Walleye trolling rod recommendation?

[Walleye101]

I will be purchasing a new trolling rod and reel primarily used for fishing Walleye's. I am looking at a baitcaster combo. I have $400-500 to spend. I was looking at the 7'2 Shimano Cumara paired with Smoke PT by Quantum. I'm just wondering if anybody has any experience with this rod or reel?

[EZM]

Here's the ticket;

Reel - Abu Garcia Ambassadeur Record RCN50 - $180

http://www.abugarcia.com/products/reels/round-reels/ambassadeur-round-baitcast/record

Rod - St.Croix Eyecon 8'-0" Trolling Med Pwer, Mod Action ECT80MM2 - $180

http://www.stcroixrods.com/category/products

The moderate action of this trolling specific rod will work well for lower speed bottom bouncing, deep dive crank bait presentation.

Then, after paying taxes you will still have enough money to spool up with 15lb power pro and buy some high quality flourocarbon leader material.

[Walleye101]

Thanks ECM. I'm heading to the sportsman show Thursday. So I will check them out.

[Walleyedude]

The Cumara is a great finesse fishing rod, but not very well suited to a trolling application.

Nothing wrong with the Quantum Smoke, but I would look for a reel with a linecounter if you want to really maximize your trolling results.

Here's my suggestions -

Shimano Tekota 500LC $200 - Pretty much the undisputed king of linecounter trolling reels. It's a work of art. Do a quick search on it, the results will speak for themselves.

Shimano Compre 8'3" Medium Action Trolling Rod ~$150 - I've tried lots of trolling rods, and this one is the best I've found. It collapses to under 7' to fit in most rod lockers and has longer handle for ease of use with rod holders. It has a nice moderate action that loads slowly and evenly, and just as importantly, it also has a soft tip so you can see exactly how your crank is running and always know if it's fouled or not running true.

Spool up with 10/4 Fireline or 20/6 Power Pro so you can use the Precision Trolling dive curve charts, and you're off to the races with the best setup you can buy for freshwater trolling in my opinion.

[Cal]

For the purpose of trolling I've never found a single excuse to upgrade from an Ugly Stick. I know all you high dollar gear jocks look down your noses at them, and I conceed that there are things they are not well suited for, but I've never seen any advantage to trolling with a high dollar rod over an Uglystick. Save your pennies ang get another good jigging rod with the money.

[cube]

I will be purchasing a new trolling rod and reel primarily used for fishing Walleye's. I am looking at a baitcaster combo. I have $400-500 to spend. I was looking at the 7'2 Shimano Cumara paired with Smoke PT by Quantum. I'm just wondering if anybody has any experience with this rod or reel?

This sounds more like a very good all round outfit rather than a trolling outfit. Don't get me wrong the above outfit will certainly catch you lots of fish, and I'm sure you will have lots of fun doing that, but if trolling is what your after perhaps a different setup would be better.

You need to ask yourself some questions as to what kind of trolling you would like to do. e.g. if you plan on perhaps running planar boards, deeper divers, jet divers, 3 way rigs, or heavy bottom bouncers (which seam in vogue lately) then you will need a heaver rod.

If you ever plan on using led core then perhaps a higher capacity reel would be a good idea.

Certainly Like others have said a line counter (I also like bait clickers with mine) for trolling is a good idea.

If all your wanting to do is troll some lighter bottom bouncers then the rig as you suggested will certainly do that.

Good luck with what ever you go with.

[Blairh]

Daiwa light 4 piece pack rod, pfleuger Supreme XT 9230 xtx. Makes every fish a blast to bring in, I'd rather take 4 min a fish to bring in then 4 seconds winching them in haha

[TROLLER]

As much as it would seem simple just to have an ugly stick for everything it just won't work.

Bottom bouncing takes decent rod that also has enough sensitivity to feel those weary walleye. Then if you are using deep downriggers then you need a rod that can take a good load.

Trolling for trout again something different.

Buy one now but realize you will need weather you like it or not most likely 4 or 5 troller rods. It is a sickness with no cure.

[EZM]

Cube makes a good point.

I assumed trolling for walleyes is normally (or commonly) done bottom bouncing or trolling a rapala.

Bottom bouncing is letting the line out until it hits the bottom and you are set.

Rapalas (or other plugs) will run at the designed depth unassisted.

In both these cases a line counter is not required.

If you are, on the other hand, running a dipsy diver, maybe a micro, a line counter reel is good. I find the counters get heavy and bulky as most are designed to carry 600 yards of braid - which is simply to bulky and heavy for me. There are not many options to get a small and light lower capacity line counter reel out there.

Allot of great lakes walleye guys will use a dipsy and counter - but that's not all that common out here in the west.

We are typically bottom bouncing or back trolling in 20-25 feet of water or dragging a deep plug down 15'.

I have used a 20 or 30 jet diver with a plug or spoon trailing for open water walleye trolling, but again, you don't need a counter for that set up.

Cal also makes a good point - a very basic ugly stick which is a even moderate action rod is a good choice for bouncing. Many new rods have fast action or extra fast action tips which are not ideal for bottom bouncing.

[bwackwabbit]

For the purpose of trolling I've never found a single excuse to upgrade from an Ugly Stick. I know all you high dollar gear jocks look down your noses at them, and I conceed that there are things they are not well suited for, but I've never seen any advantage to trolling with a high dollar rod over an Uglystick. Save your pennies ang get another good jigging rod with the money.

Agreed and they even offer a line counter Ugly Stik trolling rod for around $70 @ BPS.
This gives you more flexibility on the type of reel (level wind or even low profile baitcaster). Assuming this is for very light duty trolling its a more economical option.

[npauls]

IMHO I wouldn't spend big bucks on a trolling rod setup. Sensitivity isn't a big issue with trolling normally.

Most of the time a trolling rod is going to be sitting in a rod holder and once and awhile held by the fisherman.

I would spend some decent money on a good drag system reel and find a nice mid priced rod to pair up with.

[huntsfurfish]

I would rather have 2- 4 trolling rigs for that price. At least one of which would be a line counter.

Line counters can be used for almost any trolling application.

Even bottom bouncing. Great for training new anglers that arent sure what they are feeling.

Longlining raps + line counter.:)

[sonny42]

For the purpose of trolling I've never found a single excuse to upgrade from an Ugly Stick. I know all you high dollar gear jocks look down your noses at them, and I conceed that there are things they are not well suited for, but I've never seen any advantage to trolling with a high dollar rod over an Uglystick. Save your pennies ang get another good jigging rod with the money.

For bottom bouncing,trolling i would not spend big dollers, Instead spend more money on a good jigging rod and reel,, this is when one needs to have a sensitive rod and good reel.

[Cal]

Cube makes a good point.

I assumed trolling for walleyes is normally (or commonly) done bottom bouncing or trolling a rapala.

Bottom bouncing is letting the line out until it hits the bottom and you are set.

Rapalas (or other plugs) will run at the designed depth unassisted.

In both these cases a line counter is not required.

If you are, on the other hand, running a dipsy diver, maybe a micro, a line counter reel is good. I find the counters get heavy and bulky as most are designed to carry 600 yards of braid - which is simply to bulky and heavy for me. There are not many options to get a small and light lower capacity line counter reel out there.

Allot of great lakes walleye guys will use a dipsy and counter - but that's not all that common out here in the west.

We are typically bottom bouncing or back trolling in 20-25 feet of water or dragging a deep plug down 15'.

I have used a 20 or 30 jet diver with a plug or spoon trailing for open water walleye trolling, but again, you don't need a counter for that set up.

Cal also makes a good point - a very basic ugly stick which is a even moderate action rod is a good choice for bouncing. Many new rods have fast action or extra fast action tips which are not ideal for bottom bouncing.

Like I've said befor, keep track of how many times your level wind travels back and forth and you can troll most presentations with good precision, no line counter needed. You just need a reel where the level wind mechanisim still functions in freespool. For a straight up Walleye rod I'd put a Ambasadeur 4500 or 5500 on it.

[Buck9]

Walleye 101. I was going to buy the exact same combo, but never did. I like you am looking for a pure walleye trolling set up, but mostly to operate with one hand as i am often using the I pilot remote. Look forward to more discussion.

[npauls]

Walleye 101. I was going to buy the exact same combo, but never did. I like you am looking for a pure walleye trolling set up, but mostly to operate with one hand as i am often using the I pilot remote. Look forward to more discussion.

If you are looking for one hand operation in a trolling rod make sure to get a baitcast reel with a flipping switch. makes things a dream.

[Freedom55]

I will be purchasing a new trolling rod and reel primarily used for fishing Walleye's. I am looking at a baitcaster combo. I have $400-500 to spend. I was looking at the 7'2 Shimano Cumara paired with Smoke PT by Quantum. I'm just wondering if anybody has any experience with this rod or reel?

My experiences with trolling for walleye are significantly different from trolling for trout or salmon. Having said that, and if I get the spirit of your request, then indeed the PT Smoke or the PT SuperLite are the perfect rods for feeling the light bites. Lindying with the bait caster reels with weights up to 1/2 oz and dragging blades behind a bottom bouncer (or walker)up to 2 oz. with the spinning reels.

I learned from the best and the best used that set-up, but staying with the Quantum group for the reels also.

I have two 7' Smokes, one spincast and one baitcast; similarly I have two 7' PT Superlites, one of each.

Two PT Energy 10 spinning reels, a QL2000 and a Shimano Calcutta 200 baitcasters.

Admittedly, I use an UglyStik to troll crankbaits, with a Pflueger Medalist.

My trout/salmon set-ups are all over 8' with level wind or single action reels.

Free

[Buck9]

I was at bass pro last week and they mentioned that they do not make many more bait cast reels with the flipping switch. They only had one in stock. Said it used to be popular but does not seem to be anymore. The flipping switch was what I was looking for, as I thought it would be handy for one handed operation and also going over ledges when you want to stay in constant contact with the bottom. Or spool the line out on finicky walleye

[newguy]

i fished all over manitoba and north western ontario for many years up until 89. i caught maybe 2 walleye. (that's a joke, haha)

seriously though. my set up cost maybe $30 then, rod, reel, line, tackle.

today, my set up cost maybe $50... i just don't see the need to search farther than a wal mart sale for my gear. great to hear all these amazing, expensive set ups!

[Walleye101]

Well honestly I wasn't expecting this much feedback. I really appreciate the suggestions. I now have a ton of options to look at. I will primarily be pulling blades, lindy rigging, and 3 way rigging with floating cranks. Maybe I will look at getting a couple rod and reel combos. Thanks again for all the feedback! Keep it coming if you got more.

[EZM]

I personally spend good money on a mid to higher end reel - call it $120 to $250 on average.

If you have $500 to burn ........ cool ........... I'd go with a good reel and good rod.

I Don't, however, typically buy a real expensive rod, $60-$100 on average.

Comparing reels I feel there is a significant difference in performance. That's money well spent.

Flip side is rod performance is much less discernible (noticeable) if you match the specs.

You can blindfold most seasoned veterans and give them a $50 rod ML fast action and a $300 ML fast action and many would be unable to tell. Do the same with a reel peeling drag, or retrieving and most will see a big difference and pick out the high end model every time.

Put your money in the reel and worry less about the rod .....

[huntsfurfish]

My bottom bouncing rods, 3 ways even pull cranks cost me $20.00 - $30.00 usually. Buy 2-4 at a time when on sale. Dont have to spend lots on a trolling rod. Even at that cost I can feel the weight bouncing off pebbles or dragging thru sand or mud.

$500.00 easily buys me 4 rods and 4 reels.

[Blake]

The Cumara is a great finesse fishing rod, but not very well suited to a trolling application.

Nothing wrong with the Quantum Smoke, but I would look for a reel with a linecounter if you want to really maximize your trolling results.

Here's my suggestions -

Shimano Tekota 500LC $200 - Pretty much the undisputed king of linecounter trolling reels. It's a work of art. Do a quick search on it, the results will speak for themselves.

Shimano Compre 8'3" Medium Action Trolling Rod ~$150 - I've tried lots of trolling rods, and this one is the best I've found. It collapses to under 7' to fit in most rod lockers and has longer handle for ease of use with rod holders. It has a nice moderate action that loads slowly and evenly, and just as importantly, it also has a soft tip so you can see exactly how your crank is running and always know if it's fouled or not running true.

Spool up with 10/4 Fireline or 20/6 Power Pro so you can use the Precision Trolling dive curve charts, and you're off to the races with the best setup you can buy for freshwater trolling in my opinion.

Were you snooping through my boat?

[npauls]

i wouldnt use the same rod for trolling and lindys.

2 completely different techniques that need different set ups.

[huntsfurfish]

i wouldnt use the same rod for trolling and lindys.

2 completely different techniques that need different set ups.

agree:)

[Walleye101]

What would you use for trolling lindy's? And blades/cranks?

[Walleyedude]

This is turning into a great thread. I'll try to add some more.

First off, I think you need to define "trolling".

I would define trolling as pulling crankbaits or 3 way rigs behind the boat at speeds of 2-3 mph.

Bottom bouncing or "blading" falls in the middle, and involves weights from 0.5-3 oz being pulled at 1-2mph. Three way rigs work at these speeds too.

Lindy's or live bait rigging involves weights from 1/16 to 1/2 oz, and is generally done at 0.4-0.6 mph.

There is a HUGE difference in the gear you need to troll cranks and rig live bait, it's like the difference in gear needed to play baseball and football lol.

Rapalas (or other plugs) will run at the designed depth unassisted.

In both these cases a line counter is not required.

If you are, on the other hand, running a dipsy diver, maybe a micro, a line counter reel is good. I find the counters get heavy and bulky as most are designed to carry 600 yards of braid - which is simply to bulky and heavy for me. There are not many options to get a small and light lower capacity line counter reel out there.

Allot of great lakes walleye guys will use a dipsy and counter - but that's not all that common out here in the west.

I'd like to comment on this.

Rapalas (crankbaits) do not necessarily run at a designed depth. The depth they run at is determined by the amount of line you have out and your speed.

When cranking, speeds are generally pretty consistent at 2-2.5mph, so you control the depth your fishing by your crank selection and the amount of line you have out. You start with the Precision Trolling book, for every crank listed (it's pretty much everything) it puts you right in the ballpark for the number of feet of line you need to reach a given depth. Easy if you have a linecounter. Once you get to know each crank, you'll know exactly how many feet you need for the depth you want. You can now precisely control the depth your crank is running at all times by simply looking down at your linecounter. On top of that, and just as important, it gives you instant repeatability. You get a strike, catch a fish, or have to reel in over a structure, and you simply note how many feet back you were and you can quickly and accurately put your crank right back into the strike zone with no guesswork. You can do this by counting your level wind, using depth colored line, etc..., but none of those options is as fast, accurate, or easy to use as a linecounter. In my opinion, a line counter reel is absolutely essential to maximize your success when trolling cranks. They've come a long way too, they aren't all heavy and bulky, the 300 and 500 size Tekotas and the 17 and 27 series Daiwas are actually pretty light and compact reels. They spend most of their lives in the rod holder anyway.

For trolling, I agree with the others, if you're going to cut costs, do it on the rod, not the reel. I suggested a top of the line option for a rod, but there are a lot of other options out there that will work just fine. The key is to find a longer rod (around 8') in a medium power with a good moderate action and fairly soft tip.

For bottom bouncing, the most common setup these days is a 7 medium or medium heavy rod with a moderate action. A lot of people will say any $20 rod or a piece of 2X4 is good enough for bottom bouncing. I disagree, a little more money spent on a better quality rod will pay off in sensitivity and in both hook up percentage and getting those fish to the boat. Spinning or baitcasting reels both work fine, but baitcasting seems to be the way to go. A reel with a flippin switch is really nice. The Quantum Accurist is one of the best ones left on the market. This is a great setup for bottom bouncing or pulling 3 way rigs.

Rigging is all about finesse and feel. To my mind, you're much better off with a spinning outfit for this application. It's about balance, and more importantly, rigging should be done with your bail open and line on your finger, that's harder to do with a baitcasting rig. I'd disagree with others here about rods when it comes to rigging. To my mind, spend more money on your rod than your reel in this application, like 2-1 in favour of the rod. Feel is everything. I can guarantee you that I can feel the difference between a $50 rod and $300-400 rod, I would know almost instantly. I think that's true for most people actually, even first timers. Look for a longer rod again, 7'-7'6", medium light, and a fast action. For a reel, go small, like 1000 series size, and as good a quality as you can, it's really about weight and drag performance.

[Walleye101]

You raised some good points there WALLEYEDUDE. I have never really used a baitcaster. I've always used spin cast reels, so maybe I'll just stick to spin cast reels. I have to agree that having a good quality rod makes a world of a difference in feeling the bite. Especially when the bite is soft.

[fishnfoo]

For bottom bouncing I use a Shimano Compre casting rod 6'10" Hedium heavy extra fast action. It has worked well. I notice that many posters are using medium powered rods with moderate action. I find they are not as sensitive and have difficulty handling heavier bouncers.

As a bonus the Compre is also a graet pike casting and trolling rod.

I tend to use the medium/fast rods for jiging and medium-light/moderate rods for Lindy rigging and slip bobbering.

My 2C

[EZM]

This is turning into a great thread. I'll try to add some more.




I'd like to comment on this.

Rapalas (crankbaits) do not necessarily run at a designed depth. The depth they run at is determined by the amount of line you have out and your speed.

When cranking, speeds are generally pretty consistent at 2-2.5mph, so you control the depth your fishing by your crank selection and the amount of line you have out. You start with the Precision Trolling book, for every crank listed (it's pretty much everything) it puts you right in the ballpark for the number of feet of line you need to reach a given depth. Easy if you have a linecounter. Once you get to know each crank, you'll know exactly how many feet you need for the depth you want. You can now precisely control the depth your crank is running at all times by simply looking down at your linecounter. On top of that, and just as important, it gives you instant repeatability. You get a strike, catch a fish, or have to reel in over a structure, and you simply note how many feet back you were and you can quickly and accurately put your crank right back into the strike zone with no guesswork. You can do this by counting your level wind, using depth colored line, etc..., but none of those options is as fast, accurate, or easy to use as a linecounter. In my opinion, a line counter reel is absolutely essential to maximize your success when trolling cranks. They've come a long way too, they aren't all heavy and bulky, the 300 and 500 size Tekotas and the 17 and 27 series Daiwas are actually pretty light and compact reels. They spend most of their lives in the rod holder anyway.



You are correct that letting out more line or trolling at faster speeds may change the running depth of your lure. Officially you are correct ....... to a certain extent.

But no sexy line counter is going to make your 8-15' deep diving crank go down to 25' feet period. No chart will allow you to achieve 23.645 feet exactly and it's unlikey the fish will be exactly at that particular depth only .

Your 8'-15' diver will also not troll at 3' below the surface unless it's 8 feet behind the boat.

Premium crank makers use basic assumptions on line, trolling speed and length which determines the diving characteristics of a plug. Typically this seems to based on 3mph/50ft/10lb mono.

Get a high end fish finder and you will clearly see where your presentation is running (in deep water). For shallower water let the bottom of the lake tell you where you are likely running.

I simply use a sharpy fine point to mark average running depth on the lip of every crank bait after I test it out a few times. I typically set it up at 2.5mph (average speed) and cast it out about 50ft behind the boat. An extra 15 feet short or long makes less than a foot of run depth in difference - check your charts if you like.

Cranks run true - at least the better quality products like rapala and storm do.

I have to say one thing that made me write this response ....... If cranks did not run true, as you indicated in your post, then your theory of using charts to pin point a running depth is not scientifically sound and the charts would, by definition, be useless. The variable, of course, being the constant of the running depth at speed.

I'm not sure how a line counter changes basic physics or common sense.

If you want to get official about line drag and coefficient, calculate the weight of the line vs, the weight of the lure and triangulate the effect on the position of the diving lip ........ cool .........

I have not met a fish that requires depth control at a prescision like that yet.

In 15' of water - typically fish will hold and strike lures in a 4'-5' range. If you see them holding on bottom, just let out until you bump and either slow down or reel in a bit. you should occasionally bump when you wander shallower.

4' to 5' of error is very hard to achieve with reasonable deviations in speed and or line out.

Either way - I see zero benefit to using a line counter running straight crank baits ........ zero benefit whatsoever.

Invest in a fine point sharpy and figure out what 2.5 mph does. It will have you catching more fish instead of triangulating a chart with multiple variables such as boat speed, water temp, line diameter, line bouyancy, line weight per foot vs. lure weight and feet of line out, and position of venus as it relates to mercury.

Take the extra $30 you saved on not buying a line counting reel and buy some snacks too - you will have time to enjoy them instead of looking up your charts.

Cornnuts Nacho / Lime are good choice. Don't crack a tooth .....

We are catching fish here not landing a man on the moon.

That's just my opinion on this topic.

[huntsfurfish]

This is turning into a great thread. I'll try to add some more.

First off, I think you need to define "trolling".

I would define trolling as pulling crankbaits or 3 way rigs behind the boat at speeds of 2-3 mph.

Bottom bouncing or "blading" falls in the middle, and involves weights from 0.5-3 oz being pulled at 1-2mph. Three way rigs work at these speeds too.

Lindy's or live bait rigging involves weights from 1/16 to 1/2 oz, and is generally done at 0.4-0.6 mph.

There is a HUGE difference in the gear you need to troll cranks and rig live bait, it's like the difference in gear needed to play baseball and football lol.



I'd like to comment on this.

Rapalas (crankbaits) do not necessarily run at a designed depth. The depth they run at is determined by the amount of line you have out and your speed.

When cranking, speeds are generally pretty consistent at 2-2.5mph, so you control the depth your fishing by your crank selection and the amount of line you have out. You start with the Precision Trolling book, for every crank listed (it's pretty much everything) it puts you right in the ballpark for the number of feet of line you need to reach a given depth. Easy if you have a linecounter. Once you get to know each crank, you'll know exactly how many feet you need for the depth you want. You can now precisely control the depth your crank is running at all times by simply looking down at your linecounter. On top of that, and just as important, it gives you instant repeatability. You get a strike, catch a fish, or have to reel in over a structure, and you simply note how many feet back you were and you can quickly and accurately put your crank right back into the strike zone with no guesswork. You can do this by counting your level wind, using depth colored line, etc..., but none of those options is as fast, accurate, or easy to use as a linecounter. In my opinion, a line counter reel is absolutely essential to maximize your success when trolling cranks. They've come a long way too, they aren't all heavy and bulky, the 300 and 500 size Tekotas and the 17 and 27 series Daiwas are actually pretty light and compact reels. They spend most of their lives in the rod holder anyway.

For trolling, I agree with the others, if you're going to cut costs, do it on the rod, not the reel. I suggested a top of the line option for a rod, but there are a lot of other options out there that will work just fine. The key is to find a longer rod (around 8') in a medium power with a good moderate action and fairly soft tip.

For bottom bouncing, the most common setup these days is a 7 medium or medium heavy rod with a moderate action. A lot of people will say any $20 rod or a piece of 2X4 is good enough for bottom bouncing. I disagree, a little more money spent on a better quality rod will pay off in sensitivity and in both hook up percentage and getting those fish to the boat. Spinning or baitcasting reels both work fine, but baitcasting seems to be the way to go. A reel with a flippin switch is really nice. The Quantum Accurist is one of the best ones left on the market. This is a great setup for bottom bouncing or pulling 3 way rigs.

Rigging is all about finesse and feel. To my mind, you're much better off with a spinning outfit for this application. It's about balance, and more importantly, rigging should be done with your bail open and line on your finger, that's harder to do with a baitcasting rig. I'd disagree with others here about rods when it comes to rigging. To my mind, spend more money on your rod than your reel in this application, like 2-1 in favour of the rod. Feel is everything. I can guarantee you that I can feel the difference between a $50 rod and $300-400 rod, I would know almost instantly. I think that's true for most people actually, even first timers. Look for a longer rod again, 7'-7'6", medium light, and a fast action. For a reel, go small, like 1000 series size, and as good a quality as you can, it's really about weight and drag performance.

I agree with almost all of your comment. Graphite rods today are amazing. The sale price of $20.00 to $30.00 gets you a very sensitive rod for bouncing. I have tried expensive rods and inexpensive rods. Dont get hungup on that. I would put the money into a mid range rigging rod or jigging rod. But you dont even have to go that high there either. $100.00 or so to max $150 will get you a very sensitive rod.

A little test I do is close eyes or look away from the rod. Lower the tip slowly and lightly touch floor. How well that touch(need to touch lightly) is transmitted will give you an indication of how well (sensitive) rod is. putting a reel on it helps but is not really neccessary. Try a variety of rods and you will get a sense of which is more sensitive. Years ago(fibreglass) sensitivety was achieved by stiffness. Not so much with graphite. Try it!

Agree with the bolded statement.

[huntsfurfish]

You are correct that letting out more line or trolling at faster speeds may change the running depth of your lure. Officially you are correct ....... to a certain extent.

But no sexy line counter is going to make your 8-15' deep diving crank go down to 25' feet period. No chart will allow you to achieve 23.645 feet exactly and it's unlikey the fish will be exactly at that particular depth only .

Your 8'-15' diver will also not troll at 3' below the surface unless it's 8 feet behind the boat.

Premium crank makers use basic assumptions on line, trolling speed and length which determines the diving characteristics of a plug. Typically this seems to based on 3mph/50ft/10lb mono.

Get a high end fish finder and you will clearly see where your presentation is running (in deep water). For shallower water let the bottom of the lake tell you where you are likely running.

I simply use a sharpy fine point to mark average running depth on the lip of every crank bait after I test it out a few times. I typically set it up at 2.5mph (average speed) and cast it out about 50ft behind the boat. An extra 15 feet short or long makes less than a foot of run depth in difference - check your charts if you like.

Cranks run true - at least the better quality products like rapala and storm do.

I have to say one thing that made me write this response ....... If cranks did not run true, as you indicated in your post, then your theory of using charts to pin point a running depth is not scientifically sound and the charts would, by definition, be useless. The variable, of course, being the constant of the running depth at speed.

I'm not sure how a line counter changes basic physics or common sense.

If you want to get official about line drag and coefficient, calculate the weight of the line vs, the weight of the lure and triangulate the effect on the position of the diving lip ........ cool .........

I have not met a fish that requires depth control at a prescision like that yet.

In 15' of water - typically fish will hold and strike lures in a 4'-5' range. If you see them holding on bottom, just let out until you bump and either slow down or reel in a bit. you should occasionally bump when you wander shallower.

4' to 5' of error is very hard to achieve with reasonable deviations in speed and or line out.

Either way - I see zero benefit to using a line counter running straight crank baits ........ zero benefit whatsoever.

Invest in a fine point sharpy and figure out what 2.5 mph does. It will have you catching more fish instead of triangulating a chart with multiple variables such as boat speed, water temp, line diameter, line bouyancy, line weight per foot vs. lure weight and feet of line out, and position of venus as it relates to mercury.

Take the extra $30 you saved on not buying a line counting reel and buy some snacks too - you will have time to enjoy them instead of looking up your charts.

Cornnuts Nacho / Lime are good choice. Don't crack a tooth .....

We are catching fish here not landing a man on the moon.

That's just my opinion on this topic.



:sign0161::snapoutofit:

Have you even used the trollers bibles?

You are a reader, they might be a good read for you.

Precision Trolling.
Precision casting.
Precision Trolling Big Water edition.(this might be of particular interest as it has lots of Dipsy Divers and other divers).

Bad part is most are out of print. Might try BP in Calgary they had some left as of last spring. Due to come out as an App for iphone and Android. Have stickers available for various cranks, they are available now. Mark Romanack/Stephen Holt.

[Walleyedude]

You are correct that letting out more line or trolling at faster speeds may change the running depth of your lure. Officially you are correct ....... to a certain extent.

But no sexy line counter is going to make your 8-15' deep diving crank go down to 25' feet period. No chart will allow you to achieve 23.645 feet exactly and it's unlikey the fish will be exactly at that particular depth only .

Your 8'-15' diver will also not troll at 3' below the surface unless it's 8 feet behind the boat.

Premium crank makers use basic assumptions on line, trolling speed and length which determines the diving characteristics of a plug. Typically this seems to based on 3mph/50ft/10lb mono.

Get a high end fish finder and you will clearly see where your presentation is running (in deep water). For shallower water let the bottom of the lake tell you where you are likely running.

I simply use a sharpy fine point to mark average running depth on the lip of every crank bait after I test it out a few times. I typically set it up at 2.5mph (average speed) and cast it out about 50ft behind the boat. An extra 15 feet short or long makes less than a foot of run depth in difference - check your charts if you like.

Cranks run true - at least the better quality products like rapala and storm do.

I have to say one thing that made me write this response ....... If cranks did not run true, as you indicated in your post, then your theory of using charts to pin point a running depth is not scientifically sound and the charts would, by definition, be useless. The variable, of course, being the constant of the running depth at speed.

I'm not sure how a line counter changes basic physics or common sense.

If you want to get official about line drag and coefficient, calculate the weight of the line vs, the weight of the lure and triangulate the effect on the position of the diving lip ........ cool .........

I have not met a fish that requires depth control at a prescision like that yet.

In 15' of water - typically fish will hold and strike lures in a 4'-5' range. If you see them holding on bottom, just let out until you bump and either slow down or reel in a bit. you should occasionally bump when you wander shallower.

4' to 5' of error is very hard to achieve with reasonable deviations in speed and or line out.

Either way - I see zero benefit to using a line counter running straight crank baits ........ zero benefit whatsoever.

Invest in a fine point sharpy and figure out what 2.5 mph does. It will have you catching more fish instead of triangulating a chart with multiple variables such as boat speed, water temp, line diameter, line bouyancy, line weight per foot vs. lure weight and feet of line out, and position of venus as it relates to mercury.

Take the extra $30 you saved on not buying a line counting reel and buy some snacks too - you will have time to enjoy them instead of looking up your charts.

Cornnuts Nacho / Lime are good choice. Don't crack a tooth .....

We are catching fish here not landing a man on the moon.

That's just my opinion on this topic.

I'm not sure why you felt the need to reply with this with kind of tone, but I'm not here to have a childish argument or attempt to belittle anyone else. You've made up your mind and don't see any value in a linecounter. That's OK, you've got a system, it works for you, so be it. To each their own.

At no point did I ever state or imply that cranks don't run true, not sure where you got that from. They do need to be tuned from time to time though. My point was that you don't simply throw out a Rapala SR7 and just expect it to run at 11' all the time regardless of all the other factors involved because that's what's written on the box, it doesn't work that way.

I've stated what I see as the advantages of linecounters. In my experience, the added precision in my presentation has amounted to catching more fish, more consistently. Everyone else's mileage may vary, and they can take the info and make that decision for themselves. If linecounters truly had zero value, the vast majority of pros and tournament anglers out there wouldn't be using them, and the fact is, they are, and not because they're sexy, but for the reasons I stated.

[EZM]

:sign0161::snapoutofit:

Have you even used the trollers bibles?

You are a reader, they might be a good read for you.

Precision Trolling,
Precision casting, and
Big Water edition.

Bad part is most are out of print. Might try BP in Calgary they had some left as of last spring. Do to come out as an App for iphone and Android. Have stickers available for various cranks, they are available now. Mark Romanack/Stephen Holt.

Precision Troller's Bible ?........ seen it .......... simply no reasonable application or advantage for structure fishing and/or trolling in water shallower than 20-30 feet. That was my point. This post was about trolling for walleyes.

Let's assume, for the sake of this duiscussion, I NEED to know, to the foot, where my lure is running consider the following device ..........a sonar.

You know how I fish in deeper water from my other posts. I do allot of salmon / deep water trout fishing using riggers, dipsys etc....

I use line counters in most of these applications.

You will also recall, a second transducer, tipped back, will not allways read that far out to the side or that far down. So a line counter is needed at greater depths.

For trolling up to a depth of up to about 50 feet ........ there is simply no point.

It takes essentially 2 seconds = to gain 100% accuracy = ?????? This is time it takes my fat head to turn to the left and look at my sonar to see where my lure is running in relation to the fish. Then I pop a cornnut and crunch away.

What the hell would a chart and line counter do for me ...... how long would it take for me to get a theoretical running depth from the chart?

I might not be the smartest guy out there but I see no advantage to using a counter for trolling walleyes in our typicall trolling speeds and depths.

As a matter of fact - I often don't look to much at the sonar anyways as the depth changes as you are trolling along structure, a bump here, a dip there, etc....

If I wanted precision I certainly wouldn't be using a book and chart to give me a theoretical running depth when I can be 100% accurate with zero effort using the techniology on my boat.

Seems logical to me ............ but maybe I'm just doing it wrong and just pretty lucky.

:sHa_shakeshout:

[Walleyedude]

I agree with almost all of your comment. Graphite rods today are amazing. The sale price of $20.00 to $30.00 gets you a very sensitive rod for bouncing. I have tried expensive rods and inexpensive rods. Dont get hungup on that. I would put the money into a mid range rigging rod or jigging rod. But you dont even have to go that high there either. $100.00 or so to max $150 will get you a very sensitive rod.

A little test I do is close eyes or look away from the rod. Lower the tip slowly and lightly touch floor. How well that touch(need to touch lightly) is transmitted will give you an indication of how well (sensitive) rod is. putting a reel on it helps but is not really neccessary. Try a variety of rods and you will get a sense of which is more sensitive. Years ago(fibreglass) sensitivety was achieved by stiffness. Not so much with graphite. Try it!

Agree with the bolded statement.

Good post. I agree for the most part about rods, especially today's graphite rods and rods that are going to be used for trolling or bottom bouncing where sensitivity isn't king.

I still believe you do get what you pay for, but there is a point of diminishing returns. The difference between a standard $30-50 rod (not on sale) and a $100-150 rod is pretty huge, and realistically, that $100-150 rod is all a person needs. There is a difference between that $150 rod and a $300+ rod too though, it's not as big a difference, but it is there, and it is significant. It's obviously not for everyone, you have to be really into it to spend that kinda money. I am, and not necessarily by choice, but once you fish one of those $300+ rods, it's hard to go back to your old one lol.

[Walleyedude]

Double post.

[Walleyedude]

...

[huntsfurfish]

Precision Troller's Bible ?........ seen it .......... simply no reasonable application or advantage for structure fishing and/or trolling in water shallower than 20-30 feet. That was my point. This post was about trolling for walleyes.

Let's assume, for the sake of this duiscussion, I NEED to know, to the foot, where my lure is running consider the following device ..........a sonar.

You know how I fish in deeper water from my other posts. I do allot of salmon / deep water trout fishing using riggers, dipsys etc....

I use line counters in most of these applications.

You will also recall, a second transducer, tipped back, will not allways read that far out to the side or that far down. So a line counter is needed at greater depths.

For trolling up to a depth of up to about 50 feet ........ there is simply no point.

It takes essentially 2 seconds = to gain 100% accuracy = ?????? This is time it takes my fat head to turn to the left and look at my sonar to see where my lure is running in relation to the fish. Then I pop a cornnut and crunch away.

What the hell would a chart and line counter do for me ...... how long would it take for me to get a theoretical running depth from the chart?

I might not be the smartest guy out there but I see no advantage to using a counter for trolling walleyes in our typicall trolling speeds and depths.

As a matter of fact - I often don't look to much at the sonar anyways as the depth changes as you are trolling along structure, a bump here, a dip there, etc....

If I wanted precision I certainly wouldn't be using a book and chart to give me a theoretical running depth when I can be 100% accurate with zero effort using the techniology on my boat.

Seems logical to me ............ but maybe I'm just doing it wrong and just pretty lucky.

:sHa_shakeshout:

:) You really are an engineer.:)lol

[Buck9]

Walleye101. One thing to consider when you are trolling if you are running a kicker with one hand you need to use the other hand to run the reel. I do agree with Walleyedude that using a spinning outfit and keeping the line on your finger offers superior feel. But when operating the motor and having to drop line for changing depths it is often hard to pick up the line again without letting go of the motor. This is why I like the bait caster option.

[npauls]

Walleye101. One thing to consider when you are trolling if you are running a kicker with one hand you need to use the other hand to run the reel. I do agree with Walleyedude that using a spinning outfit and keeping the line on your finger offers superior feel. But when operating the motor and having to drop line for changing depths it is often hard to pick up the line again without letting go of the motor. This is why I like the bait caster option.

Finger on the line was mentioned for lindy rig fishing. Most guys who lindy fish use their bow mount trolling motors or back troll with a transom mounted electric at very slow speeds.

[bobalong]

For bottom bouncing I like the 6 1/2 to 7 ft. Ratings will change between rod companies but my bouncer rods have a line rating of 12-18 lbs or there abouts. I have a few different reels but my favourite for bouncing is the Shimano Castaic with the thumb bar, very handy for trolling.

[EZM]

I'm not sure why you felt the need to reply with this with kind of tone, but I'm not here to have a childish argument or attempt to belittle anyone else. You've made up your mind and don't see any value in a linecounter. That's OK, you've got a system, it works for you, so be it. To each their own.

At no point did I ever state or imply that cranks don't run true, not sure where you got that from. They do need to be tuned from time to time though. My point was that you don't simply throw out a Rapala SR7 and just expect it to run at 11' all the time regardless of all the other factors involved because that's what's written on the box, it doesn't work that way.

I've stated what I see as the advantages of linecounters. In my experience, the added precision in my presentation has amounted to catching more fish, more consistently. Everyone else's mileage may vary, and they can take the info and make that decision for themselves. If linecounters truly had zero value, the vast majority of pros and tournament anglers out there wouldn't be using them, and the fact is, they are, and not because they're sexy, but for the reasons I stated.

Certainly not my intention to belittle you at all actually. Just share my opinion and have a few laughs along the way.

My statement is line counters, in this particular application, trolling for walleye, provide zero advantage. period.

I also provided data driven facts and opinions and tried not to be too serious and up tight.

Not a big deal.

Like i said, I use counters in certain applications. I use them where they will provide value and put more fish in the boat. Unfortunately walleye trolling, isn't one of them in most cases.

No big deal .......... I still love you.:)

[EZM]

:) You really are an engineer.:)lol

yes, unfortunately for the rest of you who have to read my silly rating posts ............ but more importantly ........ I'm kind of lazy and like to find easier ways to do things. lol.

[Walleyedude]

Certainly not my intention to belittle you at all actually. Just share my opinion and have a few laughs along the way.

My statement is line counters, in this particular application, trolling for walleye, provide zero advantage. period.

I also provided data driven facts and opinions and tried not to be too serious and up tight.

Not a big deal.

Like i said, I use counters in certain applications. I use them where they will provide value and put more fish in the boat. Unfortunately walleye trolling, isn't one of them in most cases.

No big deal .......... I still love you.:)

Not to worry. I've got a pretty good handle on you and your posts, and I take them for what they are.

There's been plenty of people here who believe their opinion and "facts" to be one and the same. I've learned long ago to resist the urge to respond in kind and not to get too involved with them, it doesn't do anyone any good.

To quote Mark Twain "It's not what you don't know that gets you in trouble. It's what you know for certain that just isn't so."

[ak-71]

:) You really are an engineer.:)lol

I have my doubts about this approach :thinking-006:
I just can't picture fish finder working accurately when trolling something with enough line out, because of the bottom "shadow" zone, the kind you get when fishing a steep drop-off, unless we are talking about downrigging (where the ball is almost under the boat)
What lure depths we are talking about, how much line out, water depth and transducer "cone angle"?
Could you elaborate, please?

PS. To re-word:
1. Your "depth" reading on a lure should be exactly the same as your linecounter reading, which would be fine, but...
2. You apparent WB depth is not depth, but the earliest "bounce" back from the bottom, which in this case is some point on the bottom in between your boat and a lure.
It is neither vertical depth nor something easily convertible to depth (depending on the "cone angle") Unless "cone" is very narrow

[SamSteele]

I just started using linecounter reels to troll cranks for walleye last year. It resulted in a big improvement in consistently catching fish.

One note: if you are using more than one linecounter reel of the same manufacture and model, ensure you load them with the same amount of line in order to make them reproducible. More line on one than on the other will change the circumference of the spool, and since most linecounters use number or revolutions of the spool the circumference change will have an effect on the accuracy of the linecounter.

SS

[EZM]

I have my doubts about this approach :thinking-006:
I just can't picture fish finder working accurately when trolling something with enough line out, because of the bottom "shadow" zone, the kind you get when fishing a steep drop-off, unless we are talking about downrigging (where the ball is almost under the boat)
What lure depths we are talking about, how much line out, water depth and transducer "cone angle"?
Could you elaborate, please?

PS. To re-word:
1. Your "depth" reading on a lure should be exactly the same as your linecounter reading, which would be fine, but...
2. You apparent WB depth is not depth, but the earliest "bounce" back from the bottom, which in this case is some point on the bottom in between your boat and a lure.
It is neither vertical depth nor something easily convertible to depth (depending on the "cone angle") Unless "cone" is very narrow

Transducer 1 - tipped back 12-16 degrees (3 clicks) @ 83 kHz 60 cone, ping speed 10 (max), sensitivity @ 80%-90% (depending on the junk in the water). You are trying to get as much info back as quickly as possible without interference.

Second transducer is set "normal" and used for depth and sonar.

Details

Keep in mind - Your "tipped back" transducer" will, of course, provide "disproportionate" depth readings, however, you are moving your lure running depth using the same "disproportionate" ratios.

Here's an "extreme" example (it's not quite this bad .....In other words your ducer might read 56ft in 30FOW kinda thing. Your schools of fish might be reading at a range of 40 feet at the top and 52 feet at the bottom (range of 16 feet) but they are actually holding between 21 and 28 feet (range of 7).
A tow fish, of course, would not give you this issue but who wants to drag a transducer around the lake.

What you are looking for, on transducer 1, is your lure to "draw a return (shows up as a line) right through your target range. Depth reading are irrelevant on this display. Returns are what you are looking at.

Keep in mind - and you are right - if your lure is 75 back of the boat this isn't going to work well enough as your return (from your lure) will not be captured in the 60 degree cone despite "cheating another 12 degrees or so".

Remember this post was about trolling for walleyes - which with a bouncer, at 1mph, is done a a very steep angle whereas a crank might be 2.2mph.

After about 3mph and 50 feet of depth or 75 feel behind the water this ceases to be an effective method. At that point you are probably fishing for lakers or salmon and using a rigger or counter anyways.

PM for more detail – this is an epic de-rail (on my part) ……….lol

[ak-71]

Transducer 1 - tipped back 12-16 degrees (3 clicks) @ 83 kHz 60 cone, ping speed 10 (max), sensitivity @ 80%-90% (depending on the junk in the water). You are trying to get as much info back as quickly as possible without interference.

Second transducer is set "normal" and used for depth and sonar.

Details

Keep in mind - Your "tipped back" transducer" will, of course, provide "disproportionate" depth readings, however, you are moving your lure running depth using the same "disproportionate" ratios.

Here's an "extreme" example (it's not quite this bad .....In other words your ducer might read 56ft in 30FOW kinda thing. Your schools of fish might be reading at a range of 40 feet at the top and 52 feet at the bottom (range of 16 feet) but they are actually holding between 21 and 28 feet (range of 7).
A tow fish, of course, would not give you this issue but who wants to drag a transducer around the lake.

What you are looking for, on transducer 1, is your lure to "draw a return (shows up as a line) right through your target range. Depth reading are irrelevant on this display. Returns are what you are looking at.

Keep in mind - and you are right - if your lure is 75 back of the boat this isn't going to work well enough as your return (from your lure) will not be captured in the 60 degree cone despite "cheating another 12 degrees or so".

Remember this post was about trolling for walleyes - which with a bouncer, at 1mph, is done a a very steep angle whereas a crank might be 2.2mph.

After about 3mph and 50 feet of depth or 75 feel behind the water this ceases to be an effective method. At that point you are probably fishing for lakers or salmon and using a rigger or counter anyways.

PM for more detail – this is an epic de-rail (on my part) ……….lol

If I was someone to use that I would draw it out first, and I think what one will easily see is that "what you see" on "depthfinder" - is NOT "what you get".
Just need to keep in mind that "depth" has nothing to do with depth, just a bounce time converted to depth with a water velocity, and "cone" is "60 degree". Much less than 100% accurate. :)

Unless your lure is very close to be right under the boat

[EZM]

If I was someone to use that I would draw it out first, and I think what one will easily see is that "what you see" on "depthfinder" - is NOT "what you get".
Just need to keep in mind that "depth" has nothing to do with depth, just a bounce time converted to depth with a water velocity, and "cone" is "60 degree". Much less than 100% accurate. :)

Unless your lure is very close to be right under the boat

Just trying to understand your post ... but I think I agree .... estentially the rate of error on this particular display is directly proportionate so, you are right the "values" indicated on this display (head unit one) are innacurate. I 100% agree.

The part of having to be directly under your boat isn't exactly correct actually as your lure can be a ways behind you, and as long as your cone captures the bounce, you will read the lure proportionately.

The only way to do this is try it yourself.

It works and will accurately allow you to see your lure running through the band of the fish at your desired depth. Down to 2" ( 2 inches) of accuracy.

[ak-71]

Just trying to understand your post ... but I think I agree .... estentially the rate of error on this particular display is directly proportionate so, you are right the "values" indicated on this display (head unit one) are innacurate. I 100% agree.

The part of having to be directly under your boat isn't exactly correct actually as your lure can be a ways behind you, and as long as your cone captures the bounce, you will read the lure proportionately.

The only way to do this is try it yourself.

It works and will accurately allow you to see your lure running through the band of the fish at your desired depth. Down to 2" ( 2 inches) of accuracy.

Imagine that fish is directly under the boat and your lure is 30degrees off to make it simple (I know "60 degree" transducer cone is a simplified concept, but anyway), if they appear at the same depth on a fishfinder they are not.

Basically all I am trying to say is that even if you are watching your lure going through the fish it may be as much as 15.47% :) higher than the fish. If you draw it and calculate cos(30degree) you'll see what I mean. That's why fish looks like a hyperbola (deeper/shallower and deeper again) on a conventional fishfinder. (BTW lure will still swim 15% "deeper" than the bottom)
But as long as it catches fish for you - who cares. Sorry for off-topic

Opps, reread and think geometry "A" students here will say that 15.47% is wrong and I agree.
It should've said that lure has to read 15.47% deeper to go through these fish :)

[Walleyedude]

I just started using linecounter reels to troll cranks for walleye last year. It resulted in a big improvement in consistently catching fish.

One note: if you are using more than one linecounter reel of the same manufacture and model, ensure you load them with the same amount of line in order to make them reproducible. More line on one than on the other will change the circumference of the spool, and since most linecounters use number or revolutions of the spool the circumference change will have an effect on the accuracy of the linecounter.

SS

That's a great tip. :happy0034:

Consistency and repeatability are the key. Ideally all your reels and your fishing partner's reels should be calibrated so they measure as close as possible to each other. A couple feet either way is no big deal, but if 100 feet on one reel is 120 or 80 feet on the other reel, you're kinda defeating the purpose of the linecounter and you're not getting your cranks into the right depths. The easiest way to get close is to use the line counter and consistent pressure when you're spooling the line to put the same amount of line on each reel.

The next step is to run the same type of line and lb test on all your reels so the cranks run consistently from reel to reel. If you're using Fireline or PowerPro, there's no need to fill the whole spool with it. I'd suggest putting a good thickness of mono backing on each reel before you spool the superline. Loading the spool more fully will make the reel smoother and the line counter will be more accurate. Just be sure to get the mono spooled on nice and tight and don't use too heavy a lb test so the superline doesn't dig in when loaded up.

[EZM]

Imagine that fish is directly under the boat and your lure is 30degrees off to make it simple (I know "60 degree" transducer cone is a simplified concept, but anyway), if they appear at the same depth on a fishfinder they are not.

Basically all I am trying to say is that even if you are watching your lure going through the fish it may be as much as 15.47% :) higher than the fish. If you draw it and calculate cos(30degree) you'll see what I mean. That's why fish looks like a hyperbola (deeper/shallower and deeper again) on a conventional fishfinder. (BTW lure will still swim 15% "deeper" than the bottom)
But as long as it catches fish for you - who cares. Sorry for off-topic

Opps, reread and think geometry "A" students here will say that 15.47% is wrong and I agree.
It should've said that lure has to read 15.47% deeper to go through these fish :)

Correct - if you are calculating the deviation of the bottom reading to the reading of the depth of your lure (or any suspended target).

But ......What you should be doing, is comparing a suspended fish, and matching a suspended lure. Other than "noise" (like water temp/density, electrical interference) in this case, you will have near zero deviation and therefore your sonar would indicate and confirm that you are actually running at a near identical depth as the fish you are marking.

http://www.personal.psu.edu/faculty/m/x/mxm14/sonar/beamforming.pdf

Also - the newer transducers actually eliminate bum reading and will compensate for this angled install...... can't wait to get my new stuff.

Holy crap we derailed this thread ......

But you are right - if you are nailing fish - it's working ..... that's the true test I guess ....lol.

[ak-71]

[QUOTE=EZM;1886963]
...
But ......What you should be doing, is comparing a suspended fish, and matching a suspended lure. Other than "noise" (like water temp/density, electrical interference) in this case, you will have near zero deviation and therefore your sonar would indicate and confirm that you are actually running at a near identical depth as the fish you are marking.

QUOTE]

Nope, ain't working this way

[Walleye101]

Well I ended up buying a baitcast and spincast Quantum Smoke paired with matching Quantum Smoke reels. These rods are absolutely feather lites!! I bumped into the Reel Doctor at the Sportsman show and he strongly recommended those combos. I can't wait to slay some eye's with these units this season.

[baptiste_moose]

Trev taught me to use baitcasts as well for pulling blades. Can't beat them. Spinning reels for rigging, phelps floater and line counter for cranks because of it's REPEATABILITY. There's a lesson to be learned with ever fish caught. Why not capitalize. I learnt my depths using a guide for their depth and fine tuned it from their. These are walleye's boys. If your pulling cranks below suspended eyes you might as well have a thumb where the sun don't shine. 4' over their head is where it's gonna be in 64 days, 8 hrs and 12 minutes.

[HuyFishin]

Hey walleye which quantum smoke spinning rod did u pick up?