Tackle Tour Reviews Bps Pro Qualifier

[Tywithay]

TT does a very good job with reviews, my only problem with them is they do have a bias when it comes to Daiwa or Shimano and I'll tell you why I feel that way and the PQ review is part of the reason. The minute they mention a reel being heavy as a bad thing, I don't like heavy reels either, I immediately think of the Zillion and the Metanium, great reels but neither ever got knocked on the weight issue and to me they are bricks. Both those reels are 8 oz, the same weight they knock other branded reels as being heavy, and I've asked about this and I was told that everything else is so good that they look past the weight because it really isn't an issue with these reels. Well is the weight isn't an issue with high end reels then it shouldn't be with any other reel and that is my only problem with their reviews otherwise I trust everything they report. Myself, when I picked up a Revo Premier 2nd generation and then a Smoke and finally a Tourney Pro, that was it, I was done with reels over 7.5 to 8oz, I don't care if the reel is said to be better than sliced bread, if it weighs more than 7oz it is a brick.

If a reel offers other-worldly performance and weighs 8oz, it's easier to overlook than an 8.5oz reel that offers average performance. I have an SS SV that's a few crumbs over 5oz, but I still reach for my Antares 9/10, even on the same rod, because the performance makes my day that much more pleasurable.

What'd you do to a Metanium to make it weigh 8oz? Mine only weighs 6oz.

[smalljaw67]

If a reel offers other-worldly performance and weighs 8oz, it's easier to overlook than an 8.5oz reel that offers average performance. I have an SS SV that's a few crumbs over 5oz, but I still reach for my Antares 9/10, even on the same rod, because the performance makes my day that much more pleasurable.

What'd you do to a Metanium to make it weigh 8oz? Mine only weighs 6oz.

 

Wrong reel, I meant the Antares. I understand performance aspects but as I've said, weight is a killer and deal breaker for me no matter how good the performance. I fished with a friends Zillion type-R yesterday, I wouldn't pay more than $100 for it because it is a brick. Did it perform well, absolutely but just as some guys can't get past tip heavy rods, I can no longer get past reels in the 8oz area. The same thing for rods, TT does a great job but they do show a little bias when doing a high end reel that performs well, no mention or points deducted for weight, fine but then you can do it to others either, if an 8oz reel is heavy for a $100 dollar reel then 8oz is heavy for a $600 dollar reel.

[frogflogger]

Hope this isn't off subject - Just weighed a box of reels - my old PQ10hb packed with 12# fluoro weighs 7.7 oz. - - my Ardent packed with 10# flouro comes in at 8.4 oz. - I fished these reels along with curados, calais, daiwas for 250 - 300 days a year, never minded their weight- back a few years ago we palmed 5000's without permanent damage to our bodies or minds - I've always been far more concerned with the weight of my rods than the reels.

[Goose52]

If a reel offers other-worldly performance and weighs 8oz, it's easier to overlook than an 8.5oz reel that offers average performance......

 

Absolutely – if a reel is really nice, I don’t notice, or even mind, the weight at all. I have a bunch of nice reels that are in the PQ weight range, or even an ounce or so heavier, that have similar line capacities and would fill similar roles as the PQ – Antares, Calais 200DC, Calcutta 100DC, Conquest 100s, Calcutta CTE-100GT - don’t mind the weight at all and they are all delightful reels.

 

HOWEVER – as has been mentioned, TT has decided that weight is “bad” and detracts score for weight.  Thus that detraction should apply equally to all reels. Now, since the 2012 Antares has been mentioned, let’s look at TTs Design & Ergonomics Ratings for the Antares vs. the PQ:

 

Weight:  Antares – 4 / PQ – 3    OK, Antares gets a better score – the factory listed weight IS a whopping .7 oz lighter than the PQ. Perhaps they have a table that says that reels 7 oz and under get a 5, 7.1 to 8 get a 4, 8.1 to 9 get a 3, etc. At least I HOPE they have a table or they are getting subjective on what should be an objective criterion.

 

Handle Length:  Antares – 4 / PQ – 3   That’s strange – they have the same length handles – why did the Antares score higher?

 

Knobs:  Antares – 5 / PQ – 3   Are the Antares knobs really THAT much better – two scoring points?  I guess it is to them so I’ll go with that.

 

Palming:  Antares – 4 / PQ – 3   Curious – the Antares is bigger in every dimension and visually dwarfs the PQ. They have an equivalent height when on the same reel seat (the Antares has a recessed reel foot but the PQ has a smaller height of the palm sideplate so that’s a wash). So, why does the Antares palm better and get a higher score?  And don’t forget the sensation you get when picking up and “palming” an  Antares/Calais that’s been in the hot sun or on a cold morning…   Anyway – must be some subjectivity here.

 

Ease of Breakdown:  Both score a 3 – a wash.

 

Now, before anyone gets the wrong idea, I’m not directly comparing the Antares and PQ, I’m examining the scoring system.

 

So, as I have mentioned repeatedly in this thread, I have no problems with the PQ scoring in the seven-ish range, I just have issues with consistency and subjectivity re the scoring system, have issues with some of the narrative comments in the PQ review, and felt it necessary to offer a counterpoint that real-world experience indicates that the “drag issue” is not as dire as they would have you to believe.

[OkobojiEagle]

While in college we had a pretty subjective scoring system of the gals present at the bar we were frequenting.  That scoring system endured dramatic revisions as closing time approached...

 

 

oe

[iabass8]

While in college we had a pretty subjective scoring system of the gals present at the bar we were frequenting. That scoring system endured dramatic revisions as closing time approached...

oe

Sometimea you just gotta take home that pro qualifer bro

[Hogsticker]

I don't even pay attention to the scores on the TT reviews. I just read it and take it for what its worth. None the less, the reviews done there are some of the best on the web IMO. I also think part of it is that this particular reviewer does not enjoy reviewing these lesser expensive rods and reels. He did a review on a Denali rod and it pretty much sounded the same. But when he reviewed the Megabass XX he was all sorts of pumped, which again leads to my original question - Why are they doing these reviews? I can think of so many other reels that have not been reviewed that would fit the TT niche a lot better. Maybe Wolbugger needs justification for his position? I have to be honest though, I wasn't the least bit excited when I saw they reviewed the PQ. I didn't even read it till I saw this.

[bootytrain]

Absolutely – if a reel is really nice, I don’t notice, or even mind, the weight at all. I have a bunch of nice reels that are in the PQ weight range, or even an ounce or so heavier, that have similar line capacities and would fill similar roles as the PQ – Antares, Calais 200DC, Calcutta 100DC, Conquest 100s, Calcutta CTE-100GT - don’t mind the weight at all and they are all delightful reels.

 

HOWEVER – as has been mentioned, TT has decided that weight is “bad” and detracts score for weight.  Thus that detraction should apply equally to all reels. Now, since the 2012 Antares has been mentioned, let’s look at TTs Design & Ergonomics Ratings for the Antares vs. the PQ:

 

Weight:  Antares – 4 / PQ – 3    OK, Antares gets a better score – the factory listed weight IS a whopping .7 oz lighter than the PQ. Perhaps they have a table that says that reels 7 oz and under get a 5, 7.1 to 8 get a 4, 8.1 to 9 get a 3, etc. At least I HOPE they have a table or they are getting subjective on what should be an objective criterion.

 

Handle Length:  Antares – 4 / PQ – 3   That’s strange – they have the same length handles – why did the Antares score higher?

 

Knobs:  Antares – 5 / PQ – 3   Are the Antares knobs really THAT much better – two scoring points?  I guess it is to them so I’ll go with that.

 

Palming:  Antares – 4 / PQ – 3   Curious – the Antares is bigger in every dimension and visually dwarfs the PQ. They have an equivalent height when on the same reel seat (the Antares has a recessed reel foot but the PQ has a smaller height of the palm sideplate so that’s a wash). So, why does the Antares palm better and get a higher score?  And don’t forget the sensation you get when picking up and “palming” an  Antares/Calais that’s been in the hot sun or on a cold morning…   Anyway – must be some subjectivity here.

 

Ease of Breakdown:  Both score a 3 – a wash.

 

Now, before anyone gets the wrong idea, I’m not directly comparing the Antares and PQ, I’m examining the scoring system.

 

So, as I have mentioned repeatedly in this thread, I have no problems with the PQ scoring in the seven-ish range, I just have issues with consistency and subjectivity re the scoring system, have issues with some of the narrative comments in the PQ review, and felt it necessary to offer a counterpoint that real-world experience indicates that the “drag issue” is not as dire as they would have you to believe.

The Antares was reviewed by Cal, while the PQ was reviewed by Wolbugger. So the preference or opinions in handle length, palming, etc are bound to be varied.  I think my Metanium palms better than my Curado I despite the Curado being smaller. Other people will have different opinions.

[shanksmare]

I have read several of the reviews that TT has done. I must say that I take what they say with a grain of salt.

 

I purchased a PQ about 4 years ago. I use it 4 or 5 days a week. I fish for 3 or 4 hours each outing. I like using reaction type baits so I am continually casting and winding. I fish from the bank and like traveling light so I only use one outfit. Since I'm fishing off the bank my outfit takes a bit of abuse. I have had to replace the pawl and worm gear on the reel because of this abuse. I put a few drops of oil in this reel every month or so. I break it down and clean it maybe once a year or less.

 

Is this reel the best thing since sliced bread? No! But it is a tool. It works well enough and I see no reason to upgrade to anything more expensive.