Jayme,

You are probably right, I could maybe do just as well stock. And I have seen catches in non-laminated MB's. Pretty rough. Not something I would be proud of.

However, I did state why. More surface area = more resistance. Once you get that pad inside of the jaws it isn't going to matter because it isn't going anywhere. It's a comfort thing then. I still believe that the more surface area gives more to bite not letting the foot move as much, if any. Like I care if slides a bit anyway. The jaws are laminated with roll stock so no cutting.

But, I don't believe laminated jaws will make up for weak springs. The rest of the trap needs to be up to par as well. You got weak springs it isn't probably going to matter if you had 5 laminations on it. They would be a memory.

More surface area = more resistance. what about pliers with no teeth?

LOL! Thanks Jerry, I'll get off your back now. lol

I will say this though, if a person uses the right sized trap for the intended critter and catches that critter, I've see lots of different stock traps that did no damage at all especially with a good pad catch. I used to catch coyotes in 1 1/2 Dukes (no lie, its all I could afford) I don't ever recall any damage from them stock traps.

Welllllll, who needs laminations with teeth?

Wide smooth surface.... VS. thin surface.... nevermind.

I think that the fact that no one lams without also talking about 4 coling or beefing up the springs kinda pulls the plug on their own arguement ADC.

If Lams did not require more to hold the same why would 4 coiling even be discussed.

In regards to more surface area = more holding power, that is not true. the pounds per square in are only half as much if you double the area of the hold with the same springs (back to the reason for 4 coiling.)

If you were to exert the same amount of pounds per square inch with a pair of 2x4's on my hand as that of a belisle 330 and put it on my hand I would die before I could pull out of one and the other would simply slide off.

I can't believe this is causing such a debate. Good one ADC...


.

Better check your eyeglasses, this was never stated in any post that I can see.

Jerry dude, it's right there. LOL

Found em... things still look the same, now only different.

beside the obvious, the lamination is never quite as neat as your little flat inside surface demonstration to start this discussion. The inside surface is actually two round surfaces one above the other, assuming time was taken to round the jaws or round jaws were used on model of trap that was laminated. The small gap that is left between these two round circles also increases holding and preventing animals from pulling out, since tissue will be pressed into this gap.
Another Major improvement with the lamination is the strengthening of the jaws-----This prevents them from flexing up and down as animal struggles----thus preventing scissor actions.

Also because the jaws do not flex, when animal flops from side to side, instead of straight up and down, there is much less cutting actions. put a broom handle in a trap and attempt to work it by tipping from dog side to opposite side with both laminated and regular jaws.

Basically there is only one real reason for NOT laminating traps ------- CHEAP LAZY TRAPPER!

LOL Barkstone! Thanks for the support.

From now on we say ALWAYS laminate AND BEEF UP YOUR SPRINGS.

But why center swivel?

Or poor kid who just wants to trap with what he has.

No thanks I don't want to play anymore.

If they hold better than unlaminated traps why are there unlaminated traps Mr.Pedersen? Why don't Paul have all them CDRs laminated?

all my montanas are NOT laminated, they hold just fine.

pretty sure im gonna sell what bridgers i have left, that are all tricked out, as i dont need them tricked out, and its bugging me i have a few that are different.

I do not belive coyotes are these monsterous supe strengthed animals that can tear steel up. AGAIN, i run all #3 sized traps to. I have seen BOBCATS yank a trap more thna coyotes, especailly big toms.

if a new trapper doesnt want to trick out a trap, thats fine, IMO i dont think he needs to.

As far as the poor kid that can not afford it----when I look around today, I see very few actual poor kids in this great nation of ours, and I see lines of people offering help---even here on this forum there are donations after donations to help kids.

There is a big difference in water trapping and land trapping and I do not think lamination does improve trapping for big slick hard hind foot beaver catchs. So I stand corrected on that line item.

Slim what year did you first hear of/see/use jaw lam.s? I think JC and I discussed this a few years back...was wondering.

Not sure of exact year, but sometime in late sixies or very early 70's maybe was first time I attempted to laminate some number three long springs, due to the high cost of cast jaws. It was an effort to immitate cast jaws at first, but over time, I came to realize the value of laminated jaws. Not saying yet, that they are as good as cast jaws, but still cheaper and much easier to come by.

Thanks Slim...a man ahead of the times for sure!

Asumming the jaws a srong enough to begin with to keep from popping out, I think non lams will allow the trap jaws to set into the foot better, thus a better hold. Having said that, the non lams will do more damage than laminated traps because of this. If a trap is in good enough condition to be serviceable, pullouts shouldn't be a problem. How's that for stirrin it up? LOL!

ttt