[storlaks]

Has anyone ever calculated the cubic capacity of a Grandspey 10/11 line? i.e. using a mathematical formula how much space would this beast take up on a reel, in cubic inches.

A colleague had already calculated that an XLT would take about 6.12cubic inches...just the line, no backing.

Wonder if the Grandpsey would be approximately the same or are the profiles and volume required by these lines very different?

This is getting to scientific now, but it may help me in selecting the right reel with a suitable, not un-nessecary, amount of backing.

thanks

 

[fredaevans]

I'd hazzard a guess that the GrandSpey will

take up even more volume in a reel. The XLT and 150 yards of 30# backing was a tight fit even on the Redington AS 13-14 reel. The GrandSpey line wouldn't go entirely go on the reel so had a few feet flopping about when the rod was broken down into two sections.
fae

 

[Nooksack Mac]

When spooling a new line onto a reel, I usually put the line on first, then fill the rest of the spool with the optimum amount of backing. Then, to reverse them, I wind the backing and line off separately, usually onto a Medalist 1498 with empty spools. It takes time, but it's an easy TV-watching project, and it gets the fit right.
The 10/11 Grandspey filled so much of my AS 13/14 that I feared that even this huge reel wouldn't be enough. But when I added 35 lb. gellspun backing on top of it, I was able to put on approx. 200 yards (that's subjective, based on how long the process took and how sore my hand was when I'd finished!)

 

[Willie Gunn]

I started to work out the cubic capacity of the line by using the old greek method. I filled the bath with water then sat in the bath and started to cast the line on the water. I had a measuring jug to catch the displaced water, this would give a very accurate reading, but there were 2 major problems.
1. my casts were too long and the line kept landing outside the bath, this was never a problem with the windcutter I used before.
2. The line floated so gave an inaccurate reading.

If Simon from Rio reads this perhaps he could make a sinker for me and I will try again.
Sorry I was no help.

Malcolm

 

[fredaevans]

Doc, since you've "retired" I think you may have

a bit too much free time on your hands.


fae

 

[Bob Pauli]

Reel capacity

This is an excellent thread subject. Last year a member of this board offered the thought that describing reels by available line volume would be an excellent method of comparing one reel's capacity against another. Will that person please step forward and take credit for a good idea!

The techno-nerds among us could define a method of measuring reel dimensions to establish reel volume. This board's members must possess almost every reel in existence, so a data base could be quickly constructed.

Beau please, no more hassles like I endured with backing measurements.

 

[storlaks]

how to calculate

here's a pointer to make a simple calculation for reel capacity.

http://grapevine.abe.msstate.edu/~fto/tools/vol/cylinder.html

The height is basicly the width of the spool.

Still have the problem of calculating the actual line capacity. I've tried to do it using the dimensions of the spool on which is came on, but I guess this is not to accurate. It came out at 7.47 cubic inches, which is considerably more then the XLT, which was 6.2, so I'm told.

Would be interested to hear from anyone who has their 10/11 on a spool, knows the capacity of the spool in cubic inches (based on the above calculator) and then can measure the space taken up by the line, minus the backing of course.

Christ, this is complex.

Would be better if Rio came out with this data.

 

[BobK]

Careful, guys....

If it were easy, someone would have done it by now.

The problem is how backing (one set of problems) and line (another set of problems) "packs" and lies because of varying air space due to diameter between the layers, and softness (how "out of round" does it get in soft compression) and density.

It's why shotgun shooters go nuts when reloading. An ounce of #9 shot does NOT fit in the same volume of an ounce of 7 1/2 shot, and so it goes as the shot gets larger. Small shot "packs" better, so takes up less volume (the air space between pellets is less). That's why your reloads are subject to a weight inspection at registered target shoots.

Same problem with lines on reels. Give it up, guys, there is no "one size fits all" formula due to this problem.

I now put on line first, then backing, assure the reel is as full as I want it, then do a "double respool" to get it right - works every time!

BobK

 

[storlaks]

Fine if you already have the reel but...

if you need to puchase a "new" reel for your line and are unsure about capacity, then you still face the same problem.

I don't have the luxury of going to a tackle dealer and trying out different reels with my new line. I will buy a new reel online or via mail order.

The guidelines given by Reel Mfgs are pretty vague.

 

[Guest]

I'm not sure if I was the first to present the idea here, but I've been saying to anyone who would listen that all reels should have a volume measurement determined and clearly promoted. In reality it would tell us more than the line/backing capacity now given. Henschel reels has done this since the early '90's, but even with them the information is not on the box, just their catalogs. It wouldn't solve all the problems because of issues of air space, etc. that were pointed out a few posts ago, but it would sure help one determine that a Ross Big Game #8 does indeed have greater capacity than the Lamson Velocity #4 which became an issue on a thread a few weeks ago. I've mentioned this to many manufacturers at the Denver dealer show but most say that the average customer wouldn't know what the information meant. My response is that we have to educate them. People didn't know what WF7F meant, either, after that system replaced the old letter system back in the '60's. It didn't take long for people to catch on. Since almost no reelmaker seems interested in making this information available, I rather doubt it's going to happen any time soon.