I think someone (maybe @bulldog1935) touched on Japanese line standards for reel capacities in another post. 

   I (finally) bought a Tatula 150 this afternoon. It's rated 150 yards of 14 lb. line. I already had line on a Curado 200. It's rated 110 yards of 14 lb. line. 36% difference in capacity, right? So I simply transferred the line from the Curado to the Tatula, thinking I wanted to see how much backing line I would need to add.

 

   Guess what? Exactly the same amount, from full spool to full spool.

   Draw your own conclusions.                      jj

Others - not just me - have noted Japan mono and fluoro are rated by max breaking strength, and the Japanese still rate them by gou# - diameter is most important.  

 

Since I'm mostly fishing X-braid on JDM reels - and if I'm fishing fluoro, it's probably bought in Japan, too (Toray, Kuhrea Seaguar) - I'm totally happy with their line ratings - they make a lot of sense.  

Here's  part of the table again from JP Tackle News (link to the long table)

 

 Pardon me. Not the focus of my post. I was commenting on the fact that two Japanese reels were rated as having a 36% difference in line capacity, but in actuality had the same line capacity.    jj

Clearly a Diawa and Shimano yard isn't equal which explains why the Daiwa fan boys think they cast farther. ?

Line capacity based on yards is sort of subjective.  It should be based off line diameter and each standard between companies and even countries is different.   

 

On a side note, I spooled two Curado K's earlier this year with Daiwa Samaria FC 14lb 220 yards with 10-20 yards of backing and it filled them perfectly with only a few yards leftover.

hey, you called me - think it has nothing to do with the fact they're using different line diameters for lb-test?  That's everything.  

only in the US do manufacturers report in test - the rest of the world thinks in diameter (mm)

 

The Japanese list their lines by diameter (first by gou#) - they then report Maximum breaking strength.  

 

In the US, everyone does everything by lb-test - Minimum breaking strength.  

You have to hunt to find diameter and then guess what's right.  A reel that's aimed for US market may follow suite - and may not.  

And you're trying to equate two different manufacturers.  

 

My Yumeya F-spools are rated in (max) fluoro breaking, as is ZPI Alcance bait spool.  The equivalent diameter is always smaller than nylon mono test, which again, I like, because I'm not using big mono.  (The balance of Yumeya spools are rated in gou-meters, e.g. 1520 spool = PE#1.5, 200 m)  

6 minutes ago, bulldog1935 said:

hey, you called me - think it has nothing to do with the fact they're using different line diameters for lb-test?  

only in the US do manufacturers report in test - the rest of the world thinks in diameter

 

   Yes, but with the Japanese standards being based off diameter, as you have shown, and both brands being Japanese, one would thing that the conversion of test to diameter would be consistent. Same/same, right? At least I would have thought they were  close.

   But this far off?  Hmmmm ........

First of all, I think these two specific reels are catering the US market, thus their line capacity estimates might be so as well. Secondly, what is considered as a "full" spool might be another factor - some company may base the line capacity estimate on a spool that is fully loaded to the brim; the other may recommend leaving a 1/8~1/4 inch gap to the brim on certain reels' spools.  And finally, I don't think there's an industry standard of what "150" or "200" stands for. For years, a Daiwa 1500 spinning reel was as big as a Shimano 2500 reel. 
These are all my guesses. 

I thought this was gonna be a thread about how the Tat 150 trounced the K. Oh well.?

1 hour ago, PhishLI said:

I thought this was gonna be a thread about how the Tat 150 trounced the K. Oh well.?

 

   It might turn into that. I don't know yet. I'll find out this afternoon or tomorrow.      jj

8 hours ago, PhishLI said:

I thought this was gonna be a thread about how the Tat 150 trounced the K. Oh well.?

 

   I had no intention of making any sort of comment to that effect, but I took the Tatula 150 fishing this PM, 50 lb. test Sufix 832 on a 7'-02" Mojo Glass H/M rod. I was really curious about performance with braided lines.

   With lures 7/8 or 1+ oz., the Tat did indeed trounce the Curado, and by what seemed a fairly significant distance.

   With 3/4 oz. lures, it beat the Curado, but not by anything important.

   Less than 3/4 oz? No difference.

 

   So the Tat isn't a total loss.         jj

  

Daiwa's line ratings are usually for fluorocarbon thickness, where Shimanos seems to be for fat mono. I always suspected but confirmed this year that the Curado K definitely holds more than 110 yards of your typical 16# fluorocarbon, such as Seaguar.

 

I use a Tatula 150 for braid for frogging and flipping cover.