Jump to content
  • GUESTS

    If you want access to members only forums on HSO, you will gain access only when you Sign-in or Sign-Up .

    This box will disappear once you are signed in as a member. 😀

  • RECEIVE THE GIFTS MEMBERS SHARE WITH YOU HERE...THEN...CREATE SOMETHING TO ENCHANT OTHERS THAT YOU WANT TO SHARE

    You know what we all love...

    When you enchant people, you fill them with delight and yourself in return. Have Fun!!!

Sign in to follow this  
Fowlmouth

Colorado vs. Indiana blade

Recommended Posts

Whenever I make spinners I've always used colorado blades, always had good luck with them so never bothered using indiana blades. Just wondering What people prefer and if you use indiana blades do you have much luck with them? May have to try tying a few on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm no expert so take it with a grain of salt. Indiana blades are smaller. Not as much thump. I find I have better luck with the Colorado Blades. I think if your pulling spinners you are looking for the aggressive fish. So more flash the better IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the colorado Blades are the way to go. They seem to provide more vibration than the Indiana I think. I have used them all though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Colorado blades are more popular with the walleye guys than Indianna blades, but they both work.

Colorado blades will spin better at slower speeds, will put off more thump and vibration, put off less flash, and will tend to ride higher at faster speeds due to lift from the blades.

Indianna blades need to be moving faster to spin, they don't put out as much thump and vibration but they do put out more flash, and Indianna blades do not have the lift or rise in them that you get with Colorado blades.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am a Indiana blade fan and always have been, Hammered gold or the diamond blade no larger than no.2. Those big colorados can scare those spooky walleyes unless they are very agressive. I would rather go with no blade than a big colorado but that is what I have confidence in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've had many good days with #8 colorados when the fish wanted nothing else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Number 8, eh? That must create quite the thump

Yes they do. We call them garbage can lids over here. Put four of them out, and they'll slow the boat down and sag the transom, lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They are readily available at most tackle stores here on Lake Erie. Since I paint my own, I have a few places that I order the blanks from.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Het, I'd like to see some of you painted blades... I have been making my own inline spinners, 13 last nite. I am using Colorado's...

full-33703-8360-img_20110505_003914.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have really good luck on #4 or 5 Colorado as long as i am going 1.5 mph or under. But i change to Indiana style when i really want to kick up the speed. Another great thing to do is make sure to use a quick change clevis. They don't spin as pure as a metal clevis but you can just keep changing blades to what seems best. I only give one 20 minutes before I am on to another blade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Het, I'd like to see some of you painted blades... I have been making my own inline spinners, 13 last nite. I am using Colorado's...

I posted some in the 'favorite spinner blade pattern' thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When it comes to Colorado vs Indiana spinner blades which one do you think works best with walleyes?

 

Which one works best for bass?

 

Which one works best for Muskies and Northern Pike?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  



  • Your Responses - Share & Have Fun :)

    • I'm OK with the replay if it's used for a challenge.  The automatic review is pretty lame though.   And I agree with Dave about the playcall.  If he would have thrown to an open receiver nobody would have said it was an awful call.  Cousins effed that up.
    • I have an terrova with Ipilot, (not link),   I lay the trolling motor in the bottom of the boat which is stored in covered storage.  It has been fine for several years.   Gets darn cold up around Cook.   No problem.  On the other hand I bring my depth finders and transducer home and store above freezing due to bad experiences with Lowrance transducers in previous years and ambiguity in documents about my elite 7s I have two  
    • ^^^^^^^^   1. zimmerman and stefanski should be fired, cousins benched. (or released)   2. the review by the "experts" in NY has destroyed any legitimacy this sport may have had.   Should note cousins contract. speilman got played. (he should go too)    
    • Ive never really been a fan of replay.  I think we've all seen cases where the refs still screwed it up after replay so we're trading one bad call for another.  Its interesting to hear the rules guy they have commenting on the broadcasts.  They always give their opinions on how they see the play and whether it should be overturned or not.  Yesterday there were 2 reviews that they disagreed with how the officials called the play after review which shows how its all still subjective.    You can look at every single play during a game and probably find something to call on both teams if you look hard enough which I think is a case of what happened during Diggs touchdown that was called back.  Cook either ran into the defender or intentionally tried to block him.  I'm not sure its 100% clear either way and isn't the benchmark supposed to be "clear and indisputable"?  Unfortunately now that replay is a thing pandora is out of its box and I don't think it can ever be put back in.  
    • 1. I think the play call was fine, Cousins just F'ed it up. Play action on first down after you have been running up and down the field on a team is pretty standard but throwing into triple coverage on a play like that is not.   2. Anyone who has ever advocated for instant replay review in sports is now getting what they deserve in my opinion. I could have told you that there would be a natural progression that would lead to this point and beyond. I say get rid of replay review in it's entirety and live and die by what referees call on the field. I was told at the beginning stages of replay that the reason was "so we get the calls right". If that is really the reason, you should be happy they got it right. 
    • Only 2 comments on the game.    1. What a lousy throw by Cousins in the endzone and what a lousy play call.  They were running the ball right down the Packers throats, why would you not keep running it.  2. I think I hate the new PI replay.  To take a touchdown off the board because they noticed someone maybe sorta blocking when they reviewed the scoring play is kind of a joke.  The PI wasn't called on the field and no one challenged it.  When you're reviewing the scoring play it seems like you should only be reviewing if the player got the ball across the line without losing control.  Pretty soon they'll be reviewing every lineman to make sure they weren't holding on the play as well and that none of them moved a thousandth of a second before the snap.  If that happens I hope they also review every defensive player to make sure they didn't move early, hold, or engage a receiver after 5 yards.  It really feels like we've gone too far with this replay thing and they're using it as a answer to everything when sometime you're just exchanging one bad call for another.    I think thats all I've got besides the fact that I haven't been real impressed with the NFC north so far.  The Packers and Vikings look average to decent but hardly superbowl contenders.  The Bears squeaked out a win but they are looking like they don't have much to work with at QB.  And the Lions as usual aren't worth talking about.  
    • The roof is finally on and I got some of the wiring started.  The tin came in over the weekend so I was able to pick that up last night.  I will start to put that up this week if the weather permits.
    • This is where:   Big Dave2 HSO Legacy Member Don't know much about football, huh?   😁   Doesn't matter if we have a good QB. We're a running team! 🙄
    • I hope they draft a good QB next year. That was a shiatty play call on first and goal to begin with. Pack aren't that impressive, neither are the Vikes.
×
×
  • Create New...