rofish

Diemai, I thought I had a lot of patience when I make my lures, needing hours to fine shape, sand, making hardware, tuning, etc. Now that I see you at work, I think I am a small child compared to you.

Diemai, I think I have to explain what I was thinking of. The superglue does not have to be used in large quantities, you just put a drop or less in let's say 3 or 4 places to bond the wire to the wood in the desired position, so as to be able to use the real glue afterwards without the possibility that the wire changes it's position when applying the 2 component glue. I thought the process of forcing the glue to pass through the slot is tedious and the result is not the one you expect, since there is still air between the tape and the wood. What I was thinking of was not to put a piece of wood in the slot when you glue the wire, but before that, so as the glue cannot go through the slot. But this depends on the size of the slot and the consistency of the glue. It may be the situation that you do not have to block the slot at all, you just put the glue into the groove, and then you reverse the lure and put the glue on the other side. This way you avoid using the tape and you also avoid air bubbles. But as Mark Poulson said, you know best what is best for your lures.

Diemai, I simply do not understand why you have to go through such a complicated way of gluing the wire to the wooden lip. I see the reason why you have to put first a little glue on the wire, to keep it in place, and then continuing the gluing process. But to speed up things, I would simply use some superglue to make the wire stay in place. Superglue dries instantly, so it saves time for you. Then, the problem with the tape. On one hand, you say that bubbles in the glue must be avoided. On the other hand, you say that if you press the glue from above, using a toothpick, it is most likely that the slot is not entirely filled up with glue. I think this is quite a logical result, since the air is trapped between the tape and wood, and since you press the glue from above, with a toothpick, and through the slots in the wood, I assume, the air has little chance to escape through the unique way out - the small slots, made for the 2 peaks of the "M" shaped wire to go through the wood. I think there is a simpler way to glue the wire. After the wire is glued with a little glue in place (either superglue or your 2 component glue), you find a method to block out the 2 slots, so the glue would not be able to go through because of gravity (you put there small pieces of wood, or use a little of your 2 component glue the moment it starts to harden). Then, you glue the wire in 2 steps, once from above, and then from the other side. If you glue the wire this way, you can avoid air bubbles, which have a natural tendancy to go upwards, through the glue. Another method would be that you use a very soft wire, which you can form directly on the lip, and in this case you do not make slots, but just holes, a little biger than the wire, and so the glue could not go through the holes. I have to try your idea with your egg box. Very clever one. Recently I have used a similar squeeze tube glue, similar to yours, to glue in lips. It is a 10 min. epoxy, 2 components, transparent not clear, as I presume yours is. Don't know if it would be suitable to glue the twisted wires in. After cure, unlike most epoxies, it is still soft.

I have a different oppinion on the subject. A master lure maker is not the one that makes lures with the ability to catch fish, but lures that catch fish at the same place and time where other lures cannot do this. But the nice fish in the picture is a reminder that you are on the right track.

Some things are not going to be understood by my head. If the experience Mark Poulson and others had with 5 min. epoxy was to be explained by the prolonged contact with water, then why does this not happen with the lips that you glue in with 5 min epoxy? Most makers seem to use 5 min. epoxy for the lips, which, in some cases, remains uncovered by Devcon 2T or other type of clear coat. So why aren't they any reports about lips falling off the lure, in case of using 5 min. epoxy? Perhaps what happens with 5 min epoxy in some cases, is due to other things than water?

Mark, It happened to me too. I have a gold effect rattle can. It says on the label that you are not allowed to cover the paint with laquer. I did this, and the gold effect went off. Same happens if you rub the paint with anything. Gold effect (and I guess aluminium as well) means that small particles of "gold" stay on the surface, but they are not bond together very well, or to the surface. And if you use any bonding stuff on top of it, you will loose the gold or silver effect. I think this is the real problem, and not the fact that you cannot bond the gold(silver) to another coat of paint. To solve this problem, I used a clear acrilic rattle can spray over the gold. But mind you, if you use it normally (from a quantitative point of view) you will loose the metal effect. You have to use it very quickly, just a high speed pass over, and the clear will not cover every spot on the lure. After cure, you repeat this operation several times. You might loose some of the metal effect though. But some will remain. Now you have a surface on which you can paint. Or add a coat of epoxy. I don't have an airbrush, but I think you can do a better job of covering the metal effect paint with a clear through an airbrush, than you can do with a rattle can.

Diemai, If they can do it, I am sure that you can. I see in your sketch that you still preserve your earlier design of these lures, in the sense that the rear part is thicker than the front part, so contrary to those jdlurestas baits. My guess is that the question of which part should be thicker, is not a real issue in designing such lures.

LaPala, I love your quote from Buddha's wisdom. And I agree with your way of thinking. Diemai, Same happens here. There are an increasing number of English words finding their place in the Romanian language, and this is frustrating for older people. 2 days ago, my father, who is 84, saw a big poster, and asked me what the word "fitness" on the poster meant. There were many debates here over this situation, some say we should adopt Romanian words for some new products, services, etc, but since such words do not exist, they are simply "naturalized" from the English language.

Mark Poulson, PB and LaPala, Thanks for the explanations. Things are clearer in my mind as to the difference between a crankbait and a jerk bait. But still, a question remains. Are there crankbaits that cannot be twitched? I think that the border line between the 2 terms is quite elusive. And as far as I know, this is the situation with the English language only. In Romanian language, any wooden or plastic lure with a lip is called a "vobler" (from the German word "Wobbler"). I think the situation is the same with the French language, where the lures with a lip are called "poisson nageurs" ("swimming fish"). Maybe our friends from Germany, Holland, Norway etc. could tell us what is the situation with such terms in their languages. In Romanian language, there is not a word for a lure such as a glider, so we use the English word. BTW, if I had to think of a lure that can be twitched, the first one which would cross my mind would be a glider, and not a jerk bait. I think that English language conquers the world in the fishing industry as well.

After I cut out the square blank, I sand it with a disc/belt sander. using the table at exactly 90 degrees, and sanding a little from the other side as well, so there are no small pieces of wood hanging out from the edges, and I am sure that the angle is exactly 90 degrees. Now I would scribe the center line as BobP said, but always from both sides, and I think it is better if you have 2 lines, very close to each other, so you know that the center line is between these 2 lines. Using a very sharp kind of nail and a small hammer, I mark (I make a small hole) for every eye and for the ballast. For the ballast hole, I use 4 drilling bits, increasing the diameter. Then I scribe some other lines which would help in shaping the lure. And even if I work so precisely, I can still see that after I glue in the wire eyes, they are not always aligned. But I can easily correct this with pliers. So may I suggest that instead of screw eyes you use wire eyes? You can use the diameter you need and the length you need. You are not constrained by the diameters and lengths you can find for the screw eyes. Not to mention the price.

...and when I think that I was too afraid to ask such a question, because I thought that everyone should know the difference between a jerk bait and a minnow crank, even those with a poor knowledge of English as myself... I thought that every lure with a lip should be called crankbait, wether a fat one or a minnow type one. And that a jerk bait is another word for a glider. Finally I wonder if I really know what types of lures I make?

Diemai, I have not made such banana lures yet, but since you have made us share your findings, and I do not fully understand your explanations, I hope you will not find my questions to be too dumb. You say the lip area of the body must be slim, and the rear area must be attractive ... er ... I mean more voluminous, and therefore more buoyant. This situation would lead by itself to the fact that the lure would have a nose down attitude. And if you add weight in front of the belly hanger, the nose down attitude would only increase. But you said that these lures must float with the 2 ends level, or a little nose down. Does it mean that the rear hook and hanger have so much weight that they can counterbalance the weight of the tow wire (big enough, as it seems) combined with the weight of the lead? And the front volume of the wood is smaller than the rear half? These lures seem to be tricky to make, in such a way that they preserve some stability. Have you ever tried to split the weight between the 2 ends? Because I think that this way such a lure would have the best stability. What if you would just glue some lead sheet under the lip area, and you would also put some lead in a lower area at the back? Just asking your oppinion about some dumb questions of a guy who has not made such lures yet. And now the last one. From your drawing, it seems that the wire for the tow eye goes somewhere into the body (the lip), but I think that the 2 ends of the wire go through the lip, and then they are bended flush with the back of the lip, perhaps there is a groove for them, and perhaps they are epoxied in place. Is that so ?

I think this thread would be a nice reading for everyone interested on the subject. I have not seen yet a crankbait that hunts in action, but from what I understand from this thread, a hunting crankbait would go off track from time to time (you cannot predict when this would happen) after which it would come back to the center, and NOT to the other side. This doesn't mean that other actions of a lure cannot be better than usual actions in triggering fish strikes. http://www.tackleunderground.com/forum/hard-baits/543-crankbaits-hunt.html

Vman, I am also interested to find out ways to make a crankbait

Something like this?

Pizza, I think that for such small crankbaits, 0.040" Lexan is the best thickness. The small crankbait in my picture has a 0.040" polycarbonate lip.

Some thoughts, If you make such tiny lures, you can use a harder wood without having to add weight, but in this case it is difficult to make the lure stable. Stability is easier achieved with the help of added weight, which means you have to use lighter wood, not necessarily balsa, poplar or willow would also be good. The small crankbaits I made up to now have a good action, large enough, and they all have the treble hook at the very end of the tail. The treble hook at the tail is a weight which acts like a lever with the longest arm in the crankbait. But you can balance the treble hook with the weight, which you have to put not at the middle of the belly, but closer to the nose(let's say 35-40% of the distance from nose to tail). The weight plus the lip will balance the weight of the treble hook, which, in this case, "weights" more because of the lever.

Pizza, I am sure you ca answer most of your questions yourself. If you are not sure about an answer, make a small crankbait to find out the answer. Here are 2 crankbaits that I did not care much about the way they look. I am more interested in the action. The top one has a geat action, the other one is not ready yet. The last one has the natural colour of the wood on the back. I used light wood and through wire construction.

What size treble hooks are you going to use on that tiny thing? Are you sure they would not get tangled? It happened to me on small lures like yours, and I've learned it the hard way (when fishing the completed lure). Now I also want to make some small crankbaits (less than 2" long) but it will have only one hook eye, the tail one.

I am not very sure about it, since I did not try it, but I guess a matte finish of the epoxy could be obtained from a glossy finish which you sand a little with a very fine sanding paper. I do not know how a matte finish would appeal to fishermen, since they seem to like a glossy finish.

Jamie, I think you have to make one more as a present for Rookie ...

Mr. J., haven't you learned yet that the lures you make cost you more than a similar lure which you can buy in a shop?

BopP, As I said, a good sealing of the bait would prevent air bubbles to escape from the lure, and even if they would, the vacuum combined with heat, and possible with epoxy thinning, would determine the air bubbles to continue their way up to the surface, so to the vacuum itself. As you say, a bait can withstand much more pressure from the outside that it can from the inside, and that's exactly what I was saying. So if you apply the epoxy under air pressure, when the epoxy is cured and you return the lure to normal pressure, that lure might have a problem, which would be very much amplified if the lure is kept at a high temperature (as I said, in your car, perhaps under the windshield, in a hot summer day). The lure has already a higher pressure in the inside, compared to normal atmospherical pressure, and if you increase the internal pressure by heat, I think you might have a problem. So I would choose vacuum instead of more air pressure. But as I said, neither of the 2 is necessary since you have heat and thinning at your disposal to get rid of air bubbles. Just look at the pictures in the gallery posted by Fatfingers, for instance (could be anyone, but Fatfingers also has some close ups, and the finish of his lures is perfect). Do you see any air bubbles there?

My experience with 2 cranks in which I placed a rattle in the middle area of the lure has lead me to find other places for the rattles, because such rattles would not make any noise, and that's because the BB would not move, or not move enough. But when I placed the rattle towards the head or towards the tail, the rattle worked very well. This is not only a placement issue, it also has to do with the distance a BB would have to travel to one side and to the other. The longer the distance, the less chanses for the rattle to make noise.

Just my humble oppinion about a thing that I have not too much experience with. Pressure is not what you want your lure to be in, while the epoxy sets. After the process is done, the volume of the lure would like to come back to normal, and this may lead to cracks in the clearcoat, especially if you forget your tackle box in the car, on a hot summer day. And I do not think that the bubbles would just disappear, they may just become smaller. On the contrary, vacuum is something good for for the lure, even if more bubbles would come out of the wood. Those bubbles would also make their way to the surface, and disappear into thin air (or vacuum?). Maybe those bubbles would also destroy your paint job, but that's a minor issue, I think. Such a problem can be avoided if you make a good sealing of the bait. When the lure is again at normal atmospherical pressure, you do not have to worry about clearcoat cracking, because the pressure in this case is applied from outside to the clearcoat, and the clearcoat has something to lean on (the wood), so it would not crack. Anyway, I do not know why you want your lures to be clearcoated this way, because you have enough ways to get the bubbles out of the clearcoat. Heat, as Rookie says, should be enough to solve the problem, but if it isn't, you could also try thinning the epoxy, which would make it even more like melted butter, thus allowing the bubbles to escape from the epoxy.