Presision Trolling, no 30lb??

[trolling troll]

Ok this is my first copy so this might be a dumb question but I quickly glanced through it... I did not notice standard trolling line like 30 test fireline, ect. in it anywhere? only 10lb?

[perchjerker]

read the book closer. Its explains it.

[trolling troll]

Could you please help me, I just read the whole book and still dont get it, I tought everybody said they tested with 30lb on the dive curves but they use 10b, the line conversion chart only goes to 20lb, there is no 30lb! Should I use "line diameter" instead for fireline 30lb test to get the results? I just bought precision trolling 8th edition, do I need to get 7th edition? I bought the Big Water edition about a month ago and have no problems understanding it, it was very simple and clean but so far I am not as impressed with the 8th edition layout, it dosent seem as easy to understand?

Appreaciate some advice on this,

Thanks.

[SUPERTROLLER]

Yes, you have to find the equivalent diameter line of any Superline compared to the diameter of the correct size of Trilene XT. The dive curves of all of the lures is run on a standard line size of Trilene XT 10# test. Any line sized smaller than XT 10# will dive deeper and any line diameter larger will run shallower than the dive curves show for the length of line you have let out. Don't get so caught up in whether it is 20# or 30# line. Power Pro runs slightly smaller than Fireline when comparing the same line weights. The reason people run 20 or 30 # lines is so that they can more closely match up the exact line diameter of 10# XT. They may or may not really care if it is stronger or not. Many guys like to run 10/4 Fireline to get the 10# break strength but want the 4# diameter so they can acheive added depth due to the smaller line. There used to be a chart in the previous editions of Precision Trolling that was a quick reference for the comparison of Fireline to mono,,, that is what perchjerker was referring you to so you could figure out your own question. I have not seen the 8th Edition so if it is no longer part of the book you will have missed that part of the information. I can't imagine that they dropped that though since it explains so much of what a troller needs to know to put the selected lures down to the targeted depth. It ties all of the stuff together. Will the lure dive to the desired depth? How much line do you need to let out? If you can't get to the right depth with 10# diameter line, can you get there with a smaller diameter Superline? Do you need to run the lure off of a diving apparatus or can you get there with snap weights or leadcore? These books give you all of the answers and opens up all of the tackle box to whatever depth you are targeting. That is why we refer to them as the Trollers Bible. Hope this helps to answer your question or help you find the right page to read again.

[trolling troll]

Ok thanks Super Troller, that sums up that part of it, now that 10/4 you were talking about, is that how all brands of line code there product with wight first and diameter next? Thanks. Also could I get 10 lb in a 6dia?

[SUPERTROLLER]

Most manufacturers of Superlines will put the actual test strength of the line in Bigger bold print. Then you will see in much smaller print the equivalent mono size diameter. I'm not aware of all the Superline options from all the different makers of line. You can go to the nearest major store like a cabela's or *#### Pro shops, and see as many different lines as possible. Maybe there is something out there that exactly matches your want list.

[Ristorapper]

The 30 lb. test/ 8 pound diameter Power Pro line very nearly follows the 10 lb. mono dive curves in the Precision trolling chart book. THEREFORE there are no conversion charts to use with that line~!~!

I've been pulling 30/8 for the past two years now and it is very close to the charts put out by Precision trolling.

[phern]

In the test done with 20 lb test super lines, they all broke at about 35 lbs. The strongest was 20 lb test Fireline which broke at around 37 lbs. As for the diameter, I say that Fireline is the thinnest of the super lines because it is not "braided". The braiding process adds a bit of girth to line because there are miniscule spaces between the lines that make up braid. However, braid does not fray as easily therefore making it a bit more abrasion resistant.

As for the size of braid, I have yet to see a braid that is as small as the manufacturer states. Most braids are 50% smaller than equivalent good quality mono. I have used Mason Tiger Braid, Power Pro, Remington Power Lokt, Tuf Line XP, Spiderwire Fusion, and Gorilla Braid. The Remington Power Lokt is the largest of the braids. However, it is more resistant to abrasion....which is normal because it is larger. As for it's strength....difficult to say...it may be way under evaluated. I don't use it anymore because I wanted a finer line for improved casting distance on my baitcasters.

So far my favourite has been Mason Tiger Braid. I have yet to try out Fins Evolution, Fins Braid, Stren Braid, Spiderwire Stealth and a bunch of other braided lines that sound interesting.

[less than accurate]

I bought a Prec. Troll. edition some years ago. I don't believe they are nearly as accurate as they are made out to be especially when all the variables are considered. I've found that the closest way to be dead accurate concerning depth is to measure the line back in the backyard, (and record it). Then, feed that amount of line to the bait and pull the bait shallower until you make bottom contact. Then record all the variables, (speed, line diameter, lure, water temps). Of course, using this procedure to nail down all the baits out there will take a generation or two.
So, learn to use 3 "confidence" baits that cover shallow, mid depths, and deep.
I believe that Prec. Troll. data is ballpark at best.

[ETT]

In their defense: They had a man down in scuba gear witnessing the lure pass a measuring devise. Their reels were calibrated for accuracy, and the lures were well tuned. Now to do this, expeditiously the on water trials were done when boat control was not a problem (when it was fairly calm) so that track and speed could be controled. For these reason, and the reasons you mentioned, the opportuity for variables exists, and we haven't talked about the fact that every lure of a particular brand and model, are not exactly the same.

The book is far and away the best info out there, and I'll continue to believe that's it is the first 30 bucks anyone wanting to troll should spend.

[fair enough]

I believe what you say, (ETT), is for the most part accurate. The only point I would disagree with is the $30.00 investment. I think it would be better invested in Perry's "Abc's of Spoonplugging", then buy Prec. Troll. if one wishes.
In order to get the exact same results as the authors of 'Prec. Troll', all variables in their efforts would have to be duplicated.
The amount of line back itself would be iffy unless one knew exactly how many ft. of line was actually behind the boat when the line counter read 100, (for example).
Does a line counter reading of 100 equal 100 ft. back, (this can only be determined if 100 ft. is staked out in the yard and line is pulled from the reel until the line counter reads 100, then the two distances compared). If so, how does the amount of line on the spool effect this calibration? Does a counter reading of 100 equal 100 ft. if the spool is only half full?
Obviously, spool diameter, (amount of line on the spool), will effect distance to the bait with the same counter reading.
Unless one has a mark on the rod, say at two ft. from the level wind, and manually pulls the line off the spool for two ft. intervals, one can't be sure of the distance to the bait in the event of break offs due to snags, tangles, etc., if the line counter is the only means used to determine line back.
This is just one of a number of variables that determine the depth the bait runs.
I probably should have worded my earlier post differently by saying our results would be ballpark when compared with PT results, (data), because of all the variables which must be duplicated for us to acheive the exact same results.

[perchjerker]

as far as the line counter calibration issue the answer is pretty simple. I use a clip on counter to check the accuracy and calibrate my line counter reels with.

its really very accurate when done properly.

[perchjerker]

as far as the line counter calibration issue the answer is pretty simple. I use a clip on counter to check the accuracy and calibrate my line counter reels with.

its really very accurate when done properly.

[perhaps]

Have you ever actually checked the accuracy of your clip-on with a known, (measured), distance?
Assuming it's accurate and stays that way, it would simplify matters.

[perhaps]

Have you ever actually checked the accuracy of your clip-on with a known, (measured), distance?
Assuming it's accurate and stays that way, it would simplify matters.

[perchjerker]

of course I have. If I hadnt what good would it be.

[perchjerker]

of course I have. If I hadnt what good would it be.

[ETT]

Most of us are aware of the inherent inaccuracies in line counters. Variations of as little as 80' and as much as 112' were found when 6 different reels were checked against a tape @ 100'(all full spools). And I do not argue with any of your points.

My point is few of us have the spare time to devote to working up our own curves, and Precision Trolling is (in my opinion) the best alternative out there.

Not wanting to pick a fight, just standing up for what I believe to be true.

[ETT]

Most of us are aware of the inherent inaccuracies in line counters. Variations of as little as 80' and as much as 112' were found when 6 different reels were checked against a tape @ 100'(all full spools). And I do not argue with any of your points.

My point is few of us have the spare time to devote to working up our own curves, and Precision Trolling is (in my opinion) the best alternative out there.

Not wanting to pick a fight, just standing up for what I believe to be true.

[perchjerker]

If you use the method outlined here by Rick Gardner to load your reels, you will find your reels are dead on at 100ft. My 8 are anyway.

http://www.walleyecentral.com/articles/?a=618

[perchjerker]

If you use the method outlined here by Rick Gardner to load your reels, you will find your reels are dead on at 100ft. My 8 are anyway.

http://www.walleyecentral.com/articles/?a=618

[InTheNet not logged]

Just happened to have tested the accuracy of my line counters last night. At 100 ft measured 5 were at 103 /1 at 102/ 1 at 100/ 1 at 96 ft. In my mind this is close enough for repeatability which is what I am looking for. I will play with line out till I get things going.Then I want to repeat it on my other rods.With all the variables involved of speed , current line diameter etc. etc. etc.I think close is good enough to get started and then fine tune. (Penn digital line counters 10# maxima)

[pearcheye]

pearchjerker,

Could you breifly explain the methode, I read it but it wasent clear.

[perchjerker]

the text does look a little confusing. If you just try it, step by step, you will see how it works, then it will be easy to understand.

Unless there is something specific I can help ya with.