BFS UL OR XUL

This is the place to talk shop about all the enthusiast and import tackle for the truly afflicted
Post Reply
RIng
Senior Angler
Senior Angler
Posts: 66
Joined: Fri Mar 24, 2017 8:00 am

BFS UL OR XUL

Post by RIng » Fri Dec 15, 2017 6:02 pm

With stock reels . Caleutta Conquest BFS , Aldebaran BFS , Scorpion BFS , and Alphas Air witch one will handle light wt. best 1/8 oz and under . With the right rod will any work with 1/64 -- 1/32 oz . ? Has any one tried or used them this way ? Thank you , good fishing

User avatar
Hobie-Wan Kenobi
Pro Angler
Pro Angler
Posts: 3014
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2014 1:25 pm
Location: Michigan (U.P)
Contact:

Re: BFS UL OR XUL

Post by Hobie-Wan Kenobi » Fri Dec 15, 2017 6:09 pm

I haven't used the Conquest or Scorpion BFS.

I currently use a 16 Aldebaran BFS XG with a KTF spool. I can cast some light stuff but, 1/64oz is LIGHT. I can cast 1/32oz plus a 1in grub
IG @hobie_wan_kenobi_fishing

fffishing
Elite Angler
Elite Angler
Posts: 246
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2016 10:18 am
Location: Toronto

Re: BFS UL OR XUL

Post by fffishing » Fri Dec 15, 2017 6:14 pm

It's a bunch of rods(and blanks for your dream rod) for this weights...Depend of lures what you want to use. Spoons-area and stream rods(moderate,mod-fast),jerkbaits -fast,jig-extrafast...Of cource you can mix ,it's just basic direction :?

CM_Stewart
Senior Angler
Senior Angler
Posts: 96
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2016 10:08 pm

Re: BFS UL OR XUL

Post by CM_Stewart » Sat Dec 16, 2017 7:40 am

I received a report from an experienced baitcaster who bought a Shimano Calcutta Conquest BFS HG. He said he could cast the 1 gram Owner JH-85 jighead alone (without any plastic) 40 feet. One gram is just over 1/32 oz. He used the same Shimano Trout One NS B50UL that you have. I think he could do as well with the Aldebaran BFS XG (same spool and braking system) but he prefers the Calcutta Conquest.

The Scorpion and Alphas Air have heavier spools, so the stock reels should not be able to cast that weight quite as far. That said, you don't always have to cast 40 feet to catch fish.
Chris Stewart
(affiliations: TenkaraBum.com, Finesse-Fishing.com)

User avatar
Hobie-Wan Kenobi
Pro Angler
Pro Angler
Posts: 3014
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2014 1:25 pm
Location: Michigan (U.P)
Contact:

Re: BFS UL OR XUL

Post by Hobie-Wan Kenobi » Sat Dec 16, 2017 8:23 am

CM_Stewart wrote:I received a report from an experienced baitcaster who bought a Shimano Calcutta Conquest BFS HG. He said he could cast the 1 gram Owner JH-85 jighead alone (without any plastic) 40 feet. One gram is just over 1/32 oz. He used the same Shimano Trout One NS B50UL that you have. I think he could do as well with the Aldebaran BFS XG (same spool and braking system) but he prefers the Calcutta Conquest.

The Scorpion and Alphas Air have heavier spools, so the stock reels should not be able to cast that weight quite as far. That said, you don't always have to cast 40 feet to catch fish.
Able to cast and able to cast functionally is different. I don't consider it "casting" unless it is accurate and manageable.

The KTF spool does wonders for the 16 Aldebaran BFS XG. I thought the reel stock was the bee's knees until I got the KTF spool.
IG @hobie_wan_kenobi_fishing

Farnorth
Elite Angler
Elite Angler
Posts: 599
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 10:48 pm
Location: SK, Canada

Re: BFS UL OR XUL

Post by Farnorth » Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:08 pm

ccass wrote:
CM_Stewart wrote:I received a report from an experienced baitcaster who bought a Shimano Calcutta Conquest BFS HG. He said he could cast the 1 gram Owner JH-85 jighead alone (without any plastic) 40 feet. One gram is just over 1/32 oz. He used the same Shimano Trout One NS B50UL that you have. I think he could do as well with the Aldebaran BFS XG (same spool and braking system) but he prefers the Calcutta Conquest.

The Scorpion and Alphas Air have heavier spools, so the stock reels should not be able to cast that weight quite as far. That said, you don't always have to cast 40 feet to catch fish.
Able to cast and able to cast functionally is different. I don't consider it "casting" unless it is accurate and manageable.

The KTF spool does wonders for the 16 Aldebaran BFS XG. I thought the reel stock was the bee's knees until I got the KTF spool.
KTF makes a spool for the Conquest BFS now as well. I think I saw 6g spool weight and you just transfer over the mag brakes from the stock one. Very tempted once again...

-Boris-
Senior Angler
Senior Angler
Posts: 121
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2016 11:51 pm
Location: Berlin - Germany

Re: BFS UL OR XUL

Post by -Boris- » Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:29 pm

CM_Stewart wrote:The Scorpion and Alphas Air have heavier spools, so the stock reels should not be able to cast that weight quite as far. That said, you don't always have to cast 40 feet to catch fish.
The weight difference of the Aldebaran BFS and Scorpion BFS depends on the spool shaft and doesn't matter. The spool shaft of the Scorpion BFS is a little bit thicker and longer, but it does not influence the performance. The CC BFS would be another option, but I personally don't like the low line retrieve.
More pictures: https://www.instagram.com/addicted_to_baitcaster/

User avatar
Hobie-Wan Kenobi
Pro Angler
Pro Angler
Posts: 3014
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2014 1:25 pm
Location: Michigan (U.P)
Contact:

Re: BFS UL OR XUL

Post by Hobie-Wan Kenobi » Sat Dec 16, 2017 4:17 pm

Farnorth wrote:
ccass wrote:
CM_Stewart wrote:I received a report from an experienced baitcaster who bought a Shimano Calcutta Conquest BFS HG. He said he could cast the 1 gram Owner JH-85 jighead alone (without any plastic) 40 feet. One gram is just over 1/32 oz. He used the same Shimano Trout One NS B50UL that you have. I think he could do as well with the Aldebaran BFS XG (same spool and braking system) but he prefers the Calcutta Conquest.

The Scorpion and Alphas Air have heavier spools, so the stock reels should not be able to cast that weight quite as far. That said, you don't always have to cast 40 feet to catch fish.
Able to cast and able to cast functionally is different. I don't consider it "casting" unless it is accurate and manageable.

The KTF spool does wonders for the 16 Aldebaran BFS XG. I thought the reel stock was the bee's knees until I got the KTF spool.
KTF makes a spool for the Conquest BFS now as well. I think I saw 6g spool weight and you just transfer over the mag brakes from the stock one. Very tempted once again...
You don't have to transfer anything. The brakes are on the side plate. The spool doesn't have any brake components.
IG @hobie_wan_kenobi_fishing

southpaw619
Senior Angler
Senior Angler
Posts: 71
Joined: Sun Jan 18, 2015 3:06 am
Location: San Diego

Re: BFS UL OR XUL

Post by southpaw619 » Wed Dec 20, 2017 2:18 am

Definitely the aldebaran will be the best. It has the lightest spool of the three. Also the lighter weight of the reel itself will make for smoother casts strokes and will pair better with lighter rod. The Conquest is as heavy or heavier than my complete set ups and that's with me using bass taper rods. I spend a good portion of my fishing throwing baits around 1/32 total weight. 1/64 total weight is something I can cast but isn't really a fishable weight unless you only need 5 yards. I fished a bare 64th trout magnet head a good amount one day but that is .6 g and of course distance was not important. I haven't spent much time casting an aldebaran bfs stock but 1/32 should definitely be doable with all the magnets in. For these weights, I feel braid is a must almost and of course only 30-50 yards of line.

Post Reply