# bridger #2



## LAtrapper (Feb 5, 2007)

im about to buy some #2 bridgers and dont know if i should go with offset or regular. im going to use it as an all around trap for coyote, ****, fox and otter because many of my sets have the potential to catch more than one. i know the offset would get me more holding power on the coyotes and otter but i dont want it to be to much for a fox or make a **** want to chew off his foot even more.


----------



## ND trapper (Nov 14, 2006)

I use the offsets and love em. The offset allows the blood in the foot to keep circulating which prevents the foot from going numb. This will cut down on **** chewing their toes under the jaws. It also makes the animal much more comfortable at the set which is a big plus for you and the animal.


----------



## smitty223 (Mar 31, 2006)

#2's are too large for **** traps, unless they're set on drowners. However, I do catch a number of **** in my K9 traps, atleast the #2's (which carry lower pan tension for fox). My #3's carry too much pan tension for an "average" ****. I'll mention too that we have a 24hr. check law, and I run my traps early in the AM.

I will respectfully disagree about bloodflow in offsets though. Offset traps place no less pressure on the foot of an animal, so there's no difference in bloodflow. What there is however, is the mechanical advantage of the offsets allowing the levers to ride higher on the jaws, thus permitting a more positive hold on an animal.

I'll also add that I've personally witnessed no **** which chewed in any of my traps in the past 4 seasons. Jaw laminations will make an animal more "comfortable" in a trap than offset jaws will.

Smitty


----------



## ND trapper (Nov 14, 2006)

Lol. I new it wouldnt take long for someone to jump in on the bloodflow theory. I was refering more to the 4 coiled traps. I believe in the bloodflow thing as well as the offsets having a more positive hold. Many big name trappers also believe in the offsets allow blood circulation and many dont. Its comes down to what works for you. Yes, the #2 is to big for **** and IMO is to big for fox. I like a 1.5 for **** and fox. I have caught both however in #2 modified Bridgers without ill effects.


----------



## LAtrapper (Feb 5, 2007)

i know a #2 isnt the trap of choice for **** and fox but they will make the cut. i use 1.5's otherwise. there's a good chance that ill catch ***** at my dirtholes, that's why i dont want to step it up to #3.


----------



## rangeman (Dec 7, 2006)

Hey LA Trapper, I bought some #3 offset 4-coil Bridger traps towards the end of this past season. I was having a lot of pullouts on my #2's. I caught 2 ***** in them with very little chewing going on. The trap is so heavy they do not seem to fight them like they do in the smaller traps. I was not targeting them as they were on a ridge top. I caught my first bobcat, coyote, and a skunk in them too (no pullouts at all). The skunk had hardly any fur damage on the foot area and could hardly even move around with the trap. I am no pro by any means, but I would not take for those heavy duty #3's. I trap in areas where visible sign is often difficult to come by except for logging roads. And on those I see every kind of sign there is. Targeting is difficult except where the bait and lures are concerned. I use rabbit, fish, and deer meat mainly for bait and so I could possibly catch anything in my sets. What was getting me was the limited amount of time I could spend trapping (because I work full time) and finding one pullout after another really got old. I run my traps every day and only have a 20 trap limit, so each situation is different. But if you want a great all around trap try you a few of those #3's. Rangeman


----------



## M*F (Nov 3, 2006)

The #2 will work just fine for ya. Like Rangeman, I use #3s offset for coyotes and have no trouble holding fox, **** and skunk.


----------



## ND trapper (Nov 14, 2006)

The best "all around" trap I have found when checking every 24 hrs. is the Bridger 1.65 with #2 springs installed and a shock spring.


----------



## smitty223 (Mar 31, 2006)

NDTrapper- I'd be interested in hearing your theory behind the bloodflow in offsets.

As I see it, as long as the foot is holding the jaws apart, there is full spring-pressure on the foot. Now if the foot were small enough to allow the legs of the jaws to contact one another, I could see this reducing the pressure on the foot, which would however increase the chance of pullouts.

Again, as I see it, offset jaws allow the outsides of the jaws (where the levers ride) to become more "narrow" than regular jaws once a catch has been made. Because the legs of the jaws are tapered, the offsets allow the levers to raise higher than regular jaws holding a similar-sized catch. This was the "mechanical advantage" I mentioned in my previous post.

Smitty


----------



## ND trapper (Nov 14, 2006)

Hey Smitty. My theory on the blood flow thing is that when using the same size trap with one being reg. jaws and one being offset I have always had more chewing by **** with the Reg. jaws. So my theory is that with the reg. jaws the blood flow is cut off and the foot goes numb. With the foot being numb the **** will start chewing their toes under the jaws since they dont feel any pain. I dont think that they are intentionaly doing this but more so they are just biteing and chewing on the trap and the toes are the only thing that they can gain any ground with. I might be right or I might be wrong. I dont know. I have just seen more chewing with the reg. jaws.

I see your point and I dont disagree with your theory as you make a valid point about the jaws haveing full pressure on the foot. I'm just going by what I see on the line and the only thing I can contribute to the less chewing with the offsets is the blood flow theory. Like I said, right or wrong who knows, but its always good to have a healthy discussion. Thanks for your point of view. I will look more into your theory.


----------



## smitty223 (Mar 31, 2006)

I guess I can understand your theory, but would have to think alot of "variables" might apply, like timeframe of **** being caught compared to time that particular trap was checked.

Say you have 50 **** traps set, you start checking at 5:00AM, and are done at 10:00AM. Trap #50 (last one to check) caught a **** at 8:00PM the previous night, so he's spent 14 hours in the trap. He'd be more apt to experience this than a **** caught in Trap #1, at midnight, and checked 5 hours later.

Agreed, not a "right or wrong" thing, was just curious to hearing your thoughts.

Thanks
Smitty


----------

