Search didnt produce much on this....

Am trying to get feedback from anyone about this reel.Really considering getting one soon, and thus far havent heard any negatives about it.

Anybody got one??

Thanks

            J

I had the original and it sucked. Randall (guide and "Big Bass Man" from Georgia) has the newer version and really likes the reel. If you decide to buy one, please post a review after you have fished it awhile.

8-)

I had the original and it sucked. Randall (guide and "Big Bass Man" from Georgia) has the newer version and really likes the reel. If you decide to buy one, please post a review after you have fished it awhile.

8-)

What was the problem with the original?

Poorly machined (rough spots on retrieve), unbalanced, and loose.

The original US Reel was sold in connection with Ray Scott's introduction of a new, lightweight rod and reel combination. Several years ago he was trying to mount an initative to encourage the professional tours to fish with light equipment exclusively, even the field and make the sport more challenging. Well, that never got off the ground. However, his rod is still out there.

Initially, I received the rod as part of the package, but the first reels were unacceptable to Mr. Scott and apparently reworked to higher specifications. This resulted in a 90 day delay in shipment. Once I received the reel, I fished the combo a few times, but it was nothing interesting. I repackaged it and gave it to my dad for Christmas!

I'm told my reel was subsequently recalled, but I was never notified. That's all I know, I lost interest and have not paid any attention to the company until a few months ago when this topic came up on the Forum. I essentially posted these same comments and Randall responded. He has the newer reel and highly praised it in his post.

So, there you go. That's my story, but here is how it was promoted:

Photo: Ray Scott Outdoors

Ray Scott is so impressed by the new SuperCaster 225 reel that he put his name on it.

Photo: Bob Cobb/Ray Scott Outdoors

Fred Kemp and Ray Scott check out the ultimate light-line system: the SuperCaster reel and Sportackle rod.

Sportackle:

A Cure For Tough Tourneys And No Bites

Monday, January 06, 2003

by Ray Scott

Hear me out about using Sportackle. We're not waving a fairy wand or bad- mouthing tournament tackle. It just works.

A New Reel

The first thing you'll observe about the new spinning reel Fred M. Kemp designed is the unusually oversized line spool. It's a sizeable 2 1/4 inches diameter, almost an inch larger than standard spinning reel spools.

A St. Louis, Mo. home-builder turned reel designer, Kemp has been issued a patent (No. 6,082,651) by the U.S. Patent Office for his open-face reel: "a lightweight spinning reel with large-diameter spool."

You ask, "What's the big deal about a big spool?" Your reaction is similar to my thinking 3 years ago when Kemp first offered his prototype U.S. Reel for my inspection at the St. Louis Boat and Sport Show at the Transworld Dome.

Inside the dome were countless booths and displays of the newest innovations in fishing tackle products -- seemingly enough offerings to fill a bass angler's spinning reel needs.

But, Fred Kemp begged to differ. "This reel will outperform any other reel in this show," he said with a straight face.

"It casts a country mile, particularly with light lines," he said. "And with the big spool, line twist and line memory problems are almost nonexistent."

As an advocate of using Sportackle (Editor's note: Sportackle is Ray's trademarked name for a specifically-designed light-line outfit), and since I've been urging bass fishermen to consider putting the "sport" back in "sportfishing," the Fred's light-line mention caught my attention.

Could it be true? Longer casts, less line twist, lower line memory? All of this in a spinning reel weighing just 8 ounces?

Since we were in Missouri, naturally my reaction was "show me." The model I had in hand was the prototype, and it worked, but as soon as the first SuperCaster 225 rolled off the assembly line, Fred assured me of an on-the-water test to prove his claims.

A Little Background

Before we get to the "field" test, here's the interesting story of how Fred Kemp birthed his SuperCaster reel.

In 1995, he and a friend were standing in the middle of a mass retailer's tackle department. The friend asked Fred to pick out a reel for his two sons. "There was every reel known to man in the store," Fred said, "but not a single reel to buy."

The friend could afford to buy one reel for each boy. But trying to pick a reel for fishing 4-pound line for bluegill and crappie and that would also handle heavier 14-pound test for bass in heavy cover seemed impossible. The reels either weighed too much or had too small of a spool diameter.

Later, Kemp wondered if such a multi-use reel had merit. He cannibalized parts from several reels and fashioned a larger-diameter-spool reel that weighed about the same as a typical ultralight spinning reel.

"I'd never cast 4-pound test on a large spool before," recalls Kemp. "The difference was tremendous and immediately apparent."

Buoyed by his experience, he visited friends and tackle shops. "Here, cast this thing," he insisted. Each caster was surprised and amazed at how far the tiny practice plug sailed.

For the past 7 years, he has tinkered with his idea. He researched the U.S. Patent Office filings -- the research and development documents -- to eliminate any previous claim to his "field of invention" as a spinning reel improvement, and working on his home computer, he designed the reel in graphic detail and set about with local St. Louis-area die cutters and machinists to build his prototypes.

Reel Specs

The end result of those prototypes and further tests is the SuperCaster 225. As I mentioned, it weighs only 8.0 ounces with a graphite spool and slightly more (8.6 ounces) with an aluminum spool. "Lightweight, but tough," said Kemp, who explains the reel body is made of space-age, aircraft-grade carbon fiber that is "much stronger than graphite and some metals."

Also, as all another sites know, with some spinning reels a crank on the handle results in a noticeable "wobble" in the rotor and gear train. But after I gave the SuperCaster a few spins, my comment was: "smooth."

Kemp smiled and quickly pointed out why. "The drive and pinion gears are machined from magnesium bronze and stainless steel in a special process to get the highest-quality, smoothest gears."

He added: "The SuperCaster shaft is made of a specially-treated stainless steel alloy that can take more than twice the punishment of ordinary steel shafts."

And if the number of "stainless steel ball bearings" in a spinning reel impresses you, Kemp's design incorporates eight. Seven are placed at stress and support points from the handle to the rotor, and an eighth bearing supports the line roller.

The drag mechanism, with conventional drag assembly, is on the face of the spool for easy and quick setting, and quick-response adjustment, an important function in light-line fishing.

Also, the conventional skirted-spool feature helps prevent line from becoming entangled with the rotor or rotating cup of the reel.

Some of these features are standard on any quality spinning reel, but what Fred Kemp says makes the "performance difference" is his reel's lightweight and the large-diameter spool.

Functionally, with the oversized spool, the lip is within convenient reach of your index finger which makes feathering the line easier and helps improve casting accuracy.

The lightweight, large-diameter spool concept in Fred's mind is the "biggest advance in spinning reels since the skirted spool." Also, he believes he's built a reel with all-around versatility, capable of handling a range of line sizes from 2- to 15-pound test. And it has a super-fast retrieve rate: 28 inches of line per turn of the handle.

Understanding why Fred Kemp's rather simple solution works but has escaped the attention of such skilled reel manufacturers as Shimano or Daiwa is interesting to ponder.

Kemp explains it all with one word: "versatile." With the reel's ability to handle the wide range of line sizes, the SuperCaster 225 performs the job of several reels. "Such a versatile reel will mean fewer overall reel sales in the long run," he believes.

The Rod and the Test

In late November, just before the winter chill hit central Alabama, Fred arrived at my 55-acre lake near Pintlala, Ala. with his first production model. "It's still not the finished, ready-for-the-market product," he said, "but it's ready for a no-holds-barred field test."

I said: "Well, if this reel can live up to your claims and my expectations, it may be the perfect mate I'm wanting for light-line Sportackle fishing."

I filled the oversized spool with Stren monofilament and quickly observed: "You need a bulk spool of 4-pound line for this job." Kemp listened as we suggested using an arbor on the spool with light line.

Using plastic tape, I affixed the reel on the Tennessee handle of a 7-foot custom-made Ray Scott Sportackle-design rod. Like the reel, the rod is lightweight (only 2.6 ounces), with a fast-taper tip, but also has a solid butt section for setting the hook and playing a larger bass.

This is a rod design I've spent many years testing and improving, just as Fred Kemp has tinkered with his spinning reel. The rod is as fundamentally different as Fred's big spool, notably with my concept of the smaller guides. For example, the first stripper guide located ahead of the spool is about the size of a dime as compared to the half-dollar-size diameter on conventional spinning rods.

The smaller the guides, the better the casting accuracy and distance -- the theory being quicker loops coming off the spool and line slap on the blank being reduced or totally eliminated. That means less resistance and added distance on the cast.

But with the SuperCaster's larger spool and consequent bigger loops, I wondered whether the line would snarl in the downsized stripper guide. Only one way to find out. I rigged a 4-inch Slider worm with a 1/16-ounce head, aimed at a stickup and flicked my wrist. The tiny Slider worm took off like a rocket.

Distance was no problem. And by feathering the line on the spool's rim, the lure settled softly on the edge of the target.

I'd like to say the first cast produced a "thump" and a resulting 6-pound bass. But that sequence would be later.

Cast after cast, the reel and rod combination performed. Distance and accuracy were as advertised. Line twist? No problem.

Curious about how the drag system would fare, I got my answer when that 6- pounder inhaled the Slider.

First, on line-light (4-pound test), you sweep the rod and grind the sharp wire hook with quick turns of the reel handle into the fish's jaw. The 28 inches of line per handle turn worked great.

Now, I'm playing the bass with the 7-foot rod's action and paying a mind to the reel's drag adjustment. It's a smooth drag, working against the fish's power -- and that's good, because with light-line fishing, your mind, body and tackle need to function as one. Any mistake or tackle flaw will go in the fish's favor.

The purpose of a "field test" is to prove a point as well as find flaws. For the most part, U.S. Reel's claim of "when performance means everything" proved out. But Fred still wants to tinker.

Yeah I was mostly interested in the fact that it can handle braid well.Normally I use 15lb power pro.Anything more doesnt cast well.This thing claims to be able to handle 20 or even up to 30lb...

If it is even a little off balance I may not get it.I'm too spoiled by my stradic mg's and sustain.

Why can't your reels cast 20 or 30 lb. braid very well ?