![]() ![]() |
May 19 2005, 08:44 PM
Post
#1
|
|
![]() Member ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Members Posts: 3,544 Joined: 23-December 04 From: Alsager, Cheshire Member No.: 5,915 |
Having recently replaced my 30-year-old glass float rod with a MAP CFS 2 piece waggler model (which I'm very pleased with), I'm now looking to retire my equally ancient leger rod.
I'm torn between the MAP CFS Carp Feeder (which looks from the brochure as though it has 3 top sections with colour-coded quivers of different weights, rather than plug-in quivers)and a twin-top barbel rod like the Grey's Prodigy (pricier, I know). My question is this: Presumably the "Avon" top on a twin-top rod has a different action to the quiver top, more suited to heavier float fishing than my CFS could cope with. Does this mean that such a rod has more "bangs per buck" than a pure feeder model like the CFS? What are the pros and cons of plug-in quivers and a single top joint over 3 separate tips with built-in quivers? If anyone has experience of the CFS Carp Feeder, I'd be interested to hear your opinion. Most of my fishing is either pleasure fishing for mixed species on the local commercial or barbel and chub on smallish rivers. Thanks! |
|
|
|
![]() ![]() |
Similar Topics
| Topic Title | Replies | Topic Starter | Views | Last Action | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
![]() |
13 | Casey | 1,610 | 16th February 2005 - 06:21 PM Last post by: Newt |
|||
![]() |
8 | Del_R | 819 | 23rd April 2004 - 05:45 PM Last post by: Peter Waller |
|||
![]() |
7 | gotthebugagain | 1,270 | 13th July 2005 - 12:48 AM Last post by: paul mc |
|||
![]() |
22 | maggotsworkforme | 1,384 | 2nd December 2004 - 07:15 AM Last post by: Peter Waller |
|||
![]() |
11 | sherlockofsheff | 1,321 | 3rd March 2004 - 02:27 AM Last post by: sherlockovsheff |
|||
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 3rd December 2008 - 03:53 AM |
Navigation
spacer