|
Post by BrandonH on Feb 27, 2006 16:29:48 GMT -6
Steve, Have you used modified Duke 1.75 before, (i.e. laminated, baseplated, etc)? You continually say that these traps work fine right out of the box, just curious as if you've seen the other side of them. And, how many did you try? 1,5, 10, 50?? BH
|
|
|
Post by Steve Gappa on Feb 27, 2006 16:43:34 GMT -6
I have only a few laminated 1.75s. About 20 laminated #2. No laminated #3, but will have the #3 laminated, because of fox foot damage.
But what are the advantages of laminating small traps? The bmps show no difference in injury problems with the laminated over the non laminated with smaller traps. Laminations do what? Bottom line- they provide more of a jaw surface. So what does a wider jaw surface do?
1) prevents sliding, if thats a concern.
2) spreads out compression- how much I don't know, but on the 1.75, according to tests by bmp, it isn't enough to matter.
On bigger, more powerful 4 coiled traps- modifications are one thing...on smaller 2 coiled traps- they are another.
Baseplates do nothing and are only needed, imo, when you put TOO much stress on the stock baseplate- usually done by putting on heavier springs or 4 coiling. AS a modificaiton in itself, doesn't do much for smaller trpas on shot chains. You could argue, and be right as rain, that long chains cause lunges that tweak the baseplate, causing the jaws to pop out. Since I've never had this happen- its not a concern.
So- for foot comfort, for performance ie losses, I have no concerns with the smaller Dukes ( I stress Dukes, cause with the few other brands of 1.75s I have experience with, I cannot say the above).
The proof of no foot damge is there- the dnr took dozs of photos of the feet of the released coyotes- and you cannot even tell which foot the trap was ON....
I've never been one to fix what wasn't broke, and for me, not much broke with the 1.5s and 1.75s.
|
|