Shark Rigger Weights: Black or Chrome?

[FleetTracker]

Hi All,

 

I'm looking to replace my current 12lb torpedo weights that I bought off the LOU (seemed to really blow back a lot this year!!!).  I'd like to get some original 12lb Sharks.  My question is: black or chrome? (or both - I just don't want to shell out the $ for two sets).  I primarily fish Lake Ontario out of Henderson.  What are your experiences or thoughts with either choice?  Thanks for your input - much appreciated!!!

[bear]

13 lb black

[Jammer]

Go with the black.  I had a chrome 15 lb Shark on the probe/chute rigger that was getting a lot less hits behind it than my corners with black 12 lb cannonballs.  Painted the shark black and immediately had more hits.

 

JAM

[FleetTracker]

Thanks for your feedback Jammer!  I was thinking that the chrome wouldn't be as 'stealthy' and 1) may spook fish and 2) may compete as an attractor with the actual attractor on the line behind the ball (spoon/spinny/flasher, etc..).  OK - I'm heavily leaning toward black... anyone else have experiences to share?

Edited October 8, 2013 by FleetTracker

[snox49x]

I suppose they both have their time and place but my limited experience says black is a better bet. Bought chrome ones this summer and was taking a bunch of fish off of the cheaters but rarely off the lure at the ball. Painted them black and immediately saw a difference in the number off hits at the ball vs the chrome, when comparing the number of strikes on the riggers to other presentations. Spray on truck bed liner seems to hold up well for anyone considering painting them.

[lineman49]

Check out/google some "stick" downrigger  wts.  I have read where 8#,s work as well as 10# cannon ball wts.  I just made some 10# out of 1.5" pipe & 16" long, they are suppose to cut down on blow back.  I also think my crew won't bang the side of the boat as often as with the balls.    jmo

[FleetTracker]

Lineman... interesting... I suppose they could dual as a fish beater in the boat too eh? haha Let us know how they perform when you get a chance to get those bad boys wet!

[FleetTracker]

Thanks for the feedback Snox49x - sounds like the same experience Jammer encountered.  Black seems to be the way to go.  (And it's cheaper! YES!)

[lineman49]

   For sure as a fish beater!

[Yankee Troller]

You will see no noticeable difference between a 12lb Torpedo and a 12lb Shark except for a few less Benjies in your wallet. If you want less blow back you need to go to 15lb weights. If you have Cannon, Scotty, Traxstech, or Big John Brutes they can handle that weight. Don't just go buy a Shark to have one, and realize it did you no better than your Torpedos.

[FleetTracker]

Thanks for your input Yankee. I feel like the particular torpedo's I purchased do not track very true and exhibit a side-to-side sway in the water, causing more then normal blowback. I have the new Mag 10's so I know they can handle the extra weight of a 15lb ball, it's the way that I have to mount the riggers to my boat that worries me going higher then 12lbs. I'm in the process of working with Cisco Fishing Systems Engineers to develop a more rigid mount. If we can come up with something better then I think I'd be comfortable going up to 15lbs.

Here's a picture showing the mounting of the riggers so you know what I'm talking about.

[Xxx]

Thanks for your feedback Jammer!  I was thinking that the chrome wouldn't be as 'stealthy' and 1) may spook fish and 2) may compete as an attractor with the actual attractor on the line behind the ball (spoon/spinny/flasher, etc..).  OK - I'm heavily leaning toward black... anyone else have experiences to share?

I run 10# well with the fin attached they are 11# pancake style, I have a 10# mold and it has a slot to put a tail fin in it, and I messed around with different tails till I came up with the one I'm using now, and of course you know I'm out of Henderson also, anyway maybe I'm reading into this to deep, where you say(2) on the line behind the ball, do you attach a release to the  tail fin of the weight or a release above or below the weight, I can see my "balls" weight at all times, down over 100ft, reason asking is I made the mistake of attaching the release to the tail fin and when I would load the rigger pole, so it would have a nice arch I was picking the weight up also and had terrible blow back, got some Blacks and attached them below and above the weight and problem solved. I doubt that is your problem, just asking.

[FleetTracker]

Hi Pap - I use Chamberlain releases in-line with the rigger cable just above the ball.  I probably should have been more clear when I said "on the line behind the ball"... sorry for the confusion.  I understand the fact that you can pick up the rear of the weight when loading the rod and force the weight to do a headstand down there, which could cause abnormal blow back and poor tracking... but that's not my issue here.

[Justin B]

You could always track style pedestal mounts and mount them to the back platform instead of ur gunnels you jus need at least a 6" pedestal to clear ur gunnels

[capt ace]

 We run black 15lb sharks . They really have their place when fishing deeper in the column with over 140ft of cable out or more. Also, if you check out the shark website you will notice that the price has come down considerably from where it used to be.

  http://www.sharkcannonballs.com/superstore.html   When fishing really deep the sharks exhibit the least amount of blowback among all the rigger weights that I have used.

[Xxx]

You could always track style pedestal mounts and mount them to the back platform instead of ur gunnels you jus need at least a 6" pedestal to clear ur gunnels

What type of rod holders do you have, they look impressive, I've got the same problem, my gunnels are narrow at the top, which make for tough mounting, I made plates up to fasten to the gunnels and then the Tite Loks to the plates which makes for protruding mounts which in rough water can be, hasn't yet a black & blue mark in the hip area, my boat is really deep, so that puts those brackets at hip height, if I could mount them like yours on the inside that would be nice. I looked at the ones at BP, Cabelas, I don't think they will handle the pull of a Dipsy and flasher ect. 2 years ago flat lining at the Black River Bay something hit with authority and cleaned a plastic rod holder right off, lost everything, that's when I went to the tite loks. Thanks PAP

[Tim Bromund]

 We run black 15lb sharks . They really have their place when fishing deeper in the column with over 140ft of cable out or more. Also, if you check out the shark website you will notice that the price has come down considerably from where it used to be.

  http://www.sharkcannonballs.com/superstore.html   When fishing really deep the sharks exhibit the least amount of blowback among all the rigger weights that I have used.

I had a 15 lb chrome shark for a while (sitting on the bottom now due to an oops on my part), and the reduced blow back was great on it, but honestly, the 16 lb Torpedo Diver weight I'm using now blows it out of the water.  I've never seen a weight with less blow back, even when running that rigger down 160-200', it is amazing.

 

Tim

[FleetTracker]

Hey everyone - Shark is also running a year end special right now where with every shark weight purchase, they ship out a FREE shark weight holder, and you get to choose 2 FREE spoons.  That said - I opted to Ante Up and go with a set of Black 15lb sharks (per many of your suggestions).  With that they're shipping me 4 spoons that I picked out and 2 of the shark holders.  Including shipping it was $152.90 total... still spendy but I'm happy they're on the way.  Now I'll put the pressure on Cisco and make sure this custom rigger mount is rigid enough to support these 15lb sharks.

 

PAP - I use Folbe rod holders... nothing comes close to them in the injection molded arena... Proven time and time again out on the West Coast.  They're a family run business out of Seattle - I have nothing but GREAT things to say about them.  They are however, not cheap.  I ran Mag Dipsey's on them with 10ft rods all year.  They're solid holders and the quick rod exchange out of the holder is something very unique to the design.

 

Here's a link to their website:  http://www.folbe.com/

 

Some video's:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b-_V24qQMWI

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jvl7Qx-vpsc

(don't rock out too hard to the music in this one... haha)

[BAZOOKAJOE]

I own 12 lbs Torpedo weights and a buddy of mine brought his 12 lbs Sharks to try.  The Sharks have much less blow-back!  My DSI FF doesn't usually mark my weights but it did when i ran the sharks.  Much less angle to the cable.  And they were much easier to crank up on the manual Cannons.  Plus, the harmonic sound from them is an added attractor.  I would get 15 lbs myself.  I would like to try out the Torpedo Diver weights.  But, i don't really think it matters too much.  I still catch fish with blow-back on the Torpedo weights.

[capt ace]

I had a 15 lb chrome shark for a while (sitting on the bottom now due to an oops on my part), and the reduced blow back was great on it, but honestly, the 16 lb Torpedo Diver weight I'm using now blows it out of the water.  I've never seen a weight with less blow back, even when running that rigger down 160-200', it is amazing.

 

Tim

   Tim with all due respect do you think that the extra pound of weight 16 vs 15 has some effect as well?

[Sk8man]

What about a stainless steel "I" brace on the outside underneath the mounting plate to better support it? maybe an aluminum plate inside the gunwale to make it sturdier for the brace as well?

Edited October 17, 2013 by Sk8man

[FleetTracker]

Hi Sk8man - I'm in the process of working with Cisco Fishing Systems on a superior mounting method.  They sent me a prototype piece to mount up and take additional measurements for fine-tuning.  I took those measurements last night and relayed them back to Cisco.  They're confident that they can make something that I will be very happy with.  They said 2 weeks from today so we'll see how it turns out.  They're also anodizing them blue to match my boat.  Great company!

[Sk8man]

Cool! As far as the color of the weights go I've used downriggers since 1975 and I've had orange, red, and chrome weights for quite awhile. A few years ago I coated all my weights (9 of them) with a black rubberized material and I'm pretty much convinced at this point that it has made a difference in the action from fish (for whatever reason). I'd go with black.

[Tim Bromund]

   Tim with all due respect do you think that the extra pound of weight 16 vs 15 has some effect as well?

Maybe a little, but I think the shape of the weight has a much bigger influence.  Like I said, I was happy with the reduced blowback of the shark weight, just commenting that the TD weight is even better, if you have riggers capable of pulling that much weight.  Piece of cake for my HP Scottys.

[ReelPower]

You will like the sharks, they track nice. I have good luck with the chromes, especially higher in the water column. 12lb. for shallow work, 15 lb. when going deep. I run black and purple or blue chrome. These fickle fish think any trolled hunk of lead looks interesting or scary depending on random conditions or feeding behavior. That said I do see more fish come into my spread when I run sharks with a full complement of flashers. Sometimes they even bite.