22 Aldebaran bfs vs 23 Conquest bfs

[Smalleyez]

For those who have used both the 22 Aldebaran bfs and the 23 Conquest bfs is one or the other easier to cast?

Disclaimer, I have both but I just didn’t get enough time with them this summer to make a determination. Herd thinning is on the hozizon and I’d like to keep the best performer.

[Hobie-Wan Kenobi]

Conquest is "easier" to cast. The Aldebaran requires more braking but, both cast great. The Conquest sweet spot is around 44-55% of brakes, the Aldebaran being closed to 75-80%

[Lastworm]

How do you guys find the added weight and bulkiness I round aluminum framed reel when using the Conquest after fishing with the featherweight Aldebaran?

I used round reels (Calcutta 50b) back in the day, but it’s been years since I’ve fished with a round reel. Have been considering the Conquest since it’s release

[Smalleyez]

I haven’t used my Conquest enough to answer this completely, but in general, to me, a round reel is just a different experience. They may cast identical, I don’t know yet, but the real difference is in having that hunk of round metal in your hand, which I like. I am a traditionalist and I like things like round reels and side-by-side shotguns for my upland bird hunting. If you liked your old Calcutta B I think you’ll love this new Conquest BFS.

[Lastworm]

I was so close to pulling the trigger on the Conquest, but the lightness of the Aldebaran convinced me to get another, this time in the HG ratio. (I have issues)

I usually have the brakes at about 4.5 when casting 3.5-6g lures, but I’m not a violent caster and prefer a low effort flick, my casts are also short distance usually 10-15metres. Besides the performance, the weight of the reel is the main reason I’ve never considered the Daiwa options.

Boring having another of the same reel, but I just can’t fault it.