A Reel Choice

[allan.lambert]

Given the opportunity and the right quality of fish I like to play fish on
the reel. I'm looking at the Modula large arbor disc drag and the Orvis
Rocky Mountain large arbor. Has anyone any experience of using either reel
and if so, what is the drag like? Thanks.

Allan

[W. D. Grey]

In article >, allan.lambert
> writes
>Given the opportunity and the right quality of fish I like to play fish on
>the reel. I'm looking at the Modula large arbor disc drag and the Orvis
>Rocky Mountain large arbor. Has anyone any experience of using either reel
>and if so, what is the drag like? Thanks.
>
>Allan
>
>
>

Hi Allan,

I don't wish to dampen your enthusiasm, but a reel is a device to hold
your fishing line - nothing more nothing less.

I've no idea how much you want to spend, but I'm sure that there are
plenty of excellent reels on the market for just a few quid that will
do all you want and you'll have money to spare for something else.

I have just purchased a mill end line for £4 - not as good as Cortland
444 but does the job well enough. The reel I bought to go with it is a
Shakespeare Summit which cost me £12 at the Welsh Game fair.

I usually use BFR Rimfly reels and they are only a bit more expensive.

I'm sorry if I haven't answered your question, but maybe have given you
some food for thought.
--
Bill Grey
http://www.billboy.co.uk

[W. D. Grey]

In article >, allan.lambert
> writes
>Given the opportunity and the right quality of fish I like to play fish on
>the reel. I'm looking at the Modula large arbor disc drag and the Orvis
>Rocky Mountain large arbor. Has anyone any experience of using either reel
>and if so, what is the drag like? Thanks.
>
>Allan
>
>
>

Hi Allan,

I don't wish to dampen your enthusiasm, but a reel is a device to hold
your fishing line - nothing more nothing less.

I've no idea how much you want to spend, but I'm sure that there are
plenty of excellent reels on the market for just a few quid that will
do all you want and you'll have money to spare for something else.

I have just purchased a mill end line for £4 - not as good as Cortland
444 but does the job well enough. The reel I bought to go with it is a
Shakespeare Summit which cost me £12 at the Welsh Game fair.

I usually use BFR Rimfly reels and they are only a bit more expensive.

I'm sorry if I haven't answered your question, but maybe have given you
some food for thought.
--
Bill Grey
http://www.billboy.co.uk

[John Lloyd]

In article >, allan.lambert
> writes
>Given the opportunity and the right quality of fish I like to play fish on
>the reel. I'm looking at the Modula large arbor disc drag and the Orvis
>Rocky Mountain large arbor. Has anyone any experience of using either reel
>and if so, what is the drag like? Thanks.
>
>Allan
>
>
>
Best done with a multiplier, like the old Intrepid reels (sadly no
longer available). Their rate of retrieve is far better than the large
arbor reels.
--
John Lloyd, West Midlands, UK.

[W. D. Grey]

In article >, laxhill
> writes
>I wouldn't necessarily agree with the "nothing more" bit. I mostly
>fish reservoirs. This involves long casting and if you get a take
>close in on the retrieve you can have 20+ yds of line around your
>feet. No problem with small fish but with large fish it's far safer to
>get the spare line on the reel - fast - or you are in serious risk of
>a tangle with loss of the fish. A large diameter reel is a big
>advantage. The reservoir I fish has rainbows/browns/blue trout all
>well into double figures. I wouldn't like to fish it with a small
>diameter reel. I use the "old" Dragonfly 120 reel. Conversely I fish
>the river with a small antique wooden reel that just takes a 4# line
>- just for the hell of it.

Well Keith, you have to agree that even a larger diameter reel is still
only a device to hold the fly line.

The question of what type of arbor you use is a matter of opinion, and I
can categorically say that several acquaintances of mine who fish in the
Welsh Fly Fishing team use Wide reels rather than larger arbor reels per
se. Of course the wider reels may well have larger diameter arbor
anyway. This could easily be achieved by using more backing.

If you really want to get your line in quickly why not use a multiplying
fly reel in which one turn of the handle turns the spool two an a half
times like the old Shakespeare Speedex.
--
Bill Grey
http://www.billboy.co.uk

[laxhill]

On Tue, 3 Aug 2004 20:32:44 +0100, "W. D. Grey"
> wrote:

>In article >, allan.lambert
> writes
>>Given the opportunity and the right quality of fish I like to play fish on
>>the reel. I'm looking at the Modula large arbor disc drag and the Orvis
>>Rocky Mountain large arbor. Has anyone any experience of using either reel
>>and if so, what is the drag like? Thanks.
>>
>>Allan
>>
>>
>>
>
>Hi Allan,
>
>I don't wish to dampen your enthusiasm, but a reel is a device to hold
>your fishing line - nothing more nothing less.
>
>I've no idea how much you want to spend, but I'm sure that there are
>plenty of excellent reels on the market for just a few quid that will
>do all you want and you'll have money to spare for something else.
>
>I have just purchased a mill end line for £4 - not as good as Cortland
>444 but does the job well enough. The reel I bought to go with it is a
>Shakespeare Summit which cost me £12 at the Welsh Game fair.
>
>I usually use BFR Rimfly reels and they are only a bit more expensive.
>
>I'm sorry if I haven't answered your question, but maybe have given you
>some food for thought


I wouldn't necessarily agree with the "nothing more" bit. I mostly
fish reservoirs. This involves long casting and if you get a take
close in on the retrieve you can have 20+ yds of line around your
feet. No problem with small fish but with large fish it's far safer to
get the spare line on the reel - fast - or you are in serious risk of
a tangle with loss of the fish. A large diameter reel is a big
advantage. The reservoir I fish has rainbows/browns/blue trout all
well into double figures. I wouldn't like to fish it with a small
diameter reel. I use the "old" Dragonfly 120 reel. Conversely I fish
the river with a small antique wooden reel that just takes a 4# line
- just for the hell of it.

Keith

[laxhill]

On Tue, 3 Aug 2004 20:32:44 +0100, "W. D. Grey"
> wrote:

>In article >, allan.lambert
> writes
>>Given the opportunity and the right quality of fish I like to play fish on
>>the reel. I'm looking at the Modula large arbor disc drag and the Orvis
>>Rocky Mountain large arbor. Has anyone any experience of using either reel
>>and if so, what is the drag like? Thanks.
>>
>>Allan
>>
>>
>>
>
>Hi Allan,
>
>I don't wish to dampen your enthusiasm, but a reel is a device to hold
>your fishing line - nothing more nothing less.
>
>I've no idea how much you want to spend, but I'm sure that there are
>plenty of excellent reels on the market for just a few quid that will
>do all you want and you'll have money to spare for something else.
>
>I have just purchased a mill end line for £4 - not as good as Cortland
>444 but does the job well enough. The reel I bought to go with it is a
>Shakespeare Summit which cost me £12 at the Welsh Game fair.
>
>I usually use BFR Rimfly reels and they are only a bit more expensive.
>
>I'm sorry if I haven't answered your question, but maybe have given you
>some food for thought


I wouldn't necessarily agree with the "nothing more" bit. I mostly
fish reservoirs. This involves long casting and if you get a take
close in on the retrieve you can have 20+ yds of line around your
feet. No problem with small fish but with large fish it's far safer to
get the spare line on the reel - fast - or you are in serious risk of
a tangle with loss of the fish. A large diameter reel is a big
advantage. The reservoir I fish has rainbows/browns/blue trout all
well into double figures. I wouldn't like to fish it with a small
diameter reel. I use the "old" Dragonfly 120 reel. Conversely I fish
the river with a small antique wooden reel that just takes a 4# line
- just for the hell of it.

Keith

[MichaelM]

"W. D. Grey" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, laxhill
> > writes
> >I wouldn't necessarily agree with the "nothing more" bit. I mostly
> >fish reservoirs. This involves long casting and if you get a take
> >close in on the retrieve you can have 20+ yds of line around your
> >feet. No problem with small fish but with large fish it's far safer to
> >get the spare line on the reel - fast - or you are in serious risk of
> >a tangle with loss of the fish. A large diameter reel is a big
> >advantage. The reservoir I fish has rainbows/browns/blue trout all
> >well into double figures. I wouldn't like to fish it with a small
> >diameter reel. I use the "old" Dragonfly 120 reel. Conversely I fish
> >the river with a small antique wooden reel that just takes a 4# line
> >- just for the hell of it.
>
> Well Keith, you have to agree that even a larger diameter reel is still
> only a device to hold the fly line.
>
> The question of what type of arbor you use is a matter of opinion, and I
> can categorically say that several acquaintances of mine who fish in the
> Welsh Fly Fishing team use Wide reels rather than larger arbor reels per
> se. Of course the wider reels may well have larger diameter arbor
> anyway. This could easily be achieved by using more backing.
>
> If you really want to get your line in quickly why not use a multiplying
> fly reel in which one turn of the handle turns the spool two an a half
> times like the old Shakespeare Speedex.
> --


Good advice. I have a Battenkill multiplier that gets the line back onto
the reel
tout vite. For most fish I don't bother too much with drag systems, and for
trouting
with my 3lb tippets I don't bother with drag at all. The manually applied
drag is the best for this (IMHO).

I went through a large arbor phase for trout reels, though I'm now happily
back with my Farlow's Sapphire 3 1/8". The Sapphire looks similar to a Hardy
lightweight (i.e. 30's-50's design), and uses the click pawl drag. I slacken
the drag right off, and find that this reel is plenty enough, and I like its
lightness on my 8' #3 trout rod.

[MichaelM]

"W. D. Grey" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, laxhill
> > writes
> >I wouldn't necessarily agree with the "nothing more" bit. I mostly
> >fish reservoirs. This involves long casting and if you get a take
> >close in on the retrieve you can have 20+ yds of line around your
> >feet. No problem with small fish but with large fish it's far safer to
> >get the spare line on the reel - fast - or you are in serious risk of
> >a tangle with loss of the fish. A large diameter reel is a big
> >advantage. The reservoir I fish has rainbows/browns/blue trout all
> >well into double figures. I wouldn't like to fish it with a small
> >diameter reel. I use the "old" Dragonfly 120 reel. Conversely I fish
> >the river with a small antique wooden reel that just takes a 4# line
> >- just for the hell of it.
>
> Well Keith, you have to agree that even a larger diameter reel is still
> only a device to hold the fly line.
>
> The question of what type of arbor you use is a matter of opinion, and I
> can categorically say that several acquaintances of mine who fish in the
> Welsh Fly Fishing team use Wide reels rather than larger arbor reels per
> se. Of course the wider reels may well have larger diameter arbor
> anyway. This could easily be achieved by using more backing.
>
> If you really want to get your line in quickly why not use a multiplying
> fly reel in which one turn of the handle turns the spool two an a half
> times like the old Shakespeare Speedex.
> --


Good advice. I have a Battenkill multiplier that gets the line back onto
the reel
tout vite. For most fish I don't bother too much with drag systems, and for
trouting
with my 3lb tippets I don't bother with drag at all. The manually applied
drag is the best for this (IMHO).

I went through a large arbor phase for trout reels, though I'm now happily
back with my Farlow's Sapphire 3 1/8". The Sapphire looks similar to a Hardy
lightweight (i.e. 30's-50's design), and uses the click pawl drag. I slacken
the drag right off, and find that this reel is plenty enough, and I like its
lightness on my 8' #3 trout rod.

[laxhill]

On Tue, 3 Aug 2004 22:42:51 +0100, "W. D. Grey"
> wrote:

>In article >, laxhill
> writes
>>I wouldn't necessarily agree with the "nothing more" bit. I mostly
>>fish reservoirs. This involves long casting and if you get a take
>>close in on the retrieve you can have 20+ yds of line around your
>>feet. No problem with small fish but with large fish it's far safer to
>>get the spare line on the reel - fast - or you are in serious risk of
>>a tangle with loss of the fish. A large diameter reel is a big
>>advantage. The reservoir I fish has rainbows/browns/blue trout all
>>well into double figures. I wouldn't like to fish it with a small
>>diameter reel. I use the "old" Dragonfly 120 reel. Conversely I fish
>>the river with a small antique wooden reel that just takes a 4# line
>>- just for the hell of it.
>
>Well Keith, you have to agree that even a larger diameter reel is still
>only a device to hold the fly line.
>
>The question of what type of arbor you use is a matter of opinion, and I
>can categorically say that several acquaintances of mine who fish in the
>Welsh Fly Fishing team use Wide reels rather than larger arbor reels per
>se. Of course the wider reels may well have larger diameter arbor
>anyway. This could easily be achieved by using more backing.
>
>If you really want to get your line in quickly why not use a multiplying
>fly reel in which one turn of the handle turns the spool two an a half
>times like the old Shakespeare Speedex.

"not use a multiplying" Bill - in a word - weight. I did many years
ago use the old Intrepid Gearfly reels but the gears soon wore out - I
fish a lot. I also tried a lever operated automatic reel with a large
spring inside it - Mitchell 710 weighed a "ton" and line capacity was
too small. I have had trouble with tennis elbow and less weight is an
advantage.
Welsh Fly Fishing team - ah memories, I vaguely remember we beat them
in 1994 & 1995 when I was in the England Fly Fishing Team ;-)
Reels for boat fishiing again don't have the same "needs". In
competitions you are invariably fishing for stockies which can be
hustled in and you are often short lining. You don't have as a rule
yards of spare line waiting to tangle - at least not by a fish - just
when you cast!
Keith

[laxhill]

On Tue, 3 Aug 2004 22:42:51 +0100, "W. D. Grey"
> wrote:

>In article >, laxhill
> writes
>>I wouldn't necessarily agree with the "nothing more" bit. I mostly
>>fish reservoirs. This involves long casting and if you get a take
>>close in on the retrieve you can have 20+ yds of line around your
>>feet. No problem with small fish but with large fish it's far safer to
>>get the spare line on the reel - fast - or you are in serious risk of
>>a tangle with loss of the fish. A large diameter reel is a big
>>advantage. The reservoir I fish has rainbows/browns/blue trout all
>>well into double figures. I wouldn't like to fish it with a small
>>diameter reel. I use the "old" Dragonfly 120 reel. Conversely I fish
>>the river with a small antique wooden reel that just takes a 4# line
>>- just for the hell of it.
>
>Well Keith, you have to agree that even a larger diameter reel is still
>only a device to hold the fly line.
>
>The question of what type of arbor you use is a matter of opinion, and I
>can categorically say that several acquaintances of mine who fish in the
>Welsh Fly Fishing team use Wide reels rather than larger arbor reels per
>se. Of course the wider reels may well have larger diameter arbor
>anyway. This could easily be achieved by using more backing.
>
>If you really want to get your line in quickly why not use a multiplying
>fly reel in which one turn of the handle turns the spool two an a half
>times like the old Shakespeare Speedex.

"not use a multiplying" Bill - in a word - weight. I did many years
ago use the old Intrepid Gearfly reels but the gears soon wore out - I
fish a lot. I also tried a lever operated automatic reel with a large
spring inside it - Mitchell 710 weighed a "ton" and line capacity was
too small. I have had trouble with tennis elbow and less weight is an
advantage.
Welsh Fly Fishing team - ah memories, I vaguely remember we beat them
in 1994 & 1995 when I was in the England Fly Fishing Team ;-)
Reels for boat fishiing again don't have the same "needs". In
competitions you are invariably fishing for stockies which can be
hustled in and you are often short lining. You don't have as a rule
yards of spare line waiting to tangle - at least not by a fish - just
when you cast!
Keith

[W. D. Grey]

In article >, laxhill
> writes
>"not use a multiplying" Bill - in a word - weight. I did many years
>ago use the old Intrepid Gearfly reels but the gears soon wore out - I
>fish a lot. I also tried a lever operated automatic reel with a large
>spring inside it - Mitchell 710 weighed a "ton" and line capacity was
>too small. I have had trouble with tennis elbow and less weight is an
>advantage.

Tennis elbow is hell of a nuisance to a flyfisherman - as I know to my
dismay. It took nearly a whole season to get better.

aas for the weight of the reel, I used my Speedex with a 10' - 6"
Kunnan
7/ 9 rod and it was well balanced. My main reason for giving up on the
Speedex was the mess I got into from the grease (balck stuff) when
changing spools. I wouldn't have called the Speedex particularly heavy
with a big rod though.


> Welsh Fly Fishing team - ah memories, I vaguely remember we beat them
>in 1994 & 1995 when I was in the England Fly Fishing Team ;-)

Not difficult:-) BTW did you ever get to know my old friend Mike
Matthews (now sadly deceased)



> Reels for boat fishiing again don't have the same "needs".
It is when boat fishing, I have seen the wide reels in use.


>Keith

Regards,
--
Bill Grey
http://www.billboy.co.uk

[Ian D]

On Tue, 03 Aug 2004 19:12:27 GMT, "allan.lambert"
> wrote:

>Given the opportunity and the right quality of fish I like to play fish on
>the reel. I'm looking at the Modula large arbor disc drag and the Orvis
>Rocky Mountain large arbor. Has anyone any experience of using either reel
>and if so, what is the drag like? Thanks.

I use a Modula and it's generally a decent reel, but has one annoying
fault. The drag setting doesn't remain as set for too long, but
slackens off over the course of an hour or so, probably as a result of
line being drawn off. The setting doesn't change quickly enough to
affect the playing of a fish, but it's exasperating all the same. The
drag itself has a decent range, and is smooth enough.

The spare spools for this reel were a bit of a rip-off when they first
appeared, being identical to the spools on the Orvis range, but
considerably more expensive. Prices seem to have evened out now though

I like the reel, but can't see myself buying another
In the more reasonably priced large arbour reels I much prefer the new
Greys GTX, and the Pfleuger (Shakespeare) Trion.
The GTX is a cartridge type and should be available for about the same
as a Modular. The Trion is a bit cheaper, but appears to be at least
as well built. Against this though is the extra cost of spare spools
iof you need them.

Cheers
Ian D

[laxhill]

On Wed, 4 Aug 2004 11:01:55 +0100, "W. D. Grey"
> wrote:


>
>Not difficult:-) BTW did you ever get to know my old friend Mike
>Matthews (now sadly deceased)
>
>
>
Sorry Bill - can't bring his name to mind - but that's not unusual
for me. You meet such a lot of people on competitions and I have a
terrible memory for names. I packed comps in a few years ago it became
no longer enjoyable.
Regards
Keith

[W. D. Grey]

In article >, laxhill
> writes
>>
>Sorry Bill - can't bring his name to mind - but that's not unusual
>for me. You meet such a lot of people on competitions and I have a
>terrible memory for names. I packed comps in a few years ago it became
>no longer enjoyable.
>Regards
>Keith

Mike was known to me on two fronts fishing and Indoor Bowls. I remember
he was Welsh Captain in the autumn match in Ireland. about 6 / 7 years
ago (or more maybe)
--
Bill Grey
http://www.billboy.co.uk

[laxhill]

On Wed, 4 Aug 2004 23:33:24 +0100, "W. D. Grey"
> wrote:

>In article >, laxhill
> writes
>>>
>>Sorry Bill - can't bring his name to mind - but that's not unusual
>>for me. You meet such a lot of people on competitions and I have a
>>terrible memory for names. I packed comps in a few years ago it became
>>no longer enjoyable.
>>Regards
>>Keith
>
>Mike was known to me on two fronts fishing and Indoor Bowls. I remember
>he was Welsh Captain in the autumn match in Ireland. about 6 / 7 years
>ago (or more maybe)

Just had a rummage through my old papers. Mike fished for Wales in
1994 when I did so I would have meet him if perhaps only fleetingly.
Venue was Lough Conn. Captain that year was Roy Harris. Mike was
second top rod for Wales with three fish. Roy Harris was top Welsh rod
also with three fish but a slightly heavier weight. Conditions were
very difficult - very strong winds - it was more like sea fishing!
There were many blanks throughout all the teams
regards
Keith

[laxhill]

On Wed, 4 Aug 2004 23:33:24 +0100, "W. D. Grey"
> wrote:

>In article >, laxhill
> writes
>>>
>>Sorry Bill - can't bring his name to mind - but that's not unusual
>>for me. You meet such a lot of people on competitions and I have a
>>terrible memory for names. I packed comps in a few years ago it became
>>no longer enjoyable.
>>Regards
>>Keith
>
>Mike was known to me on two fronts fishing and Indoor Bowls. I remember
>he was Welsh Captain in the autumn match in Ireland. about 6 / 7 years
>ago (or more maybe)

Just had a rummage through my old papers. Mike fished for Wales in
1994 when I did so I would have meet him if perhaps only fleetingly.
Venue was Lough Conn. Captain that year was Roy Harris. Mike was
second top rod for Wales with three fish. Roy Harris was top Welsh rod
also with three fish but a slightly heavier weight. Conditions were
very difficult - very strong winds - it was more like sea fishing!
There were many blanks throughout all the teams
regards
Keith

[W. D. Grey]

In article >, laxhill
> writes
>Just had a rummage through my old papers. Mike fished for Wales in
>1994 when I did so I would have meet him if perhaps only fleetingly.
>Venue was Lough Conn. Captain that year was Roy Harris. Mike was
>second top rod for Wales with three fish. Roy Harris was top Welsh rod
>also with three fish but a slightly heavier weight. Conditions were
>very difficult - very strong winds - it was more like sea fishing!
>There were many blanks throughout all the teams
>regards
>Keith

Even fleetingly - you were privileged to have met him, he was a great
guy.
--
Bill Grey
http://www.billboy.co.uk

[W. D. Grey]

In article >, laxhill
> writes
>Just had a rummage through my old papers. Mike fished for Wales in
>1994 when I did so I would have meet him if perhaps only fleetingly.
>Venue was Lough Conn. Captain that year was Roy Harris. Mike was
>second top rod for Wales with three fish. Roy Harris was top Welsh rod
>also with three fish but a slightly heavier weight. Conditions were
>very difficult - very strong winds - it was more like sea fishing!
>There were many blanks throughout all the teams
>regards
>Keith

Even fleetingly - you were privileged to have met him, he was a great
guy.
--
Bill Grey
http://www.billboy.co.uk