Bps Pro Qualifier Bc Reel – 5 Year Challenge – 4 Years Down, 1 To Go 2024
Goose52 reply :
The test reel for the PQ 5-Year Challenge hit its fourth service anniversary on October 26 (today). I cleaned the reel this morning, fished it mid-day, and wrote this report in the afternoon.
Background:
Briefly, the 5-Year Challenge resulted from some board members expressing the opinion that the PQ reel was a “one-season” reel (it would be completely worn out after a "season"), and certainly wouldn’t stay in an angler’s arsenal for as long as 5 years. The subject reel is being used to test those opinions.
Other threads in this series:
BPS Pro Qualifier BC Reel – 5 Year Challenge – Interim Report (12-7-2011)
BPS Pro Qualifier BC Reel – 5-Year Challenge – A Speed-Bump On The Road To Paradise
BPS Pro Qualifier BC Reel – 5-Year Challenge – Three Years In
BPS Pro Qualifier BC Reel – 5-Year Challenge – Time To Pay The Piper!
Current Statistics (based on documented catch data and assumptions as discussed in the 12-7-2011 thread):
Reel placed into service: 26 Oct. 2009
Months of service as of this report: 48
Number of “catch days” (days when fish were caught with this reel): 373
Number of fish caught: 786
Biggest fish caught: 48.6 lb grass carp
Biggest bass caught: 9.5 lb LMB
Number of cycles (casts & retrieves): 39,000+ (see note)
Note: Number of cycles is based on catch data, not on total days/hours of use. The reel was used many days where no fish were caught, especially during the winter months. I fish this reel nearly every day and actual number of use days probably easily exceeds 600-700. Actual number of cycles could easily be in excess of 60,000. Frankly, it is getting difficult to calculate the number of accrued cycles on this reel due to the significant number of days where it is fished, but no fish are caught – resulting in thousands of uncounted cycles.
Significant Events In the Last Year:
On January 25, 2013, I filed an interim report to detail a parts replacement necessary due to damage to the level wind system caused by debris lodging in the worm shaft (See the “Time To Pay The Piper” thread linked above). Otherwise the reel has been mostly trouble-free for the past year (see the "When Plastic Trumps Aluminum" section below).
The biggest fish caught with the reel during the past year was this 34 pound grass carp:
The biggest bass caught with the reel in the last year was this 6.08lb LMB:
Special mention goes to the smallest fish ever caught with this reel, landed just a few days ago: a 1 7/16” minnow! It was a tough fight but I managed to land the fish 
(And how the heck that treble drilled the minnow right through the eyes I'll never know.)
Previous Maintenance/Repairs:
December 2010 – Annual cleaning.
December 2011 – Annual cleaning. Replacement of line guide pawl at about 26 months of use. Interesting factoid – the pawl had probably made at least 320,000 passes across the worm shaft at the time of replacement.
July 2012 – Repairs / cleaning (see the "A Speed-Bump On The Road To Paradise" thread linked above):
Repair 1 – debris jammed the line guide pawl causing the pawl to create a burr on the worm shaft. Filed off the burr and thoroughly cleaned the reel.
Repair 2 – centrifugal brake wear – replaced the palm-side sideplate assembly.
January 2013 - Repair / cleaning / upgrade (see the "Time To Pay The Piper" thread linked above):
Repair – replaced the worm shaft, line guide pawl, and two idler gears.
Upgrade – replaced the stock drag washers with Carbontex washers.
October 2013 – Annual cleaning.
Current Condition:
The condition of the internal parts of the reel are about the same as previously reported – some wear on the clutch return pawl that doesn’t affect function, and the centrifugal brake shoes have considerable wear (as reported in the "Speed-Bump" thread). Otherwise, things are looking pretty good inside. Externally, the reel has a bit more minor rash on the top of the reel, very little on the sides. Spool bearings are getting increasingly noisy but spin well when cleaned. If you are familiar with the whine made by Shimano Digital Control reels during a cast…that’s sorta the noise I hear when I cast this PQ – you get the audio experience of a DC reel without the high cost… Otherwise, the reel is fishable, but it’s readily apparent that you are not fishing with a new, tight reel.
As I mention with every report, this reel has not been babied, and has often been rode hard and put away wet. In winter, the reel is frequently rode hard and put away frozen, with ice still in the line guide when taking the rod out of the trunk of the car. I still believe that much of the centrifugal brake wear that I reported back in July 2012 may have been a result of cold-weather service (air temps down to below freezing) - causing some of the grit and congealed oil film on the brake drum to become particularly abrasive - accelerating wear on the brass drum.
When Plastic Trumps Aluminum:
Earlier this year, I noticed the clutch bar (thumb bar) getting a little loose. My initial thought was that the bar had cracked on the inside surface (it’s a plastic part) and that the nylon(?) shims on each side of the clutch bar were probably worn. I added a clutch bar and a set of shims to a parts order without disassembling the reel to determine the actual cause for the looseness. When the parts came in, I stripped the reel and quickly found the actual cause – wear to the aluminum frame caused by the action of the clutch bar. I went ahead and installed the new parts but they did little to tighten up the bar so I am not reporting them as necessary parts replacements.
In the photo below, note the vertical grooves (indicated by the red arrows) cut in the frame by the “legs” on the bottom of the clutch bar - this entire area of the frame should be completely flat. As mentioned, the clutch bar is is a plastic part but it does have some sort of plating on it. That plating, with perhaps the addition of grit and grime under the bar, were enough to actually groove the aluminum frame. Thus, plastic trumps aluminum in this case. This is the causal factor for the loose clutch bar and potentially could be a source of an eventual frame crack. I checked my other 5 PQs and this wear (to a lessor degree) is present - the severity based on the amount of use of the reel.
Summary:
After 48 months of use, where are we at?
Parts replacements:
Parts replaced due to wear: (necessary) 1 line guide pawl, (optional) original drag washers
Parts replaced due to damage caused by debris: (necessary) worm shaft, line guide pawl, (optional) idler gears
Parts replaced (probably) due to my failure to maintain: palm-side sideplate assembly (to replace the brake drum)
Parts ordered and installed but did not fix the problem: clutch bar and shims
Lessons learned:
Keep the brake drum CLEAN and appy lube to the drum to prevent premature wear.
Accept that the dual-braking system (DBS), along with its advantages, has some disadvantages - added complexity and potential wear to parts that are not readily replaceable - like the brake shoes.
Closing:
That's it. Hopefully, I won't have another report until the reel hits its fifth service anniversary and I issue a final report in October 2014.
Will this PQ last another year? Stay tuned and we’ll find out...
Jaiden reply :
Sweet reports. I love my PQ. After 2 years of use, mine still fishes like it did on the first day.
Delaware Valley Tackle reply :
Nice report. It's cool that you've stayed on this so long. I'd like a nickel for every "initiative" or "project" I've seen fall by the wayside in the corporate world in a fraction of the time you have into this.
bassboy107 reply :
So, after four years, would you recommend this reel.
Ima Bass Ninja reply :
Great report as always goose. I would also like to add that the use you have put this reel through would be in my eyes extreme. I would be hard pressed to say ANY $100.00 reel put throughout his kind of use would have zero problems. I have several pq's (most over 5 years old) and they still work great with no replaced parts. I also only fish with them about 1/4 of the time you have used this one.
Thanks for keeping up with this for 4 years!
Arv reply :
Awesome report. Awesome dedication. Thanks for the update.
Goose52 reply :
Thanks guys.
Since we don't have a "castometer" instrument that we could attach to a reel that measures cycles, line-out/line-in, strain, etc.; establishing some conservative metrics and calculating the usage of a reel based on those metrics is about as close as I can come to offering an objective look at the durability of the reel.
On 10/27/2013 at 6:16 AM, Delaware Valley Tackle said:Nice report. It's cool that you've stayed on this so long. I'd like a nickel for every "initiative" or "project" I've seen fall by the wayside in the corporate world in a fraction of the time you have into this.
On 10/27/2013 at 6:42 AM, Arv said:Awesome report. Awesome dedication. Thanks for the update.
Thanks again. This test has had considerable impact on the way I fish. Prior to this test, I would toss lipless cranks on all sorts of combos - it was a good way to keep all the combos exercised. Now, I use this reel nearly exclusively for lipless so I can put a lot of mileage on it. Thus, I have a lot of other very nice equipment gathering dust. I will be glad when I hit the five-year point.
On 10/27/2013 at 6:27 AM, Bassboy107 said:So, after four years, would you recommend this reel.
Yes.
On 10/27/2013 at 6:29 AM, Ima Bass Ninja said:Great report as always goose. I would also like toast dd that the use you have put this reel through would be in my eyes extreme. I would be hard pressed to say ANY $100.00 reel put throughout his kind of use would have zero problems. I have several pq's (most over 5 years old) and they still work great with no replaced parts. I also only fish with them about 1/4 of the time you have used this one.
Thanks for keeping up this for 4 years!
The reel gets used a lot (nearly every day), in every kind of weather, with no babying. It has been laid down on the bank hundreds of times while I handle/measure/weigh fish and that introduces the possibility of damage due to grit or other debris entering the reel. She's had a pretty hard life so far.
kickerfish1 reply :
Incredible data and evaluation. Even digging that whopper pushing the 2 inch mark!
Thanks for the update!
bassmaster8100 reply :
I hear a lot of good things about the PQ but I think the most impressive thing here is your reports and that you've stuck with it for 4 years already.
cddan reply :
Great work!Thanks for your posts!
Goose52 reply :
On 10/27/2013 at 8:17 AM, kickerfish1 said:.......Even digging that whopper pushing the 2 inch mark!
I don't want to take credit for it being a whole 2 inches - it was only 1 7/16" - under 1.5 inches.... 
bigbill reply :
Great report goose I never expect anything less from you. I know goose from other forums. Bigbill
Goose52 reply :
Thanks Bill.
Kevinator1 reply :
Goose, thanks for the information...I've had a couple of Pro Qualifiers for about 4 years and both have been flawless. I also fish Revo's and Chronarchs but the Pro Qualifier is right up there. And guys, as hard as Goose has fished this reel, it probably means it is a 15 year reel for most of us. I probably get to fish 50 days a year so I can expect mine to last a long time with proper maintenance. And of course the best thing about the PQ........when it goes on sale for $80.00. That is a steal.
The Rooster reply :
I think this says as much about Goose's durability as it does the PQ. 4 years is a long time to fish a reel that's obviously showing signs of wear. For me, I wouldn't even enjoy it anymore.
But, one thing I will say, if the test reel gave up and died tomorrow, and all you got was 4 years, it was still well worth it and I'm convinced it would go at least 10 - 15 years for me the way I fish. Nobody could say it wouldn't last 5 years after all this.
I might have missed it, but do you have a total cost including original purchase price and all replaced parts? It would be interesting to see what it costs to get where you are with it.
Goose52 reply :
On 10/28/2013 at 9:52 AM, The Rooster said:I might have missed it, but do you have a total cost including original purchase price and all replaced parts? It would be interesting to see what it costs to get where you are with it.
Rooster - the reel was $80 on sale - hard to determine shipping because it was a combined order with other stuff.
Regarding parts replacement - the purpose of this test is to determine the durability/longevity of the reel. Thus, only parts that have "worn-out" should be factored. The only part that has completely worn out so far is a line guide pawl - a common wear part in all BC reels - it was $2.10. The palm-side sideplate assembly was replaced for brake drum wear - but that was my fault due to failure to maintain - still, lets call that a wear part - it was $14. So, $16.10 plus shipping. This is the total cost of parts related to wear.
For the rest of the parts:
- Drag stack: The drag stack was getting worn but would have been serviceable for bass for the length of the test; I chose to upgrade to Carbontex since I occasionally get to play with 40-50lb class fish. I don't consider this a necessary replacement - it was an upgrade (~$11 with shipping).
- Worm shaft and related parts: Damage caused by debris jamming the worm shaft can happen to any reel, even a new one, so this cost is not related to wear. A new worm shaft, another line guide pawl, and (optionally replaced) two idler gears were $10.70 plus shipping.
- Clutch bar and shims: Unnecessary replacements due to my faulty diagnosis ($5.18 plus shipping). The actual cause of the loose clutch bar was wear to the frame.
So, $80 plus $16.10 plus some shipping cost = perhaps 600 or more days on the water and 786 fish up to 50 pounds. I'm at about 14 cents a fish right now - pretty good value delivered I think...
Goose52 reply :
On 10/28/2013 at 8:14 AM, Kevinator1 said:Goose, thanks for the information...I've had a couple of Pro Qualifiers for about 4 years and both have been flawless. I also fish Revo's and Chronarchs but the Pro Qualifier is right up there. And guys, as hard as Goose has fished this reel, it probably means it is a 15 year reel for most of us. I probably get to fish 50 days a year so I can expect mine to last a long time with proper maintenance. And of course the best thing about the PQ........when it goes on sale for $80.00. That is a steal.
I have fished 284 days so far this year (and caught fish on 223 of those days)...with this PQ reel used probably at least 75% of those days. So, it indeed gets a lot of use!
kickerfish1 reply :
Goose, any chance you would be able to comment on the PQs ability to fish resistance baits over an extended period of time. Thinking medium to large crank baits, 1/2 oz + spinnerbaits, and any other bait that would be classified as such. Thanks.
Goose52 reply :
On 10/28/2013 at 2:02 PM, kickerfish1 said:Goose, any chance you would be able to comment on the PQs ability to fish resistance baits over an extended period of time. Thinking medium to large crank baits, 1/2 oz + spinnerbaits, and any other bait that would be classified as such. Thanks.
This particular PQ reel has tossed 1/2oz-5/8oz lipless cranks probably more than 95% of the time (I'd have to crack the Excel file to get an exact percentage). So, lots of cycles due to the typically fast retrieve on a lipless, but with a lower resistance bait.
I have a 4.7 PQ on my deep cranking rod, and a 5.2 PQ on my heavy spinnerbait rod, but I don't fish either one enough to have any comment about durability of the reel for those applications. But - aluminum frame, brass gears, brass driveshaft - they have the "makings" to hold out.
All this year I've had a Gen1/Gold Carbonlite reel on a medium cranking rod. The 26" IPT on this reel is workable for such duty...but I would prefer more like 22-24" IPT for medium cranking. I caught 126 fish on that reel this year but that's not enough service to tell me anything yet. It would be interesting to see how the aluminum gears and aluminum driveshaft of that CL hold up under long-term cranking service...but I may not fish that combo long enough to find out. My other medium cranking rod is a St. Croix Legend Elite 7'2" mm with a Calais 100A on it - I like to use that from time to time too....
One thing that IS interesting is that the wear that I'm seeing on this particular reel is more related to the high number of cycles (casts and retrieves) - the wear on the frame due to clutch bar action tens of thousands of times and the wear to the centrifugal brake drum and brake shoes (due to my failure to maintain) but also due to those tens of thousands of casts. I'm not seeing wear on the drive train parts - for instance, when I cleaned the main gear the other day it still looks new. On an application where you work the bait with the rod tip, and the presentations tend to be slower, with fewer cycles, a PQ should last considerably longer than the test reel.
One thing for sure, I will not be running any more formal tests like the PQ 5-Year Challenge !
lmbfisherman reply :
Awesome report again, BPS really has a winner!
shootermcbob reply :
Goose, thanks for taking the time to provide this information for us. I think your report should put to bed the "disposable" reel claims. The time and dedication you have put into this project is impressive.
kickerfish1 reply :
Appreciate the additional feedback. Thanks for the dilligent recording keeping and quality info. Amazing job on your part! Sounds like it may work for what I have in mind for a resistance bait reel...
Goose52 reply :
Thanks to all that have posted - I appreciate it.
On 10/28/2013 at 9:43 PM, shootermcbob said:I think your report should put to bed the "disposable" reel claims....
One would think so...but my reports are full of facts, figures, and objective observations - not something that many of the folks on the board seem to care about. The reports are long and have a lot of words and many lose interest after the first paragraph or so. So, I'm not sure I have accomplished much but I only have one more year to finish the project and I can move on...
MUCH more interesting, it seems, are the reel "reports" where a "brand-droid" will proclaim that his/her selected brand is the best, will never wear out or be damaged (even if run over by his truck) and he/she knows this for a fact because they fish the reel HARD!!!!!!!, or that they own two of them (one is still in the box) and they have never failed (they fish them once a week, for 8 months of the year....except the weeks when they didn't fish because they had to work...) and that they've lasted a whole "season" and handled that 4-pounder with no problem. Then, the Shimano-bots will load on and proclaim that the brand-droids are mentally challenged if they don't own a Shimano, and then it goes to mine is bigger than yours, my dad can beat up your dad, and on and on until thread lock. THOSE are the threads that get the most posts and views...................... :lol:
The Rooster reply :
Haha. Love the word coinage of "brand-droid". Makes so much sense. Your descriptions of them are spot on also.
By my understanding, not considering the drag upgrade or original shipping costs, you've spent less than $100 on the reel, even with repairs. Nobody anywhere can argue with results like that. Also, you may feel you haven't accomplished much with this test but I think you have. You've given the people who want to think good quality reels can be bought for much less than they've been told a reason to believe they can. Not only that, but you have also proven that the lack of a mainstream brand name on a reel is not proof it won't last. Nobody will ever again be able to say house branded reels cannot last.
I think the Pro Qualifier was already developing a solid reputation for reliability before this test, but I wonder how much of that was even developed in ways similar to how you described above for "average fishing habits". I actually think most reel reputations are from that same type of promotion. For me, I think your test of this reel really drives home that the PQ truly deserves the reputation.
Goose52 reply :
Thanks Rooster.
Regarding the scope of this test, one might reasonably extend the conclusions to other mid-range BPS reels of similar design: the Rick Clunn/RCX/Carbonblack, ProLite, Gen1 Carbonlite, etc.; on the assumption that BPS would have specified with their OEM manufacturer similar requirements and quality of components as they did with the PQ.
Regarding other house-branded reels, like Cabelas, or the well-regarded Academy Mettle, someone ELSE will have to conduct those 5-year tests............................
kschultz76 reply :
Goose as all if said awesome work here, great dedication and great info shared. Has made me think about the future of my PQs. I was starting to consider trying something else like a Chronarch or Tatula thinking I would get better performance. But maybe I just need to send my PAs into DVT for some service, then practice practice practice until I'm better at using them. I've found I struggle casting them blustery windy conditions. Sounds like I'm probably the issue not the DBS. Any tips on how to get them adjusted and casting well in conditions, especially with crankbaits and spinnerbaits? I know the rod and other factors affect casting as well.
Thanks for your efforts and sharing all your work with us.
ChiCityBasser reply :
Great report Goose and the reason I purchased my PQ was after reading the initial thread and reports. My PQ doesn't get as much use and does have that brake drum issue you mentioned but its a deep cranking reel and will be serviced this year. I purchased it used for $40 or so and it's just coming up on one year of usage.
Thanks again
CWB reply :
I have a PQ high speed that I use for rattle baits, which is quite often, and I believe its at least 5 years old and still,going strong. Also have a Blue Rick Clunn BPS reel that is 6 or 7 or more years old and it still looks and works like new. Of course I don't put in near the days Goose does. Excellent report. Like Rooster said, you don't always need a $200.00 reel to get the job done. For $80.00 the PQ is a steal.
Goose52 reply :
Thanks again guys.
On 10/28/2013 at 9:52 AM, The Rooster said:4 years is a long time to fish a reel that's obviously showing signs of wear. For me, I wouldn't even enjoy it anymore.
Rooster - sorry, I missed this comment earlier. The reel is not THAT bad....the goal is to always have a fish on 'cause you don't notice the reel at all then...
On 10/29/2013 at 9:35 PM, kschultz76 said:..... I've found I struggle casting them blustery windy conditions. Sounds like I'm probably the issue not the DBS. Any tips on how to get them adjusted and casting well in conditions, especially with crankbaits and spinnerbaits?
Wind gives many people problems, especially if trying to cast directly into the wind. Gusting wind (as opposed to steady wind) can give you fits as well. Magnifying the problem are baits like spinnerbaits and some crankbaits that lose velocity quickly. Assuming you have your reel working OK for no-wind conditions, when the wind comes up you can try adding more magnetic braking. If that doesn't work, add another centrifugal brake and play with the mag brakes. AND, as everyone says, that educated thumb needs to come into play to lightly ride on the spool and feather, or stop, the cast if you feel the reel getting ready to backlash. I have reels with centrifugal brakes only, Daiwas with Magforce magnetic brakes, and dual brakes. I prefer the DBS reels in windy conditions, or in conditions like near- or sub-freezing temps when the educated thumb suddenly gets dumb....since you can add more mag braking to supplement the centrifugals.
In some cases, especially with really strong gusting wind, you end up using so much braking and/or thumb that you really sacrifice a lot of casting distance - in that case, it's time to re-position the boat (if you're afloat), or try another spot on the bank that is more favorable for wind. THEN, when all else fails, grab a spinning rod !
Basswhippa reply :
On 10/29/2013 at 9:35 PM, kschultz76 said:Goose as all if said awesome work here, great dedication and great info shared. Has made me think about the future of my PQs. I was starting to consider trying something else like a Chronarch or Tatula thinking I would get better performance. But maybe I just need to send my PAs into DVT for some service, then practice practice practice until I'm better at using them. I've found I struggle casting them blustery windy conditions. Sounds like I'm probably the issue not the DBS. Any tips on how to get them adjusted and casting well in conditions, especially with crankbaits and spinnerbaits? I know the rod and other factors affect casting as well.
Thanks for your efforts and sharing all your work with us.
The one PQ that was tested is solid. It could be an anomaly. There are Chevy Chevettes and Dodge Neons out there with 300,000 miles. Get yourself a Chronarch and forget about it. Shimano is the best period. Every other reel maker aims at them as their goal, and bows before them. There are 20 year old Chronarchs in the locals boats that frequent Castaic, Clear Lake, Delta, Fork, Guntersville, Falcon, Rayburn, Toledo Bend, Kentucky Lake, Toho, Okeechobee, Eufala, Amazon River, etc. that are still running solid. Why buy a Korean made Kia when you can own a Japanese engineered Toyota or Lexus? Or any Dodge truck when you could buy a Ford, which are clearly superior if you study Consumer Reports carefully.
kschultz76 reply :
Goose thanks again for the valuable info. As seen in this thread many others share your experience of long service and dependability from the PQ reels. As I said I've got four and they all perform well so far.
I'm glad it's not just me who struggles with the wind. I just need to adjust the brakes more and train my thumb more.
Goose52 reply :
Regarding the Shimano-bot that jumped on...
I own 13 Shimano BC reels: 3 - CU50E, 1 - CU200E, 1 - Core 50, 1 - Calais 100A, 1 - Calais 200DC, 1 - CTE-50GT, 1 - CTE-100GT, 1 - CTE-200GT, 1 - Calcutta 100DC, and 2 - Conquest 50. Nice reels - they work, catch fish. Usually good values at their price points.
The purpose of this study is to determine if the PQ, a sub-$100 reel, is a viable option at its price point.
It is.
Dave P reply :
I have 4 that I use religiously. Maybe 50x per year and have had zero issues. When you get them dialed in, they will throw in the wind just fine. It helps to keep the cast low to the water. I also use a Quantum one remaining Shimano and three Daiwas. I had two other Shimanos and liked them just fine but after they got destroyed after flying out of the boat and onto the highway, I'm glad I went with PQs. Will buy more.
kschultz76 reply :
I don't much stock in Shimano bots. Besides I bought the Hyundai instead of the Toyota 
Darren. reply :
Very interesting "study" Goose. Appreciate the info you've gathered. Always liked the PQ, but never pulled the trigger. How do they do with light baits - like weightless 4" senkos, etc.? I can throw weightless Zoom Finesse worms wacky rigged with my Chronarch 50e and Lexa 100. Curious if the PQ could throw the same. And yeah, rod helps, my fave is a 6' MF casting rod for the light stuff.
kschultz76 reply :
Darren fwiw, and I'm a rank amateur so take that into consideration, I just demoed a Chronarch 201e7. I mounted it and a PQ 7.1 on the same 6'8" M/XF Croix LTB. With both reels I could throw a weightless 5" Senkos on a 4/0 Gamakatsu EWG hook the same distance. I wasn't scientific about it and could only do this comparison over the span of a few hrs, but was pleasantly surprised when the PQ cast the Senkos that well. I didn't attempt anything lighter then that, and I know a weightless zoom finesse work will be a fair bit lighter.
Ima Bass Ninja reply :
On 10/30/2013 at 9:05 AM, Basswhippa said:The one PQ that was tested is solid. It could be an anomaly. There are Chevy Chevettes and Dodge Neons out there with 300,000 miles. Get yourself a Chronarch and forget about it. Shimano is the best period. Every other reel maker aims at them as their goal, and bows before them. There are 20 year old Chronarchs in the locals boats that frequent Castaic, Clear Lake, Delta, Fork, Guntersville, Falcon, Rayburn, Toledo Bend, Kentucky Lake, Toho, Okeechobee, Eufala, Amazon River, etc. that are still running solid. Why buy a Korean made Kia when you can own a Japanese engineered Toyota or Lexus? Or any Dodge truck when you could buy a Ford, which are clearly superior if you study Consumer Reports carefully.
It's hardly an anomaly. Many post by PQ owners here support what goose has said and reported on. Shimanos being the best is an opinion and that's all it is. Maybe you should consider doing a 5 year report on your chronarch and your post may have a little more credibility.
Goose52 reply :
On 10/30/2013 at 10:12 AM, DarrenM said:Very interesting "study" Goose. Appreciate the info you've gathered. Always liked the PQ, but never pulled the trigger. How do they do with light baits - like weightless 4" senkos, etc.? I can throw weightless Zoom Finesse worms wacky rigged with my Chronarch 50e and Lexa 100. Curious if the PQ could throw the same. And yeah, rod helps, my fave is a 6' MF casting rod for the light stuff.
Darren - I've tossed down to 1/4 oz with PQs with no problems. A GYCB 4" Senko weighs 1/4 oz not counting the hook and casts like a bullet so it shouldn't be a problem casting it with a PQ. Now, under 1/4 oz? I haven't a clue - I have better tools for that weight range than a PQ...
In theory, DBS equipped reels might be at a slight disadvantage in the lighter weight ranges as the spool might be a bit heavier than other braking systems due to the captive brake shoes and springs, and the cover plate that provides the surface for the mag brakes to act on.
Dave P reply :
You can go lighter (1/8 is as low as I've gone), but you will want a tail wind or cross wind or no wind. You will not like throwing it into a wind. At all.
CWB reply :
On 10/30/2013 at 9:05 AM, Basswhippa said:The one PQ that was tested is solid. It could be an anomaly. There are Chevy Chevettes and Dodge Neons out there with 300,000 miles. Get yourself a Chronarch and forget about it. Shimano is the best period. Every other reel maker aims at them as their goal, and bows before them. There are 20 year old Chronarchs in the locals boats that frequent Castaic, Clear Lake, Delta, Fork, Guntersville, Falcon, Rayburn, Toledo Bend, Kentucky Lake, Toho, Okeechobee, Eufala, Amazon River, etc. that are still running solid. Why buy a Korean made Kia when you can own a Japanese engineered Toyota or Lexus? Or any Dodge truck when you could buy a Ford, which are clearly superior if you study Consumer Reports carefully.
Got a chuckle out of this. Using this logic, why would you get a Japanese Toyota when you can buy a Swedish engineered Volvo or German engineered Mercedes (Abu)
Judging by the responses there are several anomalies out there.
Basswhippa reply :
Shimano bot short circuited. Buy the Shimano and quit worrying about it. They are not good reels at their price point. They are superior reels at their price point. I would love to see the trash bin that BPS has for all their returned reels. Got a Johnny Morris. It ain't all that. Drag is pathetic. It is supposed ot be superior to the PQ. Going on a trip of a lifetime. It would stay in the garage for sure.
Long Mike reply :
Opinions, opinions, opinions. To paraphrase Shakespeare, "full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."
Goose52 reply :
On 10/31/2013 at 8:28 AM, Basswhippa said:Shimano bot short circuited. Buy the Shimano and quit worrying about it. They are not good reels at their price point. They are superior reels at their price point. I would love to see the trash bin that BPS has for all their returned reels. Got a Johnny Morris. It ain't all that. Drag is pathetic. It is supposed ot be superior to the PQ. Going on a trip of a lifetime. It would stay in the garage for sure.
Yes - the stock drags are "pathetic." Good thing I was using a whopping 10 lb line on the PQ test reel so I didn't have to rely on stock drag performance to land these fish...
cddan reply :
Bps! Those pics are awesome!If you have any more they sure color up the post! Thank you goose for your detailed information.
Amarley reply :
I don't beat my equipment to death and am fortunate enough to have several rods and reels, but I love my PQ's. Never an issue with any of them.
KDW96 reply :
The post was a continued report on PRO QUALIFIER nothing else.Why the shimano groupys even chirpin here?
Goose,this has been a well written,thought out,and not to mention a extensive amount time put in to it. Anyone thinking of getting a new caster,would benefit greatly,by reading the entire thing. It clearly PROVES that this reel has the gutts and at alot less money!Because of your indepth dedicated review,ive been slowly switching all my casting reels to the PQ. I have been shown PROOF that ill get my moneys worth,thank you.
Until the shimano ladys can give a dedicated,indepth report on a reel,you need not chime in until you can
PROVE IT as Goose has done.................................
Goose52 reply :
Thanks again guys - I appreciate the acknowledgements of the effort that it takes to conduct this test.
Since the "S" word got introduced a number of posts ago...let me make something clear. This test is not about trying to demonstrate that the PQ reel in particular, or BPS reels in general, are better than Shimano or any other brand. There are lots of fine reels out there, representing a number of brands; most work well, will last, and will help you catch fish. I personally own BC reels from BPS, Shimano, Daiwa, Abu, and even an Ardent. The purpose of the test is to demonstrate that these mid-range BPS reels (PQ in particular) offer value that can equal or exceed their price. They are viable options when shopping for a reel in their price range. That some of the internet lore about them is not correct.
Value is about more than a name, or how many "seasons" (whatever those are) a reel will last. It is the totality of the fishing experience with that reel. It's the number of hours fished, or fish caught, or cycles (casts & retrieves), per dollar spent. It might also be about the performance and feature set of the reel - how far it can cast, how good is the drag, etc. For some anglers, the smoothness of a reel is important, along with other subjective characteristics, The PQ, while not the best reel in any of those categories, offers a feature set, performance, and longevity that most users consider to be above its price range - thus offering value for money spent. The PQ is offered in 4 gear ratios, in both left-hand and right-hand - pretty nifty.
Will a PQ last as long as an Ambassadeur 5000? No. But it's OK for a mechanical device to eventually wear out - the question is whether you received sufficient value from it during it's useful life to justify the cost of the item. The PQ, while not necessarily better than other competitor reels, offers such value. The test PQ will likely eventually develop a frame crack at the grooved wear points illustrated earlier in this thread. At that point, it will likely have reeled in over 1,000 fish - achieving a cost per fish of about a dime - excellent value delivered. To extract similar value from my Daiwa PX Type R, or Shimano Conquest 50, I would have to reel in 5,000 fish to equal that cost performance .....
On 11/1/2013 at 4:52 AM, cddan said:Bps! Those pics are awesome!If you have any more they sure color up the post! Thank you goose for your detailed information.
Well, bass seem small compared to the grass carp but here's a few LMB.
Basswhippa reply :
On 11/1/2013 at 5:58 AM, KDW96 said:The post was a continued report on PRO QUALIFIER nothing else.Why the shimano groupys even chirpin here?
Until the shimano ladys can give a dedicated,indepth report on a reel,you need not chime in until you can
PROVE IT as Goose has done.................................
Prove it? I own two 93 second year Calcutta 200's and a Calcutta 100 that is 18 years old. They have been used hard(albeit maintained) and work as good as new. The Shimano Calcutta birthed the modern reel and they are as good 20 years later as they ever were, with few design changes. A poster asked about possibly buying a Chronarch. That is why I spoke up. Plus I loved the term "Shimano Bot". I know it isn't apples to apples, Chronarch to PQ. The PQ is a top option reel at its price point. Good as an ABU 4600C3? Of course not. Good as a low model Abu or Lews. Of course. It is the same thing. It'll make it until you break it and then you just throw it away and go and get another, or take it back to BPS, as it's just a loss leader for them. Some people prefer the lower cost KIA and Hyundai's to Toyota and Honda. Consumer Reports readers know which is best. Reel mechanics do to.
kschultz76 reply :
On 11/1/2013 at 7:27 AM, Basswhippa said:On 11/1/2013 at 5:58 AM, KDW96 said:The post was a continued report on PRO QUALIFIER nothing else.Why the shimano groupys even chirpin here?
Until the shimano ladys can give a dedicated,indepth report on a reel,you need not chime in until you can
PROVE IT as Goose has done.................................
Prove it? I own two 93 second year Calcutta 200's and a Calcutta 100 that is 18 years old. They have been used hard and work as good as new. The Shimano Calcutta birthed the modern reel and they are as good 20 years later as they ever were, with few design changes. A poster asked about possibly buying a Chronarch. That is why I spoke up. Plus I loved the term "Shimano Bot". I know it isn't apples to apples, Chronarch to PQ. The PQ is a top option reel at its price point. Good as an ABU 4600C3? Of course not. Good as a low model Abu or Lews. Of course. It is the same thing. It'll make it until you break it and then you just throw it away and go and get another, or take it back to BPS, as it's just a loss leader for them. Some people prefer the lower cost KIA and Hyundai's to Toyota and Honda. Consumer Reports readers know which is best. Reel mechanics do to.
Please do not suggest that my post, which you quoted, warranted your negative post which lacked any objectivity. I'd like to point out as well that I did not ask a single question about a Chronarch or any Shimano. I merely stated I was considering trying a Chronarch or a Tatula to try something different. Bottom line is the value demonstrated here in the PQ makes me very hard pressed to lay out more then twice it's cost for a Chronarch. In posting your rant of all you've managed to do is convince me your opinion is worth squat to me.
Basswhippa reply :
On 11/1/2013 at 9:01 AM, kschultz76 said:Please do not suggest that my post, which you quoted, warranted your negative post which lacked any objectivity. I'd like to point out as well that I did not ask a single question about a Chronarch or any Shimano. I merely stated I was considering trying a Chronarch or a Tatula to try something different. Bottom line is the value demonstrated here in the PQ makes me very hard pressed to lay out more then twice it's cost for a Chronarch. In posting your rant of all you've managed to do is convince me your opinion is worth squat to me.
Don't try the Chronarch then. I might re-read my posts, but I didn't mean it as a rant. Opinion, admittedly. Opinion of a lot of people. Many consider the dated Curado 200B to be the finest baitcasting reel ever made, and they can be picked up in like new condition for $100. They hold their own against saltwater, which can't be said of many reels. The surf boys love em. Did I back this opinion by 5 years of almost daily use? No. 20 years of weekends if I'm lucky. Kind regards.
The Rooster reply :
Goose, that last post of yours was so well written and the subject matter so well explained, I feel smarter for having read it. LOL.
I noticed at least three of those big bass pics have KVD Redeye shads in the orange crawdad color hanging out of their mouths. Apparently I need to get some of those.
Basswhippa reply :
On 11/1/2013 at 9:39 AM, The Rooster said:Goose, that last post of yours was so well written and the subject matter so well explained, I feel smarter for having read it. LOL.
I noticed at least three of those big bass pics have KVD Redeye shads in the orange crawdad color hanging out of their mouths. Apparently I need to get some of those.
x 2
Goose52 reply :
On 11/1/2013 at 9:39 AM, The Rooster said:I noticed at least three of those big bass pics have KVD Redeye shads in the orange crawdad color hanging out of their mouths. Apparently I need to get some of those.
I'm not part of the crowd that thinks that color is critically important...but I'll have to admit that the RES Orange Belly Craw pattern is particularly effective in fall and winter...
K_Mac reply :
Goose as a charter member of the PQ fan club I salute you! The only anomaly at evidence in this thread is you my friend. Many of us intend to do in-depth analysis of many things-few of us actually do. At its price point the PQ is a solid winner. Combine that with BPS customer serve and it is an exceptional value in my opinion and experience.
Some read your review and feel compelled to condemn for a variety of reasons. We would both agree that all BPS reels do not have the record of success that the PQ does. All of the major manufacturers are the same, esp at the lower end of their lines. You have not tried to make any case here, other than the over-all value of the PQ based on your well documented experience. Well done.
Goose52 reply :
Thanks Kirby! Another year to go. If the frame hasn't cracked by then, I'll keep fishing it past the 5 year point, but perhaps at a reduced rate so I can spend some time with my other gear.
Maxximus Redneckus reply :
Since the shimano posse jumped in...let me induldge Y'ALl. Into longevity.18 yrs ain't nothing.I have abus 60+ yrs old still going hard.so using shimano as a example as a long haul reel..they have a long way to go. AbuForLife
Basswhippa reply :
On 11/2/2013 at 1:15 AM, Maxximus Redneckus said:Since the shimano posse jumped in...let me induldge Y'ALl. Into longevity.18 yrs ain't nothing.I have abus 60+ yrs old still going hard.so using shimano as a example as a long haul reel..they have a long way to go. AbuForLife
Go ahead and indulge. Yeah, technically we may be hijacking, but the PQ guys appear to enjoy calling names such as bots and posse, so it's all in good fun. This board would be boring without differing points of view. I have some from the early 70's ABU's as well. Those were good reels for their day and decades later, if maintained, good as they ever were. Heavy but built like tanks. Replace a pawl every now and then and you are good for decades. At Guntersville this last spring I looked on the deck of a boat of an old man (appeared late 70's) who was hard of hearing who got very close so we could converse, and on his deck were the Chronarch 100A's and Black Abus with knobs on both sides. He was so old I was worried if he should be out by himself. The stories those baitcasters could tell. LOL There was a dark era in reel design in the 80's. Actually in the early to mid 80's there were some breakthroughs, the ABU Ultracast spool AKA super free and Diawas magnetic braking. But basically the reels were graphite junk. Then in 1992 with the debut of the Shimano Calcutta the modern reel was born. If there is a missing link between humans and our ancestors, the Shimano Calcutta was link between the old technology and the contemporary baitcaster. And really, almost nothing about them has changed. They were engineered that well and really that was their only secret. Take what was good and worked and perfect the tolerances and create instant anti reverse. You can use a Calcutta and you will never be outgunned or "out reeled" by any reel, assuming you need the gear ratio it had. They eventually upped the speed. Everything else is just some sort of copy, including other Shimano models.
To stay on point, the PQ is an excellent borrow design of the Curado 200B (low profile cousin of the Calcutta) and Goose has possibly proved it. It isn't all that different than the Gary Yamamoto designed Senko and the BPS copy Sticko. Lead, follow or get out of the way, BPS is a good follower and excellent loss leader marketer. Come let us give you a PQ for free ($80 for that reel? Come on.) and we will double our money on the soft plastics and other fishing gear and clothing you buy. But BPS will never, ever change the industry the way Shimano did. Maybe no other reel manufacturer ever will. It was like we were using rocks and stones for weapons and they invented gunpowder. Or maybe a better analogy would be we were using muskets and they designed the modern rifle.
Not knocking BPS stuff. Love their stickos and my mid 90's 7 MH Extreme that was well worn when I got it at a pawn shop has caught me countless bass. Love that stick! I remember when BPS sold them with the $119.00 Shimano Curado for $129.00. Did someone mention BPS knows about loss leaders. LOL
The Rooster reply :
Goose, I have a couple of good questions for you. I know the purpose of this research is to see whether or not the PQ will last 5 years. It seems the use you've subjected this reel to in that time has been absolutely extreme. To the point that I'd question if you fish your other reels like this or not when you use them, which I don't think you do. If not, then why did you not simply choose to fish this PQ as normal (for you) and see how long it would last that way in the regular rotation? Wasn't the original suggestion that the PQ wouldn't last that way? Of course I do recognize that the way you're fishing it does seem to leave no room for doubt at all. So based on all that, I guess we'll also know how these reels handle normal use after 5 years as well, based on your other PQ's not being officially tested and documented, and also not being fished as hard, but still in rotation.
My second question is, at this point considering the wear this reel has sustained to the frame, you are still using it because the test isn't over yet. But, if any of your other reels had gotten to this point while not being tested, would you continue to use them or retire them? I know you said you'll continue to use this one after the test is over, but I assume that's because you'll already have it at that point in its worn down condition so you may as well, it can't hurt it further. Others not there yet but heading that way eventually, would you stop using them before they got there, maybe due to them just not being enjoyable anymore?
Not trying to stir the pot because what you've done here I have a lot of respect for. I was just curious about these points. Sometimes words on a screen from the Internet without any tone to accompany them can be hard to discern the original intended meaning from. In other words, I'm asking this because I'm interested to know, not to "call you out on something". LOL.
Goose52 reply :
Hey Rooster - good questions.
Question 1: The test period is 5 years because that is the period mentioned by a board member that prompted this test. By itself, the term a "year" or a "season" has no meaning since everyone fishes a different amount. SO, I wanted to fish the reel as MUCH as possible to put the maximum amount of use on the reel that I could. At the end of the test, if I have documented, say, 450 catch days, and I estimate, say 1,000 or 1,200 use days - an angler can compare that usage to how often they fish, and calculate for themselves how long the reel might last in their service. The data is already showing that the reel will last much longer than 5 years in typical service by most anglers and for certain, it is NOT a one-season, disposable reel.
Question 2: I tend to use things until they are "used up"...as long as they are still giving acceptable performance. For instance, my primary fishing car I bought new 25 years ago, my "back-up" fishing car I bought new 41 years ago - they both still run OK and get me where I need to go. Not as nice as a 2013 car I bought last year but still give acceptable service. I still use tools that I've owned for 40 to 45 years. As long as something still works, I tend to keep using it. I don't really care if it doesn't feel "new" any longer - performance is what counts. Now, if something no longer gives acceptable service, or it becomes seriously obsolescent by newer technology, I might consider replacing it. You might remember the thread I started a while back about retiring the last of my mid-80s vintage Shakespeare spinning reels. They were all still serviceable, they worked, caught fish...but the lack of an instant anti-reverse was bugging me so as I came across good deals on modern spinning reels I gradually phased them out. So, this PQ, as long as it works acceptably, will continue to be used. Same with one of my "modern" spinning reels - it's already over 2,200 fish caught, is getting a little grindy, but still gives acceptable performance, so it will be used until its used up...
The Rooster reply :
Wow. Grindy gears are grounds for immediate dismissal in my arsenal. I guess in comparison to you, I'm very wasteful. I use things, long term even, as long as they work "like I think they should". I'll stick to fishing gear for any references, but this pretty much applies to everything I own. I like stuff to look and feel relatively new. I understand some break in wear and cosmetic blemishes will show up in time, like maybe the overall shininess has worn to a dull haze, but I want the mechanics and feel to be within 95% or more of where it was when new. I do all I can to help maintain my stuff too, but when it starts to wear beyond my tolerance of it, even though it is still well within someone else's, then I feel it's time for it to move on to someone else.
This will sound funny to you, I'm sure, but I told myself a long time back that I'd only ever accept three things used (as in not new and perfect). Cars, houses, and women. Whether we know it or not, we all still live in an unofficial caste system. According to my level within it, I always figured I'd "never be able to afford the best" in any of those three, but everything else would be new. So I buy new, I maintain as new, and I dump it when it starts to not feel new anymore. LOL. As an aside, my wife turned 43 this year and I jokingly told her when she turns 44 that I might have to trade her in for two 22 year olds. Also said I may have to wait until she's 54 because the 22's might not have come down in price enough until then. She told me not to worry about a price drop because I'd lose my rear end on that deal anyway.
Goose52 reply :
On 11/2/2013 at 10:09 AM, The Rooster said:Wow. Grindy gears are grounds for immediate dismissal in my arsenal.
And that's OK - whatever it takes to enjoy your fishing experience... 
Me? I tend to think more about the fish on the wet end of the line than the hardware on the dry end of the line...
Maxximus Redneckus reply :
Calcutta great reels...then again 60+ yrs can't be beat...
DogBone_384 reply :
On 10/30/2013 at 10:12 AM, DarrenM said:Very interesting "study" Goose. Appreciate the info you've gathered. Always liked the PQ, but never pulled the trigger. How do they do with light baits - like weightless 4" senkos, etc.? I can throw weightless Zoom Finesse worms wacky rigged with my Chronarch 50e and Lexa 100. Curious if the PQ could throw the same. And yeah, rod helps, my fave is a 6' MF casting rod for the light stuff.
I throw 4" Senko's Texas rigged with a PQ on a 7' MF Vendetta pretty well. Once I cleaned & reoiled it it got better. I've tried weightless Zoom worms with it and find distance to be fair/decent.
CWB reply :
I always thought the Ambassadeurs were the father of the Modern baitcasters. When did Shimano become the one. If I recall an Ambassadeur still holds the long distance casting record. My dad still uses his 5000, small white knobs and all, and has the leather case it came in. Gotta be pushing 60. Shimano wasn't even making reels until 1970. Think maybe they got a few of their ideas from Abu- Garcia? That being said, I do have some and they are darn good reels. But considering you can get 2 PQ's for what you would pay for todays Curado 200 G, which is nothing more then a green last generation Citica, I would probably opt for the PQ's. JMHO
MarkH024 reply :
Goose, What knobs are you putting on the PQ and is the handle itself stock? They look like the newer Shimano CI4 knobs to me. I like them and after reading 5 pages of this post, I didn't see if this was asked. If so I do apologize, I must have read over it.
Goose52 reply :
On 12/12/2013 at 10:41 PM, MarkH024 said:Goose, What knobs are you putting on the PQ and is the handle itself stock? They look like the newer Shimano CI4 knobs to me. I like them and after reading 5 pages of this post, I didn't see if this was asked. If so I do apologize, I must have read over it.
You're the first person to ask about that after all the pics that I've posted of that reel over the past 3 years or so. That handle/knob combo is from a BPS ProLite Finesse reel - the last model (PRL05HC). It is about 1/2 oz. lighter than the stock PQ handle and it comes with two knob bearings. Add the two knob bearings from the stock PQ handle and you end up having a 4-bearing handle. I've never mentioned this mod as it doesn't really affect the long-term durability of the reel itself.
Good eye !
related Fishing Rods Reels Line Knots topic
previous topic
most viewed Fishing Rods Reels Line Knots topic
© 2024 - fishing.qciss.net. All Rights Reserved.