Super Shark - Top Secret

We can't show anybody the new Super Shark just yet; patent laws etc. But we can let you in on some exciting results from our testing. We haven't changed a thing on our original Chrome Faceted Shark in the last nine years. Our philosopy has always been if it ain't broke; don't fix it.

So it would take something pretty earth shattering for us to mess around with the original design. Our new Pro Staffer Ryan Hare was so startled by the difference in performance of the ten pound of the new SUPER SHARK he actually ended up sleeping with it under his pillow for the week of testing. It was that good. Watch this blog for regular updates on the exciting new developments on our new Super Shark.

We have all had days when the riggers just won't produce. We try spoons, flies, meat strips, nothing will work. You can see the fish down there hugging the bottom, looking for some cold water. You see the occasional one streak to the ball, almost looks like it is taking a swipe at the Shark, but no hits. Before you resort to the copper and lead core; try this on one of the riggers. Take off the big 15 pound Sharks and hook up a light weight 10 pound Shark. The objective of the excercise is to get the lightweight Shark as for back from the boat as possible. Sounds weird; read this story.

My buddy Captain Jim Munoz up in Leland Michigan will only use ten pound Sharks. Jim has a 30 ft Tierra with four heavy duty Big Jon Brutes. I have tried to get him to use the heavier weights for years to no avail. Jim has always stuck to his theory that certain times of the year, (especially when the riggers are not working for most boats) the fish bang the ball because they are angry at it. I always had a bit of a problem trying to figure out exactly what that meant, but how do argue with a guy that returns back to port after an hour with a full limit of fish on a regular basis, year after year. Many of Jim's customers complain about the short fishing trips, he tells them "if you want to take a boat cruise, take that boat over there. The limit on this lake is five fish per person, when we get that, the trip is over" Captain Jim Munoz played a huge role in making the Shark famous nine years ago.

Anyway, let's have a closer look at what is going on here. Nine years later I got some clues from our new pro Staffer, Capt. Ryan Hare and his team We Pound 'em. We gave Ryan a proto type sample of our new Super Shark that we have been developing and testing for years. That's right :the Super Shark! We only had one ten pound version for Ryan to run his tests on. We knew we were on to something with this new model, but we were a little surprised to hear back from Ryan he was sleeping with the new Shark under his pillow.

Ryan reported when the new ball was out, all the hits came off the new ball exclusively. The other riggers would get hits when the new ball was out of the water. We were all pretty exited about this and decided to get right down and pound out a few fifteen pounders in time for the last competition of the year. Thinking inside the box, the fifteen pounders always worked better! Not always!
The team had a rough week out on the water, nobody was getting hits off the riggers; it was all copper line and dipsy's. But Ryan did make some excellent observations over the week. Although not much was coming off the riggers, certainly not like the previous week with the new prototype; he could see fish coming up of the bottom and literally banging the ball, but no takers.

Here is Ryan's actual email to me:

Ed

Its hard for me to give you accurate information on the new sharks because of the amount of fish caught but here is what I discovered.

The amount of blowback @ 25ft is the same as the original shark running 2.5mph

the amount of blowback @ 75 ft is also very close, however the new shark appeared to be experiencing a lesser degree of blowback.running down deep at over 100ft both balls are very similar in amount of blowback.

running down @150ft they both preformed very well however it was very hard to tell which ball was running with less blowback because to the depth. My graph would more often read the new shark leading me to believe that it was running with less blowback.

My rigger bite was slow, the best performing ball was the original black shark. ran tight to bottom in 70fow or down 153ft over 200-250 fow. The new black shark also took fish.The actual problem I was having was the fish where too attracted to the sharks.They would run up and bang the sharks but not hit the lure's Almost all big fish being caught where males. They where very aggressive but also very tight lipped. Most guys complained of dropping fish because of the light bite.

Back at Shark head quarters, we were super impressed with the data; the facets of the new Shark are about 10 times as rough as the old ones, yet the blow back was the same or even less. The golf ball effect really works! At the same time the more pronounced rugged facets are churning up the water way more than the older model; therefore creating a much greater sonic signature.
So what was the problem; why weren't the fifteen pounders working like the ten pounders. Isn't bigger better?.

I sent Ryan another email asking him for some more details: This was his actual reply.

Ed

I mixed it up through out the week to see if I could get more bites but no cigar.I did run spoons tight to the ball and with medium and long leads. Nothing 0 hits on spoons off the riggers. Big light bright coloured spoons off copper and lead core took a couple fish but that was it for my spoon bite.herring strips and paddles dragging bottom with long leads was my most productive rig. followed by flies off of dipsy's.A big part of this was simply because of the time of year.

a) these fish are stuck to bottom trying to find survivable water temps

b) they are highly aggressive and territorial right now but not so much hungry

c) intense boat traffic over shallow water quickly scattered the fish and made it even harder to entice a strike. still

hope to do a bit more with the new sharks before the season wraps up, but I hope what I provide helps a bit.

Ryan

It all started to make sense, especially item c) on Ryans list

Here's what is going on: The ten pounder is much lighter and the swing back is much greater. At a hundred feet down, it was dragging so far behind the boat, you couldn't even tell where the heck it was. Precisely! So far behind the boat was the clue.

I thought back to what Jim Munoz has been telling me for nine years; remember Jim only uses 10 pound Sharks; bingo!

I put that together with a story a scuba diver related to me at a fishing show in Seattle. He sat on a rock down about eighty feet and watched schools of spooky fish scatter when a boat came overhead. The fish always scattered in the same pattern; they broke out sideways and always circled back to the same spot when the boat passed by. The boats were running round cannonballs with a great deal of swing back. When the fish circled back they ran into the ball and they hit the spoons traveling close behind.

This is why the ten pounder worked better in Ryan's test: The fish scattered when the boat passed over, the ten pounder was far enough back when they circled back. The fifteen pounders were running right under the boat when the fish scattered; no takers.

This explanation would pertain to both the original "classic" Shark facet design or the new "radical" facet pattern on the Super Shark. That is a partial explanation of why there are days when the riggers don't work. It explains what happens to fish directly under the boat, and it also explains what’s going on to fish coming in from the sides; if they are spooky they won’t close in on the presentation directly under the boat, rather they prefer to investigate what’s going with the presentation dragging back a safe distance behind the boat. The Shark is still the best attractor out there; on days when the fish are a little spooky, you just need to run them a little further back behind the boat. Give it a try and let me know how it works out..

Then of course there are days when the riggers are going off as fast as you can set them, when the ball is just down ten or twenty feet. Go figure.

Thanks Jim
Thanks Ryan

Sharkman