Vodkaman

I assumed both sides. But if only one side, a tiny drop of CA glue on the end of the BBQ stick. I just tried it. Easily strong enough for epoxy application. It does leave a slight blemish though. But you could paint a black spot with a paint pen and call it a kill spot. Dave

John, I still think Pete's foam/wood combo is a possibility. I actually wrote a reply to Pete's original post on the idea, outlining similar thoughts to what you found, namely that both densities are buoyant and fighting for the surface. The situation is worse than you wrote, as doubling the woo density is not going to double the angle. As long as the wood has buoyancy, it is going to hit the surface. I could go into more detail and show you how the angle can be calculated, but what would be the point. The way Pete's idea works, is that if the ballast is located at the joint of the two materials, then once the lip pulls the body under the surface, the lighter density foam will win in the buoyancy race and turn the lure through 90 degrees. When the retrieve stops, the lure hits the surface and flips on its side. If you have the materials already, you should investigate further. Dave

I had a go with the CA glue yesterday and really liked it. I used a 6" square of food wrap plastic, wrapped around my finger. It worked very well. Dave

I thought you might have had a few replies to this request by now. My guess is not too many members visit this section of TU. Good idea starting a new thread for this problem though. I saw the blades that you are talking about on another of your posts. This question has been discussed before, but I don't recall a satisfactory solution. It is near impossible to search for the thread unfortunately. For blemish free mounting, you only have the hole to work with, but anything that you put in the hole, like a tapered stick, the epoxy will ride up against and you end up with what looks like a volcano once the stick is removed. Cleaning/trimming/sanding this build up will leave a visible blemish on your work. But I cannot think of another way to get the job done. I did a test on a piece of aluminium with a hole. I waxed up a BBQ skewer and wiped excess wax off. Jammed it into the hole. I applied the D2T epoxy with a small, fairly stiff brush. I was able to rotate the stick between finger and thumb and lay down the epoxy close to the stick and fairly quickly. I then pushed the epoxy with the tip of the bristles, as close as possible to the stick but without touching. If it does touch, not to worry, that is why we waxed the stick, so the epoxy will not adhere. The trick is not to lay too thick a coat, just enough to get the job done. I drilled a 3mm diameter hole in the drying wheel, tapered the other end of the stick and jammed it in. The method worked just fine. The aluminium did not fall off, but I only did one test. You can increase the grip of the stick by reducing the angle of the point (longer taper). Dave

Pete, have not been ignoring you. I just couldn't think of a good arguement for or against. I hope that you build it and report. The same goes for everyone else with an idea, build and video. Could call it a design swap. Dave

I think Powereorm nailed it. Dave

Can you post a pic of the mold. It sounds like your vents run from one cavity to the next instead of venting out to atmosphere. Dave

Ha! I have built a few of those in the last four years. We should learn from our mistakes and you are right. I have built and tested my first proto. It failed, but I learned a lot and will adjust for second attempt. It kind of worked by righting itself, but it just kept going and blew out the other side. So by reducing an angle will slow the roll, but whether a balance can be reached remains to be seen. I am sure the 6" twitch idea can be achieved, but I would really like it to swim longer distances with wiggle action, without rolling out. Back to the CAD now, I have to design and build another lip plane jig. Dave

The problem is that ml or millilitre is a BIG measurement compared to the 'drop'. Officially, a metric drop is 1/20th of a ml, but that does not mean that all drops are the same. Drop size depends on viscosity, so you cannot even compare a drop of one color with another. The best you can do for consistency is to use the same dropper each time and record the numbers. You could weigh the paint measures, but again, each paint color is a different density, so you are back in the same position as the drops. I say stick with the drops, unless you are mixing gallons at a time. JMHO. Dave ps. aparently American drops are bigger, LOL. Here is a link to a discussion on the subject: http://forum.onlineconversion.com/showthread.php?t=618

John, thanks for getting back to us, and with more information. I am now interested enough to take this project to the next level and make a few prototypes to see what happens. No guarantees as this has been all pure theory so far and is way outside the box of my/our experience. I am not so sure that what I will produce will work on a fly rod setup, but the final lure, a 2” lipped crank with a single belly treble, will weigh approximately 10 grams (0.35 oz). But if it works (big IF), I am sure it could be adapted to what ever you need. For the time being I will work with what I have available to me. The first job is to create a double angle jig, for controlling the cutting of the lip slot. Free hand cutting is possible, but no two lures would be the same, not good for prototyping. I have cut the double angle block, next is to find a way to locate the blank body on the block. This will be a Bondo filler half mold of the body. Not so sure I want to do a running documentary of a project that is more likely to fail than succeed, so I will probably go quiet for a few weeks, but will document the progress with drawings and photographs. As soon as I have anything to report, I will get back to you. Dave

You should read back through your own posts and then maybe you will understand how I arrived at my conclusion. Today, however, your posts wizened up and I hope that they stay that way. I am more than willing to spend many hours on answering some questions, as you will see even just looking through the last few days posts. But I hate wasting my time. I spent at least a couple of hours reading up on dimmer switches, wading through and trying to understand some very technical stuff, so that I might be able to explain Why ordinary light dimmers are not suitable. That was not a complete waste, as I can now link back to that thread in future. The final straw was your current thread on jig prices. What an appalling thread. Basically, “I’ve got some jigs to sell, I’m not telling you how many, what type or what size etc. I am too busy’ to spend five minutes of my time to take a photograph, but I would like sensible offers please”. This prompted me to look back through your posts, only to find that just about every post was equally silly. I have been accused of a lot of things in my time, but ‘not communicating’ was never one of them. As for this thread, “what woods (Soft Or Hard) that should NOT be used”? What a strange question, considering the plethora of woods growing on this planet. “Also would it matter if it is a Top Water, Diver, or Brand of swimming thing attacks it”? Not sure what that means at all. This again just leads me to the conclusion that you are trying to waste peoples time for your own entertainment. I suspect the glaring lack of replies to your question may have something to do with other members arriving at the same conclusions as me, maybe not. But I hope you think about what you are writing in the future. So giving you the benefit of my obviously considerable doubt, back to the question: Which woods are most suitable would have been a better question. As you mentioned in post No3, any wood can be used for a lure, but there are properties that make some woods more suitable than others. But just about any wood can be made to swim. The first consideration is the density for your particular application. Top water poppers are better made of lighter woods, gliders and ‘walk the dog’ style lures are better with medium to heavier woods, as the weight needs to be more evenly distributed for function. Another function of density is the ‘action’ that is required. If you want wide action, then lighter woods are better. But some days/waters a more subtle action fares better and a heavier wood might be a better choice. It would seem logical that deep divers would require a heavy wood, but the density of the wood has very little to do with the depth it will swim. It is all about lip geometry, tow eye location and ballast location. Two identical lures that sit in the water the same depth, one made of low, the other high density wood, both will weigh the same. Other considerations of wood choice, is its workability, is it easy to carve, is the grain a problem. Health issues, all wood dust can hurt you, but some more than others. Price, availability, Some woods are oily, causing paint problems, the list goes on. Some of the common woods preferred are: balsa (dense), basswood, beach, birch, cedar (various types), cypress, elm, fir, mahogany, maple, oak, pine, poplar, redwood, spruce. These are woods that have been mentioned in TU threads. Those typed in blue are the more common. A discussion could be had on each of them, so I will leave you to do some research, to find the most suitable for you. Do not limit yourself to TU searches, Google the individual woods for more detailed information on workability and applications. Here is a link to some properties of woods to get you started: http://www.csudh.edu...mdata/woods.htm Dave

I have just read through all your posts to date and realise that you are just having a laugh, to put it politely. V

I am still thinking about the design and tweaking in my mind, in fact, I have another lip option. I do actually see a wiggle action. But Johns original specification of the lure travelling as little as 5" or 6" is not really achievable if a wiggle action is part of the deal. With a short, sharp twitch, I think the lure will right itself, then lay flat again, as specified. With a longer draw, the lure will wiggle, but I am not expecting it to swim straight, with all those offset angles and high ballast. The first thought that I had was the same as yours, namely a sliding weight system. But like you, I could not see the cycle, plus I did not fancy the complexities of the build, especially in such a small lure. The original spec was for a 1.5" lure, a bit small for my eyes. I have a 2" x 0.63" master for the dup m/c, this is fairly close, so I may just go ahead and cut a dozen for testing johns idea. I just found a couple of 2" bodies, also a bag of 2.5" x 0.5" bodies, already cut. All this time I have been trying to master the art of cutting perfect square lip slots, it is going to be wierd cutting these and fitting the lip all scewed. Dave

### WARNING - TECHNICAL DISCUSSION ### This picture shows how I see the lure at rest, with nearly all the lip under the surface. From a theory point of view, the first vortex, unfortunately, will form on the bottom edge of the lip. This will not achieve much, other than rotating the lure in the plane of the water surface. The second vortex however, should form on the sunken lip side, pulling the lure down towards vertical. This vortex needs to be strong enough to rotate the lure far enough to sink the opposite edge to an angle that will attract the third vortex. To get this to happen, the lure will require a firm twitch to kick start the vortices. Vortices prefer vertical edges. When a vortex forms, it tries to rotate in a vertical axis (this is why twisters form). This means that the third vortex is more likely to form at an edge that is closer to the vertical. So the lure has to rotate far enough to make the opposite lip side more attractive to the vortex. This might not happen with the current design, but there are things that we can change to correct this. A round lip may well be a better proposition, as this doesn’t have a distinct bottom edge and the first vortex will be forced to form in the sunken edge. The second vortex, being out of options, will be forced to form on the opposite edge. I am now confident that this design will work, but it will be a case of tuning the offset angles to find a swimming balance. Dave

John, that is a very interesting and challenging idea, but it makes sense. We have all seen dying fish, they go belly up, then swim erratically for a foot or two. From a design point of view, I do not think a 180 degree rotation is doable, as the lip would not be able to ‘bite’ the water. I think 75 degrees might be possible. At this angle, the lip has a chance to bite and would achieve the visual that you are looking for. With this imitation, we can forget about the concept of perfect alignment and straight swimming, as that would defeat the object. If I were to attempt this build, I would fit the lip about 10 degrees off centre. This would guarantee that the lure stopped on the same side each time and the lip was hanging in the water, ready to catch the water when moved. I would fit the weight high up the body, towards the back. This would require trial and error, to find the weight vertical position to balance the normal hardware (belly and tail trebles) and tip the lure on its side. You could achieve the same with a back hook, but I think it would be more difficult. Another small problem is, that the addition of the top coat will change things slightly, but this will be learned from the first few builds. This would be the direction I would take the design, but I would not start there. Prototype No1 would be a standard design with a properly aligned lip, with a lip angle of 75 degrees (for a top swimmer), but with the ballast mounted high enough to lean the bait over severely to one side. I suspect a lot of lip variants would have to be tried (shape, width and length) to find the right one for the job. I would video the swim and study it. From here I would change one thing at a time and expect to be building a lot of prototypes. I would be building a new bait for each change, marking a number on each bait and making notes and references to the video record. Another adjustment is the ‘cross’ angle that the lip is cut. Looking ‘end on’ the lip, introduce a 10 degree angle. This would increase the strength of the vortex on the forward pointing edge. This would cause the lure lip to pull harder on the downward stroke and weaker on the upward stroke, enabling the lure to right itself. I think without this modification, the bait will just swim on its side. This is the way I go about all my development lures. I don’t usually use video, but I think it would help with this design. Please excuse the ramble, as I am typing as I think. You have captured my interest enough that I might even attempt this myself. Maybe I had better just put it on the list. This is a rough sketch of what I had in mind. Dave

I agree Mark. When you place the cold Pyrex on a hot surface, the heated part expands rapidly and the surrounding glass does not. This stresses the glass with shear forces and little cracks are formed. It won't necessarily break the first time or even the tenth, but each time the stress cracks increase until it finally gives in and explodes. You can examine the base of your Pyrex closely. If you see any cracks or crazing, then it is time to discard or find a safer use for it. Dave

Welcome to TU CA, I think your contributions are going to be valuable. Dave

The baits look good, but they will look much better if you applied a seal coat to the wood before painting. This serves many purposes: it helps prevent water getting into the wood, it strengthens the wood and in your case, a seal coat with a light sanding will eliminate the wood grain, giving you a nicer looking paint job. Epoxy thinned with denatured alcohol is a popular choice. If you let the etex coat hang, it will all run to the bottom. You will need to flip the bait regularly so that it levels out even. You will soon get bored with this. The solution is a drying wheel that slowly rotates your lure and removes the hassle. Not difficult to make. Dave

DEFINATELY NOT touching the element. It is the contents of the pot that you are controlling, so away from the element and touching the pot. Not exactly sure if it has to be touching or just very close, hopefully a Lee pot owner willl jump in here. Dave

The mixing cup idea is good, but I re-use my can bottoms. So I brush some of the epoxy on the side of my Rotator frame, so I can check progress without touching the baits. Dave

I just re-built the model as a lead lip, as per your post. The lead lip cast weighs in at 0.093 oz, which is a bit heavier than your spec. Dave

That is quite amazing, the dimensions that I chose for my hook were very close to yours. Not sure if your weights include the hook or not, but the weight of the lead alone in this model is 0.053 oz. I think it looks workable, though I think I like the straight hook better. Dave

Drying timber is more about airflow than heat. The heat source (50W bulb) is more to enable the air to absorb or hold more moisture. Here is a schematic drawing of a drying box that I use for drying PoP molds The air is forced around by an axial fan (computer type, very cheap). The air flows past the bulb, picking up heat, and back to the fan. Above the fan is low pressure, so fresh air is drawn in through the inlet hole. Below the fan is high pressure, so moist air is pushed out, through the exhaust hole. Thus the air is continually replaced with dry air. With this dryer, you are not heating the wood, the temperature will be only a few degrees above ambient. The drying time will be only a couple of days or less. You could raise the bulb wattage for faster results, I use 3x100W bulbs in my PoP dryer with two fans, with no problems. But for wood drying, slow is better. This method is proven by me, I have dried wet wood in my PoP dryer, reducing the bulb wattage to 1x100W bulb. The size of the box is not important and only depends on how much wood you need to dry at once, obviously more wood will take longer. Rest the wood on dowel pins, so the air can circulate all around. the gap or clearance around the wood should be at least 1" but not much more, for best results. If the gap is too great, the air slows down and so does the drying rate. Let me know if you want more information and pics. Dave

Welcome to TU Don. After you have finished reading all you can, ask specific questions and the plastic masters will point you in the right direction, regardless of your reasons. Dave

Ah! fair enough. I guess I should have done a bit of research before stepping in. Thanks for the heads up Bob. Dave