fish weight calculator
- Thread starter Fish Camp
- Start date
spring fever
Well-Known Member
I don't have the calculator handy but a 77cm spring is in the neighbour hood of 15lbs-no idea on the girth but if the fish looked in the area of 28lbs it was well over 77cm.
17 ft sea ranger
Active Member
'(Length x Girth squared) divided by 740 for Chinook. You already have a calculator on your phone. More accurate than just about any scale out there and can't beat the price! 36" Chinook with 20" girth comes out just shy of 20lbs, which is bang on.'
Not my formula, but I copied it from another thread that i read......hope that helps
thanks Ukee
Not my formula, but I copied it from another thread that i read......hope that helps
thanks Ukee
UkeeDreamin
Well-Known Member
Here's a chart I copied from the inter-web that doesn't account for girth so weight will be higher or lower depending on if a fat fish or skinny. 77cm is 30.3 inches so you'd be looking at the low teens at best.
Cheers!
Ukee
Chinook Salmon Weight Conversion Chart
25 in 6.49 lb
26 in 7.28 lb
27 in 8.12 lb
28 in 9.02 lb
29 in 9.99 lb
30 in 11.02 lb
31 in 12.12 lb
32 in 13.29 lb
33 in 14.53 lb
34 in 15.84 lb
35 in 17.23 lb
36 in 18.70 lb
37 in 20.25 lb
38 in 21.88 lb
39 in 23.59 lb
40 in 25.38 lb
41 in 27.27 lb
42 in 29.24 lb
43 in 31.31 lb
44 in 33.47 lb
45 in 35.72 lb
46 in 38.08 lb
47 in 40.53 lb
48 in 43.08 lb
49 in 45.74 lb
50 in 48.50 lb
51 in 51.36 lb
52 in 54.34 lb
53 in 57.43 lb
54 in 60.63 lb
55 in 63.94 lb
56 in 67.37 lb
57 in 70.92 lb
58 in 74.59 lb
59 in 78.39 lb
60 in 82.30 lb
Read more: http://www.in-fisherman.com/trout-s...salmon-weight-conversion-chart/#ixzz4IIPyR9oN
Cheers!
Ukee
Chinook Salmon Weight Conversion Chart
25 in 6.49 lb
26 in 7.28 lb
27 in 8.12 lb
28 in 9.02 lb
29 in 9.99 lb
30 in 11.02 lb
31 in 12.12 lb
32 in 13.29 lb
33 in 14.53 lb
34 in 15.84 lb
35 in 17.23 lb
36 in 18.70 lb
37 in 20.25 lb
38 in 21.88 lb
39 in 23.59 lb
40 in 25.38 lb
41 in 27.27 lb
42 in 29.24 lb
43 in 31.31 lb
44 in 33.47 lb
45 in 35.72 lb
46 in 38.08 lb
47 in 40.53 lb
48 in 43.08 lb
49 in 45.74 lb
50 in 48.50 lb
51 in 51.36 lb
52 in 54.34 lb
53 in 57.43 lb
54 in 60.63 lb
55 in 63.94 lb
56 in 67.37 lb
57 in 70.92 lb
58 in 74.59 lb
59 in 78.39 lb
60 in 82.30 lb
Read more: http://www.in-fisherman.com/trout-s...salmon-weight-conversion-chart/#ixzz4IIPyR9oN
FishTactics
Member
(Length x (Girth x Girth)) / 800 is what most of the major fishing lodges use for releasing chinook. I've experimented with 740 and have found it to be a little too "generous" especially on fish larger than 20lb. Usually the divide by 800 is conservative and will give you a fish that is bang on or actually 1 to 3 pounds heavier on the scale that what the formula gives. Girth is the biggest contributing factor and as a general guideline a chinook has to be over 38" in length to hit the 30 pound mark.
Peahead
Well-Known Member
That chart posted by Ukee I would say is quite "thin" and perhaps is more likely closer to minimum weights - for example a 77 cm fish can be only 11 lbs as the chart says but more likely 13 lbs. And a 36" fish more like 22 or 23 lbs ish average not likely 18.7 lbs. As FT points out a Tyee is likely gonna be longer than 38" but the chart weight on a 38" fish stating " 21.88 lbs " must be some rare malnurished scrawny thing from the Great Lakes lol.
I have a fair bit of experience with taping out fish because I switched to this method years ago due to getting so tired of scales that varied up to as much as 25%!! - and within the same few minutes! Weighing a fish in the boat with it rocking back and forth will also give you inaccurate readings.
With taped out fish I can compare all fish I weigh and know accuately the differences. Weights provided by others on various different scales can mean big discrepancies (even without any of the 'exaggerated' creativity added into the equation, lol) Now with newer digital scales there seems less discrepancy between scales however with some derbies I have still seen a couple pounds difference on a teenage fish weighed on a boat digital scale and then the derby weigh-in digital scale.... within minutes of each other. I use the girth squared x lenth devided by 800 exclusively. That is because I have found it to be very comparable to scales that proved to be reasonably accurate . This is why catch and release derbies such as the Vancouver Chinook Classic relies on this particular equation......its worth a ton of money so accuracy, especially from fish to fish, is imperitive.
I have a fair bit of experience with taping out fish because I switched to this method years ago due to getting so tired of scales that varied up to as much as 25%!! - and within the same few minutes! Weighing a fish in the boat with it rocking back and forth will also give you inaccurate readings.
With taped out fish I can compare all fish I weigh and know accuately the differences. Weights provided by others on various different scales can mean big discrepancies (even without any of the 'exaggerated' creativity added into the equation, lol) Now with newer digital scales there seems less discrepancy between scales however with some derbies I have still seen a couple pounds difference on a teenage fish weighed on a boat digital scale and then the derby weigh-in digital scale.... within minutes of each other. I use the girth squared x lenth devided by 800 exclusively. That is because I have found it to be very comparable to scales that proved to be reasonably accurate . This is why catch and release derbies such as the Vancouver Chinook Classic relies on this particular equation......its worth a ton of money so accuracy, especially from fish to fish, is imperitive.
