Shimano Sedona 2500 SFI vs Penn Squall II Levelwind 20 LW LC-Right handX

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

Shimano Sedona  2500 SFI, Spinning reel with front drag
Shimano Sedona 2500 SFI
Spinning
52.60 out of 100
Value for money2.5 out of 5
Quality classLow
Durability3 out of 10
Ergonomics6.18 out of 10
Gear ratio5.0:1
Maximum drag4kg / 8.82 lbs
Weight245g / 8.64oz
Line retireve per crank73cm / 28.74 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 size2500 SFI
  • Handle typeHandle
  • Drag typeFront drag
  • Handle orientationLeft, Right
  • Line capacity monofil0.16mm-150m / 0.18mm-120m / 0.20mm-95m
Penn Squall II Levelwind, 20 LW LC, right hand, Multi Fishing Reel, Star Drag, 1545927
Penn Squall II Levelwind
Multireels
66.10 out of 100
Value for money4 out of 5
Quality classGood
Durability4.5 out of 10
Ergonomics5.92 out of 10
Gear ratio4:9:1
Maximum drag14.9kg / 32,85lbs
Weight530g / 18.7oz
Line retireve per crank70 centimeter / 27.56 inch
Ball bearings4

Technical Specifications

  • BrandPENN
  • The main category of the reelMultireels
  • Price range~ €138.60
  • Is saltwater resistantNo
  • Spare spoolNo
  • Reel size20 LW LC
  • Handle typeSingle handle
  • Drag typeStar drag
  • Handle orientationRight
  • Line capacity monofilmm/meter: 290/0.29

Conclusion

Penn Squall II Levelwind 20 LW LC-Right handX edges out Shimano Sedona 2500 SFI with slightly better overall performance, especially on the total score (6.61 out of 10) and the line retrieve per crank (70 centimeter / 27.56 inch). Still, Shimano Sedona 2500 SFI holds its own with strengths like a ball bearings of 3 S SUS + 1 Rollerbearing and a ergonomics of 6.18 out of 10, making it a solid choice depending on your preferences and fishing needs.

What's the difference between Shimano Sedona 2500 SFI and Penn Squall II Levelwind?

There are not much differences between the two comparables