|
|
Posts: 2687
Location: Hayward, WI | Some of you might have noticed my post in the Tackle forum asking about a big bait rod.
I am looking to buy one rod only, and it looks like it might be quite a compromise to buy a rod that can cast anything from double 10's, 10 inch Jakes, and Mag Dawgs all the way up to 13 inch Suzy's and Pounders.
My question is, how many of you feel you are missing something by not using the really big stuff like Pounder-sized baits? I do almost all of my fishing in NW-N Central Wisconsin (Chippewa and Rusk County mostly). I'm not fishing lakes like Mille Lacs where bigger is usually better.
I have chances at big fish, some of them hawgs if I get lucky. But in all honesty, most of the fish I see are between 36 and 40 inches, with a few over 40 and the occational mid 40's, with upper 40-50's being fairly few and far between.my biggest fish this year were 44, 45, and 46. Lost one approx. 48, and saw somebody raise a 48-50 this fall, so my year isn't full of giants, but bigger fish are around (though I sometimes wonder if using bigger baits would make more big fish show up).
So, would you say I could buy a rod to throw baits up to Mag Dawgs, 11" Curly Sues, Kickn' Minnows, and other stuff up to 6 or 8 ounces, and not feel like I'm only bringing a knife to a gunfight? I know the big baits do work around here, but I am wondering if it is worth spending another 60-80 dollars on a rod, and about double for the baits, especially if I am on a tight budget.
If I did buy a rod to throw the big stuff, I have a feeling I would be only throwing the real big stuff (12-16 ounces) maybe 10-20 percent of the time. How often do you catch a fish on a Pounder that you don't feel you would have caught on a Mag Dawg or 11" Suzy or Curly Sue?
I know this is a hard question, and nobody can really tell me what to do, but I am just looking for some opinions.
curleytail |
|
| |
|
| I bought an 8.5 ft bull dawg rod and it will handle BIG BAIT's trolling or casting, it doesnt matter! I know your not looking to spend all that money but this rod will make you happy. you can use it in the cold months and not worry that it will snap. The only down side to this rod is it's a little heavy due to the fiber glass.
Hope this helps, Alex |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2687
Location: Hayward, WI | Thanks Alex. I should make it more clear that I want this rod to be able to effectively cast and work baits smaller than the really big stuff too. I can afford to spend $160-$180 on a rod to throw Pounders, but if it won't throw Jakes, Grandmas, and Cowgirls, it isn't very cost effective for me, since I probably won't be throwing the 12-16 ounce baits nearly as much as the 4-8 ounce baits.
If one rod can't do it all, I would buy a cheaper rod to throw Mag Dawg sized baits.
Anyway, I have another post about the rods. This post is more about the effectiveness of decent sized baits like Mag Dawgs, versus BIG baits like Pounders.
So, the other thread is about the rod selection, this one is to help decide what TYPE of rod I need to be looking for. Uhh...clear as mud?  |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2687
Location: Hayward, WI | Nobody has any opinions on bait size? Again, I'm not looking for advice on gear selection, but am wondering about bait size.
How many of you feel that you really see more and bigger fish on baits like the 13 inch Suzy or Pounder than you do on Mag Dawg or 11 inch Suzy Sucker or Curly Sue sized baits? If you are hoping for trophies, but not specifically targeting them, would you ever feel undergunned using baits as small as Mag Dawgs?
Like I said, this might be a bit of a confusing question, but I am just looking for how many guys like the real big baits, versus using something just a little bigger than "average."
curleytail |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32886
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | I don't throw the really big stuff, and don't think I'm missing much. I've never felt undergunned, but I know some darned big fish have been caught on the MonSter sized baits. |
|
| |
|
| Since you already know the water that you'll be fishing and the potential fish to be caught in those waters, why not gear for that?
Just remember....even the BIG fish...will still eat smaller baits. Just because they're "big fish" doesn't mean that they only eat big meals/baits.
If you're on a budget...and if your tackle box if mostly filled with medium to smaller sized muskie baits and you know the lake that you'll be fishing most has more of a population of fish in the 36 and 40 inches, with a few over 40 and the occasional mid 40's, why not just gear up for what you'd contact most and what fits your budget the best. Don't get caught up in all of the hype of all this bigger is better stuff. A lot of times...there's a lot of "chest thumping" going on out there as to who's got the biggest boat, the biggest stick, the biggest bait and who can throw it the longest duration during the day. So what? Who cares? That's just bar talk and braggin' rights to see who thinks they're better than the next person.
Do what fits you comfortably...from the aspect of what's most comfortable to you to cast all day long and what makes for an enjoyable day on the water and what doesn't break your bank.
Muskie fishing is like any other hobby/sport in life...you can spend as little as you want or can afford...or..you can go into some serious debt buying all the newest, latest and greatest and most expensive and biggest gear/baits possible.
You gotta figure out what works best for you, on the waters your fishing and the fish you'll come in contact with most.
Quality rods can be had for a fair price...quality reels can be had for a fair price....quality lines can be had for a fair price. There's something for everyone out there.
Until you find yourself in a position that the gear you're throwing isn't holding up to you encountering bigger fish more often than you would have originally thought....I'd say get a decent St. Croix rod in the Premier line-up, get a decent size reel to match that...get yourself some quality braided line in the area of 80lb, good leaders and good rings or snaps...and go have fun.
Don't get caught up in all this hype of people saying that one day they're fishing a 7'6" rod and everyone should be, then the next year they're throwing a 8' rod and everyone should be, then the next year they're throwing a 8'6" rod and everyone should be then the next year they're throwing a 9' rod and everyone should be then the next year they're throwing a 9'6" rod and everyone should be yada, yada, yada, yada. Good gawd man..where's it going to stop? Pretty soon the rods they're throwing are longer than their 20' boats and the double-10 bucktails are no longer sufficient so now they're throwing home-made bucktails with aluminum garbage can lids for blades...just to say they have the biggest gear and no one is better than them.
Heck...even St. Croix's Premier XXX rod to throw the pounders and big Suzys and Curleys is adequate and "affordable" by most industry standards...
Don't get caught up in the hype. Go have fun. Outfit yourself with what fits you and your budget best. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 759
| I've got St. croix Premier rods,both the 6'09" and the 7'06" heavy action rods. That's as heavy as I'm going to get. 20-to 30 years ago large musky baits were 8-10 inches weighing 3-5 ounces. Many of those baits are still made today because they caught fish. I agree with Steve that there is a time and a place for those big baits but day in and day out, I'll fish with the "normal" sized stuff. Side thought here-but wasn't probably the best documented 60 pound fish,O'brien's 65 pounder in Ontario caught on a walleye sized rapala? Any sixties caught on the magnum sized baits yet? Kdawg |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1243
Location: Musky Tackle Online, MN | I'm going to start off by stating the obvious. When you go from small to bigger, you are increasing your odds in contacting more fish and catching more (and generally bigger) fish. When I say small in this context, I'm talking something like a 2" or 3" walleye crankbait and increasing to your 5" to 10" musky baits. However, when you're talking the big to the really big baits, there does come a point of diminishing returns. One just has to decide what that point is. And it's going to vary greatly from lake to lake. Take into consideration where you're fishing, number one. Know the size of the fish that swim in the lake you're on. But more importantly, know the size of the forage that inhabit that lake. If you're on a lake where the forage tops out in the 8" to 10" range, the really big baits aren't going to be nearly as effective as they are on lakes where your forage will top out in the 16" to 18" range. So what I'm saying is - know your lake - and then decide what's appropriate. If you're unsure, it's best to start out by NOT using the really big stuff to shorten the learning curve.
Another advantage/disadvantage that you'll want to take into account is how effectively you can work these baits because of their size. Of course, rod (and reel) selection is also going to be a factor there, which is another thing you're looking at in all of this. The really big baits usually offer less versatility in what you can do with them, which is a consideration for me in not only if I use them at all, but when I use them.
Aaron
Edited by AWH 1/6/2008 10:58 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1243
Location: Musky Tackle Online, MN | One thing I didn't mention, which we probably all know, is that you ARE going to catch fewer fish by going to the really big stuff. The small fish are just going to be more hesitant to hit them, which can be a good thing. This in itself can possibily mean better chances of a big fish, simply because the time your bait is in the water isn't being reduced because of a small fish hitting it. If it pays off in the form of bigger fish than you would otherwise catch, it's definitely a trade off that's worth considering. We just have to decide (given the lake) if it's worth that trade off.
Aaron |
|
| |
