Vodkaman

Pretty much ALL types can hunt. Dave

LMAO

Tally - I put the hunting post out there so everyone could share this apparent enigma. Believe me, it is not such a big deal! Dave

Further to the first post: The pond is called a 'galatama', a man-made competition pond, stocked with bawal varying in weight between 0.8Lb and 12.5Lbs. Lure fishing is not permitted, and the bait is limited to a tapioca jelly, no limit on flavour or essence. I did not weigh the fish in the videos, but they were between 4.5Lb and 7Lb. To put this into perspective; a 3 hour competition of 15 guys might only produce three fish this size. This just shows the power of lures. Dave

The object of videoing this 20 minute session was to compare a straight swimming lure with a hunter lure. Ten throws of each lure with a constant retrieve. The results are hardly conclusive; the weather varied throughout the test, the lures were not identical, I deviated from the constant retrieval plan on a few throws. I lost the continuity of the experiment by stopping the video, I should have shot it in one clip. Also, in part 3, I swapped out the original hunter for a different hunter with no paint. Lessons learned. Obviously with only ten throws of each lure, I can hardly claim a case for hunters, even though I am biased. A better test would be a 4 hour session, alternating lures after each cast, or five casts, but time available and inadequate battery power prevented that idea. I will do better next time. Still, given the limitations of the test, and my mistakes in continuity, I feel a lot more confident in the hunter’s ability to catch fish. I will be revisiting this test in the future. Sorry a close-up of the lure actions was not possible, I will try to get a shot of the actions next time. Here are the three videos for your perusal: straight vs hunter part 1 straight vs hunter part 2 straight vs hunter part 3 Dave

Tarheelfishing88 - I enjoyed your post. Lots of truths in there, particularly the innovative possibilities of the new builder. In my early days, I refused to view the gallery purely because of that reason; I did not want to corrupt my 'virgin' mind with 'the way things are' designs. I built a lot of weird stuff, some worked, some didn't, but with every build experiment my knowledge increased. I spent a lot of time developing 'fast build' lures. I like a pretty lure like everyone else I suspect, but the idea of spending 4 hours on a project only to lose it on a snag or a BIG fish was not acceptable. I wanted a lure that took no longer than 20 minutes from start to finish for general fishing. Also, this lure would have to swim every bit as good as a fully shaped lure and catch a lot of fish. Obviously a lot of members were not impressed with this project, but that was OK, I totally understood their feelings on the subject. The solution was obviously a flat sided bait, round-over router bit to remove sharp corners. Everything done with templates, jigs and guide tools, finished with a minute on the flap-wheel to tidy up. There are a lot of misconceptions about flat sided bodies; people say that they swim differently, some say they won't hunt. But, I find flat sided baits every bit as good as a shaped bait, only not as pretty. Works for me, I do not paint lures anyway, my baits are lucky if they get a coat of epoxy, usually just a coat of thin CA glue. Yes, they get waterlogged after a couple of toothy fish. I simply pop another on and dry out for the next trip with a fresh coat of CA glue. Works for me. Dave

I saw a lure entered for the competition, with the concave under the chin down to the belly. I thought this was an interesting idea that I would like to try. The body was a weird shape in order for the concave to catch the water. I have an idea for a very small crank, lipless but with a rear concave. could be as short at 3/4" body. A smooth rounded nose with the vortices forming into the rear concave hollow. This would give a very fast waggle, more a vibration. With the single hook treble coming out the back, this would make a rattle sound. This is in my head, inspired by the conversations above, nothing down on paper yet. I need to model it up on CAD to see what it looks like, basically a swimming lip with a nose attached. I will post when modeled. Dave

I saw a bait in the competition baits; with a similar cut but under the chin. I was very impressed, and if I had a workshop, I would be out there now, carving away a test piece. Dave

Mark - very interesting bait. The vortex from the lip and the forehead will combine to make a more powerful force. Clever design. Dave

Cadman - you can NEVER type too much Dave

Maybe a bath in vinegar would be in order, but I am not convinced that cleanliness is the problem. But, every base must be touched. As with all prototyping, changing only one thing at a time will lead to a correct diagnosis. Changing several things may fix the problem, but we will never know. Up to you Dave

Don't forget to post feedback on what eventually solves the problem, so others can learn, including the experts. Attaining knowledge is an ongoing process. Dave

Good comments Pete. I was thinking of you when I wrote about the concave lips thing. If anyone wants to experiment with curved lips, Pete wrote a super article on the manufacture of a tool for bending polycarbonate sheet. One of my tricks for visualizing vortices; a mirror placed on the bottom of the water container. Dave

From someone who has never even held a jig head let alone powder coated one, as an engineer, that doesn't look like residue but looks like moisture escaping as steam leaving behind faults in the paint surface. If you think that this could be a possibility, you could try drying a portion of your white powder by mixing with uncooked rice grains in a sealed container and leaving for a few days. There seems to be a concentration of the 'pits' around the keepers on both images. This indicates that you might have touched this area leaving slight moisture behind. Be rigorous in your management of the surface by never touching with bare hands. Obviously I could be way off. Dave

From what Les posted, and the fact that you are not selling, Stone could be right for you. Dave

Personally, I think surface finish is for the customer. The fish just don't care. But, if you are selling I guess the customer sets the standard. If you are selling, video is a powerful medium. Baits in mouths is a powerful selling tool. Dave

Les - good, positive input. I am only offering theory input. Dave

An aluminium mold would be a much better option because the cooling time for de-molding will be a lot shorter than the stone/plastic material. However, for someone with a 3D printer, printing in stone is a great opportunity. The de-mold time becomes a non-issue as multiple molds can be printed, keeping production going while the molds cool. My concern with the 'stone mold' would be the surface finish of the cavity, as 3D printing is not smooth. Dave

They don't give much information away do they! I suspect that this is some kind of 3D printed mold, judging from the 'custom mold' paragraph. I found this website that provides stone filaments used in 3D printing. Dave

Do you have a link to a website? Dave

I tried to find the lure I did several years ago, but probably got thrown out. I ditched several bags of lures when my money ran out and was basically homeless with a few essential bags. My sausages and salmon steaks are low so I will have to do some shopping soon. I will pick up the paint on that trip. I will have to see what paints are available. I tried to make a video today showing the effectiveness of a hunter versus a straight swimmer (off subject). Total disaster; I hooked a BIG momma and was snapped. Then I crashed the other lure into structure and lost the lip. I will have another go at that very soon. In another session off camera, the hunter was crushed and the straight hardly touched. Dave

NOTE - acrylic spray paints do NOT work. The paint floats OK, but the boundary layers are not defined well and they tend to merge. Also, pulling off the leftover paint after submerging simply does not work, so you have to submerge before adding the paint. I need to buy some oil paint as all I had was acrylics. Dave

I viewed a lot of hydro vids yesterday. I am enthused to have another go, but my lures are a tad small for this kind of thing. I have some paint, so why not try. Dave

I saw the swirled frog in the gallery, very nice effect. I did a few experiments many years ago, lifting oil paints floated on water. The results were pleasing but a bit hit and miss. I only gave it a couple of goes just to see, but I imagine that with practice and experience, results could be a lot more controlled. You should explain your process (if not trade secret) and include a few pics. As long as the pics relevant to the subject and not just showing off final product, they are allowed in the post. Video would be a great help. Dave

Great vid. This highlights two important facts: 1 - Dynamic (moving) forces completely over rule the static forces. The water passing over the lip provides the dynamic forces, which increase with velocity. The static forces (ballast, buoyancy) remain constant, effectively getting less as the velocity increases, relative to the lip forces. Hence, the various ballast positions make no difference. 2 - Water is a complete system, you cannot assess flow over one isolated feature independently of any other features. As you can see; all the lures are moving in sync. Even if you put a lure in there that had a slower oscillation, all the lures would still swim with the same waggle speed. The water disturbance from one lure affects adjacent lures, and those behind. The lures behind will swim slightly out of sinc with the forward lures, but still at the same oscillation speed. Here is a similar video that I made, showing the same effect. When one lure gets ahead you can see the oscillation lag. When swimming parallel, they can be in sync or 180 degrees out of sync and nothing in between. Hence water acts as a complete system. The initial object of the video; was to make a side-by-side comparison of round and square lips, obviously that purpose failed. Dave