Daiwa 18 Ninja Feeder LT 6000-SS (Feeder)X vs Shimano Vanford FA 2500SHGAX

The selected categories are different, score metrics vary from category to another.

Daiwa 18 Ninja Feeder LT, 6000-SS (Feeder), left and right hand, Feeder Fishing Reel, Front Drag, 10217-600
Daiwa 18 Ninja Feeder LT
Feeder And Match
6000-ss (feeder)x
56.10 out of 100
Value for money2.5 out of 5
Quality classLow
Durability3 out of 10
Ergonomics3.8 out of 10
Gear ratio5.1:1
Maximum drag12kg / 26.46lbs
Weight390g / 13.76oz
Line retireve per crank92 centimeter / 36.22 inch
Ball bearings4

Technical Specifications

  • BrandDAIWA
  • The main category of the reelFeeder and match
  • Price range~ €59.00
  • Is saltwater resistantNo
  • Spare spoolNo
  • Reel size6000-SS (Feeder)
  • Handle typeSingle handle
  • Drag typeFront drag
  • Handle orientationLeft, Right
  • Line capacity monofilmm/meter: 0.28/150
Shimano Vanford FA, 2500SHGA, left and right hand, Spinning fishing reel, Front Drag, VF2500SHGA
Shimano Vanford FA
Spinning
83.90 out of 100
Value for money4 out of 5
Quality classGood
Durability4.61 out of 10
Ergonomics6.42 out of 10
Gear ratio5.8:1
Maximum drag4kg / 8.82lbs
Weight175g / 6.17oz
Line retireve per crank86 centimeter / 33.86 inch
Ball bearings8

Technical Specifications

  • BrandSHIMANO
  • The main category of the reelSpinning
  • Price range~ €184.33
  • Is saltwater resistantNo
  • Spare spoolNo
  • Reel size2500SHGA
  • Handle typeSingle handle
  • Drag typeFront drag
  • Handle orientationLeft, Right
  • Line capacity monofilmm/meter: 0.18/120

Conclusion

Shimano Vanford FA 2500SHGAX clearly outshines Daiwa 18 Ninja Feeder LT 6000-SS (Feeder)X, offering significantly better performance in weight (175g / 6,17oz) and ball bearings (8). While Daiwa 18 Ninja Feeder LT 6000-SS (Feeder)X may be a budget-friendly option. For most anglers, Shimano Vanford FA 2500SHGAX is the kind of reel you can trust when performance matters.

What's the difference between Daiwa 18 Ninja Feeder LT and Shimano Vanford FA?

There are not much differences between the two comparables