Sk8man

They are all a PIA to untangle

True but not everyone viewing things here is a highly experienced charter guy either and hopefully the discussion will generate some increased interest in trying different approaches for some or to give a little backdrop to others new to the sport.

Bloodrun SeaFlee 30 lb here both environments

Just a comment about big boards vs. inlines for folks that possibly haven't used either option yet. - The big boards are nice as far as pulling control goes and especially with heavier setups (e.g. longer coppers and cores) providing you have a boat with room that will allow you to locate a mast forward or on top or sides of top if hard top and anchored real well to drag them with. They may also pull better in rough water depending on the particular boards. The inlines are best for shorter setups and toplines or small dipseys as they are a bit easier to run in and out near the shoreline (e.g. for browns etc.) and are often faster to bring in in heavy traffic adjustments. They also take up much less room in the boat and are less expensive for the budget conscious (unless like some of us where you end up with a bunch of them ). They each have their place in the arsenal and strengths and weaknesses as well. Although a purist may go with the Albright or another knot for connections I have never had a Spro #8 swivel failure regardless of knot used and they don't require gluing etc. and Rob is right cut don't re-tie those ends

I thought he was referring to attaching leaders to the copper

Spro Power Swivel #8 (50 lb test) works great.

:lol: Rick

Well said!

I knew what I said above would be controversial and after all it is an opinion and like the invisibility issue not solid results based on repeatable research and I edited it to highlight the fact that I too use fluoro for most things other than trolling flies. My general view of fluoro is much the same as Rob's but for folks new to this stuff it is intended to make people think about things not commonly said here so that they can be aware that none of these things are without concerns, potential issues, and not everyone has an identical experience using them. One of the things that I always have in the back of my mind is that fishing itself involves a great deal of superstitious behavior (and I admit to it ) and we frequently think that the colors of lures, the exact distance of our lines set to even numbers (usually), the concept of "stealth" which is largely an assumption and possibly is only stealthy in our own minds and only stealthy if it works, and all the various things we do to get hits might just be superstitious behavior. It is possible that the action of the lure combined with closeness and attractiveness of the turbulence in the water at that particular point in time fools the fish into its potentially fatal action of grabbing it. An argument that flies in the face of this view is "repeatability" of results but again a lot of different variables are operating at once so line stiffness, visibility or lack of it, and the things we assume to be going on may not be the only things responsible. All I am saying is we always need to examine our "assumptions" and not treat them necessarily as "fact".

In no way do I pretend to be an "expert" regarding the scientific aspects of fishing lines but I do have an opinion that I'd like to offer despite it possibly not being a popular one with some folks. I also respect the folks at Blood Run Tackle and I buy their products. After spending my whole life fishing fresh and salt water environments I've used everything from the old nylon braids from the 1950's through the monofilaments, dacrons, copolymers and more recently the fluorocarbons as well as all the wire types from copper, monel, stainless, and titanium. Each type of line was developed with specific chemical and physical characteristics or properties that translates basically to "compromises" depending on the environment used and the particular line selection for that environment (including temperature ranges, UV light etc.) and like many things in life each type has its strengths and weaknesses. One of the very things that is a "strength" of fluorocarbon lines is also it's Achilles Heel or "weakness" and that is the rigidity of it. Yes it is stiff but it also breaks at the knot frequently and extremely low temperatures make it brittle as well such that it can break more readily. It also has little to no stretch which for some things is desirable because it allows you to "feel" light hitting fish like perch or bluegills and walleyes for example, but for others a little stretch may be desirable or even necessary. I know many fly manufacturers use it for tying trolling flies and I used to as well in my own home made flies until I had a some salmon break the commercial flies I was using right at the hook knot. These were popular commercially tied flies and used by folks here on LOU. I decided to start tying my own flies with 50 lb mono (Big Game clear) two seasons ago and never had a break off or other problems with it since switching. 50 lb mono is fairly stiff and the Big Game stuff although inexpensive is quite abrasion resistant and durable....It also has very good knot strength. I have also tried the majority of fluoro lines and I use Seaguar fluoro for many applications just not trolling flies which I think benefit from slight stretch when a large salmon hits it and I don't use snubbers either. Although line visibility can be a factor generally in shallow clear water my hunch is that it is much less of a factor down deep or in marginal visibility. I also question a basic assumption regarding fluorocarbon line that appears over and over in the advertisements and in my view is a "marketing ploy" rather than an unbiased research result and that is that allegation that it is invisible to fish. How many fish do you suppose responded to the survey? Their eyesight is quite different than ours from a structural standpoint and because fluoro may appear invisible to humans underwater or otherwise it may bear no relationship to the eyesight of fish. To me it is an unproven statement despite anecdotal reports and experiences.

I can't help but think that there is some kind of interaction going on with copper in the water that attracts the fish whether it is the vibration or electrical conduction stuff etc. who knows but I seem to have better luck with it in terms of number of hits than with the leadcores despite my buddies swearing by the cores (but they also don't use coppers yet....you know who you are... Bob )

Luke - Devin is right about sometimes needing to get down deeper than the 300 will go but in my experience it is in the mid/late summer period when the fish (especially salmon) can be down real deep but I run the 300 and even a couple 250's during much of the rest of the season. Depending on boat speed and currents etc. you should be able to get down between 50-60 ft with the 300 copper if you are just running a spoon behind it. As Devin mentioned the 300 run down the chute is often productive and I usually run mine that way too. It will run off the TX 44 boards too. I don't use the Offshores as I have all Church boards so I can't speak to that. As far as the dipseys a setting of 1 -2 generally works well but it also matters how much other stuff you are running and where. Bottom-feeder is right too - expect to tangle once in awhile and it may not even be your fault as cross currents and certain lure actions and a bunch of other factors come into play sometimes.....you can expect over time to have some shorter coppers than you started with originally My problems have never been with the wire rigs mainly with multiple leadcores..... As far as how far out to run the boards with copper you'll have to experiment. You want them far enough out to be sure that the other stuff you're running is clear of them and I usually run one shorter than the other on the opposite side so that if they swing on turns they clear as well. I also don't usually run my downriggers as far back either and stagger the lengths of them as well. I know some guys like using dipseys from coppers I normally just run a single spoon (usually small to medium for trout and larger for the salmon) just less to mess with and less drag coming in.

Actually they were used on the Finger Lakes for trout and landlocks but if not pulling real heavy stuff I think they should still work but it may also relate to the type of boards too. Mine were regular singles not Otters etc.

John you have a PM