bubble97
-
Posts
4 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by bubble97
-
-
From your description, it may be that there is mono in the grooves instead of chenille which if this is the case would be fairly easy to replace. Another thing is not to load the spools too high as this could contribute to getting line behind the spool. Can you put up a picture of what you have currently got.
I've put up a picture of my spools (post #70). As you see, nowhere for chenille to go, so I guess I either try less line on the spool as you suggest, and/or try glueing thick mono sticking out from the bottom of the spool as Chavender mentioned in an earlier post?
bubble97
-
-
Dear all
I bought an Abu 506 in the 70s, used it a lot, and then it's been in my parents attic since I stopped fishing at 21. Restarted fishing recently, and now want to re-live using my 506. I do find it tangles behind the spool on the spindle a fair bit, more than I remember in the 70s. The spools are both match spools, but not like the ones in Chavender's (excellent!) pictures and description - mine are black but with opaque clear plastic skirting on both top and bottom.
Can somebody advise whether I need to do either the chenille thing (don't remember any chenille in the 70s with these spools, and there's nowhere obvious to put it) or the thick mono sticking out stuck on the bottom of the spool thing?
Thanks in advance.
bubble97
Chenille for closed face reel spools
in Coarse Fishing
Posted
I think your post went in before my pictures one got moderated, so you didn't miss it, it just appeared later?
They are definitely the original spools - I remember opening the box in 197?, and I remember filling them back then, and they've just been sitting in a reel case for 30 years. The reel is definitely a 506 with the blueish spool housing (and not a 506M with the two lines on the housing). I'll monitor ebay...though will I think also experiment a bit with the line filling and perhaps even putting some mono sticking out on the bottom as suggested by Chavender.
Thanks for the thoughts (any others very welcome of course).