G. Loomis Conquest 843c vs 893c

[Jeffrey Walker]

I am looking to pick up a 3 powered Conquest.  Which would you pick and why?

 

I generally fish ponds, and smaller bodies of water - Def not a deepwater or lake/reservoir fisherman.  That is the only thing I can say that may be relevant. 

[NorcalBassin]

Since you're fishing smaller bodies of water that are relatively shallow and presumably carrying your rod I'd recommend the 843 over the 903. Both would be great... just don't see the reason for the extra 6" in your application.

[kayaking_kev]

The 843c, it cast like a dream and weighs 3.8 oz. I was supposed to sell mine after I started building my own rods, but I haven't been able to part with it yet.

[Johnbt]

I fish out of a 16' jon boat with two bass boat seats 9' apart and usually fish places that are 35 acres to 100 or so. From time to time I'll fish a small river or two 1000-acre reservoirs. The deepest ones are around 30 feet or so.

 

I've had an 843C for a couple of years and never felt the need for a longer rod. I also have a 783C, 844C and 843S. I bought the 783 first and don't think it gives up a thing to the 843.

 

I've never been tempted to buy a longer rod. Bass rod. I do have a variety of surf rods up to 11.5 feet.  

[fishwizzard]

For me, the biggest deciding factor when bank/shore fishing is what the actual banks are like.  If you are stuck a few feet above/away from the water, a shorter rod makes it easier to land land a bass w/o high-sticking the rod, as the shorter the rod, the lower you have to raise the tip to get the line in your hand.  Another factor is how clear your banks are, I fish a lot of spots where I am standing in a beaver drag to cast, so a 6' rod is going to work out better then  7' one.