Daiwa 19 Cast’Izm Feeder 25QD vs Shimano Sedona C3000 HG FI

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

Daiwa 19 Cast’Izm Feeder 25QD, left and right hand, Feeder Fishing Reel, Front Drag, 10923-025
Daiwa 19 Cast’Izm Feeder 25QD
Feeder And Match
87.30 out of 100
Value for money4.5 out of 5
Quality classExcellent
Durability5.5 out of 10
Ergonomics3.8 out of 10
Gear ratio4.7:1
Maximum drag12kg / 26.46lbs
Weight430g / 15.17oz
Line retireve per crank96 centimeter / 37.8 inch
Ball bearings4

Technical Specifications

  • BrandDAIWA
  • The main category of the reelFeeder and match
  • Price range~ €209.80
  • Is saltwater resistantNo
  • Spare spoolNo
  • Reel size-
  • Handle typeSingle handle
  • Drag typeFront drag
  • Handle orientationLeft, Right
  • Line capacity monofilmm/meter: 0.28/150
Shimano Sedona C3000 HG FI, Spinning reel with front drag
Shimano Sedona C3000 HG FI
Spinning
68.90 out of 100
Value for money3 out of 5
Quality classLow
Durability3 out of 10
Ergonomics6.17 out of 10
Gear ratio6.2:1
Maximum drag9kg / 19.84 lbs
Weight250g / 8.82oz
Line retireve per crank91cm / 35.83 inch
Ball bearings3 S SUS + 1 Rollerbearing

Technical Specifications

  • BrandSHIMANO
  • The main category of the reelSpinning
  • Price range~ €52.80
  • Is saltwater resistantNo
  • Spare spoolNo
  • Reel sizeC3000 HG
  • Handle typeHandle
  • Drag typeFront drag
  • Handle orientationLeft, Right
  • Line capacity monofilmm/m: 0.25/210. 0.30/130, 0.35/100 lb/yds: 6/230, 8/170, 10/140

Conclusion

Daiwa 19 Cast’Izm Feeder 25QD edges out Shimano Sedona C3000 HG FI with slightly better overall performance, especially on the durability (5.5 out of 10) and the total score (8.73 out of 10). Still, Shimano Sedona C3000 HG FI holds its own with strengths like a weight of 250g / 8.82oz and a gear ratio of 6.2:1, making it a solid choice depending on your preferences and fishing needs.

What's the difference between Daiwa 19 Cast’Izm Feeder 25QD and Shimano Sedona C3000 HG FI?

There are not much differences between the two comparables