If the Curado G is on the same level as the Curado E, why is Shimano still making the Curado E but calling it the Chronarch E? The Chronarch E is a $200 reel. The Curado G retails for $160. Do the math—something doesn't add up if the G is just as good as the E.
The Curado G is a reel in between the Citica E/G and the Curado/Chronarch E. Not a replacement for the Curado E, a lower-cost compliment in the same way the Revo SX compliments the Revo STX. The Citica G is the successor to the Citica E, but there's not quite so much difference between the two models there.
The only reason there's any brouhaha at all about the Curado G is because Shimano decided to swap the names around. A consumer sees the Curado E. The G is a step below the E, still a good reel but a step below. Yet they share the same name, and the G comes after the E. Logical conclusion? That the G is supposed to be a better reel, an improvement on the old one. Never mind the Curado E is still being built as the Chronarch E, with a few minor changes—the Curado name is what the consumer sees first and foremost. When the Curado G isn't quite as nice as the Curado/Chronarch E, what does the consumer think? That Shimano downgraded the Curado, when in reality all that happened was they introduced a new reel.
Suppose Shimano had called the Curado G the Cutlass, Connecticut, Chimpanzee, any name under the sun that starts with C. And then kept on calling the Curado E the Curado E while raising the price to $200, or calling it the Curado G and making a few minor changes and raising the price. I guarantee there would have been rave reviews about the new Shimano Chimpanzee reel that is $40 less than a Curado and is almost as good. And there would have been no complaints about the reel being a watered-down Curado.
Shimano's reason behind the name changes was not illogical from their perspective, but the resulting negative feedback on the Curado G should have been foreseen. It was a marketing ploy that went over like a lead balloon.