Vodkaman

What version of Microsoft Excel are you using? Dave

Littleriver - you need to find a source for BIGGER tins Dave

And I thought they were names of lures! Dave

In theory rounded is the way to go for more action and they certainly look much better. But the last lure project I did was flat sided, just to explore for myself. I was pleasantly surprised that the action was very good, although a side-by-side comparison was not made. Maybe a future project. Until I get my duplicator re-built, any lures I produce for my experiments will be flat sided, mainly because repeatability is so important and I hate carving. Dave

Because I have done a lot of experimenting around this transition, I knew what to expect to see. What you have captured on video is the root cause of hunting action, described as 'the holy grail' by some lure designers and undesirable by others. For me it has been the culmination of a seven year study of the hunting action. I started this work because the common opinion was that hunting baits cannot be designed and built with consistency. I proved that hunters can be built consistently by building 11 out of a batch of 12, I rushed one and messed it up. I need to finish off that project with a video to show how it is done and what action is available. To this end, one of my first projects in my new shop is to build a 12' x 4' test tank with under water video capability. Dave

Good prototype work, especially the interchangeable lip. I find that video is a powerful tool in lure design, allowing you to replay a snippet over and over. In fact, what I do is cut and paste the same snippet about 20 times, allowing me to examine closely on replay. The first lip was particularly interesting as I replayed a couple of passes. There seemed to be a double action thing going on there, giving the lure a very erratic action, which is always desirable in my book. It looks to me like the lure is at the yaw/pitch transition were the lure is doing a bit of both. Because you are at the transition, it will take very little change of lip length to change the action, even 1/32" will be visible. You could even try a tad longer to see the effect, by wedging a slither of wood in the slot to force the lip forward. As the length increased, the action would go to pure pitch, a kind of craw nodding effect. If you just wanted to get rid of the erratic and go for a straight side-to-side, then you would need to shorten 1/16" or 3/32". Personally I would be exploring the erratic boundary. As for usefulness, I am not a fisherman, so cannot help you there. Dave

Nah - I used to own a bar Dave

Mark - it is all useful information: Take a beer glass 3" diameter (D) and 4" deep (L). V (vol) = pi x D x D x L / 4 V = 3.14 x 3 x 3 x 4 / 4 V = 28ins cu roughly 1 pint. Now give the landlord a glass twice the size and pay him twice the money and see if he will fill it for you: V = pi x D x D x L / 4 V = 3.14 x 6 x 6 x 8 / 4 V = 226 ins cu roughly 8 pints. Dave

It is all a question of volume. Consider rectangular lure 1: Length L1 = 3" depth D1 = 1" thick T1 = 0.5" This gives a volume V1 = L x D x T = 1.5 inch cu Now consider the same lure doubled up, lure 2: Length L2 = 6" depth D2 = 2" thick T2 = 1" This gives a volume V2 = L x D x T = 12 inch cu The ratio is V2 / V1 get your calculator out and divide 12 / 1.5 Dave

Loft is correct. The weight of the bait will increase by a factor of 8, as will the required ballast. Dave

I am a one-at-a-time guy. Sometimes a project will get shelved, but then technically I am no longer working on it. Dave

Littleriver's advice about one change at a time is very important. Single changes is the only way you learn about effect. I think the angle down the lip is good advice too. I think of the lip angle as acting like dihedral on aircraft wings, this adds stability. So much to learn from this set of lures. If you take it all in, this could set you up in lure design for the future. Dave

JDeee - I read a few days ago of an application of Uranium used as a ballast material and it surprised me. I think it was on aircraft somewhere. As ballast it certainly is a good choice with the same density as Tungsten. Interesting thought. Dave

Don't be too hard on yourself. I am proud to be an engineer, but every now and then wifey beats me to a solution and then tells me, "And that's engineering" Dave

Very clever. Dave

Ah yes. Proud Dad syndrome - that trumps everything Dave

Certainly the lips are not too long measured from the tow eye to the tip, in fact, maybe too short! Dave

I agree with Littleriver; either the tow eye is too high or the lip is too long. The images are going to help. My guess would be that if you did a bath tub test and had a close look, you would see the bait nodding up and down very slightly. Dave

You really need to think that one through, that is the same as handing over your credit card for the next four years. Dave

Tell her that I said it was at least worth a pair of shoes Dave

Have you tried a long exposure, say 10s to 30s, might work. Very cool project. Dave

Here in Indonesia, they also have cat ponds. They are competition ponds, mostly fished by professionals. They run about 6 comps a day, each around 2 hours long. I haven't got around to fishing them yet, but been for a watch. As usual in Indonesia, they all use the same bait which they buy at the pond. I am not sure what it is, but looks like some liver concoction - patience, I am getting around to my point. If I am going to enter a competition, I want an edge. What I am thinking is MSG (monosodium glutimate). This is the food additive that makes food taste better. It is frowned upon in the west, but they add it to everything here, like salt. The way it works is that it triggers the taste buds and so enhances flavor. If it works on cats, I could have a new day job Dave

Another material to consider is G10. Thickness 3/32" gives 48 ozs. Also, the thinner material is going to give you more action from your lure. 1/16" aluminium has reasonable numbers too, at 54 ozs.

If you are not selling the lures, I would go for the 1/4 acrylic rather than mess about gluing two sheets together. Dave

Firstly I am not familiar with the lip thicknesses for musky baits. But, I do have the knowledge to calculate deflections from my engineering background. Comparing the two materials, acrylic is actually stiffer than polycarbonate, but this leads us to one of the main criticisms, that acrylic snaps easier than polycarbonate. Also, acrylic performs poorly in cold conditions. To compare the thicknesses, I started off with dimensions that I am comfortable with: lip length 1" : width 1" : thickness 1/16" gives a deflection of 0.1" with a load of 36.7 ozs for poly and 45.2 ozs for acrylic. It made sense to me to try to match the deflection loads for the larger lip and find the thickness required to achieve this: lip length 3" : width 1.5" : thickness 3/16" gives a deflection of 0.1" with a load of 55 ozs for poly and 68 ozs for acrylic. lip length 3" : width 1.5" : thickness 1/4" gives a deflection of 0.1" with a load of 130 ozs for poly and 160 ozs for acrylic. lip length 3" : width 1.5" : thickness 5/32" gives a deflection of 0.1" with a load of 32 ozs for poly and 39 ozs for acrylic. lip length 3" : width 1.5" : thickness 1/8" gives a deflection of 0.1" with a load of 16 ozs for poly and 20 ozs for acrylic. Conclusions - 1/4" seems way overkill. 3/16" seems reasonable given the larger lip. Even 5/32" gives comparable load numbers. But, as you determined, 1/8" is just not up to the job. My calculator is a spreadsheet, so if you would like me to put in more figures or compare other materials, let me know. Welcome to TU. Dave