Sonar Controlled Downriggers (Cannon 20-DT)

[landrand]

I'm relatively new to downrigger trolling, but interested in setting up my 18' Lund Tyee with some downriggers. I mostly fish Northern Michigan inland lakes that have varying depths, contours, channels but also plan to occasionally fish Lk. Superior. Therefore, I am considering the Cannon 20-DT electric downrigger that interfaces with the Bottom Line Master NCC 5300 or 6500 Sonar. The Bottom Line sonar can track the bottom depth and automatically control the Cannon downriggers to prevent bait and weight hang up on the bottom. In addition, I can control the downriggers with the sonar unit. To me, this sounds very neat and would allow me to effeciently troll inland lakes without the constant problems of manually raising/lowering the downriggers. Can anyone elaborate on their experience with such a setup. Although using this equipment can be a tad expensive (Sonar with 2 Downriggers=$2800), would I be better off with just two cheaper electric downriggers ($600-$800). Any comments would be greatly appreciated.

[Airwave]

The concept sounds good but I would have to wonder how the tension on the pole line is adjusted as the ball is being raised up and down. If you have to be right there making the adjustments then whats the point.To me 2+2 is not making 4 on this one.

[Sluggo / NY]

I agree with Airwave.. I fished with a buddy that bought a set of Bottom-Trac downriggers and didn't like them at all! We used them on a lake that has drastic changes in depth and had to leave the drags loose to keep from false releasing. A minute later we'd have four rods standing with a 100 ft. belly in the lines. Great in theory, but you need Bottom-Trac reels to go with them..and I don't think anyone makes them yet. Good Fishing, Sluggo

[Gunga Din]

Cannon's bottom trackers are great. I have a pair of mag20's, which I love. But I can't compete with my buddy who has a pair of bottom trackers. He can keep his balls hugging the bottom while I sometimes spring from the console of my Tyee to the back of the boat to raise my balls over a hump, then reel in the slack, then steer the boat, then lower the balls again and adjust the reel's drag. So stay clear of the middle of my boat or you might get run over. Or when fishing with a partner, the conversation consists of the constant exchange of depth between the driver with the graph and person controlling the downriggers.

Sure, he has to reel up the slack on his reels, but he's not going to hang a ball on the bottom either. He doesn't have the BottomLine graph to control them--sticks with his 350A. But if you downrigger fish a lot, they're great. Only disadvantage, other than cost, is that they eat batteries. He runs them on a seperate battery.

With a Pinpoint on the front and the Cannon/BottomLine system on the back, you'd be set!!

[Kevin A.]

If you're new to downrigger fishing you might take it one step at a time to see what you need before jumping in with the bigger money. The bottom trac deal is a good idea, but not intended for fishing areas where radical changes in depth occur. The bottom trac is more of a finesse technique where a little extra bow in the line isn't as big of an issue. The tracking feature can save you from hanging a ball, but hanging up typically isn't a big problem. If you want to go with electric riggers, go for it. I run cannon digitrolls and love them...and catch plenty of fish.

[cisco]

Kevin A. gets my vote. Your downriggers are going to be most useful to you on Lake Superior, and there you don't need to worry about the bottom. If you find the fish at 35 to 40 feet, that's where you set your downriggers. Who cares if it's over 150 feet of water? Even on inland lakes you will most often be fishing strata for suspended fish. Inland lakes stratify, and only rarely are the strata tilted -- again, if fish are to 25 or 35 feet, set the riggers there. You might consider the new manual downriggers. These are nothing like the old two-hand operation Rivieras I started with 30 some years ago, manual riggers today have a clutch and are an easy one-hand operation. Of the electrics, I had awfully good service from Walkers. Good luck -- downrigging is fun.

[Gunga Din]

LAST EDITED ON Mar-28-00 AT 06:46PM (CST)[p]I guess a lot of it depends on where and how you fish. In western canyon reservoirs like Flaming Gorge, bottom trackers are extremely valuable when fishing for bottom-hugging macs in 80-120 feet of water. Additionally, we often use special pop gear that costs upward of $20 per strand, plus the cost of a 12lb ball (the ideal weight for those depths to minimize blowback), and a hangup on the rocky bottom will put a damper in your morning. The closer you are to the bottom, the more fish you'll catch--but the greater the likelihood of a hangup. Also, for these depths an electric with a high retrieve rate is critical.

But if you've got four downriggers, the bottom trackers/BottomLine combo would be a great way to go--especially if you're a guide and need to spend your time attending to clients. Out west 90 percent of all my trout fishing is done with downriggers. There’s more downrigger water than just the Great Lakes.

My downrigger tactics work for me!
http://www.climbing-guides.com/fish/kamloop.jpg.

[Kevin A]

:-) I agree with Gunga Din. It really depends on where you fish. I spend most of my time on Lake Michigan where the fish are big & the bottom is soft & flat. The only thing you'd want to hug the bottom for around here is Lakers, otherwise once things warm up everything runs from the surface to (usually) 50-75 (maybe as deep as 125) feet over 100 to 400 feet.

Nice fish Din!

I'll see yours & raise you:
http://users.wi.net/~datuboat/images/big%20king2.jpg
http://

[cisco]

landrand told us where he was going to fish -- that's what Kevin A. and I responded to. You guys do show a couple nice fish, but they're really only average for Lake Michigan. My best Chinook is 35 lb, best German brown is 19, best steelhead 18.5, best lake trout 28, and best coho salmon 12.5. Only the laker was taken off bottom,and that was on wire line, not downrigger.I'll see your two and raise. I still agree with Kevin A. landrand doesn't need to start with bottom huggers where he intends to fish. Good fishing.

[Gunga Din]

Looks like a full house!

Pretty cool how you can post pictures--I just meant to post a link. Would love to fish the Great Lakes...someday.

[Juls_WI]

Hey Gunga Din...email me and tell me how you did that? I think the pictures are cool too...;-)

Juls

[Ness]

Nice pictures, guys, thanks for sharing. But I don't know Kevin, Gunga Din's fishy looks a little
bigger to me. I think we need to have a weigh in
:-)

[Kevin A]

Though I didn't mean it that way, it appears we've reached a new level in "I'll show you mine if you show me yours" :-) I'll concede that Din's fish is nicer just on style points (colors). Actually I didn't catch the fish in the picture, though it did come from a release on my rigger (that wasn't tracking the bottom). You'll also find this picture in Yarcraft's 2000 catalog. The fish came in at 19 pounds though it really is an average king. I'm sure you won't find it hard to believe at all that a GIRL caught it. It took about 15-20 minutes, a few tears, and some coaching (cheerleading) to get it boat side.

here's a real king (great lakes at least):
http://www.great-lakes.org/

[Fin Addict]

You must be fishing a different Lake Superior than the one I fish. If you want really big lakers, they are laying on the bottom. Yes the fish are high in the water column in the spring and the cohos tend to stay high but for 30 lb + lakers bouncing the bottom is where you want to be. I do not have the bottom tracking feature but would kill for it. I know a pair of digitrolls tracking the bottom and moving the baits up and down periodically would make a significant difference but my wallet is not fat enough to justify them to the wife. If you have the $ go for it.