Vodkaman

http://www.in-depthangling.com/articles/stears_jerkbaits.html I've seen this before on this site. Found it a few weeks ago while looking for something else.

It's a new hinge design I've been working on, no big secret.

My new lure design has a hinged lip. This greatly reduces the occurance of spin and gives me an increase in casting distance into the bargain. The hinge allows my ample 70deg lip to fold horizontal during the flight, giving a much more aerodynamic profile. In the water, the pressures 'snap' it back into its working attitude. It works very well and will be my standard construction from now on. I can even interchange lips with it.

I would put a life jacket on the boy, I would be afraid of losing him. He's more entertaining than the dog! Excellent.

Glad it's not just me on this one. A brief discussion took place a week or two on another forum, not much came out of it though. I agree with the 'sweet spot'. Once the lure is spinning if fails to regain stability. We could start talking technical here, but what would that achieve, as we have a fixed rod and a favourite lure, neither do we want to change. I am using a spinning rod too. I started from scratch last weekend, 'lobbing' the lure short distances and studying the lure. Gradually extending, all the time watching the lure. The lure will generally flop around, until you cast just too fast, then the spin occurs and will not stop. The lure is travelling fastest 'out of the gate', so this needs to be slower than the 'sweet spot' speed.

Oh god, I hate eating humble pie. The first web site I read told me what a good waterproofing sealer it was. If I had taken the trouble to read a few more sites, the truth would have emerged. So, Lapala, Oops, you are right. Prolonged immersion will cause the PVA to break down. I wish I had finished my testing first, too impatient.

I was going to hold off this post reply until I had done some controlled testing. But I cannot see the point. The building industry is vertually built around PVA glue. It is most often referred to as a wood glue, but its main application is as a wood sealer, for sealing not only wood, but other materials like plaster in bathrooms, concrete etc. It may be water based, but once cured it is totally impervious to water. Two coats of watered down PVA (industry recommends 2 parts PVA to 1 part water) will penetrate the wood far deeper than any epoxy. Devcon may well be tougher, but once that thin outer shell has been pierced, the game is over. On balsa baits, it would still be advantageous to epoxy after sealing with PVA, to slow the teeth down some. Probably the best, most durable sealing method is Swedes pellet/plastic dip method. So, Lapala, with all the respect that is rightly due to you for your knowledgeable contributions to lure building. Oops, you got this one wrong.

I still think the solution is the 16lb foam. It is stronger than balsa, almost as buoyant. You already have molding skills. You are going to be making large numbers, so the cost is not an issue, it will be a lot cheaper than whittling yards of balsa. If balsa is good enough, you could even go down to 8lb foam with double the buoyancy of 16lb foam, but less strength. I really cannot think of another solution.

What can I say. My woody friends put me onto it years ago. I do a lot of work with mdf materials and use it to calm the cut edges down, ready for painting. It stops the paint from being absorbed. That is what I think of as sealing. I stand corrected.

Bear in mind, I am only making lures for myself and do not get involved with the finer points of the art. So, as far as wood carving, a few well chosen slices with a razor sharp knife, round off with some 150 grit emery, finish off with some 600 grit emery. Drill some holes, cut some slots and it's all over. The wood glue is quite inert and harmless. You can apply any type of paint to it as far as I know. Also, it is extremely strong, stronger than the wood you are gluing, don't be fooled by its flimsy texture and appearance. As for the epoxy, personally, I apply it with a spatula, purely because I have a huge supply of them and no spare brushes. It works well for me. But the big names with all the experience on this site recommend using an old or cheap brush. Do a search on 'devcon' 'brush' 'application' and you will find the technique, it has been mentioned many times. To be honest, their are far more experienced lure builders who will better keep you on the right track. The best way is to do lots of searches 'cos there is tons of stuff hidden in post replies, so you have to dig. Good luck with it.

x

It's not OK just because he is a kid. But I'm pretty sure that he won't make that mistake again. A valuable lesson learned by willie and the rest of the readers of this site, not just TU members. Now that he has stopped messing about with 'hello' and has starting to actually contribute and learn. He could well become a valuable member of the TU community. For these reasons, it could be worth cutting him a little slack after this repremand.

If the buoyancy part of the lure could be re-positioned higher up, it would serve the same purpose as the lead by keeping the lure in the right attitude. If this worked, you could eliminate the lead, this would give you more lee way with your buoyancy problem and choice of materials. Just my thoughts.

I would like to here your reasons why not, then we could help to find a diferent solution. There is always a solution to every problem.

I only use balsa, but this technique is used a lot in the wood industry. I make a 50/50 mix of wood glue and water (UK pva, USA elmers), keep it in a large jar with a lid. I place my lure in the jar and give it a good shake for a few minutes, replave the lid and the mix can be used a hundred times. Mop the drips off with a paper towel and leave in a warm place for at least 6 hours, a day would be ideal. This sinks into the wood and gives a good seal and also raises the grain. A quick going over with fine sand paper and the job is done, sealed anyway. If the wood was very grainy, it may be a good idea to repeat the operation until the grain is fixed. For harder woods, this is good enough to paint on, but from your list of toothy prey, It might be a good idea to lay down a coat of neat epoxy. I do this on balsa every time. The wood glue sealer technique solves 99% of the epoxy bubble problem and the surface is ready to paint. I always go over it with wet n dry or fine sand paper as I am always wary of the shiny surface, but acrylics do stick to it nicely. If time is an issue and you do not have the patience to wait. Skip the wood glue part and seal with 5 min epoxy. It will bubble. At least give it an hour then smooth off the lumps with a flap wheel attachment in a mini drill or dremel. It's now ready for paint. As for plastic, I would imagine that a quick scrub with wet n dry would be enough. Personally, I never undercoat, sorry Tally!

With a lure shape like that, it is dificult to know exactly where the x axis ran. If it had good roll before the mod and the roll reduced after, then the axis probably ran through the tail. This would be good design. By raising the tail, you have pushed it 'into the wind' as far as roll is concerned. You have introduced a side load with a distance from the rotation axis and stifled the roll action (re-the stick and weights experiment). Unless I am misunderstanding your modification.

I nearly suffocated reading that. Even though it is an old discussion, I think it should be aired on a regular basis so that new members get the message. It should even be laid down in the site rules.

What you are saying is true, unfortunately. But should I ever have a good idea and post it, the thought of someone making a business out of it without even having the common decency to ask is gut churning. This is an age old debate. I'm just a nice guy in a cruel world.

I notice that the more useful pictures are shot in slight perspective. In photoshop, have you tried free transform? Select - all Edit - free transform Then drag the 'handles around to get the proportions that you require.

You will have to extend the picture vertically to have enough material to wrap around. Photoshop can handle that OK, is that what you are using or are you looking for help.

Sorry, misread. For personal gain, definately not without permission.

I would say yes as that is the idea of this site, we all learn from each other. But personally, I would send a PM requesting permission out of respect.

I know, I shouldn't give up so quick. I have endless patience for prototyping and development work, but after five minutes of chasing creases around the bend, the lure's in the bin and I'm in the bar. I promise I'll practise some more.

It's a beauty! That is what it is all about. Thank's for sharing.

Dimmer switches are built around an electronic component called a triac. These are power rated, therefore, those fitted to dimmer switches are only designed for loads upto about 150W, drill motors can draw 600W or more. There are other problems using inductive motors with dimmers, the link below describes triacs in more detail, but basically, a dimmer for motors needs to be designed specifically for the purpose. Having said all that, several TU members are successfully using light dimmers to control small motors for drying wheels. A large drill motor may be pushing it a bit, be prepared for the worst. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRIAC