NLW Line Handling

[Paul Roberts]

How does one handle line lay with a NLW reel? Are they only for distance casting? What happens if one hooks a fish? Finger burn?

[Paul Roberts]

OK, found some info on catfish sites. Rod hand thumb on top gently guides the line. Might be tough with short handled rods though. I can see why they are AOK for saltwater fishing and distance tournament casting. Good to know as I plan out some rod builds for my vintage reels.

[Paul Roberts]

Edited:
So... I spooled up the gorgeous Meisselbach 480 I have and took it for a spin. It casts well. At first, the NLW part had me feeling I'd need three arms to fish with. One to crank, one to keep a thumb on the spool for when a fish strikes, and another to manage the incoming line wraps. But I found that I could thumb the front of the spool, which allows me to guide line wraps and be ready with the same thumb to lock down when needed. Pretty nifty. Line lays pretty easily, if not perfectly, without me having to keep my eye on it. Still, LW was a great invention for fishing purposes.

[Jim Schottenham]

Paul,
There were several inventions that dealt with this exact dilemma. For instance:

Left to right - a Bishop line winder, Pettibone's combo line winder and brake, and a Kester & Hoover line winder.
In more detail:

The Bishop


Pettibone's

Kester & Hoover
There are others that are relatively easy to find, like the Gem line winder. These make great "go-with" items for your reels, work remarkably well, and at least in my opinion, look really cool. If you have an interest in early line winders, you can read about them in our own Mr. Vernon's book Antique Fishing Reels - 2nd Edition. If you collect reels and don't have this book, you simply need it. Bishop is covered beginning on page 146, Pettibone is mentioned on page 160, and the K&H is likely too new to have been included.

[reelsmith.]

Those are awesome Jim.

Thanks for sharing them.

Dean.

[Paul Roberts]

Wow. Ingeneous. Where there's a will -and some knowledge and skills- there's a way.

[Ron Mc]

I've always preferred casting NLW, because of the cast distance advantage (which you can also read as lower effort).
Never had a problem with line stacking during a morning fishing, and doesn't take a lot of attention to address what bit of line stacking you're getting on retrieve.

The most important part is loading the reel initially with a good hand level wind.
A close intimate line lay going one way, and a wider, quicker line lay going the other:


A line winder should also be required with your braided line. After a morning on the water, you want to dry your braid so it won't mildew.
Much of the long-term corrosion we see on antique reels was caused by rotting line (the rest was caused by storing them in rotting leather cases - ok, rotting grease gets its share, also).
In addition to drying your braid, the line winder lets you restore your hand-level-wind in your working line before you head out next time.


Jim, seriously enjoyed your collection - thanks for posting photos.

[Paul Roberts]

Thanks, Ron. Very helpful. My concern has been in using direct drive reels (I have two Meisselbach's to practice with, a 480 and 581) where I need to keep my thumb on the spool as well as guide line. Having some success there, but not perfect yet.

Looks like I'm going to need to a line-winder. I used a nifty folding job for fly-lines but don't currently have one.

[kyreels]

If I was going to fish a NLW vintage reel (or non-vintage like Ron), I would certainly look for an aluminum spool. Many vintage reels had them. The older steel spools just overrun too much for my limited thumbing skills. I guess you could get used to anything, but why fight the reel?

[Ron Mc]

Hi Matt,
Between forums, I've swapped enough pm's with Paul to know he's as wacky as the rest of us - he's going to try everything until he dials in what's his.

you're absolutely correct about spool inertia and MOC. Line mass and spool arbor become a factor in the whole formula, as well.
The original BFS reel is Shakespeare Tournament 1740 - I have this one loaded with 4-1/2-lb Tournament silk, and it will fish 1/8 oz on a fast cane bait rod.

I'm sure there are some ephemera collectors who would like to scalp me for emptying that spool...

[Paul Roberts]

Thanks, Matt, and Ron. That makes sense. Interesting, and will help me understand all my reels as I take them through their paces. BTW: There's a 1740 up on ebay now, but it's going to run beyond my reel budget. I've done enough damage already.

Interestingly, the 1740 was not an expensive reel, by old catalogs. Guess there intrinsic/lasting value lies in their casting capability? In fishing though, there's more than casting involved. Appears to me that the engineers first had to get reels that would cast, lay down line, then control backlash, then control fish (drag). Retrieve speed came much later. All my old reels, and I have a bunch now, give 16ipt -spin-cast reel territory. The 1980's Shimano Bantam I have and still use regularly -a pillar framed reel- and is marked "XHS" =, which stands for Xtra High Speed. It's 5:1 and gives a nowadays modest 24ipt. Very functional for fishing purposes but lacking in speed for some techniques.

All my old reels -I'll call em "antique" reels to separate them- cast to fishable ranges. I comfortably get: ~100ft with 1/2oz, ~60ft with 3.8oz, ~40ft with 1/4oz (with 12lb Mason Nylon). Interestingly, and I suppose not surprisingly, it appears that the line drag in the air, as much as anything else, has a major effect on distance achievable as these distances are pretty consistent across reels. All are LW fishing reels of approximately the same spool size.

[jgestar]

Very functional for fishing purposes but lacking in speed for some techniques.

Two cups of coffee and a Snicker's bar and you will have all the retrieve speed you need. If you are fishing old school, slower is usually more important than faster anyway.

For a point of reference, here is a photo of a Langley Lurecast and the Shakespeare 1740. The Shakespeare is smaller, but made from mostly nickel silver rather than aluminum. As a result, the two reels both weigh about 5-1/2 oz.


Tom

[Paul Roberts]

Two cups of coffee and a Snicker's bar and you will have all the retrieve speed you need.

)

Apparently, light weight is not a new thing.

[kyreels]

1740 - Guess there intrinsic/lasting value lies in their casting capability?

In my opinion, there was no better mass produced pre-WWII casting reel for accuracy, unless you get into the BFM&Sons or Talbot or other high-end reels. With the 1744 and and 22143 predecessor to the 1740, It was the first lightweight mass-produced reel just for tournament use, for Skish and accuracy, but also good for some distance events. I use the 1744 for the club antique casting events (which I am still losing of course). I would also add that I use the braided 10 lb nylon, such as Cortland, but not the tournament silk. The old silk is still too rare. Good for displaying, but the Nylon is so much better for casting especially when wet.