Is 6.3:1 too much?

[BigBassin144]

What's your guys' opinions about using a 6.3:1 reel for cranking. I'm not talking deep cranking like DT16 or DD22, but normal like Bandit 100 or DT06's. Maybe some 8-12' divers.

BB

[mariner]

i dont think so, but i dont fish them all that much with my baitcaster(6:3:1) most of the time i use my openface and it is a 5:2:1 but i got to reel it fast
so i dont think so

[Rebbasser]

No problem whatsoever with shallow cranks. Been throwing them on a 6.3:1 for several years.

[Jim80]

yeah i don't see why not i throw mine on 6:2:1

[islandbass]

It ought to be alright. I have an older curado with a 6x:1 ratio and it works okay but my lower gear ratio "feels" better even with mid-sized cranks.

I can't however, stress enough that it the the line recovery rate of the reel and NOT the gear ratio that should be your determining factor. One company's 6.3:1 reel might not have the same line recovery rate as a reel from another maker whose reel with the same ratio. As a result, the ratio alone doesn't mean jack in and of itself.

Curado 201DHSV
Ratio: 7:1
Line Recovery Rate (in Inches per revolution): 30"

Curado 101D
Ratio: 6.2:1
Line Recovery Rate (in Inches per revolution): 25"

BPS Bionic
Ratio: 6.3:1
Line Recovery Rate (in Inches per revolution): 28"

KVD Reel
Ratio: 7:1
Line Recovery Rate (in Inches per revolution): 29"

KVD Reel
Ratio: 6.3:1
Line Recovery Rate (in Inches per revolution): 26" - Same ratio as Bionic, but picks up 2" less. The ratio alone didn't tell you jack.

Revo STX
Ratio: 7.1:1
Line Recovery Rate (in Inches per revolution): 31"

Revo STX
Ratio: 6.4:1
Line Recovery Rate (in Inches per revolution): 27.5" - Higher ratio than bionic, yet it recovers less ever so slightly

Abu G C3
Ratio: 5.3:1
Line Recovery Rate (in Inches per revolution): 25" Lower ratio than the Curado 101D, yet they recover the same amount of line per revolution.

Abu G C4
Ratio: 6.3:1
Line Recovery Rate (in Inches per revolution): 30" - By ratio alone, you wouldn't envision this as a "burner" reel yet at this ratio, it recovers just as much line as the "burner" reels.

Shimano Symetre 2500
Ratio: 6:1
Line Recovery Rate (in Inches per revolution): 31" - Now which is a true "burner" reel? That's right, 31" of line.

As you can see, it isn't the best option to choose a reel based on gear ratio alone if the reel is going to be used for a specific purpose. Go by the recovery rate or inches per revolution sometimes known as the reel's inches per turn. I think revolution is more accurate.

[BigBassin144]

IB, you've got a great point there. Some of the larger abu G ambassaduer reels have a slow gear ration but retrieve mor eline than a 'burner' because of their large spools.

I will most likely be using a Revo (either SX or STX if I can afford it). But it should till work good for shallow and medium cranks, right?

Thanks guys,

BB

[Lancer6]

[quote=islandbass;196851]It ought to be alright. I have an older curado with a 6x:1 ratio and it works okay but my lower gear ratio "feels" better even with mid-sized cranks.

I can't, however, stress enough that it is the the line recovery rate of the reel and NOT the gear ratio that should be your determining factor. One company's 6.3:1 reel might not have the same line recovery rate as a reel from another maker whose reel claims the same ratio. As a result, the ratio alone doesn't mean jack in and of itself.
[Quote]

The line retrieval rates as claimed by manufacturers are arbitrary at best.
Their assumptions are based on an optimally full spool of a given test (actually, diameter,) of line. Ergo, these ratings are as unreliable as are "line capacity" ratings.
It's unreasonable, of course, to expect a manufacturer to go so far as to state "If using 13.97 lb. test mono, made by the Rutabaga Line Co., and the spool is filled to .00023mm of the maximum recommended level, then you will retrieve exactly 24.64 inches of line on the FIRST full turn of the spool, then gain X inches on each successive turn as the line accumulates on the spool. Disclaimer: This assumes that you have made a cast of 39.09 ft., measured from the lure eye to the reel's line guide." Yeah, wellllllll.
The advent of braid has further enhanced real-world line retrieval rates, since a 39.09 ft. cast with with 20 lb. test braid will reduce the actual spool/line diameter to a lesser degree than will an equivalent cast using Rutabaga's Renowned #20 BassYanker Mono. The "thicker" the spool, the greater amount of line retrieved, and the retrieve rate increases with each layer of line added to the spool.
That said...
I use a Green 'Rado 5:1 for my larger cranks, a 6. something for the little guys, but here's a thought...Besides the obvious (or it should be,) fact that for LIPLESS cranks a 7:1 can be a real blessing, the 7:1 will serve well for this current wave of very shallow running billed cranks, especially if one desires a less labor-intensive "waking" retrieve. Mind you, I mean cranks that are intended to run at no more than, say, 3-4 feet. These have such small bills, and thus so little retrieve resistance, that the higher gear ratio will not impose too much strain on the angler.
There's another advantage too, re the faster reels. Let's say that you and Vern, your partner, are belaboring the water at scenic Lake Toxin. You have simultaneously fired the latest in small/medium/waking crankbait technology to a likely spot, one on either side of a defunct tree (It drowned...Poor thing.) Just as you begin winding away on your 4.7:1 ratio reel, and as Vern begins a carefully restrained retrieve with his spankin'-new 7:1-er, a school of keeper-sized bass erupts on a school of shad, forty-plus feet away on the other side of the barge, and herding the unfortunate shad away from you. Now, I ask you; Who has the better chance of getting his lure outta the water and streaking toward the new target of opportunity before the Bass Fleet's Commanding Officer signals "Cease action! Dive! Dive! Run Silent! Run Deep."? My money's on Vern...Know what ah mean?
I've lived through many an action such as the one described and that's why only the largest of my cranks gets tossed on a reel slower than 6.something. I hate the &^%$@! things anyway.
With the advent of reels that weigh less than 8 ozzies and still offer the higher-speed gearings it might be a good time to reconsider the conventional wizzdumb.

L6

[Buzz Wing]

I used my 6.2:1 Shimano Citica for crankin' and it worked great. Really helps when you need to "burn" baits, especially Traps.

[BigBassin144]

Lancer, love the examples. I sometimes do get lost in the story to the point where I forget your advice. I do see what your saying though. And line recovery does change depending on spool size and how much line os on the spool. You fill a 6:1 reel completely full, it'll most likely reel your bait in faster than say a 7:1 that is only half full.

BB

[islandbass]

You have a point lancer, but I can tell you that at optimum capacity, the line recovery rate of a Curado 201D is definitely 30". I found this out a while back when I first got the reel. The curiosity was killing me to verify Shimano's claim of 30".

I placed my level vertically against a wall in the garage with the graduated side facing outward and gave the handle one complete revolution. The measured distance the line traveled was exactly 30inches . I did the same thing with the level on the ground and the same measurement of 30"resulted. My expectation was that it was going to be close, plus or minus a wee bit, but it was right on the money. So hats off to Shimano. I have not yet tried my other reels.

The amount of line on the spool indeed affects the reels line recovery rate. IMHO, they don't need to be exact, as long as they're close enough. That the engineer's approach.

I concur with your other salient points.

[Lancer6]

Originally Posted by islandbass

You have a point lancer, but I can tell you that at optimum capacity, the line recovery rate of a Curado 201D is definitely 30". I found this out a while back when I first got the reel. The curiosity was killing me to verify Shimano's claim of 30".

I concur with your other salient points.

Errrr, I don't recall refuting any of the figures you quoted. I simply made provable assertions.
I've often been tempted to beard the reel makers via their "Contact Us" route and fence with them re claimed line capacity and recovery rates. That day will come, if at all, when I've exhausted all other means of entertainment.
Come to think of it; It's 0341 hrs and I've never hit the rack. Maybe now's a good time to draft my plans for the aforementioned effort.

L6

[islandbass]

I didn't take any umbrage whatsoever from your comments. I was just sharing with you what a big surprise it was that a manufacturer wasn't exaggerating a claim.

Before I tested it, I already had the belief that Shimano was blowing smoke up my sit down part, thinking, "Yeah, right. There is no way this reel is going to pull 30" on one revolution. Impossible."

I was just surprised they were telling the truth. Signing off at 0428 hrs.