What is the difference between the glass and carbon nets (apart from price and material?)
Is one lighter/stiffer/better than the other? Is the carbon worth the extra dough?
Thanks
Is one lighter/stiffer/better than the other? Is the carbon worth the extra dough?
Thanks
In reply to Post #1
Carbon is lighter and stronger, although for a landing net it's debatable how important that is.
Carbon is lighter and stronger, although for a landing net it's debatable how important that is.
In reply to Post #2
No issues with the standard glass version.
I have 2 of them, 42 and 36 and 2 different handles.
Mine are at least 10 years old and still excellent.
Chris B has just made me a screw thread to join my two handles together to make a 9ft version. Excellent service and FOC.
No issues with the standard glass version.
I have 2 of them, 42 and 36 and 2 different handles.
Mine are at least 10 years old and still excellent.
Chris B has just made me a screw thread to join my two handles together to make a 9ft version. Excellent service and FOC.
In reply to Post #2
Carbon with a 9 ft handle is the kiddie
Carbon with a 9 ft handle is the kiddie
In reply to Post #4
Yes they are
How much does the carbon net weigh? I have seen some people calling them feather light whilst others say they're very heavy.
In reply to Post #6
I've not weighed it but it's pretty thick and never going to break. More modern nets are slimmer and lighter, probably not as strong though.
I've not weighed it but it's pretty thick and never going to break. More modern nets are slimmer and lighter, probably not as strong though.
In reply to Post #7
Just found the weight on a facebook reply by Chris on his page - 42 inch carbon with 9ft (6+3) handle weighs 700g.
Just found the weight on a facebook reply by Chris on his page - 42 inch carbon with 9ft (6+3) handle weighs 700g.
I have the Glass 60 inch for Catfish , excellent net and lifted 40 lb cats with ease .
I didn't think for one minute , Oh this net feels heavy
I didn't think for one minute , Oh this net feels heavy
When it comes to landing nets, I think where the weight is counts for more than the total weight of the net.
I've got a solar net, it's pretty light when weighing the whole thing, but feels heavy because so much of the weight is in the stainless spreader block system/stainless arm sleeves. That's why it remains very much a spare net with a much cheaper net as my first choice.
I've got a solar net, it's pretty light when weighing the whole thing, but feels heavy because so much of the weight is in the stainless spreader block system/stainless arm sleeves. That's why it remains very much a spare net with a much cheaper net as my first choice.
Not Chris Brown but it might be worth a look at the new Calvin Hancock net,think there harrison carbon with a matrix net
In reply to Post #4
Totally agree. A beautiful, bomb proof piece of kit that will outlast me for sure. Weight-wise, doesn't seem too heavy to me. I've got cheaper & lighter nets but the CB carbon one is robust and totally reliable and the first in the holdall every time.
Totally agree. A beautiful, bomb proof piece of kit that will outlast me for sure. Weight-wise, doesn't seem too heavy to me. I've got cheaper & lighter nets but the CB carbon one is robust and totally reliable and the first in the holdall every time.
In reply to Post #12
I've got 3 CB nets, they won't let you down. Nice guy to boot also.
I've got 3 CB nets, they won't let you down. Nice guy to boot also.
I have used a Chris Brown reverse taper carbon, for nearly a decade now.
It's one of my most treasured fishing possessions. A work of art. Light, strong. A proper landing net.
I don't think they make the reverse taper anymore.
It's one of my most treasured fishing possessions. A work of art. Light, strong. A proper landing net.
I don't think they make the reverse taper anymore.
In reply to Post #14
They were harrison ,I have two of those excellent , his new ones are sourced elsewhere i believe.
They were harrison ,I have two of those excellent , his new ones are sourced elsewhere i believe.