The problem with a wide, shallow spool is that too much line can build up in one place and bind against the reel cage if you're not paying attention to how the line is distributed onto the spool as you wind it in. This is not much of a problem with small fish that you would typically not play from the reel in any event. However, when playing a bigger fish from the reel and retrieving line with the reel, it can be a buzzkill to bring him to within 10 or 20 feet from the net after a long fight and then have your reel bind up because your line is jammed in the cage.
Then again, I've got 3 Litespeeds and 4 Velocities, so it's not necessarily a dealbreaker, just something to be aware of.
i own a couple litespeeds (a 1 and a 2), and the are among my favorite reels. they are, in my opinion, very finely us made reels and i have never had an issue with them (or any other lamson reel i own).
i am quite aware of s&s's critique(a good one albeit), but i have to say that, in 2-6 wt. range, i've never had any problems with line build up.
i think lamson has addressed this(alleged) problem with the new speedster and arx series.
I have 2 rods (8wt SH and 7wt DH) with litespeeds on them. Also 2 8wt SH with konics on them. All are used for steelhead, lake run browns, coho and king salmon. So they have seen their share of line peeled off and wound back on. I never watch the line while winding. I have never seen or experienced this issue with them. Maybe its an issue if you put too much line on the reel or you are running the line thru your hand when you wind line on the spool. I never touch the line when I'm fighting a fish as long as the fish is "on the reel". I have seen others run the line thru their fingers with the hand that is holding the rod so they can manually manipulate the line with drag. I never understood this myself, after all what is the drag on the reel for? I tend to think that line wound on a reel will naturally tend to run somewhat level, not bunch up on one side unless there is external guidance on the line forcing it to one side.
Thanks for the concern, but the as far as I'm concerned its not an issue. I like the lamson reels I have and will buy another when I need another reel.
Klunker, you raise an interesting point. Manipulating the line on retrieval might possibly be one of the causes of spool lockup. To assume that the design of a reel is solely the cause for this is not right. Human error could also be part of it. Is overloading a spool with too much backing a possible cause or maybe the type of backing? I am interested to know if others have experienced this problemwith various other reel designs or is Lamson being singled outhere. The designers and manufacturers of modern day equipment put alot of thought, time and money into the design in order to bring a product to market.
Wasn't the Litespeed designed to be a trout reel? And when fishing for trout doesn't one want to protect one's tippet? Well, Lamson's wide spool does that better than a narrow spool.
Torque. You want it to remain as constant as possible when playing a fish on fine tippet.
Or am I mistaken?
I think Lamson made a choice, rather than a mistake as it is often described on this forum, to design their reels with a wide spool. The design process is a give and take, and while I think it is important that people be made aware of a design's flaws, let's not ignore the design's advantages.
For bonefishing, I can see why one might avoid a Litespeed, but I don't think anyone is bonefishing with a Litespeed 2.
I am interested to know if others have experienced this problemwith various other reel designs or is Lamson being singled outhere.
The reel that has caused me the most problems in this regard is the original Battenkill Large Arbor V, not a Lamson.
The problems arise more from the shallowness of the spool than its width: the less room there is between the arbor and the cage, the less room there is for an adequate foundation of backing, and the fewer turns of line in one spot are needed to fill the entire space. Very large-arbor reel designs tend to be shallow, and designers try to provide adequate capacity by compensating with additional width, but the width per se is not the source of the problem.
Perhaps I have developed too harsh an attitude toward Waterworks products. As Moucheur points out it is not a feature unique to Waterworks and, further, I do not doubt the ability of any of my fellow contributors here to use their tackle most advantageously. I am also cognizant of the engineering concept that the less a circumference (of a reel arbor) changes, the more constant the drag setting remains. Additionally, as I have long been critical specifically of the Waterworks products' uniformly wide/shallow aspect ratio and explained way, I am confident that if you handed me your rod and reel I would manage to get the line back on acceptably as would most of you. If, however, a less experienced angler is asking advise, particularly in a bonefishing rather than trout stream context, I think it is highly relevant to make him aware of the potential for un-even line build up issues. To inquire if anyone other than S&S and Moucheur have experienced this need to pay extra attention to retrieving line intuitively and uniformly, let me illustrate this differently. Perhaps the most respected name in fly reels today is Abel. they have uniquely offered many of the Super Series reels in both moderately wide (but not shallow) spool dimensions and narrow ones too. Over the past couple of seasons they have been methodically and brilliantly reconfiguring the entire Super line up from little trout to tarpon/tuna size reels to be NARROW ONLY! And Waterworks too introduced their newest model, Speedster, to be larger in diameter and narrower in width as well. Hardy, which knows a thing or two about reel design makes a very specific point about their award winning U DD (&CC) that it features a NARROW spool width. Do I have it in for Waterworks or find their products unattractive or badly crafted...I do not, and I am not criticizing any one for liking them either. I am suggesting for someone in the market for a bonefish reel that there are better designed choices out there with superior proportions and larger surface area drag designs. While I am feeling contrite and defensive, I will further point out that many of the rods I consider ideal for my applications would looked askance upon my many other trout fishers for being to quick in recovery rate and thus lacking in deep flexing feel.
The width / depth issue cost me $160 dollars. I like everything about Lamson reels I have had but I litterally have pinched the welded loop almost off 2 brand new lines in Lamson reels. I wasn't watching for it but the shallow spool led to the line stacking up upon retrieval and got to the point it pinched my line in the reel.
Since realizing what caused that it hasn't happened since. I don't think when spending $200-$300 on a reel you should have to
A) use 50% of the recomended backing capacity
B) be super conciensus of how you manipulate your line upon retrieval
Since I primarily fish trout along the front range going with less backing isn't a issue. The whole scenario is just annoying when for comparable money Nautilus, Ross,Galvan don't have similar issues.
I would consider their new reel with the deeper spool but I don't have room for anymore $300 line holders in my arsenal of rod/reel combos (yet )
Gee, too bad, replacing the welded loops with braided loops or whipped loops would only have cost you a couple of dollars.
Yep I did do that....didn't spend $80 on a fly line so I could have to fix it and use an alternative method. I don't mind the amnesia method but on line where I am throwing smaller than 18 dries I don't like it.