Anybody did a performance comparison among the 3?
The RORO is the cheapest but is no longer available. Based on the specs the RORO has the same construction (and depth at 1.5mm) with the Avail 17CNQ29R and is heavily ported. The AMO spool has a honycomb design and a shorter shaft (there is an extension goes all the way to the cast control) - could the short shaft further help reduce friction? It is a little deeper though at 2.5mm.
Avail vs AMO vs RORO spools for Conquest BFS
Re: Avail vs AMO vs RORO spools for Conquest BFS
No comparison test from me, but I will say that the KTF spool works so well that I have not bothered to test my DIY spool (think it is a roro, but forgot).
-
- Elite Angler
- Posts: 214
- Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2017 1:09 am
Re: Avail vs AMO vs RORO spools for Conquest BFS
I did a little personal experience write up in the fb bfs group but for my preference I went with the Avail29.
No fumbling with magnets, no changing spool shafts and it's pretty stout. The stock spool is plenty capable though and the only reason for my change was to gain a bit of line capacity
No fumbling with magnets, no changing spool shafts and it's pretty stout. The stock spool is plenty capable though and the only reason for my change was to gain a bit of line capacity