Spinning Reel- 2011 Shimano Stradic Vs 2011 Bps Pro Qualifier

[Bigbarge50]

Wow did not expect all the feedback fellas, especially this fast.

To clarify..... I have no problem spending the money for the Stradic. Thanks for the heads up on the in store discount too, though not sure I have one too close to me. I wonder what is so new and exciting about the new stradic as opposed to the "old" one. I have an old shimano myself and I love it. I also have a very old bps tournament mega cast that still is a very nice real and still catches a lot of fish. Looking to upgrade my spinning gear and would ideally have 3 set ups total.... two standard all around set ups and then then maybe a ultra light.

The main thing I was curious about is while the shimano name speaks for itself, I was just curious to not just buy the name you know. I fish almost all $100+ baitcasters which is not a point of pride or anything else, just happened to be the reels I was interested in. I have never fished a over $200 or $300 reel and am not sure what a $300 dollar Diawa is giving me over a curado. (that is not a bias Diawa statement.... I have two of them). So I do not use just one brand or such so I am open to other options.

I have never fished a pflueger, but have heard good things.

My thoughts for the last few months have been the Stradic, and still 99% there. Now to avoid the idea of buying both and trying out the Pro Qualifier or the extreme that is also on sale.

[marinetech]

opinions are like ****holes , everybody has one so here is mine for all its worth. I have 4 PQ baitcasters and love them. I have also owned my PQ spinning reel for a few years now and it has great anti reverse , drag and will cast a mile. My opinion is the quality of the pq spinner is far superior to the baitcasters. I take better care of my bc's better than my spinning gear. I just got a stradic to setup for dock skipping but won't have a chance to try it for quite some time. (dam the hard water)

[J Francho]

As long as opinions are being thrown around this is mine. As most know I'm strictly a spinning guy and own medium priced and budget reels that have caught great fish on, each reel works great. I wouldn't spend more than $100 for a freshwater reel, the overwhelming majority of fish barely tax your equipment. Saltwater I feel more comfortable with a better quality reel, saltwater, salt air and sand will take it's toll, a pound for pound that fish are tougher.

Not where I live. I've posted ad nauseum about "byproduct" catches that will tax your gear. It's all about location, location, location.

I do agree that somewhere close to $100 is good reel territory for spinning. I bought my CI4s for $175, and payed a premium for weight loss. Paired with my Avid rods I bougjt on sale for $120, I have great tools for not too much scratch. But you gotta have patience for the good deals.

[jeremyt]

I have owned many spinning reels from shimano stradic mgfi's to cardinals. The biggest thing is going to be personal opinion. I love shimano and that's just my personal opinion. If you spend $50 on a reel then expect to replace it in 5 or so years. I mostly fished mine in salt for flounder, reds and speckled trout. That said I still have a lower end stradic that has lasted 10 plus years with no issues. The $250 mgfi's is on a shelf because it's a rough reel now. Last year I purchased a bps combo ( pflueger president with bps rod ) and have no complaints as a matter of fact I love that combo as much as any other. I am not saying that my opinion is the gospel, by far there are way more experienced anglers out there. What I will say is to do what you feel comfortable with and be happy with it.

[0119]

I dont understand why folks think spinning should cost less than casting. Especially today when virtually every casting reel looks like it was spawned from the same parents. Maybe because beginner and less intensely involved anglers seem to gravitate towards spinnings ease of operation. Its true you dont need much of a reel to catch most any fish. The Pflegeur Medalist proves that. Proper fighting a fish is all up to the rod, the reel only gathers line and even a poor drag can be supplemented by your thumb or palm. Francho's centerpin reels is proof of that. But why buy cheap? Its like the dozens of saltwater guys I pass everyday on the highway. 70 grand F350 hauling a 200 grand center console with 50 grand of outboards on it. Every one has 20 buck walmart combos in the rod racks.

[Hooligan]

Not where I live. I've posted ad nauseum about "byproduct" catches that will tax your gear. It's all about location, location, location.

Aww go on, John. Nothing in freshwater can possibly tax your equipment. Not even 45" muskies on 200 size reels. Salt is the only way to catch fish worth catching...

@ Op, Stradic is a great way to go. The PQ spinning reel is cumbersome, it doesn't fit on most rods (in terms of balance) and it's got rather low line capacity for the sizes of reel. They're also quite heavy compared to their standard frame and spool sized counterparts. Point of reference, a PQ20 weighs in at 10.4 OZ with a capacity of 80yds/8lb and a 2500 Stradic is 140/8 and 9.4 ounces.

[Hooligan]

I dont understand why folks think spinning should cost less than casting. Especially today when virtually every casting reel looks like it was spawned from the same parents. Maybe because beginner and less intensely involved anglers seem to gravitate towards spinnings ease of operation. Its true you dont need much of a reel to catch most any fish. The Pflegeur Medalist proves that. Proper fighting a fish is all up to the rod, the reel only gathers line and even a poor drag can be supplemented by your thumb or palm. Francho's centerpin reels is proof of that. But why buy cheap? Its like the dozens of saltwater guys I pass everyday on the highway. 70 grand F350 hauling a 200 grand center console with 50 grand of outboards on it. Every one has 20 buck walmart combos in the rod racks.

The vast majority of high quality spinning reels are comparably less expensive than their baitcasting counterparts. It isn't that people THINK they should cost less; it's the reality that for comparable gear they generally DO cost less. Only in the past year have prices really come in line with casting reels in terms of quality, and to say that is somewhat a stretch.

[00 mod]

I have a stradic and love it. But if I were looking right now I would check tw's 12 days sale and see if the daiwa spinning reels were still on sale. Something like a $300 plus reel for stradic money. Got good reviews too!!

Jeff

[SirSnookalot]

0119 makes a good point, but in fairness the 42' yellowfins and contenders I see going out have stellas and Penn internationals on board, the 21' sea foxes have much more moderately priced gear, many of those boats are pretty much weekend fishermen. It goes down the line, saltwater offshore gear takes a real beating, inshore equipment not as much and freshwater equipment should last pretty good..

Living most of my 66 years in Michigan, being a snowbird for over 20 years and now living full time for the last 7 in a coastal environment, I've done my share off fishing, I get offshore 2 times a week weather permitting and fish inshore almost every day. I've caught most of the common species. When it comes to taxing your equipment, offshore ocean fish certainly can do that, many times we have caught a mere 30 or 40# fish like an amberjack on conventional gear and have to run it down with the boat, could fry an egg on the reel. Conversely sailfish aren't nearly as hard, not a big deal to land one on a 4000 spinning reel with 20 or 25lb class rod, they average only about 50# and the fight is totally different than the amberjack.

Inshore species don't tax the equipment quite as much as offshore, unless you're getting into 100+ tarpon, or big redfish and jacks. Fishing inshore with the salt surf, wind, sand and the power of some of these species is going to take it's toll on equipment, cheap stuff won't last.

Back in Michigan I caught plenty of those byproduct fish and I thought they fought great, until I moved, I no longer hold their fighting ability with the same esteem as I once did. A muskie is a nice fish to catch, but even a 45" doesn't come close to a cuda or tarpon of the same size. There is no reason why moderately price gear won't last in freshwater, you just don't get that many fish over 20#, I can't keep track of how many fish I catch over that size. This is just my opinion, I'm sure others will have a different view.

Those pictured byproduct fish are purdy and make a tasty meal, but I'll stick with my location..

I'm not one of these guys that eat, sleep and drink technical information about equipment, I care less about that, I just like catching fish with a good pair of shoulders.

[0119]

Wow your seven years in Florida have been much more memorable than my 50 years fishing here. I dont buy the offshore is so mighty stuff though. Been there dont that. Theres no casting involved. Most of the overfished remnants are simply like pulling a 5 gallon drum up from the drink. The flatheads Ive caught in Tenn. fought better than any Cuda or Red that exist in my part of Fl. And with all these species, like any other, proper technique dictates you use the rod to fight the fish. Salt guys in their buffs and saltlife t's just see it glamourous to us the engines forward gear to reel their fish in instead of a good reel.

[J Francho]

Three pages, I hope the OP got his answer.