Your ideal landing net

[Aknib]

I think the trade are missing a trick here.

We all have our own ideals on tackle but one thing that seems to me to be an ongoing quest is the ideal landing net.

Spoon nets are great for silvers, the Drennan Super Specialist was the king of all rounders and would deal with Barbel and Carp up to a decent size in the largest variant without being too deep and cumbersome for the smaller stuff and then we have the specimen type 42" nets where many offerings are that deep you'd be dragging a fish along the ground if you're anything under seven feet tall and a weight lifter but if anyone brought out a triangular, folding or detachable from a spreader block, net in a full range of sizes from say, 18" upwards with sensible depths to suit the size i'd be first in the queue for the whole range.

Simple, easily foldable and transportable, ideal design with the widest edge at the front, job done.

Mind you I still have, from a few years ago, a very large and lightweight, I think Gardener, oval net which folds from a single detachable arm with the two rigid arms and a drawstring across the mouth which is my go to Barbel net, i'd back that too as a perfect, single design all rounder if it came in the variants already mentioned.

IIRC I sewed in a small magnet at the base of the net, from another net, which sticks to the metal spreader block and keeps the mesh up from undergrowth when roving and, of course, automatically detaches once the fish is in the net.

Korum have come close with their rubberised, folding triangular nets but why not extend the range of sizes?

Then again is it the trade missing a trick or us... After all many of us are buying all sorts of variants of landing nets for this, that and the other so why would the trade not like that?

What are your thoughts?

 

[Alan Whitty]

I think your spot on Steve,I've never liked massive landing nets for barbel,around a 26ins spoon is my preference,I don't like them too deep as they catch on the undergrowth,for majority of the rest of my fishing a match style pan net no bigger than 22ins,today's nets are expensive,but made for peanuts,so in the main are garbage,the thread I started about Wychwood nets really gets my goat,on looking at them they are pretty good,slightly too deep again but....but it's the poor build materials and the muppet of a designer who thought that these nets were suitable to be called specialist nets,yet be made of too light a gauge tubing,why is my question,as it gets to a stage where you have to buy on line,without actually seeing an item,to find out its no bloody good....

 

[nottskev]

I find landing nets a bit of a headache too, once you start to need something bigger than the excellent Drennan Super Specialist triangles. I bought this 5-sided one this year - I think it's a Korum model - and the shape is great for long slim fish but the net itself is much deeper than it needs to be, making it hard to hold out in fast water. For unhooking fish, it's fine if you've got a flat spot next to you, but if you're perched down a steep bank, you can't stick it between your knees as the the fish will be on the ground.

One place I fish, the rules insist on a giant net so I have to use the two arms + cord + spreader block type and I find these make hard work of landing and unhooking the fish, which are almost invariably decent barbel and carp to mid/high doubles. You can't lift a fish out, obviously, you have to pull the huge net into the shallow edge, detach the arms and wind the net around them a few times, and with your arms high, hoist it to your mat. I also find getting it back in the water and released is made harder in some swims where it's best to put the fish in the net and push the net out. The giant net rule is meant to be for fish care, but I'd argue a more proportionate net with a solid rim can make for a more speedy and efficient operation, as you can see when you watch experienced match anglers on waters where they catch carp of the size I'm referring to. Of course, the solid frame nets get harder to carry around ..... It can be a relief to get back to smaller species where everything fits in a modest sized spoon. I've got Drennan Acolytes in two sizes, and they're a treat to use.

 

[sam vimes]

You'll never get any consensus from anglers about landing nets, not even those participating in a particular angling niche. Everyone seems to have a different idea about the perfect depth and head size/shape of a net.

Personally, my favourite all-round net is the 22" Drennan Super Specialist. However, I lost mine somehow last year. At the time, there was a distinct stock shortage of many Drennan products. I ended up trying a 22" Korum Folding Spoon for no better reason than being able to walk away with it from my local tackle shop. I like it enough that I've not felt the need to buy another Super Specialist just yet. The Korum is certainly a lot easier to transport.

When I'm fishing for decent tench on my usual stillwater, but there's a chance of lumpy bream and carp intruding, I tend to favour a Drennan Specialist. I have the 24", but it seems enormous compared to the 22" Super Specialist. I doubt I'll ever land anything too big for the 24" Specialist while I'm float fishing. The 26" seems to be unnecessarily large, even if it's just from a transport angle.

If I'm tiddler bashing on a venue with few bigger fish, I often make do with an 18" Acolyte. I cannot envisage fishing anywhere where a smaller net would be a sensible or necessary choice.

If I ever break out the specialist/carp gear ever again I've got various spreader block and arm type nets of 32", 36" and 42". As I don't target big carp any longer, and don't fish anywhere with daft minimum net size rules, I doubt that the 42" will see the light of day any time soon.

 

[Philip]

One net will never cover everything but its interesting how there is a swing back towards a triangle shape after everyone went nuts for oval.

Not so much the net but I think there is a a lot that could be done with spreader blocks. I would like to see someone bring out a spreader block that has a notch on it allowing you to hang a pair of scale from it without them sliding off so doing away with a separate weighing hook or crook.

I tried to create my own by melting or sawing bits off plastic spreaders so I could hang scales on them more easily.

If someone made a spreader that featured that as well as easy way to tuck the net mesh out of the way (magnet etc) then I think that could be popular.

 

[Alan Whitty]

I like spoon type nets and as I don't feel the need to own a trawler sized net,42in plus,I've yet to have a barbel that doesn't go into a 26in relatively easily,even in the dark,catching a forty pound plus carp doesn't light my fire and I've landed fish to 27lbs in the 26in...

 

[seth49]

One of the clubs I’m a member has a rule that you must carry two landing nets, one for silvers etc, And a larger one for carp.

these are the two I carry, the NGT pan net, and the Korum 30 inch folding spoon net, they both do there respective jobs perfectly, and I’ve not found anything better.

 

[mikench]

I have a net bag which will hold several and a keep net. I have never used a keep net but carry 4 different sized nets just in case. They weigh next to nothing in my overall scheme of things.

 

[Alan Whitty]

Bloody hell Mike,I only want one landing net(that works),don't mind having a collection at home,or even a spare in the car...as I post I have two nets laying in the back of the car,lol.

Also,to Seth,I appreciate your being happy with your nets,a 30 incher is a bit big for my angling needs(I have a 30in Wychwood,that is usable at present),sadly clubs that say you need a 30in net for carp,are naive and poorly run IMHO,so you get an 8lb carp and it has to go in the 30in,not the pan where it would probably be safer than jumping round in a ballroom...,that said we are all forced to coerce in rules that are a little silly...

 

[mikench]

I used to keep the spares in the boot but they weigh next to nothing and were safer in the net bag plus I always had them handy just in case.

 

[Badgerale]

I have a few, but only really use two of them.

A rubber fox rage predator net that folds up nice and compact and serves as my roving net as well as my pike net.

A 26" korum spoon net. Since I don't do either big carp or tiddler bashing, a decent sized and solidly built net that serves well for pretty much anything.

 

[S-Kippy]

I like spoon nets.

I have the Korum folding spoon in 22-26-30 and those will cover anything I’m likely to encounter bar proper carp. I have 36 and 42 in triangular ones ( because the rules say I must) both are fitted with shallow nets.
I don’t like rubberised nets except when I’m trite fishing simply because the droppers don’t stick. Funnily enough the one net I hated was the Drennan SS which is a lot of peoples favourite. To me it was an odd shape and difficult to carry as it didn’t fold. I was delighted when it fell apart after a winter in the garden.

 

[seth49]

I have a 26 inch Korum spoon net as well, but I’d sooner have a bigger net than one that’s to small, there are carp over 20lb were I fish.

 

[Ray Roberts]

I have the Korum net in three sizes too, and they are at least as good as any other net I have used previously. They are far stronger than they look and I haven’t managed to break one yet.

For a while I used the 30in one for pike, but hooking the mesh with treble hooks and the pike’s teeth getting snagged in the mesh was a right pain. I bought a Savage Gear rubberised net to combat this and it was nice and compact, but on a lot of the rivers I fish the net and handle were too short to safely net fish from high banks. I have now settled on a very strong extending handle, which I believe was made by Century and a large Korum pike spoon net. This net has a rubberised mesh and makes the netting and unhooking process a doddle, as I usually unhook the fish with it laying on the net. Crushed down barbs also help in getting the fish back quickly. I lower the fish back down in the net and sort of turn the net inside out to fully release the fish. The nets without rubberised mesh sometimes snag the pike’s teeth when you try to do this and you end up with the fish hanging on to the net.

The net and handle I have described seem ideal for most of my venues. It’s rather unwieldy to carry between swims, but that’s the only drawback.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Alan Whitty]

On the other landing net thread I mentioned I've just got a Gardner foldable 26"spoon,which at present seems brilliant,it isn't flimsy,or too deep and is quick drying and light,the next test is how long it lasts,watch this space,if it lasts more than three years it will be a good net as far as I'm concerned,any longer it will be excellent...