John E Powell

I don't know what the best knot for fireline is, but I'd tie braid with a tiny spro swivel and two palomar knots. Leader to spro first then mainline to spro second carrying the entire leader through the loop of the palomar knot.

I believe Kevin at Wilson (mentioned above) is a certified NMEA installer.

Hate to see this go to a landfill...

For fishing solo kings from a small boat I recommend 7 foot spiral wrapped rods with the appropriate action and power to tow your gear and keep it out of your rigger lines in a bad cross current. Spiral wrapped rods are much more stable in your hand than conventionally wrapped rods especially when you only have one hand on the rod while netting a large fish. A customer of mine who fishes solo a lot has his technique pretty well worked out. Just before netting the fish, he places the rod in a gunwale mounted rod holder (adjusted so the tip of his rod is just over his shoulder as he stands ready to net the fish). He then reaches down, grabs the line and hand lines the fish the last few feet into the net with no hand on the rod at all. Accomplishing something like this is a lot easier with a shorter rod than the typical 9-10.5' diver rod.

Just a reminder, the meeting is tomorrow night. Hope to see you there.

2.5-3.0 mph may be unnecessarily fast. I have no idea how you are measuring this, but 2.2 or so will help a lot at no cost. I'd start there first before spending money chasing downrigger weights.

ttt

Looking for 1 Cannon dual-axis rear mount rod holder. Looking for the rod holder assembly consisting of the rod holder tube, arm (with 1/4-20 stainless steel nut inside), 2 knobs, and 2 knob springs.

I use four of the Big John heavy duty singles, they have to be 30+ years old, they're indestructible, never a failure or lost rod. Having said that, if I was starting out today I would go with the Cisco brand over the Berts and Cannons (I've used all three on friends boats). http://www.ciscofishingsystemsltd.com/shop/cradle-rod-holders-(dipsy)-5259 To me, the big difference between the Ciscos and the Berts/Cannons is the ability to tilt the ROD up, not the ROD HOLDER. They are designed for maximum fishability while the rod is deployed. However, they are not as convenient to use if you need a double-duty rod holder (for both fishing and a place to keep the rod while you're running in and out under power). if you have lots of extra rodholders to store rods while you run in and out, the Cisco are ideal, but for most people that need a double-duty rod holder, then Capt. Vince's recommendation is spot on.

The BWD 1101 7'0" medium power 2 piece is a nice factory rod for copper as long as it will pass your splices or swivels in your rigging.

The copper rod you choose should be based upon how you want to deploy your copper. If you want to pull inline boards like a Church TX 44 with your rods, you will need a medium/heavy rod to fish in rough water or they will take a beating. If you're going to deploy the copper down the chute or off large boards, you can go with a more conservative powered rod. Keep in mind that when you are using a fishing rod, the fisherman is on the short end of the lever and the weight and drag caused by the copper, inline board (if using them) and the fish are pulling on the long side of the lever. Shorter rods of about 7' will definitely make your copper fishing more pleasant than using longer rods. Talking with people about rods, I see a common thread in that most people who hate to land fish on copper are using longer rods in the 9-10.5' range. I'd recommend 8' maximum and 7' for inline board rods. You don't need any special guides for copper other than make sure they are large enough to pass your splices and swivels. Make sure to deploy all the copper past the tip of your rod and you will avoid kinking your copper with the tip.

If you're referring to the 33 Grady White, your link doesn't go there. In my opinion, it's more than quite a bit underpowered. I had a ride on one of those with twin a few years back while fishing with a friend in Truro, that one had twin Yamaha 350s and the owner considered the performance just adequate.

Sorry salmonite, I gave a couple away this spring at the LOTSA show that had been collecting dust for ages... and let me tell you it was hard to give them away... it took most of the day! LOL

That is their sizing nomenclature to differentiate among the sizes of swivels in their line. There isn't really an industry standard on sizing that translates to strength. The quality of the swivel and snap determine how strong a snapswivel is. Often a top of the line snapswivel in a smaller size will be stronger than a cheap snapswivel in a larger size. Personally I would be hesitant to use a product where the manufacturer has made a decision not to print a rated capacity on the packaging. To me this indicates it will not compare well to other brands. Moreover, some companies make lesser and better snapswivels to sell at different price points. Some of the better brands I am familiar with are Sampo, Spro, Dreamweaver, and Torpedo.

Unless, of course, you're bottom fishing or working lines around structure, then X4 depth would seem like valuable info. More info is only better if you interpret it within the correct context.

Hmm. Some of you are not taking into account that X4 depth is an absolute but fish marks on a fish finder are variable. If you mark fish at 80 feet, depending on the cone angle of your transducer, the fish can be considerably shallower. Unless the fish is 3-dimensionally speaking directly under your transducer, you'll be setting your baits well under the fish if you match X4 depth to fish finder displayed depth. If you're going to fish the marks instead of temperature, you need to set your lines above the marks. That's what's nice about cable blowback. If your just seeing your balls on the screen, then they are at the edge of your cone angle already so rigger cable readings will more correctly place your baits to the actual depth of the fish or just above them. Given fish will rise significantly in the water column absolute X4 depth seems even less important.

ttt

The TM270W is a great transducer. But it does not have a 45 degree angle - it is 25 degrees on both 50 and 200 kHz, These transducers are massive compared to mid-end transducers, about 9-10" long mounted on the bracket. I'm running one through a Garmin GSD24 on my marine network displaying it on a 12" display. If I recall correctly, the TM258 is a 4 element transducer that provides an oval-shaped area of coverage. At 100ft, this would equate to about 25' side to side x 40' fore to aft coverage with a Q of 9 on 50 kHz (that's pretty good), but the 200 kHz side has just 5' side to side x 9' for to aft coverage with a Q of 15 (that's not very useful at all to trollers). You won't see much of anything on the 200 kHz side unless it is directly under your boat. While Airmar classifies this as a high-performance transducer, it is not a high definition transducer and won't provide as good an image as the 260 and 270. I haven't checked the price lately, but I think it is priced a bit less than the other two also. The TM260 is a high definition transducer which has a 7 element 50 kHz side and single element 200 kHz side both having a Q of 8. The 50 kHz side is 19 degrees providing 34' coverage at 100' and the 200 kHz side is 6 degrees providing 11' coverage at the same 100'. The area covered by the TM260's 50 kHz is similar to that of the TM258 (and a similar Q), but the 200 kHz side of the TM260 has about twice the coverage and a much better Q than the TM258. Given the HD capability and the superior 200 kHz side, the TM260 makes more sense for downrigger trolling than the TM258. If I recall correctly, this is the mid-priced unit among the three. The TM270W is a high definition transducer which has a 7 element 50kHz side with a superior Q rating of just 4. The 50 kHz side is 25 degrees providing 45' of coverage which is about 1.6 times more coverage than the TM260's 50 kHz side. The 200 kHz side is a single element with 25 degree coverage with a Q of 15 which is not as good a Q rating as the Tm260's 50 kHz side, but the coverage area of the TM270 50 kHz side is 16 times larger than the TM260's 200 kHz side. Comparatively speaking, these are impressive differences that downrigger trollers can actually put to good use. I'm not sure there is a better transom mount transducer made for our style of fishing. If you did a lot of vertical fishing, then the TM260 might make more sense with it's narrower lower Q 200 kHz side, but if you're going to spend this kind of money over the mid-range transducers, I'd recommend spending just a little more on the TM270W vs. the TM260.

That's a "Whaler 27". The Revenges were made up to 25'. There were a couple models with similar names during those years. The whaler 27 has a smaller cabin in favor of a larger deck. Mine has the optional "Whaler Drive"

My objection is to being misquoted. I did not write what you infer I wrote in your hand typed quote. You make it sound like I wrote an either/or absolute when the words I actually used were "tend to". If you reread my actual post above, you will see this in my post.

Glad to hear your Lowrance was fixed with a transducer change. But, the conditions you describe do not eliminate the possibility of what I suggested to the original poster. Moreover, I stated that as a last resort, change the transducer which is just what you did.😇

It's unlikely it's a transducer problem; transducers tend to either work all the time, or they don't work at any time. Confirm the connections to the unit are clean and tight, and try moving the cable both near the transducer and the connector to confirm that your wiring doesn't have an intermittent break in the circuit. If this checks out, turn off auto ranging and set your depth range manually. If the symptoms continue you likely have a firmware/software/circuit board problem. If you find your transducer is bad, I recommend you replace it with the best Airmar transducer your budget allows.