jimmyjoe

Only one? We gotta do something about that! And they're not my favorite lure, even. jj

I never could do that. ☹️ Even if I feathered the line, the spinning rig always gave me line with more slack in it. Manually tripping the bail took time, and the two combined meant there was a greater delay than the casting rig. The guy who taught me to set the hook on a casting reel that way used the technique on downed trees and limbs, sharp cut banks and overhung rock piles. This was back in the '70s, and I had an Ambassadeur 5000. They had a retrieve ratio somewhere around 3.7, if I remember right, so keeping your thumb on the spool and using the rod to set the hook was infinitely faster than trying to use the reel handle. He made the comment one time that he had used to use a stout cane pole and cheap, heavy mono to do the same thing. I fished for crappie at the time, and I knew dipping when I saw it. That's what he had been doing; dipping for bass. After he started using a reel, he liked the reel for the drag capabilities, but not on the hookset. For that, he always used his thumb. It was a good few years before I heard the term "flipping". When I finally did, I realized that was what he was doing when he added the reel. The high point of his fishing was to have the fish hit at the exact second that the lure hit the water, and even better was for the fish to come up out of the water to grab the lure. I saw that happen a couple of times. He was an abrasive, opinionated and curmudgeonly old s.o.b., but he caught bass in river systems better than anyone I have ever seen. I hope the fish think I do even half as well as he did, old-fashioned or not. jj

Spinning rig advantage: easier casting into the wind. Casting rig advantage: setting the hook the very instant the lure hits the water using thumb pressure. Which one applies to your specific circumstances more? jj

Chartreuse and white spinnerbait. jj

Up to a quarter ounce, a Daiwa SMD 702ULFB. I use a Curado 70 and 8 lb. line. Above a quarter ounce, use anything you want. jj

Uh-oh. I know where this leads ........ ? jj

Glad to see you here. jj

For me it's simple; keep the lure moving. The faster you move it (within its effective speed range) the fewer fish you'll miss. Unfortunately this style of fishing is falling out of fashion nowadays. ☹️ jj

Would St. Croix Mojo Yak be something you might find acceptable? https://www.tacklewarehouse.com/St_Croix_Mojo_Yak_Casting_Rods/descpage-SCY.html jj

You always pay for what you get, but you don't always get what you pay for. jj

Been going on for quite some time. http://www.alanhawk.com/blog/rotr.html Seems there is another side to this, too. One that's even seamier. http://www.alanhawk.com/blog/zmb.html As always, BUYER BEWARE! jj

Man, I am SO jealous of all you fishermen who can fish in the winter! Winter fishing around here is ice fishing. There have been some winters around here when people drove their pickups out on the ice and bored holes. It's not like Minnesota around here, and it's not consistent, but so far every winter has supported some kind of ice fishing. Not by me, mind you, but by others. I'm chicken. Spring fishing in areas like this is a little different than spring fishing in areas that don't freeze. Just not quite as different as I had thought. I see that now. C'mon, SPRING!!! jj

Yes, that explains perfectly why this worker was putting habitat at the 30' level. Thnx. jj p.s. I didn't realize #s 3 and 5 were so variable. You just made me work harder! ?? jj

This agrees also with what the guy said. I guess my idea of what went on in a small lake during winter and early spring was way too simple. (Can I blame that on river fishing all those years?) Especially, I had no idea that there were freshwater plants that thrived in deep water. Articles like this https://www.lakeaccess.org/ecology/lakeecologyprim9.html that has this sentence, " .... In most lakes, the sunlit euphotic zone occurs within the epilimnion. ...." led me to think that way. However, that same article cites examples of deep plant life in clear-water lakes that are, I admit, much larger than the little lake I'm talking about. So here's what I thought happened in spring: Before the spring turnover (or remix) bass are deep and lethargic. When the spring remix occurs, I thought bass went hell-bent for shallower water because the sun warmed the water and because the sun caused an explosion of plant growth. I guess I never stopped to think just what was meant by "shallower". I thought it was all about light, warmth and oxygen. And it is .... but differently than I had thought. So here is (evidently) what happens in spring: When the spring remix occurs, a lake has oxygen over a huge range of depths until the thermocline forms. And that can take months. During this time, I guess the bass bite at all depths, and they can move to (and feed at) any depth they want, kinda like hit-and-run guerilla warfare. I had always fished shallow-only in spring. Looks like I was wrong. If you just live long enough, you can learn new stuff! ?? jj

Well, that pretty well jibes with what this guy said. I guess a brand-new window just opened up for me, a window about 2 months long. This principle applies to two other lakes close to me, too. Looks like Jimmy's gonna have fun come spring! Thnx. jj

S'okay. ? jj

Correct. That's why I said that the lake had a 16-foot thermocline in summer, and why I said that the thermocline formed sometime in June. I guess I didn't clarify that enough. jj

DNR drained a 187 acre lake near me in Iowa. They're renovating it. The upper 1/3 is shallow from siltation, but the lower 2/3 is 30 to (ultimately) 50+ feet deep. I saw a person putting PEX "trees" out on the lake bottom, where the 30-foot depth begins. (PEX pieces were leftovers.) I asked him why he did that when the lake was known for having a thermocline no deeper than 16 feet in summer. He said that in spring, from the time turnover occurs (Probably mid-April) until the thermocline actually forms (he thought about late June) the bass will occupy any depth, only moving up after the thermocline forms. And he thought that the fish will inhabit this depth in winter anyway, and that they'd benefit from artificial habitat. I don't know what to think about this. Some questions: 1) If the lower 1/3 of the lake is around 50 feet and the middle is 30 feet, won't wintering bass gravitate to the deepest areas? 2) Do overwintering bass benefit from cover, artificial or otherwise? 3) I always thought that as soon after spring turnover as possible, fish move into shallow (5-20 feet) water because they need to eat, and that's where the food is. 4) I thought the food was at this level because light was strongest at this level. 5) I always thought that there was little plant growth below 20 feet because light was limited, which limited the growth of forage fish. Am I wrong about these things? jj

That's good idea. I try to keep my mono on the reel for as long as possible. It would take me years to fill a small sack. I might try it, though. jj

Be careful. Shimano changes features on models rather regularly. I'm not sure about previous iterations, but right now, the Calcutta Conquest models that they sell are the 100 size and the 200 size, neither of which have synchronized levelwind, and then the 300 and 400 size, BOTH of which have synchro levelwind. So downsizing to a 300 size won't get you the disengaging levelwind that you're used to. The straight Calcutta reels might be different; the 400 size in those might be the only one that has the synchro on it. Ask your retailer. Be sure to check it out B4 you take it home. Good luck. jj

I've been retired almost 4 years. I go fishing 6 days a week, weather and circumstances permitting. I don't pay attention to Solunar tables, and I don't have an app, other than the one in my head that says, "Either they're bitin' or they ain't bitin'. Go fishing and find out which." Seems to work OK for me. ? jj

I can't hear it, so I don't know. Seriously, lube it. Especially if has been sitting on a retailer's shelf for a long time, it will benefit from a re-lube. Then you'll know, like if there's a big difference. If anyone around you has any of the 4500/5500/6500 series Ambassadeur reels from ABU, try comparing it to them. You should have approximately the same sound. From what I've heard, the Calcutta Conquests are a little bit quieter. But a synchronized levelwind reel just is what it is. The reel you have is just about at the pinnacle of refinement for round reels. Ain't much of anything any better, nowhere and no-how. My advice? Get used to the sound and enjoy the reel. I'm an old fart; that sound doesn't bother me. If you REALLY cannot abide the sound, see whether your retailer will take it back, and you can buy a TranX. A TranX is great reel, too. Good luck! jj

That's a reel that deserves good lube in all the right places and deserves it according to a consistent schedule. If you don't feel like doing that, I'll .... uh ..... I'll most generously .... uh ..... take it off your hands for you. Y'know .... kinda like a really kind and neighborly gesture on my part. Yup. Really kind and neighborly. ?? ?? jj

Is the 400 size synchro levelwind? If it is, could that be the noise you hear? I mean, you're not giving us a whole lot to go on here. jj

Here's the hardness of various ring inserts, and comments about the usefulness of such. https://www.rodbuilding.org/read.php?2,184083 Here's the forum entry that gave me the idea that SIC are brittle. https://www.rodbuilding.org/read.php?2,134234 And here is one discussing Kigan in particular. https://www.rodbuilding.org/read.php?2,417727,417736 The last entry in this post is EXTREMELY interesting. https://www.rodbuilding.org/read.php?2,184066,184069 Have a nice day. jj