Standard for wfp comparison

i have seen a few wfp comparisons by different suppliers/distributors and i think they could be improved.

here is how i believe the testing should take place for consistency and usefulness.

if poles are not exactly the same maximum length the longer pole(s) should be extended to same length as the shortest pole using top sections first as the pole would be used.

poles should be braced at the base and say the 4 foot mark.

2 or 3 bend measurements should be taken:
a drop/sag/bend measurement should be taken and listed for each pole (pole x drop equals 3 feet at 25 feet extension) drop/sag/bend measurement is the difference between where the tip would be if the pole had no bend at all and where it actually sags to.
1 with nothing but the pole
another with a standardized weight at the end say 6 oz
another with a standardized weight of say 12 oz

the total weight of the pole should be stated
the average weight per foot should be stated

the collapsed length of the pole only should be stated
the max length of the pole only should be stated



I love the way you think.

I still think that the only real wfp test is up against glass at different heights. The same weight brush. Same angle for all being compared.

The drop/sag/bend, total weight, weight per foot, collapsed length and max lenght are good criteria.
Other criteria could be:
collapsed length,
durability of clamps,
modularity of adding extensions,
availability and timeliness of replacement parts,
and serviceability (aka percentage of warranty claims).

Hmm, what other criteria should be looked at?

Then the criteria would need to have weights assigned.

You can find some good stats here


I have seen a few of these tests on ytube. Agree they are helpful.

For me there is really only one question: what is currently the most rigid carbon fiber pole on the market? I still think the gold standard of carbon fiber pole in terms of rigidity is Gardiner. I would bet their [new] high modulus with kevlar pole is the most rigid on the market today.

I saw an opinion put forward by the maker of Reach-It that kevlar is theoretically not as good as carbon fiber since its weave runs laterally, however the proof is in the pudding.


mmm pudding


thats a great sheet, if you added the rest of the specs i suggested it’d be even better!
very nice.

After 20 designs and $20,000 spent doing so.

  1. Wall thinckness will make it light but not strong.
  2. Type of carbon firber is key to strength like ud is very strong
  3. Hi mod 63 Msi is very stiff.
  4. 3K looks good
    The mix of the theses type of cf make a good pole.
  5. 100% 55 Msi is all of these but few make one that way. I used 100% 55 Msi for the last 4 years and love mine . But I do not make it any more because 63 Msi is the main cf in the Unger pole.
    The old modular Gardner was very light and stiff but at 1.1 wall thickness was not durable.
1 Like

Ken we are going to continue updating the sheet and will include your suggestions.


the great thing about standardizing the test format itself is data for new poles can be added as they become available without having to have all the poles at the same time.
i think i’m moving toward #6…i think

Kevlar is very very light and if you put carbon fiber inside will make it strong too!

1 Like

Poles are using Kevlar now

For 3 years now