Muskie Discussion Forums
| ||
Moderators: Slamr | View previous thread :: View next thread |
Jump to page : 1 Now viewing page 1 [30 messages per page] Muskie Fishing -> General Discussion -> Weight Question |
Message Subject: Weight Question | |||
uppernorth |
| ||
Posts: 4 | First thing I am new here nice to meet you all . I have a tackle and archery shop in northern Wisc . My question is . In April I was in Missouri on vacation . Wanted to go Musky fishing with my fly rod but weather made it to tuff . Went two days with a guide on the second day I caught a Musky . They guide said it was the biggest fattest fish he's ever seen . It was only 46 inch but had a 30.5 girth . If I would of caught it the first time I was out the DNR was out there netting and weighing musky's. The length and girth comes out to 51 lb but I don't think it was that much . Had never caught a fish that was full of eggs like this and was wondering if anyone new the difference with the girth what's heavier eggs or body mass ? | ||
14ledo81 |
| ||
Posts: 4269 Location: Ashland WI | Got a picture? Would love to see that fish. | ||
uppernorth |
| ||
Posts: 4 | the pictures area little deceiving the belly on this thing was over 6 inches wide . I don't see a spot to post pictures . I checked attack file but its not showing anything. | ||
sworrall |
| ||
Posts: 32759 Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Muskie Weight calculator on MuskieFIRST. | ||
Larry Ramsell |
| ||
Posts: 1275 Location: Hayward, Wisconsin | Steve: Don't know what formula you are using for the MF weight calculator, but no way it is near correct/accurate. However, if the measurements of the subject fish are correct, it is a giant! The Crawford formula (L X G/25 minus 10) puts it just over 46 pounds. | ||
mnmusky |
| ||
did it look something like; Attachments ---------------- 50aab9af9718e.jpg (92KB - 276 downloads) | |||
sworrall |
| ||
Posts: 32759 Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Larry Ramsell - 6/3/2018 10:05 AM Steve: Don't know what formula you are using for the MF weight calculator, but no way it is near correct/accurate. However, if the measurements of the subject fish are correct, it is a giant! The Crawford formula (L X G/25 minus 10) puts it just over 46 pounds. Not sure, can have Zach put in the one you have here easy enough. | ||
NPike |
| ||
Posts: 612 | Posted a link which put it at 47.5 lb's. Guess it didn't fly. | ||
muskyhunter47 |
| ||
Posts: 1638 Location: Minnesota | Love to see the pic congrats on the fish | ||
uppernorth |
| ||
Posts: 4 | See if I can get more pictures . Shes kind of deceiving when you see her from the side . Shes was over 6 inchs wide at the belly and 5 on the top . If she would of made 43 lbs she would be new state record but I will never know . She looked like she was going to bust open from the eggs , But I don't know how much they would affect the weight . Would of been great if I caught it a week earlier , the DRN was out there measuring and weighing Musky. Attachments ---------------- DSC00741.JPG (62KB - 330 downloads) | ||
Larry Ramsell |
| ||
Posts: 1275 Location: Hayward, Wisconsin | Uppernorth: They can have as much as 20% of body weight in eggs. Great fish! Steve: Formula good for this size fish...for WR class fish (over 58 pounds) we use a minus of 8 in that formula. Edited by Larry Ramsell 6/4/2018 9:35 AM | ||
IAJustin |
| ||
Posts: 1964 | I’ve caught dozens of prespawn female muskies ... nice fish ..but that not a 26” girth let alone 30” ... if you want to see a 30” girth look up the world record catch and release 55 x 30”... looks like a nice 30-35lb fish congrats!! Edited by IAJustin 6/4/2018 8:02 PM Attachments ---------------- A606631C-41CF-4C71-B1BC-F4A0F34B09EF.jpeg (60KB - 366 downloads) | ||
supertrollr |
| ||
imo the only fish that could really came close to these measurement came from st-john river new-brunswick.you will not find mid 40 pound fish smaller than 50 inch in a lot of place | |||
esox911 |
| ||
Posts: 556 | I knew WE WOULD HAVE AN expert WHO CAN AGAIN JUDGE LENGTH or GIRTH by a picture----and even better---By an absolutely TERRIBLE picture which not only doesn't show the length but not even a side view.... Some Guys are just GREAT !! | ||
Slamr |
| ||
Posts: 6995 Location: Northwest Chicago Burbs | Larry Ramsell - 6/3/2018 10:05 AM Steve: Don't know what formula you are using for the MF weight calculator, but no way it is near correct/accurate. However, if the measurements of the subject fish are correct, it is a giant! The Crawford formula (L X G/25 minus 10) puts it just over 46 pounds. That's so nice of you to say! | ||
14ledo81 |
| ||
Posts: 4269 Location: Ashland WI | Slamr - 6/5/2018 5:47 PM Larry Ramsell - 6/3/2018 10:05 AM Steve: Don't know what formula you are using for the MF weight calculator, but no way it is near correct/accurate. However, if the measurements of the subject fish are correct, it is a giant! The Crawford formula (L X G/25 minus 10) puts it just over 46 pounds. That's so nice of you to say! ?? Calling the fish a giant? | ||
ToddM |
| ||
Posts: 20173 Location: oswego, il | Why do you call it an MF weight calculator? That is a big fish anyone would be proud to catch. | ||
14ledo81 |
| ||
Posts: 4269 Location: Ashland WI | ToddM - 6/5/2018 8:16 PM Why do you call it an MF weight calculator? That is a big fish anyone would be proud to catch. Hah.... Even for you Todd, this one ranks high... I'm picturing Larry telling worrall his calculator is a MFer.... | ||
BNelson |
| ||
Location: Contrarian Island | 30+ inch girth on a 46 is hard to imagine being legit..possible? sure. would love to see the fish from the side view... heavy one regardless. | ||
Jump to page : 1 Now viewing page 1 [30 messages per page] |
Search this forum Printer friendly version E-mail a link to this thread |
Copyright © 2024 OutdoorsFIRST Media |