I’m in the market for new riggers, and found a good deal on a couple of lightly used Big Jons with 4′ booms. I’ve never used riggers with this long of booms. Are these too long to deal with on my 19’Lund? They are not telescoping? What do you think?
IDO » Forums » Fishing Forums » Toys for Big Boys » Outdoor Gear Forum » Downrigger size
Downrigger size
-
mojogunterPosts: 3289hope4fishPosts: 30January 23, 2013 at 3:04 am #1133738
Depending on how far up the gunnels you plan on mounting them, I think long booms could either be a blessing or a curse. If they are too long, it’s tough to bring in rank Salmon up the chute between them. The fish often want to make one last dash for it and often times this is to the side. It’s not good when a Salmon passes between the rigger cable and the boat . I know that scenario too well. On the other hand, it is good to get the rigger cable back away from the back of the boat a little ways. This is especially true if you’re running a kicker motor. I’d say adjustable is best, but if you have some leeway in where you mount them on the gunnels, you should be fine. I’ve got some older Cannon Mag 10’s that have short fixed booms, and they have always worked well on my boat because I have them way at the back of the gunnel. I’m now looking at a new boat though, and will need to replace with adjustable booms to make it work.
I made an assumption that you were inquiring about riggers for Salmon…..if not, my answer may be all wet
January 23, 2013 at 8:40 am #1133756Before I retired and moved to Florida, I ran my 18′ Lund “tiller” with 2 short arm Penn downriggers straight off the rear. Just in front of those I ran 2-4′ Penn downriggers off the side. And sometimes 4 dipsey divers off the side/middle of the boat. The 4′ downriggers had the swivel bases for easy access to the cannon ball. Never had the problem of landing/netting a fish off the side. I say go for it.
January 23, 2013 at 12:09 pm #1133770It will be for salmon and they come with swivel bases. I feel it’s a really good deal..I’m gonna go for it. Thanks all.
January 23, 2013 at 12:31 pm #11337764′ Jons were my first pair of riggers for the lake. I had them first mounted in 14′ sylvan, then I made a removable board for my 18′ Lund Alaskan. (30 years ago….)
As long as they tilt up, then you can easily swing the ball back to the boat without crawling over anything. I really liked them because they kept the lines well past the prop when trolling through a cross current and the lines were on an angle.
These early ones didn’t have the center roller on the shaft. I think that is more of a standard now…???? But if not, I would add them. In really rough water, they bounced up and the end roller sometimes flipped around wrapping the wire on the shaft.
January 23, 2013 at 1:04 pm #1133785I have run 4′ manual Big Jon downriggers for the past 5 years off my 18′ lund. No swivel bases and no problems what so ever.
As for fish swimming thru your rigger cables, there’s really no answer for that and it’s something that is going to happen from time to time regardless of the length of the downrigger boom.My biggest problem with the Big Jon’s isn’t the fact that they don’t telescope, its the roller they use on the tips. If the cable goes slack at any time, it can slip along the side of the pulley wheel. This will cause a kink to form in the cable and make the rigger useless until you get the cable back onto the wheel.
Despite that, if you can get a good deal on them, I wouldn’t hesitate to buy them. Good starter riggers for sure!
January 23, 2013 at 10:32 pm #1134021Quote:
Randy,
When did you take the cast of Joe Dirt fishing?
There is a reason why I don’t dig too deep into my archive of pictures Year before that, my hair was about 2′ long oh, the crazy things we did back thenJanuary 24, 2013 at 1:13 pm #1134218Quote:
Quote:
Randy,
When did you take the cast of Joe Dirt fishing?
There is a reason why I don’t dig too deep into my archive of pictures Year before that, my hair was about 2′ long oh, the crazy things we did back then
I just about spit coffee all over my computer screen.
Sorry Randy. But that was pretty funny!January 24, 2013 at 2:17 pm #1134247At least I’m able to look back and laugh at myself. My wife would be posting pics of those tight shorts that were so popular for awhile
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.