Insides Of A Curado 50E

[deep]

Told ya it's a noob question. I barely know how to clean and lube my reels, that's why I don't take them apart.

[J Francho]

Honestly, who knows. Some will say Hyundai's 10 year warranty is strong, others will say it just shows how crappy their cars are. It depends on what side of the fence you're on. I've only seen a few AR failures, and they usually involve a rupture of the sleeve. Once those fragments get into other parts of the reel, that's where the mayhem starts. The redundant AR pawl isn't going to stop that, if it fails that way.

At any rate, you'd be hard pressed to tell if the AR pawl was there or not, when properly set up.

[Packard]

Packard,

That is such a foolish statement.....

The AR Pawl is very important as a back up to the OneWay (AR) bearing pack. If the OneWay fails the Pawl is to keep the crank assembly from rotating backwards (on hookset, hard fighting, etc.) and possibly damageing the unternal parts of the reel or anglers cranking hand. The two parts when serviced correctly actually work in conjunction with each other (smoothly), making an AR system that is actually eons better than the other mfgs that you all keep measuring the need for on their reels.

Shimano created the redundant backup for AR' that other mfgs wish they had come up with.

Tight Lines!

The AR Pawl has nothing to do with a reels ability to cast better, it is the industry standard assist to the oneway bearing.

No need to say rude things to me. It isn't a necessary piece and most reels don't have it. I have only took it out of one of my reels and that was because I couldn't get it to fit right after it fell out.

I was just discussing the topic so no need to make it a personal matter.

[J Francho]

It isn't a necessary piece and most reels don't have it.

It's there because Shimano believes that US users are harder on their hooksets, hard enough to warrant the redundant AR mechanism.

[John G]

It's there because Shimano believes that US users are harder on their hooksets, hard enough to warrant the redundant AR mechanism.

Only the Cruados have that pawl, the same question could be, "Why do Shimanos need a redundant AR mechanism?"

Harder on hooksets with just Curado's?

BTW, Where is this pawl? I looked on my 50E schematc and it's #4184 but I can't see a #4184 anywhere.

[J Francho]

Harder on hooksets with just Curado's?

Dude, seriously, who knows. That's what the Shimano rep said. It's their leading seller. I mean, you own the reel, and you're ripping me, LOL?

BTW, Where is this pawl?

[baluga]

The calcutta's also have the AR pawl, although the conquest doesn't, i wish they have.

I like the AR pawl on my reels specially when I use it for saltwater. I tend to put more oil on the the anti-reverse bearings than I should to protect it from saltwater corrosion. Having more oil it will have it more prone to slipping. The AR pawl will keep it from totally sliding and protect it from messing up the sleeve and the AR bearing at the minimum. Another advantage is when using today's super line/braid where you can put in 50#s on braid on a small reel which is beyond the max of its strength. The only advantage I see in removing the AR pawl is less weight on the reel, although the AR pawl is only a few grams savings.

[aavery2]

You'd have to had seen the devastation an AR bearing failure causes a reel. I had a Zillion that failed on a frog hook set. $90 worth of parts. Zillions don't have that pawl, but to each his own.

I work on many reels a year for a major reel repair company, I have seen AR bearing fail, most in the way of the cage breaking, roller bearings coming loose or the sleeves cracking or becoming worn and unusable, but I have never witnessed on any model of reel the catastophic failure that you have mentioned. I would like to see it, it may be enough to change to mind.

So whats your thought on why the JDM versions of the same reel are produced without the pawl?

[baluga]

IMHO, I think JDM is more concern of the total weight of the reel than adding a fail safe parts. One less part can help them get close to their target. A good example is the Calcutta, a USDM 100 GTE weights 9.5 Oz while its JDM counter part Conquest 100 weights 8.0 Oz. By drilling holes and removing the redundant AR part they were able to to cut down on the weight. But who knows, we can only speculate what's their real objective when they left out the AR pawl .

Although you can always add one.

[John G]

Dude, seriously, who knows. That's what the Shimano rep said. It's their leading seller. I mean, you own the reel, and you're ripping me, LOL?

Thanks! Ripping! LOL

[Delaware Valley Tackle]

I'm with JF and RM on this. Considering all the stuff we buy that isn't "needed" I don't understand the desire to remove something that is a nice little added feature. Any perceptible difference in the feel of a reel with a properly maintained AR pawl is all in mind imo. But, as previously stated, to each his own.

[aavery2]

I'm with JF and RM on this. Considering all the stuff we buy that isn't "needed" I don't understand the desire to remove something that is a nice little added feature. Any perceptible difference in the feel of a reel with a properly maintained AR pawl is all in mind imo. But, as previously stated, to each his own.

Mike, I know you work allot of reels, have you ever seen idler gears damaged by the ears of the AR Pawl breaking off? I have never witnessed it myself, but have heard many times of reels that are not maintained and the ratchet becoming dry and wearing through the ears, only to have small pieces of them fall into the idler gears and damage them. Like I said, not a personal observation, just have heard of this occurring.

[J Francho]

Never seen the ears wear off. And I've dealt with some 20+ year old reels that use the dog and bone AR.

The Zillion is probably an isolated case. Every once in a while I'll see an AR sleeve crack. In this case, the fragments did in the gear end of the worm, main gear, pinion, idler, and bent some of the clutch parts. Obviously, there was some continued reeling after the failure - I mean there was a fish on the end of the line.

[aavery2]

I mean there was a fish on the end of the line.

A man's gotta have his priorities...

[Delaware Valley Tackle]

Mike, I know you work allot of reels, have you ever seen idler gears damaged by the ears of the AR Pawl breaking off? I have never witnessed it myself, but have heard many times of reels that are not maintained and the ratchet becoming dry and wearing through the ears, only to have small pieces of them fall into the idler gears and damage them. Like I said, not a personal observation, just have heard of this occurring.

I've seen some weird stuff but not this one. The most common thing I see with these is them getting bent all out of whack by being mishandled. The caveat of "properly maintained" covers a multitude of sins too.

[rubba bubba]

In this case, the fragments did in the gear end of the worm, main gear, pinion, idler, and bent some of the clutch parts. Obviously, there was some continued reeling after the failure - I mean there was a fish on the end of the line.

Would the anti-reverse pawl have prevented the substantial damage in this case?

[J Francho]

Perhaps. The Zillion's AR tube does not have seatment tabs like the Curado either, and that may figure in as well.

[The Rooster]

This might not even matter, but I read here that the Curado is the only one that has this part. The Citica E also has it.

[J Francho]

Yep, and so does the Calcutta - I posted without thinking - I am sure there are others in the Shimano line. I thought we were talking about the Zillion and the Curado. Thanks for the correction.

[McAlpine]

I'm confused at the issue anyone has with this pawl then. The only reel on JFrancho's list that I have is a Calcutta 200B however; it is smooth like butta. No reason to take anything out. I properly maintain my reels though.....