wondering if many guys swicht from 120 traps to 160 for marten trapping for bodygripper users and why ? do you see increase catch number , more or less damage on pelt with 160's trap?

I can't see a good reason to switch to 160's. Seems like overkill big time

X2.

seem less refusal, better if fisher travel in the area, less untarget catch , i dont think strike power is far over kill than 120's trap, also if i remember on this forum on marten set tread, some guys never comeback on 120 trap after try 160. I dont think change 200 traps but i want make some new experience just to curiousity

I'd be curious to know if you will still get that nice double strike with a 160? Let us know how it works out; pictures would be nice.

Fergus just go and use some Koro#2 and you will be surprised. Especially the new ones produced. Both are certified for marten and fisher in Canada
Areas that are traditional fisher pathways that you have caught them at before is the go-to replacement trap.
All you are doing with 160's with pans is the same as a Koro#2.

i see a lot of trapper do not get a good strike with 120 anyway, trigger system, door (box) position and trap setting can play a lot in better strike you know.

Me and my partner switched to 155's and saw an increase in catching big males. Suitcased them fine. Caught a lot of big boys who had been refusing to go in 120's. All we use is 155's now.

Here's a couple of pictures of 120 Belisle marten neck/thorax catches. Considering the 160 is 1 1/4" taller than the 120 you can see with the same neck strike the other 160 jaw will probably clamp in the upper gut area rather than the thorax. IMO and experience the 120 trap is ideal for marten and the entrance size is not a hindrance to any fisher entering if they want the bait. I have had fisher chew boxes with restricted entrance holes wider to get at the bait.

Tom i like better only head catch just being ear, to not have mark on back where the grader look first, metal freeze burn of low jaw can damage the fur and leather on back, so i like get snap on first step in the box, many 160 had be certified by test so they must know all this.

I agree with tomcat, 100%. I see bad things with a 160. I got a couple of 150 Belisle from Caven on a give-away, (same size as a 160, but single spring), and had poor strikes on vertical, flower pot sets.
In my opinion, a 120 Belisle is pretty much the perfect marten trap.

I switched to 160s . But I have fisher . I do seem to catch more male marten than before. Less refusals ?

bctomcat are your pans facing in the box to the bait or facing out ? With that suitcase job.

Yes my pans are facing into the box over the back jaw. The trap dog is pointing to the box entrance and the trap is placed within 4-5" of the bait.

Here is a big male in a 155. As you can see, there is not much wiggle room. I wouldn't know about 160's, they might be too big, but 155's work good for us.

Catches with 110 and 120 sized traps had too many catches like this one, just barely in there. It died right away, but it sure didn't get very far in there.

AMEN !!!

OK that may be the ideal strike but can you, or anybody, explain how you can get a consistent humane strike in this location virtually every time? I can do such with my pan trigger trap setup.

How did you determine that big males were refusing to go into 120's? Did you run 120's next to 155's in the same year and see(tracks) a refusal of a 120 run over to 155 and get caught?

I agree with bctomcat. I want a double strike, (suitcase) it kills way faster IMO. The 160 is to big for marten in my opinion. I miss the occasional marten in 120s. Tried 155s and found them to be on the large side too. A 120 will kill a wolverine so fisher wont be a problem.