Outdoor Life- 12 vintage reels that changed fishing

[Mike N]

It was probably written by a Mitchell rep.

As long as you're asking, your #2 quote is merely braggadocio, and the #3 quote is just the author's unsupported opinion. What kinds of "sources" can refute those? We did, however, show a source that refutes your own immortal words: "It lacked a full bale and the pick-up was sketchy" was part of your argument against the inclusion of the Illingworth. The over-hyped 300 had to wait for years before it could grow its own full "bale." No doubt its original finger pick-up also was "sketchy."

Great response, Steve. The fact is you have no sources to refute the fishingworld.com data.

*You wrote that the "25 million sold" claim is "merely braggadocio." No, in fact it is sales data, i.e. empirical evidence, that a certain reel "changed the way we fished."

**Which spinning reel has EVER outsold the Mitchell 300? Surely you can find a source from another manufacturer if you disagree.

In fact, Mitchellfishing.com lists the number sold as even higher:

"Since its introduction in the late 1940s, nearly 30 million Mitchell 300 reels have been sold worldwide."

[Steve]

Great response, Mike. No one is disputing the braggadocious sales report. But given the accuracy of the article's first sentence, maybe we should take the sales estimate with a grain of salt. But so what? If you're going to base your "changing fishing" list on sales reports, you have to remove Snyder, Meek & Milam, and probably Henshall-Van Antwerp and a couple of others from the list. Tommy and I are merely pointing out that your much-vaunted source is probably not very reliable. The way we fished, i.e., changed before the advent of the 300. I, for one, fished with spinning reels for decades before I ever owned a Mitchell spinning reel.
And your source's "due largely in part?" Speculative drivel.

[reelsmith.]

The lack of a level wind reel seems a major oversight.

Dean.

[Bill Sonnett]

The title of the article and the content seem a bit at odds with each other from my perspective. In my lifetime. (I'm 76) the two most influential reels, as far as changing the way most Americans fish each day, are the Zebco and the Ambassadeur 5000. The explosive popularity of each changed the fishing habits of the American public as much as the advent of the Internet or the introduction of sliced bread--LOL

[Midway Tommy D]

Mike,
Steve has addressed #s 2 & 3, in my mind, to a T. As for number #1, that comment is purely subjective. Someone else might say a simple worm gear driven spinning reel with an oscillation arm, or possibly an oscillation gear, is just as, if not more, durable than a complicated system of "8" gears and their respective attachments. It is a well known fact throughout engineering that spur gears, while strong, can be quite noisy and and susceptible to wear. All you have to do is own a Mitchell 300 to hear this whirring, grinding and chatter. It is also a well known fact that worm gear drives are quieter and smoother. So, "arguably", as Dr. Elder previously stated, someone else may have a different opinion or preference.




Now, as to the FishingWorld.com article you referenced. In my normal course of research and perusal, when I come upon an opening sentence, as in that piece, the rest of the contents become irrelevant because I stop right there and immediately head for another source with credibility.