Anglinarcher

Patrick, So many of us are older and grew up in the sun. I grew up on the farm, and fishing and hunting; sun screen was never used. Most of the sun screens they had did not even work well. I got what my doctor called Anomalous cells on my nose. Short for what he called pre-melanoma. Big scar, scared me to death. Now I don't go outside with out an SPF 50 sun screen, but I will always wonder if 50 years in the sun without it can be corrected now. I feel for your wife, and please let her know our prayers are with her.

I agree Glenn, the exposed gears are a disaster waiting to happen. Dirt, damage, etc., it is a real problem. Still, a no twist design has some advantages and maybe later design versions will change that. Bob, I agree with you as well. Remembering if I turned the reel or not, or wondering if the reel would stand up to normal fishing abuse, is it worth it? I guess time will tell. I learned a long time ago that putting line on a spinning reel is what causes most of the line twist. Once you figure out how to load the reel, much of the problem is gone. IF you do get line twist, then the trick is to let the line out behind your boat without anything on it and let the friction of the water remove it. It takes maybe a minute or two, and I can handle that. The next thing that always causes twist on spinning reels is the line being pulled out under drag, and that is not that much twist each time. So, a couple more times each year I use the boat to remove the twist. Actually it is reeling the line while the drag is slipping that causes the twist, and there is no reason to reel against the drag in the first place. So, unless you don't have a boat, or perhaps a river bridge to feed line downstream with, then is there a real need for the design. I learned one additional thing some time ago. Sometimes I am reluctant to change if I don't see a need to. Even though in the long run it might be a good thing. Perhaps, in time, I will see that I should have taken this more seriously and tried it, but for now, I don't plan on fixing what is not broken. LOL

First off, I made the stupid chart and I made a mistake when I read it. You were correct the first time. for a 50:50 mix (10 cc microballons to 10 cc Alumilite White), that is an equal amount of Microballons (MB)to an equal amount of Alumilite White (ALW). The density is about .66 g/cc. .69 g/cc is what I got for 92% volume of microballons per unit of Alumilite (9.2 cc microballons per 10 cc Alumilite White). I am sorry about that one. Now, how much? Mike Faupal, the owner of Alumilite, says that an equal amount of MB to ALW or your 50:50 mixture is about maximum. It gets pretty thick and sticky and it does not pour well if you get any more MB into the mix. I have observed that the density does not get a lot less with more MB. As you can see on the graph, the slope of the curve is starting to flatten out pretty fast. If you want, you can add more MB to the mix, especially if you don't need a mix that pours well, but I don't think you will benefit from it much. I have a bait that I make where I cannot get the bait light enough with ALW and MB alone. I pour a shell with ALW and MB, then fill the shell with Alumifoam 610. I did a couple of YouTube videos on that process a couple of years ago that I could direct you to if you desire. They were not very good, but ............ Again, sorry about my mistake. Steve

I have and use the Superhide, but I find that a can of Krylon white designed to stick to plastic, the "fusion" is perhaps the best. Both work well.

Alumilite White with 50:50 microballons is about .76 g/cc. Notice on the left you go from .6 to .8, with the unmarked line between them at .7. Sorry about not marking each line, but I was in a hurry when I made it several years ago. Balsa is about .18 g/cc. I think you missed the decimal point. Hope this helps you some. Notice that Alumifoam and cedar are about .47 g/cc and maple wood ranges from .6 to .75 g/cc.

I know what you are talking about. The ones I saw seem to be a plastic or fiberglass woven material. Hmmmm, got me thinking myself now. Great, more things to take my money and my time. LOL Good luck, hope you report back on this.

Alumilite can answer all of the questions you have, and of course the web site for makelure.com is a great way to get answers from Mike Faupal (owner of Alumilite) and Larry Dahlberg directly. jdr418 is correct in every detail. As for which to buy, that depends on what you are trying to do. The Alumilite White is the one sold in their lure making kit for hard baits, and it has the advantage of giving you a white color so you do not need a white base coat if you paint over it. If you go to the Makelure.com site and click on photos you will find a graph I did giving the density of Alumilite White with different amounts of Miroballons, the density of the Alumilite Foams, and the density of some woods. Alumilite Clear is perfect for making clear bodies, and I have done some lure lips with it, but you need a vacuum to remove air bubbles, or you need to cast it under pressure to crush the bubbles. Larry Dahlberg did a great Marlin lure out of it and he has a video of it on the makelure site. I also believe that he did some jigging spoons out of it for one of his TV shows and I know that last years lure build off used it for slow sinking inshore spoons. FYI, it probably is not the best for lure lips, but in a pinch I did make it work. Alumilite Regular is pretty good as well, but I have not used it myself so I cannot respond. One last thing, can you mix the microballons with the product and let it set for a week or so? My best answer is yes, but no. The best way to mix the microballons is to mix half in Part A and half in Part B, then mix the two together. Microballons do not react to the products so you could mix it and let it set forever without it doing any harm. BUT..... the microballons will separate slowly so I see no advantage in mixing it in advance. Still, if you mix it in advance, then remix it before combining, then it would work fine. I hope this helps.

Good feedback Bob. More specific, fluorescent paint converts available light of any visible light spectrum, and UVA and UVB, into a specific color. So, if we have a fluorescent green paint, and blue light, it fluoresces as fluorescent green. But, as stated, the intensity of the fluorescent color is directly proportional to the intensity of the total available light - UV or visible spectrum. Glow in the dark paints absorb photons, light energy, and emit them without any additional light for a specific amount of time, depending on the pigment type, concentration of pigment, and also the color of pigment. If you have glow green, it glows green no mater what the depth, darkness, etc. I concur that the newest glow pigments are charged by much lower concentrations of light so you do not need to charge them with a light source before use, at least during the day. One additional piece of the puzzle is the new paints designed to reflect or react to UV. These are the latest rage, and I see a lot of pro's selling them, but the reality of rather it is even visible to fish is as of yet unknown. For example, in clear water, pure salt of fresh water, UVA and UVB will penetrate to quite some depth, but........ add almost any contaminate, to include organic matter (plankton), mud, or dissolved minerals, and both can be halted at a few inches in the water column. In short, the UV paints are probably useless in most fresh water environments, of limited importance to the rest of the freshwater environments, and of limited value in most inshore saltwater environments, but without an actual UV meter at any given depth, there are just so many variables that impact UV light that it is hard to rule it either in or out of importance. I do have some issue with the claim that we don't know what fish see. We do know that they have rods (black and white vision) and cones (color vision). We do know how to take cell samples from the fish eye, expose it to light, and detect either electrical changes or chemical changes, proving that the specific light waves are detected. We do know that if we expose the cells to green, and they react, that the fish sees the green light. We really don't care if the fish THINKS that it is purple, or if we see it as red, all we care is that they can react and see that light wave associated with our test. Not all species have been tested, but it is known that trout and Salmon see near red to near UVA. Yes, that means that they see in the UVA range, which only people without an eye lens can see (very rare disorder). We do know that carp and the minnows see the same range, plus near infrared. We also know that Walleye can only see Green and Red........... or more specifically that these two colors are the colors that stimulate the eye cells the strongest. More clarity is needed to explain why so may walleye are caught on yellow. When a color is focused on the cone cells, that light color is picked up strongest in a specific range. Some cones are more sensitive to one color, other cones another color. Still, colors at the peak wave that stimulates give the biggest result, but colors near it still give some stimulation, lessening the farther you get from the peak. In short, yellow may not be the strongest peak, but yellow green stimulates and orange stimulates. The same is true at the Green range as you move toward blue. Still, I hear all the time that someone did well on purple. In reality, purple is a mix of blue (limited sensitivity in walleye) and red (strong sensitivity). In water where red is available, it makes complete sense. When it is too deep for red, then a limited reaction to the blue light with the green cones as well as the contrast with the background like black does explains the rest. Bass? I have not studied what Bass can see, but as mentioned before Doug Hannon did that for the original color selector. That study was a long time ago, and I have not bothered to critique it, but a lot of people claim the color selector works. I understand that the parameters of the test were not as scientific as perhaps many of us would like, but again, anecdotal experience by many seems to support his conclusions. I do wish we had more scientific studies on game fish to confirm what cones are stimulated, but then again, if we knew it all, where would be the fun. LOL

Bob, I concur, there is precious limited science regarding recreational fishing, fishing lures specifically, but there is some that is noteworthy. Additionally, I agree, we are trading anecdotal information, but as an Engineer, a Physicist, and a general science dude myself, I propose my observations are a little bit more then just anecdotal evidence. Nevertheless, lacking the resources and the ability to create controlled experiments (although Doug Hannon did something like that many hears ago for the original Color Selector), the best we can do is trade anecdotal information until we get a data set sufficient to approximate something we can get statistical data sets. Data sets from which we can simulate results and create an Hypothesis. Hopefully we can continue to trade this Anecdotal Evidence. I offer that the science of what is visible to fish is known, but the question of what triggers or attracts fish is not. The following is a link to a YouTube video that seems to at least explain why metallic spoons do not work as well as your glow spoons at the depth you are fishing, and why I use Black or White or Fluorescent colors at that depth. The guy who puts this on is WWW.makewoodenlures.com and the titles are Lure Colors Part 1, 2, 3, and 4. I don't agree with all he says, but then again, as an Engineer, we are known for not agreeing with each other, so why would I be expected to agree with all he says. LOL I propose that by fishing for fish that are already feeding, the glow provides the visual target and the frenzy eliminates the fear. Your method is brilliant, and explainable. I can see why it works so well for you. Next time you go out, try using a white spoon and a Fluorescent spoon at the same time and see if there is a notable difference?????? This thread is proving to be interesting............. MORE DATA, MORE DATA PLEASE!

www.lurebuilding.nl/indexeng.html aka Lurebuilding 101 translated. Above is a link to an old site that does not seem to have any activity anymore. It is from Europe, and they did all of their old painting with Rattle Cans. I admit, I still go back and use it for ideas now and then. LOL

I use the Krylon Clear Acrylic myself as either a base coat or between coats when I paint some of my poured hard plastics. It is easier then cleaning out my air brush after using Future (which I use to thin some paints), and it dries fast. Still, I find that as a top coat it is not strong enough and scratches easily. It also absorbs water after a full day of fishing and can peel.

Hey, perhaps this winter I will put my limited mind on the great task of skiing uphill, or making a hard frog. Is the traffic bad going the wrong direction? I still like the idea. LOL

I really thought it would have worked. I hope you don't give up too soon. Personally, I like what I see.

Bob, I just got to thinking, being you vertical jig, how long is are the lures in the water before you are getting strikes? Is it possible that the glow is almost gone before the strikes occur? In those conditions, I use fluorescent colors, or black and white. I find metallic spoon colors to be useless at that depth for sure.

Bob, your results are interesting, and I sure wish we could fish side by side and see what the differences were. But, I digress...... I should have been more complete in my observations and my discussions with Larry. Mark, First, I have found glow in the dark to be extremely effective for trout, salmon, and steelhead. This fact I have proven to myself for well over 20 years. I had a dam I used to fish behind at night for oversized brown trout and Cutthroat trout in Idaho, and there was so little light that you MUST have a flashlight to tie flies on. We found that color did not matter, as long as it was white or black. It was about Halloween when I was planning a trip and my youngest daughter had some glow in the dark fingernail polish she had purchased. I "stole it" for the night. At the river I put a single drop of the glow paint on the fly eye, charged it with a light, then fished it right next to two other guys that were using the same fly without the paint (I always provided my flies to my friends in the OLD days). I out fished the guys at least 5 to one, maybe even 10 to one. I switched flies with one of them and he was now the one catching the fish. It did not take long before we always used glow painted fly heads at night. Years later, after moving to Washington State, I discovered that they guys were trolling lighted crankbaits for Steelhead at night. The brand they bought, Lightning Lures if I recall right, were not great quality. About one in three lures would work in the water, so the guys would buy a lot of lures and return the ones that did not work. I hate trolling for Steelhead, so I never joined in, but it was well known that lighted crankbaits were the way to fish for Steelhead at night. Of course, I already knew that glow in the dark corkies worked for Steelhead and Salmon when drifting, in clear or dark water, day or night. I had also proven that glow hooks worked extremely well for Kokanee at night. It is well known that glow lures work very well for squid off the coast. In fact, it is the best way to get squid. I have only done this once, but it was not even worth using a non-glow or non-lighted squid rig. Now, after giving success stories, I must give the opposite. I purchased some glow in the dark crankbiats from Heddon in the early 80's. They would catch fish during the day, Bass and Walleye, but I bought them for night fishing. First the Walleye. I had a lake that was extremely rocky, vertical cliffs, broken outcroppings, long points, really weird structure. Trolling bottom bouncers was out of the question and trolling lures was a case of backing up and using drop and bounce lure retrievers all the time to free them. The only method that worked for me was the cast and retrieve so I could keep better control of the lures. I would work the shoreline with crankbaits for Walleye ranging from 16 to 30 inches, usually using perch or crawfish patterns, sometimes rainbow trout patterns. This worked well during the day, but I wanted to try night so thus the glow lures. I started fishing in late afternoon and was catching fish right to dark using the normal lures. As it started to get later I changed over to the glow and it continued to catch fish, until dark, at which time it stopped cold. I fished hard for a couple of hours and nothing, not a hit. On the way back to the launch (I was fishing from a canoe so frequent stops was normal), I decided to grab the other rod and toss the crayfish pattern. I started to catch fish again. So I tossed the glow and again, nothing. I switched back and forth all night and the only time I caught fish on the glow lure was after the lure had gone without being charged and was now lightless (at least to my eyes). I have had similar experiences on Walleye several times after that. Even today, I have a lot of commercially produced glow gigs and I find that they do not work as well as the non-glow. Largemouth Bass are known for their sometimes aggressive strikes at night, and I figured that during the heat of the summer that a more visible lure would be the way to go. After all, I had the glow crankbaits and I had some glow skirts on some spinnerbaits. I won't go into details, but the same results were had as with the Walleye. At night, the dark lures worked best, the glow only worked when they were extremely faint or the light was gone (at least to my eyes). I discussed this with Larry one time and he told me that years ago the State of Minnesota did a study on glow lures and Walleye. They found that the Walleye would ignore the bright glow and were attracted to it only when it was very very faint. He also told me that he tried glow in the dark for perch and crappie under the ice. He observed that if the jig had a lot of glow that they would either shy away or ignore it, BUT if he only had a single piece of glow flashabou tied into the skirt the fish would rush right up to the jig, stop short, then suck in the bait (as observed with a fish finder). He did indicate that some saltwater species, I believe he mentioned Marlin specifically, were extremely attracted by light. My conclusion to all of this is that not every species reacts the same to lighted lures, just as all species do not see the same colors. Some species seem to be turned off by bright lights, while some seem to be strongly attracted. If I were fishing for Bass, I would leave my glow lures at home during the night, but......... I like the idea of highlighting the lure with glow paint. I expect that this might give the extra attraction without turning the fish off. As for having caught the 6 pounder with a bright glow, well you might have just caught a very aggressive fish that day. As they say, even a broken clock is right twice a day. LOL I do hope your studies and experiments result in positive results. Steve

Ben, I have discussed this very issue with Larry Dahlberg, a casual friend of mine, and his experience is similar. Still, don't let our experience be the only factor. Get a couple of glow lures and give them a try, just in case. I would give a couple to you, but I tossed them away a couple of years ago.

Clearly you are getting an air bubble that exposes itself when you break the sprue off. I suspect it is a design flaw that would be difficult to fix and almost impossible to predict. Try Apdriver's approach to see if the air bubble remains hidden. That would be my first approach for sure. Otherwise, I might try to preheat the mold, pour slower to allow the air to escape before it fills, and use a slightly hotter lead. But, definitely try Apdriver's method first.

Mark, I hope this continues to work for you. My experience is that fluorescent paints work well for bass but glow in the dark do not. I spend lots and lots of time fishing (my wife tells me I spend way to much), and a lot of that is after dark during the dogs days of summer. I find that normally glow in the dark turns off fish like Bass and Walleye, at least at night. What time of day did you catch that 6 pounder on the glow bait? Was the glow to augment visibility in dirty water during the day? Thanks for the information and techniques.

If it is a resin that heats up as it cures, like Alumilite Regular or Alumilite White, I have actuall6 had good results adding a few of drops of water to one part, mixing the two parts together quickly, then pouring. It seems to form steam bubbles that you really don't see. The problem is that I did not work to see if I could get predictable results. I just found microballons so much easier.

I like it. There may be better ones to purchase, but I like the way you think!

Check with Mike Faupal of www.alumilite.com. He can provide you this information. www.purpledesert.net/asklarry/ connects you to Larry Dahlberg and he can get that information for you as well. I will tell you this much, it is a huge volume.

Hopefully someone will come on and prove me wrong, but I am going to say no. Nightcrawlers naturally have a hollow core that takes air well, and their bodies are accustomed to enlarging and shrinking. There skin is elastic enough to seal up after we poke them and fill with air. Plastic worms don't have that hollow core, tend to be more elastic so once you punch through the skin it pushes the air back out......... I have even tried this with a hypodermic needle with a very fine needle and "no joy".

I suggest that what you want is a super thin coat, so a lacquer based is best, but requires the most breathing protection. Still, you get excellent results from water based but adding the clear coat adds weight to the blade as well. Wicked is made by Createx and they make some excellent fluorescent and candy colors.

I noticed that I could go to eBay and locate several Hawaiian Wigglers. This sure brings back the old days to me for sure, some fine memories taking fishing lures from my dad's tackle box. One could buy the sizes desired, then make a silicone putty mold of the body, then pour your own bodies. Hmmm, got me thinking........

If clear soft plastic is not a requirement, I often add softener and then microballons to the mix to get the soft plastic to float heavier hooks. It takes some experimentation, and often I need a somewhat larger body to displace enough water, but....... I really do believe with some experimentation you will figure it out.