Why Magnetic Braking System Than Centrifugal Braking On BFS reel?

[bulldog1935]

Easy. 

Light lures don't create enough start-up jerk to need centrifugal. 

The only backlash is Wind Backlash, where linear mag brake shines. 

I removed the centrifugal from my 1500C, and replaced it with a spacer. 

Only need 2 magnets in the Avail mag brake. 

 

I've said before, if Shimano could use Daiwa's MagForce/SV patents, they would. 

Shimano has taken the SVS approach, trying to make a variable centrifugal brake that essentially disappears during mid cast - this is exactly what Mag Force does - acts like a centrifugal brake at start-up (if forces are high enough) and returns to linear mag. 

Roro-X spools for Daiwa eliminate the SV function, and are only linear mag brake. 

[ska4fun]

I disagree. Lighter lures can create momentum to start centrifugal braking, usually by moving the blocks out of the spool axis, without attriction with the braking plate, shifting angular momentum. This is the physics behind the Pixy SPR centrifugal brakes, and works for the older VBS-like brakes from Abu and Shimano.

[dodgeguy]

On 4/1/2022 at 12:13 PM, Delaware Valley Tackle said:

Personally I don’t get the accuracy claims of bait casting vs spinning. I don’t have any problem hitting targets with my spinning tackle. If you’re casting a super light bait, why would you prefer a brake system that exerts constant affect over one that “shuts off” (which is over stated)? I can tune a centrifugal brake reel to startup and spin noticeably better than mag brake reels. It’s all opinion and personal preference act to end of the day. 

I so agree with you on the centrifugal brakes. Especially those with a dial on the side.

[Tatulatard]

1 hour ago, ska4fun said:

 

I disagree. Lighter lures can create momentum to start centrifugal braking, usually by moving the blocks out of the spool axis, without attriction with the braking plate, shifting angular momentum. This is the physics behind the Pixy SPR centrifugal brakes, and works for the older VBS-like brakes from Abu and Shimano.

Yes but some baits like the really UL trout stuff don't cast well and slow very quickly which can be difficult to control with a centrifugal spool.  Ever wad up a sheet of paper into a tight ball and throw it as hard as you can?  It'll move fast for a bit when hit a wall and float down.  The heavier bfs baits like ned rigs cast like little darts and are fine with centrifugal spools.  It seems like once you step down to the trout world is where magnetics are most common with the lightest avil spools requiring magnetic conversion in shimano reels and shimano making later aldes a non linear magnetic.  For bass use centrifugal is just fine and I actually prefer it unless I am skipping.

[bulldog1935]

I've built and set up enough reels to know.  Removed centrifugal when it was a deficit, though more often dialing in shoes for max lure weight.   You tune mag brakes at the light end, and you tune centrifugal at the heavy end. 

When you need centrifugal is when the spool and line mass has inertia at start up - e.g., 1500C with loaded stock spool - but the friction is still creating brakes when it's no longer needed.  However, the heavy 30-y-o spool is also off topic for this thread. 

With the old spool it casts like an old Ambassadeur, and that's how you set it up.  With a BFS spool, it casts like a BFS reel, and that's how you set it up. 

I'm also a licensed professional engineer and a continuum mechanics weenie. 

I was casting weightless rigs on Ambassadeur 40 years ago, and could double anyone's spinning cast with the same light weight by making a spiral cast - a centrifugal cast is completely without jerk, and can easily get the 20% higher release speed - if the Ambassadeur centrifugal was engaging, the cast wouldn't go as far.  As the cast is going to overhead, you're already feeding line with your thumb, so the spool doesn't accelerate from zero at release.  It's just like a trebuchet, but it's a cast you can only make from the corner of a dock or the corner of a boat, but it's also a cast you don't need with a modern low inertia spool. 

Let's cast toe to toe. 

 

The snook was caught on a 2.8-g plug imitating winter glass minnows, and cast on Roro-X spool. That night, I was easily casting the lure 130' (across the light at the next dock - my buddy wasn't able to get his UL over there), I can duplicate that distance every cast in my back acre. 

[QUAKEnSHAKE]

On 4/5/2022 at 6:09 AM, desmobob said:

Lighter spools are essential for BFS but lighter spools are better for all bait casters, right?  It's a good trend.

Not too sure for "all" reels. A very light spool might give up strength so a set-up for frogs and 60# line might have issues. Some light spools are said to not be able to use mono/fc line cause the line will swell tighten on the spool and maybe deform it. The roro x spool I bought recently is lure rated .5-12 grams a little under 7/16 max.

 

posted by JohnG tackletour from hedgehog studios. The last few sentences its mentioned.

[Tatulatard]

2 hours ago, bulldog1935 said:

I've built and set up enough reels to know.  Removed centrifugal when it was a deficit, though more often dialing in shoes for max lure weight.   You tune mag brakes at the light end, and you tune centrifugal at the heavy end. 

When you need centrifugal is when the spool and line mass has inertia at start up - e.g., 1500C with loaded stock spool - but the friction is still creating brakes when it's no longer needed.  However, the heavy 30-y-o spool is also off topic for this thread. 

I'm also a licensed professional engineer and a continuum mechanics weenie. 

I was casting weightless rigs on Ambassadeur 40 years ago, and could double anyone's spinning cast with the same light weight by making a spiral cast - a centrifugal cast is completely without jerk, and can easily get the 20% higher release speed - if the Ambassadeur centrifugal was engaging, the cast wouldn't go as far.  As the cast is going to overhead, you're already feeding line with your thumb, so the spool doesn't accelerate from zero at release.  It's just like a trebuchet, but it's a cast you can only make from the corner of a dock or the corner of a boat, but it's also a cast you don't need with a modern low inertia spool. 

Let's cast toe to toe. 

 

The snook was caught on a 2.8-g plug imitating winter glass minnows, and cast on Roro-X spool. That night, I was easily casting the lure 130' (across the light at the next dock - my buddy wasn't able to get his UL over there), I can duplicate that distance every cast in my back acre. 

I find that my linear magnetic spools cast shorter than my non linear because if I distance cast "with a jerk" the magnetics will over brake at the end of the cast.  I cast without the jerk in a smooth cast with lower magnetic settings but it doesn't go any further.  It just goes the same distance with less effort.  When I jerk cast on my centrifugal I get considerably more distance.  This is with heaver 1/4 oz and up baits.  I do prefer the smooth and consistent braking of linear magnetic with under 1/4 oz though. 

 

I wonder how much of your preference for magnetic reels is due to using really long salt rods and associated casting techniques?  With a 7' bass rod i think a snapping "jerk cast" is a necessity for max distance and is the norm.  I don't think bass guys are doing to be doing surf style casting or spiral casting with your average bass rod.  I did a spiral throw once on a 7'6" rod I had with a magnetic reel and it actually did really well for distance.  I remember trying a normal (jerk cast) cast and that long rod did not like it so I can definitely see where you are coming from with a preference for linear magnetic reels paired to long rods.

[bulldog1935]

horse hockey - preferences and bad casting casting habits aren't part of the discussion. 

It's about optimizing reels for casting weight. 

This rod gets the Ray's Studio SV spool so it can fish the 5/8 oz, which it casts with aplomb - the fast tip on this rod is anything but goosey.  Even with the Much shorter rod and 2-gram-heavier spool, this casts 3 g beyond 120', and casts heavier weights better than the Roro-X spool.  At least part of that is casting 3 g doesn't move the SV moving rotor.  Whatever energy you don't have to remove with brakes to prevent backlash goes into longer cast distance. 

 

best skipping rod I've ever used, with reverse spiral cast, along with the reel I built for it. 

The internal mag brake is set to cast 3 g, and two centrifugal shoes is all it needs for 1/2 oz and more. 

[Tatulatard]

43 minutes ago, bulldog1935 said:

This rod gets the Ray's Studio SV spool so it can fish the 5/8 oz, which it casts with aplomb - the fast tip on this rod is anything but goosey.  Even with the Much shorter rod and 2-gram-heavier spool, this casts 3 g beyond 120', and casts heavier weights better than the Roro-X spool.  At least part of that is casting 3 g doesn't move the SV moving rotor.

So your Ray's non linear spool beats out the fixed inductor spool in distance with heavier baits.  Makes sense and is consistent with what others report as well. I do think the brake cup will activate on a cast even with 3 grams.  You can flick those spools without line and see the two ramps separate.  If it will move on a spool flick then it will move on a cast unless that cast is super low energy.  I've had a few of those Ray's spools. I like them for over 1/8 oz and up to 3/8 max.  Beyond 3/8 oz I'm spooling them of line on the cast.  I like the way they cast and actually have one of the brake cups on order to swap over to a tatula sv spool to free it up I like the way the Ray's cast so much.  

[bulldog1935]

I also use Ray's Studio SV spool full time on my salt ML. 

fishing opposite sides of a tide pass, casting 1/8 oz, I have to thumb this reel to keep it out of my friends. 

It won't cast 3 g toe to toe with Roro-X, and it won't start-up backlash pushing 2 ounces.  Quite honestly, there is no better way to fish braid. 

 

will the SV spool cover bad casting habits with light lures? yes, up to a point

[Tatulatard]

55 minutes ago, bulldog1935 said:

Whatever energy you don't have to remove with brakes to prevent backlash goes into longer casting. 

This is actually the argument centrifugal advocates make.  That braking system will brake much more strongly at the beginning of a cast and much less strongly at the end of the cast than a linear magnetic reel.  The linear magnetic will brake much more strongly at the end of the cast for the same peak braking needed to prevent backlash at the beginning of the cast making the cast seem choked off or that the bait "floats" in the air before hitting the water.  The difference is a nonlinear curve in braking profile vs linear curve.  It's that non linear "grab and then let go" nature of centrifugal that is what makes them so popular with anglers.  Bass anglers in particular really whip their rods with a jerky cast when long casting baits on open water.   

 

Its this this same braking profile that makes them less than ideal for really light weight UL baits.  There either isn't enough energy to get the centrifugal brakes to activate or if there is then the braking is really inconsistent and the baits slow rapidly making spool control difficult.

 

Different braking systems for different applications.  I like linear magnetic for sub 1/4 oz and target casting heavier baits.  I just like the smooth, effortless and consistent casting that profile offers.  Sv and magZ for all around.  For distance I like centrifugal and stiff spring magZ spools that grab and let go to be very free at the end of the cast.  

5 minutes ago, bulldog1935 said:

I also use Ray's Studio SV spool full time on my salt ML. 

fishing opposite sides of a tide pass, casting 1/8 oz, I have to thumb this reel to keep it out of my friends. 

It won't cast 3 g toe to toe with Roro-X, and it won't start-up backlash with 2 ounces. 

 

will the SV spool cover bad casting habits with light lures? yes, up to a point

2 oz on a Ray's spool?  I doesn't have the capacity does it?  Mine are empty with 3/8 oz but I'm throwing 20# braid.  

[bulldog1935]

Not only do I know what I post, I know what I'm talking about.  You made the ignore list with that, and I'll never read another. 

The Lenz force that mag brake exerts is proportional to speed of the moving conductor, and the slope of that line is set by the distance from the magnet to the moving conductor.  It can be adjusted to less than a breath of air. 

This is a thread about BFS reels and light weights. 

A linear mag brake adds Less brake than a nonlinear mag brake.  Duh.  Nonlinear (SV) mag adds extra start-up brake, but only when needed.  When the rotor is not moving deeper into the magnetic field, it is a linear mag brake. 

Centrifugal applies continued friction through the whole cast. 

You won't notice it casting big weights - that's just as insignificant today with big weights as it was 50 years ago. 

But it will cut your 3-g cast distance in half, or reduce it by even more.  

 

Momentum doesn't start centrifugal brakes - it takes force (acceleration) and especially jerk, which is the time-derivative of force. 

[Tatulatard]

2 hours ago, bulldog1935 said:

Please stop quoting me.

Eventually 

2 hours ago, bulldog1935 said:

The Lenz force that mag brake exerts is proportional to speed of the moving conductor, and the slope of that line is set by the distance from the magnet to the moving conductor.  It can be adjusted to less than a breath of air. 

Correct.  The linear slope with brake force over spool speed means that for a max brake force to prevent a backlash the brake force of a linear magnetic brake reel at the end of the cast at slower spool speeds will be braking more than a non linear centrifugal reel.  This is how we quantify that "more free at the end of the cast" nature of centrifugal reels that everyone understands or has experienced.  There used to be nice graphs on japan tackle that illustrated this.  I can't find them so here are some horrible scribbles.

 

This is a poor approximation of a linear and non linear braking profile.  Y axis from top to bottom is the braking force needed to prevent a backlash and zero braking.  The X axis for left to right is max spool speed achieved in the cast to zero spool speed on the right. 

 

This would be a snapshot of the spool as it archives peak braking and begins to slow as the bait sails away. The green box area is the portion of the cast where the bait is sailing away towards the water.  You can see that there is more braking occurring in the linear magnetic braking profile than there is in the non linear.  Both go to zero at the end but as they near the end the linear mag braking is braking more than the nonlinear.  This is poor graphical representation of this floating or choked off feeling some complain about in linear magnetic reels and daiwa SV.  This profile is not a bad thing.  For UL baits its actually very good and why we see it used so often on bfs reels.  I'd rather not have severely diminished braking at the end of the cast as my 1/16 oz snap bean hits a brick wall and slows.  In this case a linear magnetic braking profile is very beneficial.  

2 hours ago, bulldog1935 said:

A linear mag brake adds Less brake than a nonlinear mag brake.  Duh.

This is where I disagree.  I like my linears for situations where I feel there is insufficient braking occurring with my non linears.  UL baits being one of those situations.  For me a linear mag brake bfs spool will brake and control an UL bait my Ray's moving inductors will struggle with and overrun.  We both see the merits of the linear mag brake for UL however we differ on why and that's fine.

 

2 hours ago, bulldog1935 said:

Centrifugal applies continued friction through the whole cast

Once centrifugal forces diminish below a threshold no meaningful braking occurs on a centrifugal reel that has a competent brake.  I own both.  Trust me my centrifugals are more free at the end of my casts than any of my daiwas av, magZ, magV or linear magnetic.  I can't speak to the old abus but modern centrifugal reels are pretty slick.  On some reels there are even springs that pull the brakes off the race or on daiwa HLC spools the brake cup is so short that once seated against the spool it is essentially in free spool.  Daiwa magforce 3d long cast mode behaves simarly.  Anyone who owns an svs shimano and a black max can set up both to not overrun on a long cast with zero spool tension and then do a spool flick test to see which spins longer.  10/10 times that centrifugal shimano is going to spin longer because shortly after the flick the braking diminishes to negligible amounts where that linear magnetic brake on the abu is going to make some braking right down to the last revolution with a longer period of significant braking.  The exceptions to this would be brakes with a high friction between the brakes and race but this is often addressed with lubrication to the brake race.

 

Also before anyone suggests to just lower the magnetic setting to get the linear brake to match the non linear's end of cast braking ammount, you will find that due to the linear curve, this will also reduce the max braking needed to prevent a backlash.  This is why when you used your black max or similar reel and turned the brakes down to make it more free at the end of the cast you probably got a backlash in the beginning of your cast as a result. It's just the way linears are.  A lower brake setting with a smooth cast is the key to getting the most out of them and when paired to a light weight spool can be very effortless and rewarding to cast.

[Woody B]

On 4/5/2022 at 11:25 AM, king fisher said:

I have no problem casting into the trees equally well with spinning or casting reels.  

I can't.  My spinning reel cast are way right, way left, straight up, or spiked into the water.   My casting reel casts are the ones that end up in trees.   

[ska4fun]

What a high-level discussion, really appreciate the data given here. My two cents again.

Overall, linear mag and it's variations like the FTB are better in most situations, including long casting. In a zero-adjusted reel, with spool weight around 10g, you can have really good casting. Thanks to the proportional nature of the counter-emf in the spool.  That last bit of control in the end of that extreme long cast is just astonishing.  In this case thumbing isn't even a necessity.

 

The Tatula 100 ''BFS'' spool actually turns the reel into a full-fledged long caster instead of a BFS-friendly reel. 

The Abu Garcia Revo EXD is a perfect example of a linear mag long caster. Cal ''Payola'' TT did a review about it, a pathetic one, just forget about it. The reel was intentionally set incorrectly. Abu Garcia payola was lacking in the day.

 

Actually the delay in the Magforce Air braking inductor activation works against lighter lures, with bad aerodynamics, around 2-3g. That's why Daiwa opted for linear mag in the ASC series.

 

Concerning the centrifugal braking, I see a lot of people downplaying angular momentum, no-attriction braking and the composition for the braking blocks. Doyo uses ceramic blocks on it's premium Abu reels (IVCB-II), that  behave astonisngly smooth.

 

Heavier lures ask for centrifugal braking, even more so, stick baits and pencils overrall. Too much high-spinning.

Daiwa HLC is just a magforce with a lighter inductor, harder to activate than the common Z and V incarnations. Just a free-spinning promoter.

[ska4fun]

19 hours ago, bulldog1935 said:

Not only do I know what I post, I know what I'm talking about.  You made the ignore list with that, and I'll never read another. 

The Lenz force that mag brake exerts is proportional to speed of the moving conductor, and the slope of that line is set by the distance from the magnet to the moving conductor.  It can be adjusted to less than a breath of air. 

This is a thread about BFS reels and light weights. 

A linear mag brake adds Less brake than a nonlinear mag brake.  Duh.  Nonlinear (SV) mag adds extra start-up brake, but only when needed.  When the rotor is not moving deeper into the magnetic field, it is a linear mag brake. 

Centrifugal applies continued friction through the whole cast. 

You won't notice it casting big weights - that's just as insignificant today with big weights as it was 50 years ago. 

But it will cut your 3-g cast distance in half, or reduce it by even more.  

 

Momentum doesn't start centrifugal brakes - it takes force (acceleration) and especially jerk, which is the time-derivative of force. 

 

Less brake than non-linear depends on the spool build, with or without inductor plate or anything like that.

 

Continuous friction during the cast is really unlikely, maybe on IVCBII or SVS-inifity-like brakes where the ceramic blocks are tangential to the spool border. VBS-like blocks, like these on the old Abu and Calcutta reels acts in attrition only at very high spinning, in the beginning in the cast. After that, they provide braking by angular momentum only, without attrition to the braking plate.

 

Momentum starts spool spinning and by consequence, the brake blocks. It all rely in the applied froce and spool mass/inertia.

[bulldog1935]

there's no such thing as nonlinear mag brake without moving rotor. 

 

 

I've had my hands on centrifugal brakes for over 40 years, inside and out, built reels, cast and tuned 2 to 5 g, and can verify there's also no such thing as centrifugal without friction during mid cast.  That may be different for Shimano SVS, but never found the need for one. 

This is a really nice centrifugal brake for casting heavy weights, but it robs distance with anything less than 3/8 oz

Deep spool and all, this will blow it off the water casting 1/8 oz. 

 

This is also a thread about BFS brakes, specifically, which relates to modern spools

The spinning is not what engages Ambassadeur centrifugal brakes, but the acceleration and jerk, which is also true for nonlinear mag brake. 

[WRB]

My 2 cents is learn how to cast without brakes. My 1st bait casting reels were Langley 330 Lure Cast & 340 Target. Both reels had light weight drilled aluminum spools that held 50 yards of 10 lb Dacron braid line. The 330 was a direct drive “knuckle buster” when you cast the handle spins. The 340 was a free spool reel without a level wind, no anti reverse . Neither reel had any brakes, only spool end play adjustment.

It was easy to cast 50 yards using 3/8 to 1/2 oz lures with both reels under Fishing conditions.

Nothing is better then a trained thumb for casting distance. Brakes simply make it easier and more enjoyable to cast into the wind without being a highly skilled caster.

My advice is practice casting with minimum braking until you become skilled, then add whatever braking maybe need for various wind resistant lures or windy conditions.

Tom

 

[bulldog1935]

that's not going to work casting 1/16 oz beyond arms' reach

There's no reason having a reel tuned for the job at hand is cheating. 

Learning how to remove backlash from tiny threadline doesn't have to be required. 

This prewar freespool does nicely with 1/8 oz and 4-lb silk threadline. 

Alloy spool with shallow factory cork arbor - this is what it was made for. 

(unfortunately, most of the shallow cork arbors were destroyed for mono)

 

I bought a very nice 1500C from Don Iovino, who used all the Avail LW parts I would have used.  Don did me right, and the price was great. 

But with stock spool, it still cast like a 30-y-o Ambassadeur. 

Swapping the spool and brakes for BFS turned it into a 1/16 oz gigglefest. 

I have a place to fish this - we have an endemic river bass that lives in faster warmwater than trout would occupy in cold - 15" is a lunker for the species. 

[WRB]

Langley used “Anti-Inertia” light weight spools in the 40’s,  fore runner of today’s Shallow BFS reels. 

The rods back in the 50’s were short 5’ to 51/2’ tubular glass that were somewhere around moderate action designed for “plug” casting. 

Thank you sharing your knowledge.

Tom

[ska4fun]

4 hours ago, bulldog1935 said:

there's no such thing as nonlinear mag brake without moving rotor. 

 

 

I've had my hands on centrifugal brakes for over 40 years, inside and out, built reels, cast and tuned 2 to 5 g, and can verify there's also no such thing as centrifugal without friction during mid cast.  That may be different for Shimano SVS, but never found the need for one. 

(this is a really nice centrifugal brake for casting heavy weights, but it robs distance with anything less than 3/8 oz)

Deep spool and all, this will blow it off the water casting 1/8 oz. 

 

This is also a thread about BFS brakes, specifically, which relates to modern spools

The spinning is not what engages Ambassadeur centrifugal brakes, but the acceleration and jerk, which is also true for nonlinear mag brake. 

 

You need to tell that to Daiwa and their SPR series wich is made to brake without attrition. Everything depends on the spool speed and position of the blocks. VBS and the common SVS are quite default centrifugal brakes, nothing new in the front.

3 hours ago, bulldog1935 said:

that's not going to work casting 1/16 oz beyond arms' reach

There's no reason having a reel tuned for the job at hand is cheating. 

Learning how to remove backlash from tiny threadline doesn't have to be required. 

This prewar freespool does nicely with 1/8 oz and 4-lb silk threadline. 

Alloy spool with shallow factory cork arbor - this is what it was made for. 

 

I bought a very nice 1500C from Don Iovino, who used all the Avail LW parts I would have used.  Don did me right, and the price was great. 

But with stock spool, it still cast like a 30-y-o Ambassadeur. 

Swapping the spool and brakes for BFS turned it into a 1/16 oz gigglefest. 

I have a place to fish this - we have an endemic river bass that lives in faster warmwater than trout would occupy in cold - 15" is a lunker for the species. 

 

Superb! Nipponic trout anglers and swedish guys had round profile reels capable of casting lures under 4g in the mid 60's. Actually japanese trout angling is where BFS comes from.

[bulldog1935]

SPR worked so well it lasted 2 years, was discontinued in 2014, and aimed at casting 4-7 g. 

If you haven't read this so far on this thread, if you can't reduce spool mass and inertia, you still need a centrifugal brake for start-up.  This isn't a thread about 30-y-o spools, or even about 10-y-o ideas that were abandoned for better ones. 

Every generation of MagForce/SV is improved since then, and if it didn't work better than SPR centrifugal, you'd be buying Air SPR today. 

 

careful, I've made that last argument on this forum without acceptance that BFS means anything except Bass.   Freaking ChoirMaster here. 

 

 

[ska4fun]

1 hour ago, bulldog1935 said:

@ska4fun

SPR worked so well it lasted 2 years, was discontinued in 2014, and aimed at casting 4-7 g. 

Every generation of MagForce/SV is improved since then. 

 

careful, I've made that last argument on this forum without acceptance that BFS means anything except Bass.   Freaking ChoirMaster here. 

 

On our endemic bass (Texas Brook Trout), they can retreat into the aquifer to survive our droughts, and spelunkers have fished them in caves. 

I released this hen in 2005, would have been the state record, but then required a liver biopsy to prove her genetics weren't diluted with feral smallmouth.  Caught her at a bat cave vent, and she got this size eating the baby bats that fell in. 

Mentioned faster water, I'm trolling current seams in a chute using a Teeny sinking line, filming an episode of KT Diaries, True Texas Bass.  You can do the same thing with trout plugs. 

 

 

And yet it operated without attrition. Are you saying the SPR wasn't good enough over its proposal? It lasted only 2 years because of it very much specific niche, just like the Cardiff 50 DC series.

 

 

[Tatulatard]

The impression I got from the SPR review was the it was a more impressive open water caster than the magV pixy but worse as a pitching reel.  Odd tidbit: the SPR uses the same centrifugal brake found in the same era salt water jigging reels such as the arid red tune.  Its like they took this braking system and said "let's try it in a pixy as a casting reel".  My understanding of this brake is that is was originally intended to control the spool when the reel was in free spool and a bait is falling down.  

[PhishLI]

10 hours ago, Tatulatard said:

Odd tidbit: the SPR uses the same centrifugal brake found in the same era salt water jigging reels

Last year a local shop had a pile of Daiwa CATALINA BJ 100-SHL jigging reels for a blowout price. Uses the same braking arrangement. Beautiful reel, but I passed.