Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
biggstriper

Length of fish to weight ratio

Rate this topic

14 posts in this topic

I saw a big difference in a couple of fish I caught last weekend. One was 28" and sleek and another one a few minutes later was less than that but must've weighed about three or four pounds more. It was short and stocky and had thick shoulders.

It makes me think that you can't always rely on the measurement formulas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats why I use the formulas that take the girth into account.

 

I'd suppose that the formula using just the length would give you an estimate which you adjust based on if its a spring racer or a fall run fatty. formula+ a couple pounds wink.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, but these two fish were probably in the same school together. I caught them one after another. The fatter one looked like a big freshwater Largemouth Bass. It had the same shape.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didnt think many people used just a length formula?

 

Most I have seen showed various weights for a single length. There is way to much variation to go by this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Iv'e noticed for the same length of fish, some have a broader shoulder and deeper body(not talking about a feeding vs. non-feeding fish) while others remain slender. Any possibility some genetics are at play here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alright.....more seriously.....

 

If I'm not mistaken, a good estimate is length times girth times girth, divided by 800......

 

Though a friend told me that that formula, which is used across the board for most fish, is not always accruate, and the type of fish needs to be taken into consideration.....and that the "800" holds true for things like wahoo, spanish and king mackeral, and other "sleek", speedy fish.....

 

And if I remember correctly, he stated that the correct divider for striped bass is 600......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In past discussions on this board some thought the formula (length x girth x girth divided by 800) was pretty good while others thought is was not that accurate...

 

Based on my most recent experience the formula is somewhat accurate, but seems to put the weight a little high... Also, you must be accurate in your measurements...the length must be measured "fork-tail" and flat w/ the tape under the fish... But more importantly the girth must be right; taken at the fattest part of the belly w/ the tape tight or pinched around the fish. The girth dictates the weight much more so than the length...just look at the formula...the girth is exponential...

 

Here are some fish I measured and weighed on either a certified scale or a scale I had confirmed was fairly accurate...

 

weight3.JPG

 

Based on the above, the formula may have a margin of error of plus or minus 5%...

 

Poppy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish there would've been some way to safely measure and take pics of the two fish I caught last week. There was a stark difference between them. The shorter fish was thick like those big Largemouth Bass you see from Florida and the other one was the kind you catch around here all the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to register here in order to participate.

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.