High Tech or Low Tech.

cg74 · Dec 4, 2014

In the course of a year which will catch you more big fish; High Tech baits, boilies, pastes, pellets, tailor made groundbaits etc
Or Low Tech baits, maggots, worms, seeds, pulses, cereals etc

(this is for any coarse species and any fishery)

andreagrispi · Dec 4, 2014

I try to use low tech as much as possible

flightliner · Dec 4, 2014

Low tech, pretty much all the time.

sagalout · Dec 4, 2014

For me it's coarse pellets because that's my number one bait and feed being cheap and convenient.

barbelboi · Dec 4, 2014

Another for low tech..

Lord Paul of Sheffield · Dec 4, 2014

The waters I fish don't need high tech baits or gear

Alan Tyler · Dec 5, 2014

I'm very fond of a high-tech bait; grain is ground fine, sweetened, salted, and fermented with the finest cultures that modern mycology can provide, then heated to enlarge the trapped,gaseous, metabolic products and set the protein/polysaccharide matrix into a food-grade, porous, permeable, soft foam which slowly leaches flavour and has a well-proven record of catching all fish except obligate predators.
Bread.

Peter Jacobs · Dec 5, 2014

cg74 said:
(this is for any coarse species and any fishery)

In my experience then I would think it would be Low-Tec¹ for the majority of species although for Carp and Barbel then Hi-Tec might be the way to go depending on venue, which in my case I would still err in favour of Low-Tec.

¹ Personally, I would include the pink indispensable, luncheon meat, as Low-Tec

nicepix · Dec 5, 2014

Maize and sweetcorn on conventional lo-tech rigs catch me far more fish than all the other baits put together.

no-one in particular · Dec 5, 2014

I use mainly low tech, bread and sweetcorn so I cannot compare. However, I would say I don't catch many big fish either. Perhaps it could be looked at like this:-

If two anglers fished the same venues with more or less the same methods, gear and amounts of ground bait over a season side by side, except one using low tech and the other using high tech baits, who would catch the most "big" fish?
I think the high tech bloke would win.

greenie62 · Dec 5, 2014

Alan Tyler said:
I'm very fond of a high-tech bait; grain is ground fine, sweetened, salted, and fermented with the finest cultures that modern mycology can provide, then heated to enlarge the trapped,gaseous, metabolic products and set the protein/polysaccharide matrix into a food-grade, porous, permeable, soft foam which slowly leaches flavour and has a well-proven record of catching all fish except obligate predators.
Bread.

Hi Al,
I like the way you're trying to distinguish between Hi-Tech and Lo-tech categorisation re: bread - but can't really go with the last clause. Recent Chub-chasing with bread has led to annoying captures of Trout(....Grrr!) - aren't they 'obligate predators'?

Tight Lines!

itsfishingnotcatching · Dec 5, 2014

Pretty much low tech for me to. Maggot, worm, castor, bread and hemp and tare. I have occasionally tried to become a little more hi-tech but my krilled dead maggots were a complete failure

retrobob · Dec 5, 2014

markg said:
I use mainly low tech, bread and sweetcorn so I cannot compare. However, I would say I don't catch many big fish either. Perhaps it could be looked at like this:-

If two anglers fished the same venues with more or less the same methods, gear and amounts of ground bait over a season side by side, except one using low tech and the other using high tech baits, who would catch the most "big" fish?
I think the high tech bloke would win.

Why do you think that is?

cg74 · Dec 5, 2014

markg said:
I use mainly low tech, bread and sweetcorn so I cannot compare. However, I would say I don't catch many big fish either. Perhaps it could be looked at like this:-

If two anglers fished the same venues with more or less the same methods, gear and amounts of ground bait over a season side by side, except one using low tech and the other using high tech baits, who would catch the most "big" fish?
I think the high tech bloke would win.

Thank you Mark and Peter J, exactly what I was looking for.

Which species do you think high tech would triumph over low tech and any thoughts on a fishery type?

Peter Jacobs said:
In my experience then I would think it would be Low-Tec¹ for the majority of species although for Carp and Barbel then Hi-Tec might be the way to go depending on venue, which in my case I would still err in favour of Low-Tec.

¹ Personally, I would include the pink indispensable, luncheon meat, as Low-Tec

I'm inclined to agree Peter, though I'd broaden the species way beyond just carp and barbel, to include chub, bream and tench, plus possibly roach.
This would apply to all types of fishery but most markedly on heavily stocked and/or heavily fished waters.

To clarify, I'm using the term High Tech as a label for all purpose designed fishing baits (boilies), feeds (pellets) and home made concoctions (cheese paste etc).

So that places bread and luncheon meat in the Low Tech bracket.

bracket · Dec 5, 2014

Me? I would say I belong to the Low Tech group, although I do use expander pellets extensively for silver fish. Pete.

Tee-Cee · Dec 5, 2014

95% low tech for me....

symonh2000 · Dec 5, 2014

I have definitely caugh more fish with the low tech approach.

Bob Hornegold · Dec 5, 2014

I know what you mean about High and low Tech, but can baits be classed as low tech when they have undergone the canning process ?

Once I wrote an article for a firms magazine who produced Bacon Grill after the capture of a lot of Barbel caught in one season.

It truly amazed me how much stuff went into Bacon Grill and the tinning process that keeps it fresh for years.

The same can be said of Tined Sweet Corn, it's certainly not a simple boil and use procedure.

But I take your point and would say it's 50/50 depending on which species I'm targeting.

Bob

laguna · Dec 5, 2014

Low-tech generally means cheap and possibly why they're the most popular? and lets face it; a high tech bait is more selective, takes a bit of understanding and generally costs more.

Also a lot of anglers don't always factor in the fishes senses and ability to detect nutrients or consider they are influenced by chemical stimuli. Hell, some people choose to believe fish are so stupid that instinct plays no part (or confuse the two) but then again I suppose it really doesn't matter if fishing for starving juveniles on a commercial fish-stuffed pond as their nutritional needs are generally met with the large variety of different baits used.

Want it cheap? maggot, worm, corn, bread and cheese... possibly the best baits money can buy without going all hi-tech!

no-one in particular · Dec 6, 2014

retrobob said:
Why do you think that is?

Bigger fish are less common, more wary, more wary of common baits and feed less often. So something a bit extra, with a more exciting appealing scent might just tempt more bigger fish to take the bait. Or would the big fish be more wary of a strange bait? I dont know for sure but, I think the high tec would win in a straight, all things equal competition. But, it would have to be by a fair margin to be conclusive.
High tech V low tech- whats the best for big fish. Be an interesting one to do.
You could try for single species but, I would think an all species competition would be more conclusive fished over a wide range of waters.

High Tech or Low Tech.

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Moderator

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Senior Member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member