2 lbs mono/fluoro on size 500 vs size 1000/2000.

[slipperybob]

The thing for me between the smallest UL reels like the Shimano 500 series vs their 1000 series is that when they first introduced them, I took some rough measurements and found that the rotor position of the bail arms are equal distance between the two reels of the same models. So they share similar parts and specs in some areas. In other words while the reel is in operation, the feel of the reel offers no advantage. The smaller spool, frame, and shorter oscillation are all physically there in performance. The line pick up is less due to the smaller spool physical size.

It was basically the exact same thing when I used Pfleuger President reels of both the 20 size vs 25 size. What Pfleuger did differently for their models was really gave the 20 sized model a much smaller reel frame in comparison to how Shimano reels difference in size drop from 1000 to 500 models. The Pflueger 20 in weight was lighter than the Shimano 500 in weight. However in feel, the Pflueger 20 feels much heavier. It was almost like hold an ounce lead weight vs an ounce brass weight.

At that time the Sahara had just price jumped from 59 to 79 and the Symetre went from 79 to 99. The President were retailing for 49 but sale prices had them down to 25 dollars.

As for smaller reels balancing on smaller rods, well I ice fish with short rods of typically 24 inches to 36 inches. The sweet spot for most ice rods for me is about 28 inches to 32 inches. Shorter rods, you tend to give up on rod control versatility. Longer rods, you tend to lose telegraph sensitivity. Balance is all on finger position on handle. These short rods are all typically shy of 2 oz in weight and most of the weight is probably in just the handle section. The difference between a reel seat and an equal sized tennessee cork handle is typically about .5 oz difference. The merits of going straight just cork tennessee is nonexistent once a person adds a reel with weights of around 5 oz to 7 oz in weight.

This goes right back to how that lighter 20 sized Pleuger felt more like lead in comparison to using a heavier Shimano 500 or even 1000 sized reel as for brass comparison. It really just depends on the actual reel in use. A 500 sized Sienna does not offer the feel of a 500 sized Symetre for comparison. In ice fishing application, it becomes very obvious if fishing both reels side by side. Last of all, the Pfleuger 20 was using a 50 mm handle radius vs Shimano 40 mm handle radius on even a 1000 sized reel. A long time ago Shimano were using a 50 mm handle radius. The feel is different. Very different if a 1000 sized Stradic FG reel weighs in excess of 10 oz. compare the recent 1000 Stradic FL with a 6.5 oz reel weight.

[Smead]

Shimano 500 reels all seem to follow the same design form...higher priced models had more bearings, or better main gear/pnion materials...which could account for the differences.

Contemporary Symetre FJ, Sedona FS and Sienna FD schematics.

https://www.reelschematic.com/wp-conten ... Y500FJ.pdf

https://www.reelschematic.com/wp-conten ... E500FD.pdf

https://www.reelschematic.com/wp-conten ... N500FD.pdf

They changed a bit when the Symetre was dropped and the Nasci was introduced.

https://www.reelschematic.com/wp-conten ... S500FB.pdf

https://www.reelschematic.com/wp-conten ... H500FI.pdf

https://www.reelschematic.com/wp-conten ... N500FG.pdf

Even the expensive Vanford isn't that much more than a Nasci with some refinements.

https://www.reelschematic.com/wp-conten ... VF500F.pdf

[ultralight]

For what it's worth, I was fishing by a bunch of guys today and most are using 2 lbs mono that breaks at almost exactly 4 lbs, casting 1/16 oz jigheads with mini jig type bodies. A couple of these guys are very good trout fishermen and are extremely effective. They were all fishing Vanford 500s. I asked them why they use size 500 and not 1000. Their reply, "Because the 500 casts further." I told them that this is hard to believe as the consensus here is the 1000 casts further. They were adamant that they tested.

So I guess I'll have to do the test myself.

[Bronzeye]

...They were all fishing Vanford 500s. I asked them why they use size 500 and not 1000. Their reply, "Because the 500 casts further." ... They were adamant that they tested.

So I guess I'll have to do the test myself.

If you do, please let us know what you find. I'd be interested in knowing which specific line you (and they) used in testing and the size of the guide closest to the reel on the rod used in testing.

[Senkobass1]

For what it's worth, I was fishing by a bunch of guys today and most are using 2 lbs mono that breaks at almost exactly 4 lbs, casting 1/16 oz jigheads with mini jig type bodies. A couple of these guys are very good trout fishermen and are extremely effective. They were all fishing Vanford 500s. I asked them why they use size 500 and not 1000. Their reply, "Because the 500 casts further." I told them that this is hard to believe as the consensus here is the 1000 casts further. They were adamant that they tested.

So I guess I'll have to do the test myself.

I’ve found people say the same thing to me as well. I’m a SoCal trout fisherman and everybody I know basically has the Vanford 1000 or vanford 500. They say the Vanford 500 casts farther. I’m not sure how but it looks like they are all using thin braid for the most part or the 2lb izor. I haven’t done any tests myself on the smaller 500 size Vanford yet. Let us know how the 500 performs overall. I’m always looking for a new trout reel

[ultralight]

Bronzeye, you are a guy after my own heart. I have the exact same questions. Fortunately I have the exact line and rod they were using. I stripped the rod down to rebuild but I have the guides. They are basically the extra tall fuji style guides - but a knockoff. Heavy guides. I don't have the spacing measured yet but will do that.

Senkobass1, there's a chance that I may have run into you at one of the lakes. I don't get to fish a lot but have met a lot of guys.

For sure, the larger reels have one advantage - less line twist and less memory on the line. Even 2 lbs Izorline has memory. The 500 is lighter - the only 5 ox (or slightly sub 5 oz depending on how much grease they pack in there) reel in its price range.

[Bronzeye]

Ultralight, thanks for the quick reply. What is the ring diameter of the base guide ("stripper") on their rods?

It is interesting to read that they feel they are getting more distance with the smaller spool diameter of the 500 even though they are using tall guide frames. That makes me suspect that the base guide ring might be as small as size 16. If so, it could be that the smaller coils off the 500 spool pass through the small aperture better.

That was not the theory of Ray Scott when he pushed his Sportackle rods to be paired with the Supercaster 225 reel. That reel had a gigantic 56-mm. spool diameter, and Scott had his rods built with 16 mm. high-frame base guides and micro guides toward the tip--mostly, I think, to help keep the rods very lightweight for their price point. He promoted the combo for use with 4 or 6 lb. line for bass, and claimed that the lack of coils in the line coming off the huge reel spool would ease the line's passage through the tiny guides. I found that the combo casted well with a stiff light mono (4 lb. CX Xtra Tough) but was a dud with a stiff 8 lb. mono line (Sufix Siege) knotted to a lighter leader on a spare spool.

I bought a 2500-size (45 mm. shallow spool) Daiwa Ballistic FW last year and used it with 4 lb. CX Xtra Tough. I got great distance with the reel mounted on a rod with a 25-mm tall-frame base guide. When I put the reel on a rod with a shorter-framed 25 mm. base guide (Fuji KL), casts felt throttled and distance dropped considerably. I reasoned that there must be greater friction against the distal inner ring of the guide when the line has farther to rise (against gravity) after it feeds off the spool. The large (for UL) 2500 spool pushes the distal edge of the spool lip farther from the rod than a smaller reel spool would, so a taller guide frame appears to be important to pair with that reel. I suspect that a smaller-spool reel would get more distance than the Ballistic if paired with the rod with the shorter base guide frame, especially if it were used with a limper line.

The smaller the guide rings are on your friends' rods, the closer to the rod blank they will be, even in tall frames; this might produce an increase in casting distance from using a 500 size reel vs. one with a larger spool diameter, depending on the line used.

It's complex.

[slipperybob]

It's not just the line guide size but if you do a simple eyeball of a straight line looking down the line guides, that makes a difference too. When casting, the loops of the line are flying off at a high speed and there's a vortex wavelike oscillating motion of that line slapping against the line guides. There is an optimal threshold to line choke at the stripper guide, but there is probably a better efficiency when it's done so with a change from the first few line guides from the stripper guide.

When you eyeball and look down the line guides and if they're all straight as if you can peer through a straight tubular hole, it seems to make sense that the line flow would be optimal in this line guide set up. Contrary it's not so simple and nor is it that efficient. When you eyeball and look down the line guides and they appear to be offset where the opposite sides of the rings appear to choke the line into a pinched funnel, it's actually more efficient in this manner. When the line is looping and shooting through the air, the central vortex of the line is not in the middle of it, it's actually at the edge of it, in a snapshot frame. It is because the line is looping, oscillating, and wavelike. It is not just a simple controlled vortex funnel. That's part of the efficiency secret is seeking to control that vortex funnel of a line on the casting release. Ever seen those people with like 20 to 30 waist hoops and they're making them all work. There's that center of the person's body controlling all those hoops flying around them.

This is in part as to why fluorocarbon lines don't get as far as a cast as compared to braid lines. However the answer is not so simple cause just casting the line itself with no lure, that fluorocarbon line will get further distance over the braid. So there is a threshold of optimal efficiency per line for specific purpose.

[Senkobass1]

Bronzeye, you are a guy after my own heart. I have the exact same questions. Fortunately I have the exact line and rod they were using. I stripped the rod down to rebuild but I have the guides. They are basically the extra tall fuji style guides - but a knockoff. Heavy guides. I don't have the spacing measured yet but will do that.

Senkobass1, there's a chance that I may have run into you at one of the lakes. I don't get to fish a lot but have met a lot of guys.

For sure, the larger reels have one advantage - less line twist and less memory on the line. Even 2 lbs Izorline has memory. The 500 is lighter - the only 5 ox (or slightly sub 5 oz depending on how much grease they pack in there) reel in its price range.

Hope to see you out there! I’ll be fishing some of the trout openers this year. Probably will be at DVL the day of the opener. I think most people have the tall Fuji guides on their rods. That’s what I use. I’ve switched from 2lb izor to braid and Fluoro leader for casting and sensitivity. I’m going to pick up a Vanford 500 to see if there is a difference or not. I’ll have the same rod models and same braid so I can report my findings

[ultralight]

OK, I did pretty extensive tests using two different length rods (6' 7" and 7' 9"). They have the top end single foot Fuji Torzite guides.

Line: 2 lbs Izor mono in smoke. Actual break strength is consistently at 4 lbs and diameter is very similar to 4 lbs Sunline Sniper fluoro.
Lures: Trout Magnets, and 1/16 jigs. These are on the extreme range of lure weights I use.
Reel: Shimano Vanford
Spool sizes: 500 and C2000S. Note that the C2000S is only 5% larger in diameter than the 1000.
1st guide sizes: Fuji Torzite 16 and 12.

To my surprise, the 500 casts as far as the 2000 sized spools. I did dozens of casts. There were a couple of times that I thought the 500 may be 1-2 feet less with the 1/16 but repeated tests show them to be the same distance. I was casting to specific objects on the water.

In my mind, if one uses braid, then the 2000 or 1000 will not cast any further than the 500.
However, if one uses a thicker line such as 6 lbs mono, my guess is that the 2000 may well cast further but I did not test that hypothesis.

I note that the Izor is known to have pretty strong memory so I believe that Sunline Sniper in 2-4lbs range will also show the same results.

Conclusion: I am very very surprised by my finding. This makes the size 500 very viable for my fishing and I'm switching over. I was convinced before the test that the 500 will cast less distance. Since I almost never have issues with line twist even after a day of fishing, the smaller spool is not an issue. The 500 reel is .4 oz lighter which I could tell immediately on my rigs. The 500 just felt slightly more nimble in hand when jigging and casting. The only thing I don't like about the 500 is that it is not a shallow spool and not as smooth as the larger sizes.

[Bronzeye]

Thanks for sharing your findings. What is the size of the largest guide on each rod?

[ultralight]

Great question. I'll go back and add the data. One has size 16, the other has size 12. 12 is admittedly small but I do not believe that it impacts the distance. This is based on testing the 500 and 2000 reel with each 1st guide size. These are Torzites which has noticeably larger opening than the same size SICs.

I'd love to have size 500s to eventually drop in weight to 130g to match the Aldebaran BFS reels....

[Bronzeye]

Seems to me that a 16 mm guide is small for coils coming off of a 2000-size reel and a 12 mm base guide is absurdly small (even in a Torzite). That might give an advantage to the 500-size spool that would instead go to the 2000 with larger base guides of 20 or 25 mm. But like you, I'm guessing. The only spinning rod I have with a base guide as small as a 16 is the Sportackle rod, which is also my only one with micro guides to the tip. I'd be interested to know how the 500 and 2000 reels compare in casting distance when used on a light-power rod with bigger base guides and running guides of at least 5 mm.

[ultralight]

Fair comment. However, I'm going with top end JDM rod designs and believe that they KNOW what they are doing. So I won't be testing those sizes. I'm rebuilding some of my rods with smaller guides so I'm going in the opposite direction.