Air or Arity?

Home Forums Fishing Coarse And Match Fishing Air or Arity?

This topic contains 51 replies, has 14 voices, and was last updated by  TF_CriagH66 2 years, 4 months ago.

  • Author
    Posts
  • #59643

    TF_JohnH
    Member

    What’s the opinion as to the strongest top end Daiwa16m pole on the market just now? I have the Pro X and a Trillogy XS. I was all set to buy the Tricast trilogy pro 2 until I found it is not compatible with the XS. I know the air is compatible with the Pro X but my local dealer advises the Arity is stronger. I can see from the Daiwa web site it is slightly heavier but is it compatible with the Air and Pro x from a section interchange perspective?
    I have loads of kits for both Daiwa and Tricast so wont consider a third option.
    From a price perspective the air and arity are almost the same for the 13m package, My pro x 14 and 16m sections should fit to take it to 16m.

  • #176781

    TF_craigm
    Member

    Every section will interchange between the Air, Airity and Tourney Pro X, I would have thought the new Pro X would have been stronger than both the Air + Airity ??

  • #176782

    TF_JohnH
    Member

    Pro x is about 4/5 years old I bought it when they first came out but broke 5th and 6th when it blew off my roller at Cudmore. The sections are repaired and usable but £500 to replace, hence my thoughts are to buy another package instead.
    I love the tricast but feel vulnerable as I have no cover for any section breakage.

  • #176785

    TF_JohnH
    Member

    Weights at 16m, air 1368g, pro x 1379g, airity 1410g.
    Appreciate the difference is small but does this mean the airity is stronger as it has more carbon?????

  • #176792

    TF_bagging machine
    Participant

    The Trilogy is 1280g and IMO is stronger than all three Daiwa poles mentioned.

  • #176795

    Anonymous

    @johnh wrote:

    Weights at 16m, air 1368g, pro x 1379g, airity 1410g.
    Appreciate the difference is small but does this mean the airity is stronger as it has more carbon?????

    Those weights won’t tell you anything about strength as it can vary from section to section. So, for example, a total pole weight won’t tell you if the No 5 is light/weak and No 6 heavy/strong etc etc

    I would not have thought that, strength-wise, there really would be anything significant between them.

  • #176796

    TF_CriagH66
    Member

    John, you are asking all the very same questions that are rolling around in my head.
    I have a the original Whisker and the original Tourney Pro together with 20+ elasticated top kits , most with hydro. The original Tourney Pro was without doubt the strongest top end pole available at the time. I have never broken a section and believe me, I have given some big carp some serious grief.
    I need a new top end 16m pole. It has to be Daiwa with all of the top sections and spares I have.
    Question – New Tourney Pro X. Airity or Air.
    Daiwa have been tweaking the Tourney Pro for years and now it weighs less than an Airity. This doesn’t necessarily mean it’s as stiff or well balanced. But is the new version as strong as the original and how does the Airity compare in the strength stakes?
    The Air is an unknown, though I have heard excellent feedback from lads on the match circuit I fish. Will Raison did an article on snag swims in MFM a couple of years ago and was dragging carp out of reed beds on purple hydro using the Air – but then he doesn’t pay for replacement sections does he.
    I really haven’t a clue. I do not believe the tackle trade knows any better either. The only people who really know the answer are the engineers at Daiwa. Fat chance of them providing a true answer without sales and marketing jazzing it up and watering it down!
    However perhaps its time to make a call to Daiwa and ask the questions.

  • #176772

    TF_JohnH
    Member

    Just makes you think, why does a company like Daiwa need three top end poles all targeted at the same people to do the same job?
    Spares packages are remarkably similar and the technical descriptions pretty much identical.
    I cannot convince myself that there is that much of a difference between any of them. Price wise too they are very close so its pay your money and takes your choice. I suspect too that there are subtle differences between the same poles same models. You will find some anglers have never had problems whilst some have nothing but problems!!
    If pole x was every described as marginally stronger than pole y by any manufacturer that pole y would quickly cease to be available.
    I guess its down to the marketing guys but it does frustrate me that we pay over £1000s for something we can just waggle around in the shop, no manuals, no technical data, nothing else by which we can judge. Its all down to perceptions and what sponsored anglers say who clearly have some bias.

  • #176775

    TF_adi fisherman
    Participant

    I think what you need to remember is the difference between strength and how robust a product is. Daiwa test all their poles to destruction when designing them and they are all very strong if used correctly, however the ProX will always be more robust in my opinion as it has slightly stronger feeling sections than the Airity or the Air. Having said that I have sold lots of ProX’s and Airity’s and Air’s and to be honest we have had no broken sections under warranty in 2 years. The Pro ‘feels’ slightly stronger on wall strength than the other 2 models but as I said if used correctly they will all handle Red hydro with no real problems. If you are heavy handed then go for the Pro, if not then I think the Airity is worth the extra money especially at longer lengths. The Air is definately better at 16m but as with any top end pole it is only a good bet if you can afford it and not worry about the price of spares if you happen to tread on a section.

  • #176778

    TF_millie
    Member

    I sold my air when I used it at decoy lakes had a seventeen pounder on it on black hydro and I closed my eyes when it went on runs I could hear it tweeking and thought “at any time I need a tesco carrier bag to take it home” I lost all confidence in it after that thinking it’ll cost too much to replace any sections so I went back to my z12 even tho I had 24 top4s for the air

  • #176769

    TF_tench0771
    Member

    millie how do u rate ther z12 compaired to the air

    i had a go on a airity once an it felt amazing in the hand very well balanced but not as stiff as i would have liked it to b ,also a friend has the pro x an he found a few cracks in his 5th an 6th sections !! he is a very good angler an does not beast it he got them repaired an no problims since

  • #176770

    Anonymous

    @johnh wrote:

    Just makes you think, why does a company like Daiwa need three top end poles all targeted at the same people to do the same job?
    Spares packages are remarkably similar and the technical descriptions pretty much identical.
    I cannot convince myself that there is that much of a difference between any of them. Price wise too they are very close so its pay your money and takes your choice. I suspect too that there are subtle differences between the same poles same models. You will find some anglers have never had problems whilst some have nothing but problems!!
    If pole x was every described as marginally stronger than pole y by any manufacturer that pole y would quickly cease to be available.
    I guess its down to the marketing guys but it does frustrate me that we pay over £1000s for something we can just waggle around in the shop, no manuals, no technical data, nothing else by which we can judge. Its all down to perceptions and what sponsored anglers say who clearly have some bias.

    Many things in fishing are subjective and come down to opinion and not fact, not right & wrong etc. Buying a pole is not like buying a car. It must be very difficult to tell someone in the written word exactly how stiff a pole is or how much flex it has etc etc. Let’s face it, there are no industry standards for pole elastic sizes (diameter, stretch, strength etc etc) or even hook sizes (shank length ? Gape ? Point length ? Wire thickness ?) etc. Plus elastic ratings must be a minefield. Tell someone that you can use red Hydro with a pole, they go and break it (giving it too much stick) and then try telling them they totally misunderstand the concept and it’s their poor technique. I’ve seen it so many times. Ignorance really is bliss for the truly inept !!!!

  • #176761

    TF_JohnH
    Member

    Point taken but at 3 and 4 grand a go I think anglers are poorly served, 2lb line that breaks at 6lb or 0.5lb at £3 a spool is one thing but the list price for the air is £5k. I am sure there are lots of anglers out there who have never spent that much on a car, including running it for a year!!

  • #176762

    TF_mart4666
    Member

    Well I’ve just sold my air cos I fancy a change. Everybody thinks I’m daft and I may well be.i can tell you that because the air has a hyper msg core . None of the sections oval unlike the airity or pro x. Air is the stronger of the 3 by far. Had fish to 18lb on mine and it never creaked once. There’s a reason why an Air doesn’t have short 4 supplied. It doesn’t need one. Airity sag alot at 16m .airs don’t. Saying that everybody seems to break no6s on daiwa and air spares are £20 more than airity generally. No6 is something like £385.
    I never broke a section on my air and I used it down side at woodlands thirsk .Red hydro no bother.

  • #176764

    TF_tench0771
    Member

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kz70GQvaNC4

    thault there was an inch difference in stiffness, im in no doubt tho that the air does fiel beta balanced at 16m plus

  • #176768

    TF_millie
    Member

    @tench0771 wrote:

    millie how do u rate ther z12 compaired to the air

    i had a go on a airity once an it felt amazing in the hand very well balanced but not as stiff as i would have liked it to b ,also a friend has the pro x an he found a few cracks in his 5th an 6th sections !! he is a very good angler an does not beast it he got them repaired an no problims since

    I’ve always had daiwa poles from being 17 yrs old I’m now 44 and couldn’t knock them mind you I was in a team sponsored by daiwa,has time has wore on my fishing has changed,I was a silver fish angler thro n thro but now I never fish waters that are silver fish predominate all carp and f1 waters and personally I think daiwa poles ain’t made to hit fast biting n little dinks off f1s at length so I tried someone’s z12 on a snake lake fishing 14m for f1s and it was way better than my air for direct responsiveness to the float,the air felt easier to fish with better balanced than the z12 but I can get round that with being a well built man but to me I’d sooner have a pole that’s so responsive than balanced any day,the z12 is definitely heavier than the air at 16m but now adays I very rarely fish 16m ,14m n dolly butt yes,it feels a different pole.but if I was still a silver fish angler I’d go for the air every time it bends better when playing skimmers n big roach but for carp it bends far too much for my fear factor that it’s gunna break at any time but with the z12 it’s straight as a die and only the top4 arc over while playing carp letting all the elastic absorb the fishes runs

  • #176767

    TF_CriagH66
    Member

    RICHOX. Sorry mate but I’m with John on this one. There’s always the philosophical post on these threads about personal preference and how you use the pole and the myriad of factors at play and how you can’t really compare poles. But the manufacturers know exactly what the market place is about, they will have tested the competition and rated in relation to their own. Happens in every industry. Daiwa know which of the three Pro X, Airity, AIR is the strongest and exactly why. It’s not like buying a car, but it should be; and increasingly at a similar price point. Anglers are considered as easy money; expected to hand over £3K with very little in the way of facts or product testing information at hand. Nothing will change until the angling press and trade start asking the right questions and demanding answers, products are reviewed in a comparative format without the positive spin thru fear of loss of advertising revenue and anglers start to kick up a stink instead of rolling over and exposing their wallets.

  • #176751

    Anonymous

    @criagh66 wrote:

    RICHOX. Sorry mate but I’m with John on this one. There’s always the philosophical post on these threads about personal preference and how you use the pole and the myriad of factors at play and how you can’t really compare poles. But the manufacturers know exactly what the market place is about, they will have tested the competition and rated in relation to their own. Happens in every industry. Daiwa know which of the three Pro X, Airity, AIR is the strongest and exactly why. It’s not like buying a car, but it should be; and increasingly at a similar price point. Anglers are considered as easy money; expected to hand over £3K with very little in the way of facts or product testing information at hand. Nothing will change until the angling press and trade start asking the right questions and demanding answers, products are reviewed in a comparative format without the positive spin thru fear of loss of advertising revenue and anglers start to kick up a stink instead of rolling over and exposing their wallets.

    So tell me, in accurate & technical detail, how strong the No 5 is in your pole ?? If you cannot then tell me how to measure/test it so you can. After that do the same for every section in your pole and tell me that. Then after you’ve fathomed a way to do it persuade ALL pole manufacturers/suppliers to do EXACTLY the same test and provide their results also so we can all compare that ONE fact.

    It is far, far more complex than you imagine.

  • #176752

    TF_CriagH66
    Member

    Fair play RICHOX your knowledge of Carbon/Resin technology far surpasses mine. Not a problem. But to infer that the manufacturers don’t have a clue either must be a cause for concern!

  • #176753

    TF_JohnH
    Member

    Guys trust me they know exactly the strength info we want but wont give it to us because we just pay up. Many of these guys make parts for F1 and Aero and if you think an F1 team or Airbus just waggle the parts and then accept them you are very much mistaken.
    I am in the aero side of things and many parts are tested to destruction routinely and relevant strengths are very well understood and certified with each part. They would never get off the ground if they could not demonstrate this with the numbers.
    If only the manufacturers would tell us about the cloths they use it might be a start, but as they don’t, how do we know that a £200 pole from Avanti is not made out of the same cloth as a pole costing 10x that?
    I don’t think its asking too much on top end poles that we get info that at least lets us know what exactly we are buying and why it costs so much.

  • #176754

    TF_Prawnking
    Member

    I’ve got both an Air and a Pro x (new one) and the Pro X is definitely stronger and I feel I can throw it around more. Previously I had a Tourney pro and the new Pro X is stiffer yet just as strong but has a more modern finish like the Air. The Air on the other hand in my opinion is not as strong and the carbon appears more brittle (hence two section breakages no4 and no6) It seems to bend alarmingly when bigger fish are on and I certainly prefer the Pro X for carping. The Air however is a superb smaller fish pole which is what I prefer to use it for. In my opinion there is very little difference between these poles at 16m and if I had to choose one it would be the Pro X because you can do more with it.

  • #176755

    TF_JohnH
    Member

    So the Air is a great carp pole says one but two say not. I am sure if Daiwa said the air was for silvers they would not sell many. The Whisker has been around a while and from my perspective has always been judged as a very good silver fish pole at a fraction of the air price.
    They say ignorance is bliss and this series of posts pretty much sums this up.
    From a top end pole perspective we know little or nothing factual about their capabilities.

  • #176756

    TF_CriagH66
    Member

    Guys trust me they know exactly the strength info we want but wont give it to us because we just pay up. Many of these guys make parts for F1 and Aero and if you think an F1 team or Airbus just waggle the parts and then accept them you are very much mistaken.
    I am in the aero side of things and many parts are tested to destruction routinely and relevant strengths are very well understood and certified with each part. They would never get off the ground if they could not demonstrate this with the numbers.
    If only the manufacturers would tell us about the cloths they use it might be a start, but as they don’t, how do we know that a £200 pole from Avanti is not made out of the same cloth as a pole costing 10x that?
    I don’t think its asking too much on top end poles that we get info that at least lets us know what exactly we are buying and why it costs so much.

    Spot on!!

  • #176757

    Anonymous

    Nooooo you misunderstand. Having some technical data is not going to help the angler.

    1) If you test the pole to destruction, using the dead-lift method which seems common, it tells you how much that pole when assembled at that length (not other lengths) can lift. So what is the point of that ? When are you going to swing in, without elastic as that’s not part of the destruction test, a fish large enough to replicate the dead weight ??? And don’t tell me that this test tells anyone how much they can ‘pull’ on one because it doesn’t. Totally different.

    2) If you know that pole XXX will snap when dead lifting 1kg at 13m, for example, how does that tell anyone how much pressure they can apply to a section and stop Mr Numpty putting his hand through a No 3, or No 4 etc etc

    3) How does it tell anyone how much and how rigourously they can flex the pole at any given length ?? And it you want to test poles this way, to destruction, how are the technical details going to help the angler equate that to himself when he cannot replicate it and so doesn’t know what it means to him ?

    4) If the pole is rated to size 16 elastic – what does that mean ? It has no bearing on wall strength and it does NOT mean you cannot break the pole (or any individual section) when using that elastic or up to that elastic (who’s elastic anyway ?).

    5) So pole A is made in 40t carbon and pole B is also made in 40t carbon So what ? What about amount of carbon, what about resins, what about make-up, what about length, diameter, taper, oven temperature when cured, what about time in oven etc etc etc

    There are so many ways to look at it. You can have all the technical data in the world but unless it is directly related to fishing use it is useless. And as we are all different, all have different abilities, all set the pole up differently, handle the pole differently etc etc then there are so many variables.

    All of the information, what there is, is simply a guide. You don’t need to over complicate things. You just need some common sense and, unfortunately, some experience. And experience is different to expertise.

  • #176758

    Depending on how the pole is elasticated can also result in section breakages.
    i have seen a few topkits expolde where they have been elasticated with overtensioned,or really short lengths of heavy grade solid,or hollw elastic through one section.the answer you normally get is,this pole is supposed to be rated to a 20+,so it should be able to take it.

  • #176759

    TF_JohnH
    Member

    Richox, of course you are correct in absolute terms but all I am asking for is a comparison between A and B. Resins and bake time must be controlled to ensure poles of the same models behave the same but based on the above posts its clearly chalk and cheese.
    One piece of info the manufacturers could give us is droop, put the 16 m section in pole supports and measure how much the tip dips along the pole length. A reviewer/manufacturer will tell me it feels very stiff without telling me this number.
    Surely the designer knows all of the numbers, how can they make the things in the first place? Having made it how does he know its been made as designed? They must test!!
    I repeat the buyer has no data on which to base his decision other than to play and observe for himself.

  • #176760

    Anonymous

    Droop test is, seemingly, useful. But there are 2 things:

    Take poles at ‘16m’ just for example, BIG problem is that hardly any are 16m and I would bet virtually all are different lengths to each other and even over 1/2m (I’ve seen some which are even 1m short of their fishable length) short. So actual length will make a big difference to droop. Shorter poles (if everything else is the same) should droop less than longer poles. Also some have stupid tips making up the length which, in the real world, cannot be used and others at least a sensible tip diameter. So, again, many variables.

    But this only tells you how much the lower/bigger sections can support the weight of those in front of them. The other thing is actual stiffness and flex or lack of flex. That is another thing.

    It is possible to have pole X which has a droop of 80cm at 16m and another pole Z which has a droop of 10cm less, 70cm, at 16m but the former, seemingly softer pole, actually has a stiffer action. So less recoil and less downward action when striking etc (so not slapping the waters surface when fishing shallow/tight).

    I very much doubt if we can ever get all of the manufacturers to sing from the same hymn sheet.

  • #176742

    TF_tench0771
    Member

    my map parabolix sti is well short of 16m i think its 15.5m ish at its serpose 16m langth :rolleyes: i think all poles should b true langth once cut bk

  • #176743

    TF_JohnH
    Member

    Now I rest my case when 16m poles are not 16m we are being taken for fools IMO.

  • #176744

    TF_tench0771
    Member

    from wat ive hurd there r only a few that r true langth
    garbo m1
    map 901
    tricast pro 2
    z12

    all the rest come up short once cut bk

  • #176746

    TF_JohnH
    Member

    Likewise the Daiwas, if you remove the flick tips on the match kits you have to use the half butt onto the 16m section so technically they are 16m.
    Does anyone use the flick tips?

  • #176747

    Not sure about ‘flick tips’ but I use the no.1 sections. They’re cut back enough to take an internal Ptfe bush which is big enough to take an eight elastic. I guess there’s about a foot of no.1 section.

    Anything over an eight elastic I use the carp,kits.

  • #176749

    TF_tench0771
    Member

    so does any one have the true mesurements for the diawas ?once cut bk to fit a 17 hollow and r the diawa carp kits shorter ?. one other thing is the diawa long 4’s arnt up to carp fishing so i here so u need the short 4 that means losing more over all langth !

  • #176729

    TF_JohnH
    Member

    If you use the short 4 and remove the no1 section from the match kits you won’t have a 16 m pole even with the half butt. Not many use power tops as they do make the pole a bit top heavy. Also many cut them back to the same length as the match top 2 so your cupping kit is good for both.
    If you do this your pole is under 16m.

  • #176730

    TF_JohnH
    Member

    I should have added, if you use the short no4 sorry.

  • #176731

    TF_tench0771
    Member

    thanks for clearing that up johnH lots to consider with these top end poles no dout there all amazing in there own way but the langth thing realy a issue for me

  • #176732

    TF_redarmy
    Member

    john i was in the same predicament 2.5 years ago i had the trilogy xs and 18 top kits but i bought the trilogy pro 2 and have never regretted it,does anything you ask of it.tricast made a mistake in not making the xs and pro 2 compatable i dont think they will do that again.theres still plenty of xs qwners out there if you sell.the pro 2 has far exceeded tricasts sales forcast and will be its flagship for a while yet as it will take something special to better

  • #176736

    Anonymous

    @johnh wrote:

    Now I rest my case when 16m poles are not 16m we are being taken for fools IMO.

    I have to agree. 16m should be 16m. That is a basic requirement (As Advertised) and also should be fishable as is (Fit For Purpose) with at least a reasonable sized/diameter elastic. Anything fitted with a tip which is tiny in diameter which would not take any PTFE and elastic is not Fit For Purpose. You shouldn’t have to carry out major modifications to be able to use it and you shouldn’t have to spend hundreds of pounds on an extension to make it the length it was bought at in the first place.

  • #176739

    @richox12 wrote:

    @johnh wrote:

    Now I rest my case when 16m poles are not 16m we are being taken for fools IMO.

    I have to agree. 16m should be 16m. That is a basic requirement (As Advertised) and also should be fishable as is (Fit For Purpose) with at least a reasonable sized/diameter elastic. Anything fitted with a tip which is tiny in diameter which would not take any PTFE and elastic is not Fit For Purpose. You shouldn’t have to carry out major modifications to be able to use it and you shouldn’t have to spend hundreds of pounds on an extension to make it the length it was bought at in the first place.

    Maybe I’m missing something but they come as 16m with dolly butt supplied and no1 removed don’t they so are 16m in use?

    Granted they are not as long as some other poles that don’t need a dolly butt……but then they don’t come with the dolly butt free. I’ve had Daiwa, Garbo, Shimano and Tricast near or flagship poles and they were all very very good. I’m happy with what I have at the mo, suits my style of fishing and I can throw it round a bit.

    Air will be better if you fish very long a lot otherwise I don’t know why you would bother as the difference below 13m I understand is minimal.

  • #176740

    Anonymous

    @iansi01354 wrote:

    @richox12 wrote:

    @johnh wrote:

    Now I rest my case when 16m poles are not 16m we are being taken for fools IMO.

    I have to agree. 16m should be 16m. That is a basic requirement (As Advertised) and also should be fishable as is (Fit For Purpose) with at least a reasonable sized/diameter elastic. Anything fitted with a tip which is tiny in diameter which would not take any PTFE and elastic is not Fit For Purpose. You shouldn’t have to carry out major modifications to be able to use it and you shouldn’t have to spend hundreds of pounds on an extension to make it the length it was bought at in the first place.

    Maybe I’m missing something but they come as 16m with dolly butt supplied and no1 removed don’t they so are 16m in use?

    Granted they are not as long as some other poles that don’t need a dolly butt……but then they don’t come with the dolly butt free. I’ve had Daiwa, Garbo, Shimano and Tricast near or flagship poles and they were all very very good. I’m happy with what I have at the mo, suits my style of fishing and I can throw it round a bit.

    Air will be better if you fish very long a lot otherwise I don’t know why you would bother as the difference below 13m I understand is minimal.

    No, they are supposed to be 16m without the dolly butt, the dolly butt is extra. But even as the original so called 16m they are way short to start with, about 1/2 short last time I checked a friends (so 15.5m straight from the bag so to speak). And, even with the dolly butt (which shouldn’t be needed any way to make up any shortfall in length) and tip removed it was 15.8m.

    It’s just rubbish. They must think angler’s are fools or simply just don’t care. It isn’t difficult to make a carbon tube of any given length. But if they did make it a proper, fishable 16m then I guess it would not stand up well to the others out there which are already correct and they’d lose market share ?

  • #176718

    you can only really make a pole ‘longer’ without a dolly butt – by making the sections longer – garbo’s are 195cm compared to Daiwa and most other brands 1.77 – add up 10 sections and its not rocket science to figure out why the garbo’s are almost 3/4m longer.
    The Z12/14 has 2m long butts and the new drennan has an extra long no.3.

    Still Des shipp doesn’t seem to do too bad with his ‘unfashionable’ even shorter reglass/lerc PI absolute.

    .

  • #176693

    TF_adi fisherman
    Participant

    Do all fish swim around at exactly 16m from the bank then?
    If manufacturers said their pole was 15.5m long no one would buy it as the fish would be 50cm further out and would be impossible to catch. I often wonder what happens when some of the poles are 16.5 m long. Do you sit further back so you reach the magical 16m mark exactly or what?
    It’s funny how Daiwa still sell more top end poles than anyone else even with all the massive (50cm) reasons not to buy them. By the way if a dolly butt is supplied with a pole it is part of the pole and does count towards the length, well it does in my world!

  • #176714

    TF_tench0771
    Member

    does any one no wich is the stronger of the 2 ive chatted with loads of people an they all say the same torny is stronger!!! :confused:

  • #176699

    Anonymous

    @adi fisherman wrote:

    Do all fish swim around at exactly 16m from the bank then?
    If manufacturers said their pole was 15.5m long no one would buy it as the fish would be 50cm further out and would be impossible to catch. I often wonder what happens when some of the poles are 16.5 m long. Do you sit further back so you reach the magical 16m mark exactly or what?
    It’s funny how Daiwa still sell more top end poles than anyone else even with all the massive (50cm) reasons not to buy them. By the way if a dolly butt is supplied with a pole it is part of the pole and does count towards the length, well it does in my world!

    That’s not the point, people just want to get what they have paid for. If everytime you put petrol in your car you were charged per litre but each ‘litre’ was only 950ml you’d have no problem with that and be fine about it ?? The Doly butt is NOT part of the stated length or weight in the example given.

  • #176687

    TF_adi fisherman
    Participant

    Get a life

  • #176688

    Anonymous

    @adi fisherman wrote:

    Get a life

    A very informative and worthwhile adddition to the debate !!!!! Spoken like someone painted into a corner.

  • #176684

    TF_adi fisherman
    Participant

    Your grasp on reality seems very slight. Maybe you like people to think you are an expert on everything. Your analogy is flawed in that as trading standards would prosecute a petrol retailer for false measurements and as far as I am aware none of the hundreds of tackle retailers have ever been prosecuted for selling a Daiwa pole as they are actually the stated length, maybe not if you want to put a 20 elastic in them but nevertheless they are 16m long when sold. If not then I would suggest you report Daiwa and see what happens.
    By the way the Airity is more robust as I said before.

  • #176683

    TF_tench0771
    Member

    what is the best price on the airityx45 ive just red that they can b had new for £2150!! the chipest ive sin is £3000 or just under :confused:

  • #176673

    TF_adi fisherman
    Participant

    You have probably seen a price for the pole only option. The 16m pack sells for about £2850 but you will not see shops advertising for less than the SSP.

  • #176682

    TF_CriagH66
    Member

    You can buy the Airity X45 16M package at £1739.00. Only £90.00 more than the Tourney Pro X 16M package.
    I recently held all three, AIR, Airity and Tourney Pro, and it’s true, there is very little in it at 13 and possibly 14.5M, but very noticeable difference at 16M. However this is without an elasticated top kit, sitting in a shop without a breath of wind. I would suspect in a cross wind the AIR would be far superior at every length -13, 14.5 and 16M.
    I also took the time to walk up the poles and have a little squeeze of the 5 and 6 sections. A lot to be learned from this. Tourney Pro is strongest by a country mile.
    Still haven’t taken the plunge, as yet not decided. However after hearing the stats from a shop on returned broken No. sixes on the AIR as compared to the Airity and Tourney Pro, I can confidently say AIR is a no go.
    Also on cupping in big leamed-up balls of groundbait on a match at the weekend, I was wondering if anything other than my current original Tourney Pro would handle it. This pole has lasted 8 years without a breakage, I think I may well suffer the extra effort of fishing long with the new Touney and be confident the pole will meet the test of time.

  • #176677

    TF_JohnH
    Member

    Thank you for all your feedback, sorry I have not been back on but been to the airshow in Paris. Happy to report no broken sections from Airbus or Boeing despite most planes now being made of carbon fibre!!
    Seriously it seems the Air is not as strong as other poles purely based on what has been posted here though one might disagree!
    We all think 16m poles should be 16m without the dolly with a tip section capable of being elasticated. The Daiwa’s would fall down here despite being a market leader, not sure who else.
    It does appear if we are correct that the TP has yet to be bettered, which, given its age and progress made in these materials since its launch, is a surprise.
    I think my post wording needs changing to Air NOR Airity.
    However we have to acknowledge that we have very few facts outside weight and price to go on.

  • #176659

    TF_tench0771
    Member

    well ive made my mind up z12 it is then lol ide pay £2200 for a new airity or just over at a push i dont think its worth £2850 u can get a old torny for £2100 new

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.