Sk8man

Nice work Rick....another good example of the need to be flexible and think out of the box

This is exactly the issue and some of it may relate to your particular rod holders too in that the rod may be slipping in the holder (another reason for getting good rod holders) and need to be repositioned and if you either don't detect it or maybe just say screw the repositioning it can do the damage over time. Regardless of the quality of material the roller is made from or the cost of it etcthe wire needs to stay positioned on the roller wheel itself not the side plates. When this is done the friction when reeling in is much less than on a twilli.

Hachimo - you and Clark are very good additions to LOU and the Lake O scene. i have enjoyed your posts as well as your humor I also wish I had your garage it would match my house real well too in terms of color scheme

Another thing worth mentioning here and that is that the term "expensive" is a very relative term The equipment used oin the salt water environment can cost many times what we are used to. I have seen roller tips priced at over $200 and roller rods at $800-1200 on Cape Cod

That smile says it all Mark

I've used rollers for forty some years and Keith is exactly right. The good roller guides and tips are expensive and it seems to be a good example of "you get what you pay for" Many of the cheaper versions have side plates that aren't hardened or are made of soft material (eg. aluminum). Often when trolling rods will shift to the side a bit and the wwire can come off the hardened roller material and nest on the side plate and the wire works back and forth like a saw cutting through the soft material. Good quality roller tips are made of hardened material (e.g. stainless, titanium etc.) which stand up to wear from wire. Twilli's are very inexpensive and made from hardened spring steel which is harder than the wire products so it stands up much better over time. I use both twilli's and hardened rollers on my rods and prefer the feel of the rollers when the wire is being reeled in because it seems to have less friction but I guess you have to determine whether it is really worth it to you Some of the older roller rods used to use hardened roller tips (e.g. Allen brand) and they tend to do a good job with one caveat - the 30 lb wire sometimes slips between the roller and the side plate and wedges there. This is not a problem with heavier gauge wire though as it can't fit in the crevice. Although there is a little nut at the side plate it can't be tightened enough to eliminate the crevice. The pic below is an example of the cuts on cheap roller tips

Nice going especially with all the boat traffic etc.

" The deeper the water the more chance over overlap as the cone widens" This is what I was referring to in my comment.. it is possible that if you are going deep enough they may meet regardless of where the transducer is mounted as some of it probably depends on the depth finder signal strength when on the 50 khz and the ability of the Fishhawk screen out or to reject a potentially stronger signal. There is no guarantee regarding an optimal placement. By the way, my Lowrance transducer (83/200) shares a screw with the Fishhawk on the same transducer mounting plate and they run OK together although I did make some adjustments in the Lowrance settings.

What I'm wondering is not about your spacing on the hull but the cone angle of the two transducers (50 and 70) maybe coinciding down below such that the Fishhawk signal (ping) underwater is getting "confused" when they go deeper as they are being read by the Fishhawk transducer. The cone angle of the 200 khz is narrower and they may not be coming together and the frequency difference is greater in that case. Just a thought off the top of my head. The signal rejection may be weaker on the Fishhawk too.

We had the same result on Monday John. marked some in 140-160 suspended but they wouldn't touch anything we threw at them. Great pic!

Yeah he is probably seeing those death traps in his sleep by now....wakes up wondering was it a dream or nightmare that I had to fill 10,000 orders by next Monday

Nice work as usual Johnny. These guys are the future of the sport and you're doing it right

WTG Brian. Good to see you're finding some time to play

Yes especially on 2 lb test on an ice rod

I fully agree Ray.... long overdue

Rock Bass and many other species depend seasonally on small insects and the young of crayfish which historically clung to strands of the type of grass growing in the lakes within the shallows and they could sometimes be seen nibbling on rocks for food now these rocks are covered with mussels.. Since the onset of the mussels and their extensive water straining and the encrustation of the rocks, gravel, and structure present in the shallows which previously offered good hiding, spawning, and feeding opportunities for the young of various species and these small fish are actually the second link to go in that environment.. The first link is the phytoplankton and zooplankton populations that have been mercilessly strained out. The weed growth used to pretty much stop in Seneca out at about 18-20 ft or so but now because of the increased water clarity excessive photosynthesis is occurring and there are weeds out in the 30 ft range, but they are very different types and configurations of weeds than previously existed. In the past, you could sometimes see bottom down to 25 or 30 ft max at most times of the year, and not much more than that even during the winter. During a fairly recent trout derby I was looking at gravel very clearly in 55 ft. of water. The Smallmouth Bass, Perch, various panfish along with the Pike and Pickerel that used inhabit the north end of the lake in the shallows are basically gone in any numbers. Very few minnows of various species that used to blacken the water in the shallows are gone. The crustaceans such as the small crabs and even the freshwater clams are rarely seen, and if so not in extensive areas where they once were. The weed patterns have changed radically. Where huge weed beds used to exist it now is mainly small distributed clusters of a different type of weed and there are zebra mussels all over them when they are retrieved. The canal in the state park seldom has any sign of life and it used to be alive with various species of fish that could be caught from shore; and again seldom are minnows and crustaceans seen there.. I know it sounds like "gloom and doom" but it is the current reality; and although old age may suck in some ways it does offer one a different perspective because you can compare even the distant past with the present rather than 5 or 10 years ago when things were on their way to their current state. Vital links in the food chain have been drastically altered; primarily by the invasives and it has adversely impacted many species - some of which may be more vulnerable than others at different stages along the way. The bottom line is that the lake is not functioning as it has in the past and these changes are ongoing and it is unclear to me at this point where all this may lead in the extended future. My hope is that Mother Nature will take over and guide things along a more productive path and the State will energize its efforts to revitalize stocking, treatment of the lampreys and a restoration of balance to the ecosystem. This condition is not limited to Seneca either; other Finger Lakes without lampreys (e.g. Keuka and Canandaigua) are in trouble as well but are in different stages and probably primarily for the same reason - missing links in the food chain related to the invasives which gradually takes out those species above it. i know this is long winded but I guess that says something about the importance I attach to the issues too.