# Cast Pro Comparison



## Tacpayne

Today we had myself (Tacpayne), Thekingfeeder, jebson38, and pinfish out on the sod farm in Linden NC to compare some rods. We had Cast Pro 13’6-10 and 13’ 3-6, CTS 13’ 8-12 13’6” 3-6, rainshadow SU1509, WRI Fusion Mag, and a prototype WRI. We all decided to make sure that we used the same reel on comparable rods, so there was no variation from our equipment, we also used the same sinker from rod to rod. Everything used was fishing equipment. 
I started the day out casting the Cast Pro 13’ 6-10 with my 525 supermag xtra 17lb suffix tri 1 click off. I decided to run very safe with my reel settings. During the first round of casting I was very happy with how the rod performed, it was very responsive and felt like it had plenty more power to offer. I could easily get “feedback” from the rod, meaning I could feel it loading and unloading well. The rod is well balanced and has a slim 22mm butt. The tip is softer than the other rods tested, with a very firm mid section and butt. The rod was very easy loading and fit my style. Best cast 429’ worst 387’ average 410.4
Next up for me was the CTS 13’ 8-12 same reel and weight as before, same mag settings. The rod also performed well, but not as well as the cast pro, and was pretty even with my 1509. At 8oz the rod felt like it was at its limit and didn’t have much to offer. The action of the rod also didn’t give me much feel when casting. It has a larger 24mm butt and was also well balanced. The butt of the rod did not feel as firm as the cast pro or the 1509, and it also felt a little weaker in the middle than both of the others. Best cast 387’ worst 360 average 373.2
Rainshadow 1509 reel and weight the same as the above 2. Now this is my personal fishing rod, and what I am comfortable with. This rod is very tip heavy and has loads of power. It has a very firm butt, and a very stiff tip also. I did get more feed back on the 1509 than I did the CTS but not quite as much as the cast pro gave me. This rod also has a 24mm butt section, but has a 70/30 split, while the other 2 have a 50/50. I did not weigh any rods in the field, but this rod felt the heaviest of all that I threw today. I felt that I could have easily threw 10 or more with this rod if I wanted to.Best cast 393’, worst 372’, average 378.
CTS 13’6” 3-6oz, saltist 20h 17lb suffix tri 5oz weight. Out of every rod I handled today this rod surprised me the most. I have owned 4 different models of CTS rods, and all of them were better suited to cast the lower number in their rating. I was expecting this rod to do great at 3oz but not so well at 6oz. This was a legit 5oz rod, again very fast action. This was also not a built rod, it was a blank taped up. This was also not an accurate test for me personally. This was the last rod of the day that I cast, and I was finished I had nothing left, I only took 3 casts with this rod. I also put the wrong reel on this rod and the cast pro 13’3-6, the saltist was almost uncontrollable on both rods. The CTS felt very well, but at my point of exhaustion I cant provide an accurate description of this rod and how it performed. I considered leaving these results out, but knew that someone would cry foul if I did. Best cast 318’, worst 300’ average 308
Cast pro 13’ 3-6 same reel line and weight as the CTS 3-6. This rod was built by my son, as a show rod really. Full underwraps, aluminum reel seat eva formed grips. It is not a minimally built rod, and the added weight of the underwraps on the tip should effect the recovery and feel of the rod some. This rod has a soft tip, and fast action. The butt section of this rod feels larger than the CTS, though I didn’t measure it to confirm. My first impression of this blank before it was built was skeptical on the ratings I didn’t think it would throw 5 or 6 well. This rod has a powerful midsection and butt, and is very deceiving at how much power it has. If I had picked this one up for the first time when we conducted the test I would have been as surprised with it as I was with the CTS, but this is my rod and I am familiar with it. This rod throws 5 very well, you can feel it load up and unload very well and was responsive. I threw this rod 3rd in the rotation as was still somewhat fresh when I threw it versus when I threw the CTS. My best was 381’, worst 357’ average 360’. 
Again I don’t feel that the comparison of the 3-6 oz rods is accurate in my cast, due to how tired I was when I finally got to cast the CTS and those results should not weigh in really at all. My overall impression of the day was pretty close to what I thought it would be. These were all quality rods, that performed well. I will say that I did prefer the Cast Pro heaver over all the heavers I threw, even my own personal 1509. All of these rods suits different casting styles, and even fishing styles. For me the Cast pro line was easier to load as a whole than the other rods, and suited an in slow out fast cast well. I can say for certain that I would not have a problem fishing any of these rods. We were hoping to do the sensitivity test that was mentioned, but we just ran out of Daylight and energy.


----------



## Tacpayne

Cast Pro Comparison

Scott Parsons, all rods used same reel Abu 6500 Hi speed mag 17lb suffix Tri
Cast Pro 13’ 3-6 5oz weight
1.	315
2.	321
3.	336
4.	*339*
5.	330
Average 328.2’
CTS 13’6” 3-6 5oz
1.	324
2.	333
3.	*339*
4.	333
5.	309
Average 327’
Cast Pro 13’6-10 8oz
1.	*309*
2.	298.5
3.	309
4.	285
5.	264
Average 293.1’
CTS 13’ 8-12 8oz
1.	309
2.	*318*
3.	315
4.	303
5.	287.1
Average 306.42’
Chuck Payne 
Cast Pro 13’ 6-10, 8oz Penn 525 super mag xtra 17lb sufix tri + one click off
1.	387
2.	411
3.	399
4.	*429*
5.	426
Average 410.4’
CTS 13’ 8-12, 8oz Penn 525 super mag xtra 17lb sufix tri + one click off
1.	354
2.	*387*
3.	381
4.	384
5.	360
Average 373.2’
Rainshadow 1509, 8oz Penn 525 super mag xtra 17lb sufix tri + one click off
1.	372
2.	378
3.	372
4.	375
5.	*393*
Average 378’
Cast Pro 13’3-6, 5oz saltist 20h 17 sufix tri
1.	336
2.	357
3.	366
4.	*381*
5.	360
Average 360
CTS 13’6” 3-6, 5oz saltist 20h 17 sufix tri
1.	*318*
2.	300
3.	306 Average 308
Robert Hudak
CTS 13’8-12, 8oz 525 supermag xtra 17lb test, 7clicks off
1.	*465*
2.	450
3.	453
4.	441
5.	462
Average 454.2
Cast Pro 6-10, 8oz supermag xtra 17lb test, 7clicks off
1.	*471*
2.	444
3.	456
4.	444
5.	441
Average 451.2
WRI Proto type 8oz supermag xtra 17lb test, 7clicks off
1.	420
2.	450
3.	*465*
4.	420
5.	456
Average 442.2
CTS 13’6”3-6, 5oz 5500ct mag elite 8lb test ½ mags
1.	543
2.	543
3.	528
4.	*552*
5.	531
Average 539.4
Cast Pro 13’ 3-6, 5500ct mag elite 8lb test ½ mags
1.	549
2.	543
3.	555
4.	*561*
5.	552
Average 552

Jeb Thomas
Cast Pro 6-10 8oz Daiwa 7ht mag click 7
1.	*486*
2.	462
3.	483
4.	477
5.	459
Aveverage 473.4
CTS 8-12 8oz Daiwa 7ht mag click 7
1.	465
2.	471
3.	465
4.	*477*
5.	420
Average 459.6
WRI Fusion Mag 8oz Daiwa 7ht mag click 7
1.	468
2.	465
3.	465
4.	*495*
5.	468
Average 472.2
Cast pro 13’ 3-6 150g, 6500 mag 14lb mags on
1.	537
2.	*540*
3.	513
Average 530
CTS 13’6” 3-6 150g, 6500 mag 14lb mags on
1.	549
2.	*565*
3.	540
Average 548


----------



## Hudak

I will post my review when I get time to sit down and hammer one out.


----------



## Kwesi W.

Robert, I notice that with the heavers you had a better average with the CTS. Im going to take a guess and assume you were the strongest caster there, and the better of the bunch..... did you find the Heaver CTS at it's limits with 8oz?


----------



## Tacpayne

One more thing I forgot, Comparing the CTS 3-6 to the Cast Pro 3-6 is not a fair comparison at all. These 2 rods are as different as night and day, in the way they handle. I am guessing that their performance will be very close, much closer than my #'s would indicate if I was fresh when I threw them.They just felt like 2 completely different rods, and for me would serve 2 completely different purposes. Robert summed it up best the CTS is like a ground casters rod with a stiff tip, while the Cast Pro would be for a high swing pendulum. Both rods will accomplish the same thing, in 2 very different ways


----------



## pinfish

Although, I do sell both blanks. I must say I am no Surf Fisherman and therefore have no idea yet how to tell if a rod is loaded or unloaded. All of the rods I cast felt good in my hands, as you can see from my results that the distance from both blanks was very near the same. 

I am just starting competition casting and I am sure my learning curve will be a steep one. I look forward to learning all that I can. But for now will allow the more experienced to let you know thier opinions.
Scott


----------



## Tommy

kmw21230 said:


> Robert, I notice that with the heavers you had a better average with the CTS. Im going to take a guess and assume you were the strongest caster there, and the better of the bunch..... did you find the Heaver CTS at it's limits with 8oz?


Looks to me like Jeb had a slight win on the heavy stuff.... 

Tommy


----------



## Tommy

Nice report Chuck. IMHO very fair and non bias.

Tommy


----------



## Kwesi W.

Tommy said:


> Looks to me like Jeb had a slight win on the heavy stuff....
> 
> Tommy


Yeah I noticed that after i made my post.. Sorry about that Jeb...


----------



## huckfinn38

So here are my opinions....
I spent most of my day playing with the 8 oz rods...I would say I had 20 casts with a chunk of 8 oz by the end of the day. That dont sound like much but walking out, reeling it in, walking back, and recasting whooped my butt.

For me the Cast Pro and the Fusion Mag were my 2 favorites with a slight edge going to the Cast Pro. 
Both rods will smoke 8 oz, throw 10 oz without a problem, and throw 12 oz in a pinch. I would say the Fusion Mag would throw a 12 better if need be...But I dont know how long I will stay out if I have to throw 12's. I would never throw 10 oz or higher with the CTS. I feel like 8 oz and bait maxes out that rod. If I did throw 10 in it I would not put my all in it.
I love the butt diameter of both the Cast Pro and the Fusion Mag. Both will take a size 22 trigger reel seat, giving them both a butt diameter of less than 
.88 inches or 22 mm. This is great for me having small hands. Both butts are parrallel butts with approx the same diameter at the butt as the ferrell. The CTS 8-12 oz butt tapers. This does not make a difference to me. To me both the CTS and the Cast Pro have sensitive tips. Little blue bites should be able to be felt by both of these rods. I have fished the fusion mag before holding and spiking and it is tough to feel and see little blue bites. Both the CTS and the Cast Pro have sensitive tips. I dont know which rod will have a more sensitve tip until I get to fish them next weekend. 
When casting the CTS feels more parabolic than the Fusion Mag and the Cast Pro. When casting I can feel the rod bend deep in to the butt. The CTS reminds me of a more powerful Lamiglas 1502. The fusion mag and the cast pro are more fast action and both have powerful butts. In a cast you can feel the rods flex in the butt a little but both butt sections lock down. 
For me all 3 rods are great with the Fusion Mag and the Cast Pro being my top favorites because of the power both rods have, the small diameter in the butt section, and the ability to throw 10 oz if need be. The Cast Pro edges out the fusion mag because it is a lighter rod and it has a more sensitive tip.
I dont plan to get rid of any of these rods. The Cast Pro will be my go to with the Fusion Mag being my back up. I think the CTS will make a great rod to wade with because it is easy to load and light to carry.

If the cast pro rods hold up like I think they will then I expect that we will have a new top dog for 8 oz rods. I cant wait to fight a big drum on this baby.


----------



## huckfinn38

kmw21230 said:


> Yeah I noticed that after i made my post.. Sorry about that Jeb...


No problem....
I am afraid If I gave Robert another day throwing 8's he would be hitting 550.
It is nice to be able to hit the grass in be able to beat Robert at something...WELL FOR THE TIME BEING.


----------



## huckfinn38

Tommy said:


> Looks to me like Jeb had a slight win on the heavy stuff....
> 
> Tommy


Tommy,
question for you....
What is the best way to test rods. I feel like I was hindering all three rods with my 7 HT mag by just keeping the mag on 7. I am sure I could have gone lower and sped up the reel. I kind of feel like all rods were held back a little. Is it better to get the reel to fluff a hair and go 1 click back up and then test rods??


----------



## Tommy

Jeb,

There are really two approaches and depends on your objectives. If you are comparing two rods and are trying to determine a "distance" winner then, IMHO, it is best to have the reel on a conservative setting and leave it alone. I have a favorite old 6500 mag elite that i use for most fsihing rod (heavers and middleweights) testing. I usually set it on 4-6 and then just leave it alone. This at least takes the reel out as a variable. 

If you are testing one rod (or comparing two) and you want the absolute ultimate distance then you need to take more of a "tournament" approach. For me, with the same 6500, this means a tailwind and dropping the mags down to around 3-4, even 2 if the wind allows then sliding to zero after the appex is reached. This introduces more variables but makes it more fun...  

One approach that works pretty well is using the groundcast. You can set up with the same drop, same angle off of rod tip, same rotation and same weight which again removes more variables. The problem with the groundcast is that not many fishermen actually use it and are not comfortable with it. 

Then again, it is fun to just grip it and rip it... 

Tommy


----------



## Hudak

Tommy said:


> The problem with the groundcast is that not many fishermen actually use it and are not comfortable with it.


That is the only reason I didn't groundcast. Oh boy, I was wanting to...LOL I figured with the hatteras cast properly represented, I chose just to lay the weight behind me and give it a good old fashioned over head thump. I figured between the 4 of us, we would have a decent representation of the majority of surf fisherman. Let me tell you, I was a small fish in Jeb's pond. Like I told him, I can help you learn a ground cast, I never said anything about 8nbait. LOL If you want to see a perfectly timed, powerful Hatteras, just watch him a couple of times. 

Since none of these were "my" rods, I have to try to evaluate these rods based on a few test casts. That is unfair at best to each rod, but I have no choice. If I had time on each rod individually, I can't say that my findings would be the same. Case in point, the first few times I used my Estuary, I couldn't stand it. Once I had a little time on it, I learned how to throw it and love it now.

By the seat of the pants, I like the way the cast pro 6-10 feels best out of the heavers. The lightness and over all feel of the CTS is wonderful, but when I am thinking about casting all day, I would have to give the nod to the Cast Pro. It just seems easier to load. It feels like the rod does more of the work allowing you to fish it all day without wearing you out like the WRI and CTS may. The WRI felt like a beast. It is definitely not for the faint of heart. If I was comparing just the WRI and the CTS, the nod would definitely go to the CTS. It is hard for me to explain, it felt like once I got into the CTS, it didn't feel like it had much more to give. That is not saying it didn't, just I didn't feel like it did. I threw the CTS for 2 rounds just to make sure I wasn't cutting it short. Basically, I threw the CTS twice as many times to ensure I had the best feeling for the rod and how to load it. It seems like the harder I got into the Cast Pro, the more it asked for punishment. The Cast Pro felt more responsive, meaning I could feel the rod loading and had a better idea of what the weight was doing. I just like that feel better for a heaver.

The 3-6 rods. First let me say for some reason, I forgot to record my best cast with the CTS. It was 585'. This no fault of Chuck's for not posting it, I literally forgot to write it down. Once again, the cast pro felt like it wanted to do more of the work than the CTS did. This is trying to compare 2 completely different rods designed to do the same thing. For those that know distance casting, I did make the comparison that it felt like the CTS would be a groundcasting rod and the Cast pro would be more apt for a high swing. That is not to literally say that is what they are good for, that is just the easiest way for me to make a comparison of the tips....

Now, the CTS *FAR* exceeded my expectations. I didn't want to throw 5 on it because I was afraid 3 was going to be the sweet spot. I was proven wrong quick! I really think they both will get the job done exceedingly well. It will just come down to an individual fisherman's definition of the perfect rod for him. The Cast pro does feel like it does more of the work. I had to slow everything down and change my timing all together when I picked the cast pro up after throwing the CTS. After throwing the CTS, I picked the Cast Pro up and "gripped it and ripped it". That was the WRONG thing to do. They are completely different. I blew the reel up. Once I started to come in slower and nail it on the way out, the Cast Pro started to shine. I can see the CTS being very sensitive in the hand. I can also see the Cast pro being very sensitive as well. With the way the tip is on the Cast pro, if they are spiked side by side, I can see the Cast pro showing a bite a little more effectively. But, you are not going to buy the CTS to spike it. It doesn't seem like that is what it is designed for. If you like to spike your rod a lot and like the way a more progressively loading rod feels, I think the Cast Pro is the ticket. If you are going to be holding it fishing all day, it could go either way. Then it is just a matter of what feels better during the cast for you. 

I will own a Cast pro 6-10 for a heaver. Heavier weights, I just like the way the 6-10 feels. The 3-6 crowd... I will own them both. I like the way they both feel in different ways. I really think each has its own niche that it will fill nicely. The results were so close for the most part, I really think it will come down to how an individual fisherman likes his rod to load and price point. I do not know off the top of my head how the CTS, Cast Pro, and WRI compare in price. They all will do the intended job well. As far as I am concerned, there is no rod that is a clear cut winner that stands out above the rest. There will be things about each rod that one fisherman will appreciate more than another.

If I had time on each rod I tested the outcomes may be different. If I wasn't so tired at the end of the day, I may have had better numbers on the Cast pro 3-6, but it is what it is. The way we were set up casting in the field, we had a strong crosswind all day. I think the weather forecast called for 11mph winds. We could have easily moved our mess and thrown with a tailwind to show better numbers. That was not the objective. We threw in the cross because it simulated a fishing situation more accurately.


----------



## big brother

way to technical for me, but i gotta post something so the board will guit bugging me.
charlie


----------



## Mark G

Thanks guys, for the write ups, had to have been a lot of work chucking 8 oz that many times. 

Jeb-- glad you threw a fusion mag in the mix, I was interested in seeing that comparison made to the new cast pro heaver.. results seem to indicate I wasn't far off my guesstimate of the rod's capability after a shake test.

Nice work fellas.


----------



## KingKrimpet

Meat and Potatoes! Thanks guys!


----------



## Drumboy

How does the Cast pro compare to a Ballistic 40? I love how that blanks tip is stiff, but yet easy to load and somewhat light.


----------



## huckfinn38

I had the ballistic 40-405 and to me it seemed more powerful than the CTS but not as powerful as the Cast Pro. I also think with the Ballistic having 3 sections, the rod is not as sensitive as the Cast Pro.


----------



## Furball

Thanks for the reviews. Anyone have an idea how the Cast Pro heaver compares to the AFAW Beach?


----------



## Hooked Up

soon..........ive got both rods {beach and a cps}....soon as i can get one wrapped ima test it agianst all my heavers
so far i lean towards the beach in the finish dept
but the cps feels much better in the hands
time will tell for me....
1502 rs
tip tornado sport
beach
3cld
6-10 cps


----------



## Tommy

Furball said:


> Thanks for the reviews. Anyone have an idea how the Cast Pro heaver compares to the AFAW Beach?


FB,

These are my thoughts, 

The Beach is a great 8 oz rod. It is especially well suited for those that like a more "UK" feel to a heaver. Parrallel butt, powerful midsection and a (compared to most US heavers) a soft tip. I like the Beach... a lot.

When designing and testing the CPS heaver I tried to incorporate what I really liked about the "UK" style heaver with what I thought would work best for the American way of drum fishing. I wanted a stiffer tip while still maintaining the powerful butt and mid section. All of this AND a 22mm reel seat were the goals.

I think you will find it is thinner, lighter, slightly stffer throughout (especially in the tip) and stiil retaining that castability that the UK style rods give.

Hope it all came together... 

Tommy


----------



## Tacpayne

I cant say for sure, but it also feels much lighter than the Beach, I havent had a beach in close to a year, but best I can recall the cast pro is lighter, or at least better balanced


----------



## Furball

Tommy - That is not the answer I wanted to hear. Now I am going to be obsessing over a cast pro rod.


----------

