exx1976

I agree with the above, .051 stainless wire would be about as big as I would go. Even that is pretty difficult to bend. I have a wire bender that I use for making bucktails.

I prefer 3 hooks on a bait that size myself. But, my suggestion to you is to build one of each, and swim test them. You may find the action of one or the other to be preferable.

Depending on what that's made of, that design could prove quite the challenge to produce.

Engineered Angler recommended these. At $2.49 for 36 brushes, I wasn't out much if they sucked (as some posters on here indicated they might). The 1/4" brushes I was using were in the neighborhood of $25/100, so the HF ones are SIGNIFICANTLY less expensive, and being twice as wide, they make epoxy topcoat application much quicker. Opening the package, I did find them to be of questionable construction. However, quickly smashing the end down in a 6" bench vise and giving the bristles a good stiff tug to remove any loose stragglers was all the convincing the brush needed. Granted, my sample size of 1 brush is quite small, but I used that 1 brush to coat 4 baits, and didn't lose a single bristle. At a cost of less than 7 cents per brush, crushing it in a vise and giving the bristles a quick tug are both operations I am willing to endure for a near 75% reduction in cost vs the previous brushes I was using. I also did find the application to go MUCH quicker than with the 1/4" brush. I'm not normally one to recommend specific products, but if you do epoxy topcoat, for the price, you'd be silly not to give these a look. https://www.harborfreight.com/36-pc-12-in-horsehair-bristle-acid-shop-brushes-61880.html

As a musky fisherman, I do not want my lures embedded in the side of the fish. That's horrible.

The old wooden Suicks used to use a through-cotter pin design. Not sure if they still do or not, haven't bought any in years. Always seemed a pretty solid setup to me, at least for the hook hangers. I suppose I never have tested them, a la the Engineered Angler's tests, but.. LOL

An excellent point! I do use CA and baking soda to cover by ballast holes, and I learned the hard way about trying to use CA that wasn't thin. LOL

I don't do through wire, but I've seen builders use CA and baking soda to fill the voids around a through-wire and secure it in place.

While I can certainly understand and respect that argument and your point of view on the topic - especially given personal experiences (and that gut-wrenching photo! Ouch!!) - were you the one who made the lures that the screw eyes came out of, or were they lures you purchased? Do you know if they were made properly? How old were the lures when they failed? Were there other signs of damage to the lure - something that perhaps the user should have seen (epoxy failure, cracking, etc), that would otherwise have been a sign of "it's time to retire this lure" if not for the emotional and/or financial investment made in said lure that was working counter to logic? I've seen several videos in which rather small screw eyes were tested (like those used for bass-sized lures), and when properly epoxied and secured into the wooden body, the failure strength is well in excess of 100 pounds. Give this a watch. Quite interesting. The fact of the matter is that when considering the rod, reel line, and lure as a "system", the whole thing is only as strong as the weakest link. If you're using 85# braid, and the hook eye holds to 140+ pounds, the hook eye is not the weakest link. Certainly not trying to sway anyone's decision to build things one way or the other, just pointing out some additional information for consideration.

I don't see a cell for it on the spreadsheet, so it must not.

Indoor swimming pools at hotels or local schools.

Off topic, my apologies - but you guys seem the best to ask! I organize an annual, "traveling musky camp" every year. We get a big cabin in a resort somewhere on some big water, and every year it moves around. It has grown since the first year of 3 guys, to this past season we had 10 guys and 6 boats! Some even bring their wives now. It's a great time. Point being, we've about run out of places in WI to move it around to after so many years, and our favorite chain of lakes the resort has changed and we are no longer crazy about it. Unfortunately, there are no other cabins on that chain (Fence / Lac du Flambeau) able to accommodate a group of our size, so I'm starting to think about northern MN, or possibly even LoTW. I was considering Kenora as a home base for next year if this COVID nonsense lets up. When would be a good time to go up there? Historically, camp has always started on the first Monday of September, and gone until the following Sunday. We are willing to change though, if that's too late for being that far north.

I think I've seen some of that. Is that the channel where the dude makes a lure from a fidget spinner from canadian tire and some of his own hair and catches a musky RIGHT at sunset with it? LOL

Not at all. If you'd not read the thread, I'd encourage you to do so. LOL I went ALL the way - ballast, paint, epoxy, THE WORKS. You've still got bare wood. There's time to save yourself.

Kenora? There's a YouTube channel I watch pretty regularly that's done by a guy out of Kenora - Jay Siemens. Great content, check it out if you've not seen it (or for all I know, you are him, or have been in his videos. Maybe he was the guy who bought the $275 lures? LOL) Looks good so far. My only thought is #4? That seems exceedingly small for a bait that size. Are you sure you don't mean 4/0?

Before you go making 10 baits, you may want to spend a moment and review one of my recent threads, entitled "I'm an idiot". Learn from my mistakes. LOL

To me, if I manage to finally catch that elusive 50, I don't care much what kind of condition the lure is in afterwards - it served it's purpose and got the fish into the net. The the glitter question - interesting. I'll keep an eye out for that since I will be using glitter on some of my baits. Any particular glitter you're using that you're seeing this result with? As for cedar... Yes, that's a popular choice, but I opted against it for my crankbaits - mostly because those same properties that make it rot resistant also make the sawdust generated from working it toxic. That's no bueno. My workshop is in the basement, so I can't be having toxic sawdust all over the place.

A couple of my boat anchor lures, the underlying surface wasn't ONE HUNDRED PERCENT flat. After paint and epoxy, the exterior was all flattened out, but it left some interesting designs/patterns in the paint. I rather liked it. I felt like it contributed to the "realism" of the baitfish look, since nature isn't as perfect as we'd all like to believe. Of course, I am completely unable to replicate that, and the next time, they may not come out looking as neat. LOL I'm still experimenting, but I'm starting to come to the conclusion that all this talk of sealing the wood may or may not just be something we tell ourselves to make ourselves feel better. At the end of the day, Musky teeth can get through nearly anything we put on the lure, and short of magically making wood impervious to the effects of water, nothing is going to prevent damage. If we are going to rely on epoxy to get the job done, and epoxy is all that will be used (unless you're doing something not mentioned in your previous post), why not just flatten the wood, prime it, then 4 coats of epoxy on top? This assumes that it is being done only as a sealant and to flatten for paint. Then we can avoid the CA sealing, or spar urethane, or any of that. Just prime, paint, and 3 or 4 or 5 coats of epoxy and call it a day. Rely on that epoxy to both seal the wood and protect the paint, and dispense with the other time-consuming stuff. Thoughts?

There's a local guy who uses 2 coats of epoxy to seal prior to paint, then seals the paint with 2 coats of epoxy. This provides 4 coats of protection against teeth. I don't see the point. Let me expand on that - in the configuration above, 2 coats of epoxy protect the wood, and help to provide a flat surface to paint on. Then that paint job, that you took all that trouble to make look pretty, is protected by 2 more layers of epoxy. The net result? The wood is protected by 4 coats of epoxy, but the paint only by two. In my opinion, if you can get the necessary flat surface on which to paint without the use of epoxy, it makes more sense to put the 4 coats on the top. Then you have 4 coats protecting the wood AND the paint. Am I looking at this wrong somehow? Is there actually some benefit to using the epoxy beneath the paint, aside from a flat surface to paint on?

I had a big response typed up, but decided not to waste my time. It's fairly clear to me that you don't understand the purpose of any of this, so it's just not worth it.

Same. I saved that text in a notepad to come back and post it again later, if it works. So far, no love...

Man, I've been having a difficult time with this site lately. Couldn't send you a PM, then I couldn't edit my post that you're referencing, so I copied it and deleted it, now it won't let me post it again.. No idea what's going on.

@fishordie79 Thank you for your motivation. All things I know, logically, but having trouble making myself believe. LOL It would have been much less painful a lesson to learn had it been 1 bait instead of 8. But alas, I suppose that was also part of the lesson.

Also, for anyone wondering, I did manage to find the density of eTex Lite.. It's 1.06. Vodkaman - you were halfway there. The resin is 1.15, but the hardener is only .97. Here's the link to the MSDS for both components. https://www.eplastics.com/pdf/envirotex-lite-resin.pdf

oh boy... Now because it's on there, I'm gonna have to use it. That means I need to find the density for G10. Ugh. LOL