• You need to be a registered member of Barbel Fishing World to post on these forums. Some of the forums are hidden from non-members. Please refer to the instructions on the ‘Register’ page for details of how to join the new incarnation of BFW...

Difference between Daiwa connoisseur rods

The Z was a lighter more expensive blank fitted with higher quality rings. The Z was also quite a bit (approximately £100 for equivalent models) more expensive than the X. Both were available at the same time (mid to late 90s).

Daiwa 1996.jpg


Daiwa 1998.jpg
 
Thanks Chris🎣
You're welcome.

It's also worth noting that there are several incarnations of Connoisseur match/float rod. The one that tends to get the most attention/plaudits is what's generally known as the "Purple Conny". It's actually the "Team Daiwa Connoisseur" (TDCM xxxx) but also bears the "Tom Pickering" signature. They were introduced in 1993.
 
Hi Chris
Is the conny z 17/20 in the catalogue,
If it is what is the recc line rating.
Thanks
Dave,
sorry, It's not shown in either of those two excerpts and I don't have the full catalogues going back as far to check. My primary interest is in the 13' spliced tip Daiwa rods. They are the excerpts I tend to save when I find them. I also find that longer Daiwa rods are a little too weighty for my tastes. There was good reasons for Daiwa rarely exceeding 14' rods until around the turn of the century. It might be worth asking the eBay seller with one listed currently. It might be printed on the blank.

I think you'll need the 1999 (or newer) catalogue to find the Connoisseur Z 17/20.
The best I can do is the successor Spectron 17/20 from the 2005 catalogue. It's shown as being rated 8-1lb.
Daiwa 2005 catalogue Spectron.jpg

The 2010 Spectron M2 Match 17/20 is 3-10lb.
The 2013 Connoisseur G 17/20 is also 3-10lb.
The 2016 Spectron (AU) Match 17/20 is 2-8lb.
 
Thanks for the info Chris,
I've owned the rod for a number of years
Reel line rating is not on the blank
Always assumed it was around 2/3 to 8/10.
 

Attachments

  • 20230916_193719.jpg
    20230916_193719.jpg
    44.8 KB · Views: 74
  • 20230916_193849.jpg
    20230916_193849.jpg
    43.7 KB · Views: 64
Back
Top