Abu Garcia Orra Sx

[WillTheThrill]

Just got this reel in yesterday and spooled it up with some suffix 17lb mono and all I can say is wow. For $100 you can't beat this reel. It casts just as good as my buddies $180 Curado. If anyone is interested in a fairly cheap reel that can preform then look no further. I will give a more in depth review when I catch some fish with it

[bassinbob]

Will, I asked about that reel. I was interested in it because it has a pitching brake. In your further experiences could you elaborate on that for me.

[BigBassin144]

I do believe Pitch is just Abu's name for their brakes, like Daiwa's is Magforce V or Z.

That being said, magnetic brakes work much better for pitching than centrifugal brakes. This is because magnetic brakes primarily act during the end of the cast to stop the spool when the lure hits the water. Centrifugal brakes act during the beginning of the cast to keep the spool from letting out more line than your lure is pulling, and don't really do much as the spool slows down.

BB

[nofearengineer]

You know,BB144...I used to think the same thing....but I have come to a better understanding of the "centrifugal vs. magnetic" issue.

Centrifugal brakes: braking force is approximately linearly proportional to spool rpms.

Magnetic brakes: braking force is typically proportional to the square or the cube (depending on mfr.) of spool rpms.

What this means is...centrifugal braking is not suitable for long casting, unless very heavy lures are involved. Centrifugal brakes apply them selves gradually, and over the entire spool rpm range. This makes them a natural for flipping and pitching

Because of the nature of the square or cube function, magnetic brakes can seem to go from no brake to brick wall very quickly. At low rpms, they apply almost no brake force at all. Then at some particular speed, the brakes really kick in (especially for the "cube" function brakes, like Daiwa's Magforce Z). This is what makes them superior for light baits in wind. They can be tuned to kick in at a particular spool rpm they work best at.

Magnetic braking is perhaps not desirable for presentations like flipping or pitching, which have relatively slow spool speeds and variable casting requirements. You may be casting 15 feet one moment, and 35 feet the next. This degree of variability is different from open water, or long distance casting, where magnetic braking excels.

However!!! (a big however)

Most magnetic braking systems have external control (unlike centrifugal type), and can be adjusted quickly. In the hands of a skilled fisherman, magnetic brakes can be made to work well in just about any situation. Besides, there is always the good old "educated thumb" braking system to counter any inadequacies of a particular reel.

[WillTheThrill]

Originally Posted by BigBassin144

I do believe Pitch is just Abu's name for their brakes, like Daiwa's is Magforce V or Z.

That being said, magnetic brakes work much better for pitching than centrifugal brakes. This is because magnetic brakes primarily act during the end of the cast to stop the spool when the lure hits the water. Centrifugal brakes act during the beginning of the cast to keep the spool from letting out more line than your lure is pulling, and don't really do much as the spool slows down.

BB

You got it BB, A pitch centrifugal brake gives you better casting control by consistently applying magnetic force to the spool in varying amounts according to your preferences. Sounds like a regular brake to me but with a fancy name

[nofearengineer]

Just so you guys know...I really goofed up when I put together my last post. I got them switched when I typed it in from my notes. The centrifugal is the one that is proportional to the square, and the magnetic is linear. I was in a hurry to get home from work when I did it, and sorry if it caused any confusion. I always get it right in the end, but I often make some big paperwork goofs along the way. I try to be a big enough man to freely admit it when I make mistakes.

So in essence, the magnetic is better for pitching and centrifugal probably better for long casting, but an educated thumb is your best friend in either case.

[Jim80]

So in essence, the magnetic is better for pitching and centrifugal probably better for long casting, but an educated thumb is your best friend in either case



Amen to that nofear


jim

[BigBassin144]

Originally Posted by nofearengineer

Just so you guys know...I really goofed up when I put together my last post. I got them switched when I typed it in from my notes. The centrifugal is the one that is proportional to the square, and the magnetic is linear. I was in a hurry to get home from work when I did it, and sorry if it caused any confusion. I always get it right in the end, but I often make some big paperwork goofs along the way. I try to be a big enough man to freely admit it when I make mistakes.

So in essence, the magnetic is better for pitching and centrifugal probably better for long casting, but an educated thumb is your best friend in either case.

I believe this would be an appropriate time for:

I TOLD YOU SO!

You may have gotten it right in the end, but you're never going to live this one down.

BB

[nofearengineer]

By the way guys...Anthony doesn't know what "defecate" means.

[BigBassin144]

Originally Posted by nofearengineer

By the way guys...Anthony doesn't know what "defecate" means.

I know what it means AND I know how to spell it

BB

[Cavs1123]

Ya I was lookin at that reel but for the money you cant beat the BPS Pro Qualifier. It has dual brakes and its pretty light!

[WillTheThrill]

Originally Posted by Cavs1123

Ya I was lookin at that reel but for the money you cant beat the BPS Pro Qualifier. It has dual brakes and its pretty light!

I saw that reel on ebay the other day and thought about placing my bid until the wife gave me that look, then I decided I didnt need it that badly. I finally got the chance to take the Orra out and thus far I'm really impressed. I think all reels preform well the first week so I'll let time tell the true story

[bassassasin]

Originally Posted by nofearengineer

You know,BB144...I used to think the same thing....but I have come to a better understanding of the "centrifugal vs. magnetic" issue.

Centrifugal brakes: braking force is approximately linearly proportional to spool rpms.

Magnetic brakes: braking force is typically proportional to the square or the cube (depending on mfr.) of spool rpms.

What this means is...centrifugal braking is not suitable for long casting, unless very heavy lures are involved. Centrifugal brakes apply them selves gradually, and over the entire spool rpm range. This makes them a natural for flipping and pitching

Because of the nature of the square or cube function, magnetic brakes can seem to go from no brake to brick wall very quickly. At low rpms, they apply almost no brake force at all. Then at some particular speed, the brakes really kick in (especially for the "cube" function brakes, like Daiwa's Magforce Z). This is what makes them superior for light baits in wind. They can be tuned to kick in at a particular spool rpm they work best at.

Magnetic braking is perhaps not desirable for presentations like flipping or pitching, which have relatively slow spool speeds and variable casting requirements. You may be casting 15 feet one moment, and 35 feet the next. This degree of variability is different from open water, or long distance casting, where magnetic braking excels.

However!!! (a big however)

Most magnetic braking systems have external control (unlike centrifugal type), and can be adjusted quickly. In the hands of a skilled fisherman, magnetic brakes can be made to work well in just about any situation. Besides, there is always the good old "educated thumb" braking system to counter any inadequacies of a particular reel.

What the f*ck
lost you on "linearly propotional"

[bassassasin]

Originally Posted by Cavs1123

Ya I was lookin at that reel but for the money you cant beat the BPS Pro Qualifier. It has dual brakes and its pretty light!

well duhhhhh!!!

[BigBassin144]

Originally Posted by bassassasin

What the f*ck
lost you on "linearly propotional"

Maybe if you'd actually ask a question, someone would explain it to you. Secondly, and I just love saying this, nofear was wrong about his proportions. Or at least he was right, he just had the proportions assigned to the wrong brakes.

Magnetic braking force is linearly proportional to spool speed. If you know anything about coordinate planes and lines (which I'm assuming you do even though you're young since that's basic like 6th grade level math.)

Now, nofear never specified what line he used in his calculations, so I'll use the simplest one I can (y=x). In this case, as the spool speed (represented by x in the function) increases from say 10,000 rpm's to 12,000 rpm's, the braking force (represented by y in the function) applied would increase an equal amount, so from 10,000 units to 12,000 units. (keep in mind, all these numbers are made up).

However, on centrifugal brakes, whose braking force is represented as a parabolic equation. Again, I'll use the simplest one (y=x^2) Now assume spool speed is represented again by X and braking force is represented by Y. Since you have probably never dealt with parabolic equation, I don't expect you to know what this one looks like, but think about it. If the spool speed is 10,000 rpm's, then 10,000^2 is 100,000,000 units of braking force. But as the spool speeds up to say 12,000 rpm's, you'll have a braking force of 144,000,000 units.

I'm not all that great at explaining this stuff, so if this makes your MORE confused, sorry.

BB

[rrw4258]

Originally Posted by BigBassin144

Maybe if you'd actually ask a question, someone would explain it to you. Secondly, and I just love saying this, nofear was wrong about his proportions. Or at least he was right, he just had the proportions assigned to the wrong brakes.

Magnetic braking force is linearly proportional to spool speed. If you know anything about coordinate planes and lines (which I'm assuming you do even though you're young since that's basic like 6th grade level math.)

Now, nofear never specified what line he used in his calculations, so I'll use the simplest one I can (y=x). In this case, as the spool speed (represented by x in the function) increases from say 10,000 rpm's to 12,000 rpm's, the braking force (represented by y in the function) applied would increase an equal amount, so from 10,000 units to 12,000 units. (keep in mind, all these numbers are made up).

However, on centrifugal brakes, whose braking force is represented as a parabolic equation. Again, I'll use the simplest one (y=x^2) Now assume spool speed is represented again by X and braking force is represented by Y. Since you have probably never dealt with parabolic equation, I don't expect you to know what this one looks like, but think about it. If the spool speed is 10,000 rpm's, then 10,000^2 is 100,000,000 units of braking force. But as the spool speeds up to say 12,000 rpm's, you'll have a braking force of 144,000,000 units.

I'm not all that great at explaining this stuff, so if this makes your MORE confused, sorry.

BB

BB, it makes perfect sense to me. I never thought about thinking of braking like that, but it makes so much sense.

Ryan