearing) is vastly different. A semi can pull 40 tons (bait) with 500 hp and lower gearing with less stress on the motor (angler), while a corvette has no chance of moving 40 tons because the (gearing is different or higher). Would that motion not apply to a reels gearing ?
Why does the Corvette have no chance at pulling 40 tons?
Other than traction. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1828
| Let me rephrase -
In what way would the Corvette fail? What would be the evidence? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 532
| Sidejack, read the part you quoted of mine. More specifally this part
"The HG is partly spooled to bring in 30 IPT
The PG is fully spooled bringing in 30 IPT."
It move the weight the same distance for either reel, with one revolution.
So same force required to raise the weight the same distance |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1828
| rodbender - 3/13/2015 10:38 AM
Look at a 500hp semi and a 500hp corvette. Both have the same power (angler) but the transmission (gearing) is vastly different. A semi can pull 40 tons (bait) with 500 hp and lower gearing with less stress on the motor (angler), while a corvette has no chance of moving 40 tons because the (gearing is different or higher). Would that motion not apply to a reels gearing ?
Better yet:
Take your 500HP tractor/trailer, and pull that 40 ton load a quarter mile at 10 mph in first gear.
Now pull it a quarter mile at 10 mph in second gear.
Now you have two different transmissions (reel gear sets) driven by the same engine (person). No need to convolute it further comparing a Corvette with a Peterbilt.
In which case did the engine do more work?
NEITHER. In first gear the crankshaft spun at a higher RPM but output less torque. In second gear it spun at lower RPM but applied higher torque. The power was the same. The work applied was the same. Maybe it consumed more gas in one gear or the other because of efficiency losses. |
|
| |
|
Location: varies | Motor rpm's would get too high due to the transmission gearing. More effort to the motor (angler)... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1828
| rodbender - 3/13/2015 11:32 AM
Motor rpm's would get too high due to the transmission gearing. More effort to the motor (angler)...
If all that "effort" means to you is rotational speed, then sure.
If you think that lowest RPM means lowest effort, then get the highest gear ratio with the biggest spool you can find. |
|
| |
|
Location: varies | I see. Thanks. Now...why would anyone buy a pg over an hg? Is it ignorance ( as in my case), marketing bs? I see no benefit to a pg if the same work is required. It's easy to slow a reel vs. speeding itup. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1828
| rodbender - 3/13/2015 12:08 PM
I see. Thanks. Now...why would anyone buy a pg over an hg? Is it ignorance ( as in my case), marketing bs? I see no benefit to a pg if the same work is required. It's easy to slow a reel vs. speeding itup.
For different scenarios. The HG is so freakin fast that you feel like you're not even moving the handle when you're trying to slow retrieve a hawg wobbler (for example).
Also, if you plan to throw really hard pulling baits, like #13 blades, at a good pace, then you might prefer the feel of faster cranking, less force (the PG). Whereas with the HG, sure, you won't be cranking as fast (to get the same bucktail speed), but the force you apply is higher than with the PG. |
|
| |
|
Location: varies | I'm just gonna have to get em both Then dang it!
I applaud the company that comes up with a "quick change" gear set one could just pop in like a cartridge |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2687
Location: Hayward, WI | jaultman - 3/13/2015 12:16 PM
rodbender - 3/13/2015 12:08 PM
I see. Thanks. Now...why would anyone buy a pg over an hg? Is it ignorance ( as in my case), marketing bs? I see no benefit to a pg if the same work is required. It's easy to slow a reel vs. speeding itup.
For different scenarios. The HG is so freakin fast that you feel like you're not even moving the handle when you're trying to slow retrieve a hawg wobbler (for example ).
Also, if you plan to throw really hard pulling baits, like #13 blades, at a good pace, then you might prefer the feel of faster cranking, less force (the PG ). Whereas with the HG, sure, you won't be cranking as fast (to get the same bucktail speed ), but the force you apply is higher than with the PG.
I agree, it's kind of like riding a 10 speed bike. A good rider selects a gear that lets them pedal around 90 cycles per minute. A much slower cadence in a high gear might move them at the same speed, but is harder to do for long periods of time due to the force on their legs. Dropping into a low gear and peddling at 170 cycles per minute to keep the same speed is probably not even possible, but is certainly not efficient physically.
Or, trying to reel a super fast reel slowly just feels painfully slow to me. On the other hand, taking something like a Winch and trying to burn bucktails with it will really wear your arm out because we're not operating efficiently as an angler.
I prefer to reel at roughly the same pace, within a range, and would rather use a fast reel to go really fast, and a slower reel to do the slow to moderate pace stuff. Kind of like golfers have the same swing but choose different clubs based on the application (or so I'm told, I am NOT a golfer).
Tucker |
|
| |
|
Posts: 532
| Or just don't fill the spool completely of a HG. Find your own sweet spot |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1901
Location: MN | rodbender - 3/13/2015 12:24 PM
I'm just gonna have to get em both Then dang it!
I applaud the company that comes up with a "quick change" gear set one could just pop in like a cartridge
Avet? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1084
Location: Aurora | anzomcik - 3/13/2015 11:08 AM
Sidejack, read the part you quoted of mine. More specifally this part
"The HG is partly spooled to bring in 30 IPT
The PG is fully spooled bringing in 30 IPT."
It move the weight the same distance for either reel, with one revolution.
So same force required to raise the weight the same distance
Wait, so are you including your original statement of "which reel is harder to crank the handle 1 revolution" this time? If so, I'm still saying the HG would be harder to crank and would lift the weight higher from the ground because of the higher gear ratio.
Are you talking about revolutions of the spools now?
Man.. I think this is why supervisors often joke about having to shoot the engineers and get on with production. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 815
Location: Waukee, IA | How is this so difficult to understand. There are literally only 2 factors that affect line retrieve speed (spool radius and gear ratio) and two that affect perceived resistance (handle length and line retrieve speed). Gear size really only makes a difference in how long it will last under different load. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2687
Location: Hayward, WI | Sidejack - 3/13/2015 2:04 PM
anzomcik - 3/13/2015 11:08 AM
Sidejack, read the part you quoted of mine. More specifally this part
"The HG is partly spooled to bring in 30 IPT
The PG is fully spooled bringing in 30 IPT."
It move the weight the same distance for either reel, with one revolution.
So same force required to raise the weight the same distance
Wait, so are you including your original statement of "which reel is harder to crank the handle 1 revolution" this time? If so, I'm still saying the HG would be harder to crank and would lift the weight higher from the ground because of the higher gear ratio.
Are you talking about revolutions of the spools now?
Man.. I think this is why supervisors often joke about having to shoot the engineers and get on with production.
You would be correct if the two reels are fully spooled. Re-read the part about having them spooled so each brings in 30 inches per crank and see what you think.
Sometimes the engineers probably wish the supervisors would actually read the directions. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 532
| Side jack Holy crap man go back to page 3 and read my question again. In fact read it three time. I do not understand how you are missing the mark so badly. Only explanation is like curly tail said you must not be reading what is wrote. So please for the sake of my sanity read that post again and think about it then respond to what was written. Don't add stuff that was not written don't ingore a part to make it be incorrect because what was written is correct.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 532
| Never mind on going to page three. I copied and will paste it below.
Here is the corrected example Side Jack please tell the world how this example is not correct.
Ok everyone think of this and answer this question.
Two reels tranx HG and tranx pg.
The HG is partly spooled to bring in 30 IPT
The PG is fully spooled bringing in 30 IPT.
Holding the rod (same rod for both reels) in a vise perfectly level 60" off the ground with a 5# weight off the end of the line. Weight sitting on the floor, which reel is harder to crank the handle 1 revolution. This elimates the spool dia change, or human error of possiblly holding rods not pointing the bait causeing friction rubbing on eyelets or water in the line... any other BS that can be used to say the experiment is flawed.
By the way every example spool dia changes I said that from the beginning
Which reel is easier to crank?
Answer they are the same. The lower gear ratio in this example did not make a difference because the spool dia was small enough to slow the IPT of the HG. That why I said gear ratio doesn't matter In this discussion. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1084
Location: Aurora | curleytail - 3/13/2015 2:19 PM
Sometimes the engineers probably wish the supervisors would actually read the directions.
Hahaha! That's the machine operator's job.
Most supers can't read. |
|
| |
|
Location: varies | Propster - 3/13/2015 1:49 PM
rodbender - 3/13/2015 12:24 PM
I'm just gonna have to get em both Then dang it!
I applaud the company that comes up with a "quick change" gear set one could just pop in like a cartridge
Avet?
That was on the table as well as an accurate with long crank but prefer a level wind. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1100
| I love this thread :D
Anzomcik keep trying it might work. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 121
Location: Forest Lake, MN & Bemidji, MN | Propster - 3/13/2015 1:49 PM
rodbender - 3/13/2015 12:24 PM
I'm just gonna have to get em both Then dang it!
I applaud the company that comes up with a "quick change" gear set one could just pop in like a cartridge
Avet?
That was on the table as well as an accurate with long crank but prefer a level wind.
You should hold an Avet sxj raptor if you were considering a two speed reel. The profile is smaller than a calcutta D for a round reel and you can get either 39" or 24" inches per crank depending on which gear you are using. 3" power handle standard. Non-levelwind is not an issue, the spool is very narrow and tall so line capacity is good despite the narrow spool. Made to handle fish that will outfight a muskie anyday. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1901
Location: MN | But, but, but.... but it just feels different! In my mind anyway it does |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1100
| Gear ratio :D |
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert | It's very obvious why trolling passed in N. Wisconsin..... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 149
| Sidejack - 3/13/2015 8:53 AM
jaultman - 3/13/2015 7:12 AM
I could explain it another way, but being that you haven't followed along the many examples and many proofs so far, it wouldn't do any good.
I shouldn't care that people spew nonsense, but the fact is that it affects other people's choices, and also influences others' understanding of these concepts.
We've all talked ourselves into a corner before but there's no sense in getting whipped up about it.
anzomik, curleytail, jaultman, if you guys didn't contradict yourselves or offer up incorrect info (see below quotes ) so often you'd probably get more buy-in:
"Gear ratio does nothing to change force.."
"The Tranx handle is longer than the NACL handle.."
"..gear ratio has no effect on ease of retrieve. None what so ever. "
"No one is trying to argue that gear ratio is irrelevant altogether. But with regard to the original question, it doesn't matter."
Even the Tranx HG partly spooled & PG fully spooled example is flawed in that after the initially turn of each handle, the HG will begin building more line on it's spool, changing the IPT thus the HG will slowly become harder to crank.
Talk about nonsense.. sheesh
A partially filled HG would be easier to turn on the same length cast. Your IPT would go down because the spool size would shrink more on the smaller spool. The first turn on an empty HG is ~13ipt. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 45
| Never argue with a fool. Sombody passing by won't know who's who. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 531
| So suppose the spools are both filled to capacity on a tranx hg and pg... Wouldn't the drag or resistance of the lure being retrieved then have an impact on the ammount of force required to turn the handle one turn? The IPT would differ due to full spools on each. Then wouldn't the pg take less force to retrieve a super model than the hg due to the lower more "powerful" gear ratio? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1100
| That's right. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2097
| Musky, full spool hg is 43", full spool pg is 30". Thus the 30" is easier.
Like the winch is 22", 5:4:1 is mid twenty" and 6:4:1 is low 30". The 22" will be easiest. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2097
| Pointerpride102 - 3/13/2015 5:38 PM
It's very obvious why trolling passed in N. Wisconsin.....
Obviously you don't understand either.
http://muskie.outdoorsfirst.com/board/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=10...
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 16632
Location: The desert |
Could you please show me where I claimed I did understand it? I'd sure like to see it. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 531
| Cave run legend- I thought so, having both pg and hg tranx, the pg is the way to go when using super models and cowgirls for sure. |
|
| |
