How to get a wide sweep on Gliders

[MattDean]

I have been reading through some of the posts on weighting lures and I have been building a few different types of glider jerkbaits recently and I have tried various weightings and placements on the same type of lure to see if I could get something that glides well, I can get them with a tight zig zag, walk the dog type of motion but I cant get them to do a wider sweep, can someone give me some pointers as to what I should do to achieve this motion.

[RiverMan]

1. Make the lure larger/heavier so that it has more carrying power

2. Make the lure round........round lures glide further than flat-sided lures from my exp.

3. Add a manta-like tail to the back.

RM

[mark poulson]

I make only surface gliders, but I've found there's a direct connection between lure length and glide length. The longer the lure, the longer the glide.

The shortest glider I make is 5", and it glides about a foot, max., on a slow retrieve.

The longest is 9", and it glides 2' if I work it slow.

I've made them longer, but they're too hard to throw and workfor any length of time.

[atrophius]

I agree with mark as well. There is a direct association with length and shape of objects vs. their tracking and gliding. I did a lot of research on building kayaks and it directly effects them. So I imagine a lure would not be much different. Also those pool torpedoes glide forever if thrown right and those are round. If you want to read about it you could look here

How to Choose a Kayak for You

Maybe someday i will finally get to building that kayak haha, but after I am done with school, I plan to.

Edited July 10, 2009 by atrophius

[diemai]

@ MattDean

I can surely confirm the statements above:yes: ,...... one more thing , that I had found out about topwater gliders is , that if the weight is placed at the very tail end , the glide is shorter as if the ballast was placed a bit more forward .

I guess , this is , because that rear weight causes the lure rather more to dash towards 90

[uptown]

The shape of the body has the most effect on how your glider is going to turn. Something with a high curved back is going to have a tighter "slashing action" compared to a drop belly or a round glider. The placemnet of the weight is secondary to the shape of the lure.

Adding a "fin" to the back will help to stabilize the lure so that all of the effort is put into moving the bait in one direction. The MAJOR drawback to a Manta style bait is that you lose most of the triggering qualities of the bait . I am sure there are baits that bend that rule, but in general a glider with some wobble or roll to it at the end of the pause or start of the glide catches more fish. getting that wobble is the hard part and part of the reason a well made and balanced glider can command such a high price

Just my 2-cents from being a hardcore glider fisherman.

Joe

Trueglide

[MattDean]

Thanks for the replies, some interesting points of view. But Uptown has just come up with a radical statement and it has got me curious. Can you give me some of examples of the shapes you find that glide well please as I am keen to see the difference it makes. I am really enjoying learning this side of luremaking. So thanks again for all you help

[diemai]

@ MattDean

As uptown says it ,....... it just came to my mind , that I have caught more pike on flat bodied gliders rather than round ones , though I use the latter more frequent , since they do cast longer(most likely bank-fishing).

Is this because of the sometimes performed "tremble" of their bodies , as descending ? Or a "wave" pattern , as they dart forward , or simply because of a bigger silhouette and causing more disturbance in the water ?

Do you know the site Lurebuilding 101 ?

A Dutch site(English version available)with plenty of info on glider jerkbaits , also a couple of building plans and describtions .

good luck:yay: , diemai

[MattDean]

Yes Diemai, I have made some lures from Lurebuilding site . The reason I put up this post in the first place is that I have bought a few gliders that have a very sexy action and I cant seem to get the same action in my own. But reading through this post has made me realise a few things that i wasn't considering so much. Like body shape and roundness of the edges. I shall keep at it. I have caught on my own lures but I am not as confident yet on the jerkbait side of things as some of the commercially bought ones. This has to change

[diemai]

@ MattDean

Yes ,.... I have also found out , that completely rounding off back and belly of a flat-bodied glider makes a big difference to the gliding performance rather than just breaking the edges .

greetz , diemai:yay:

[RiverMan]

I have run literally hundreds of tests on gliders and kept pages of notes over many years. One thing I have learned through all this process is that just about the time you think you have it all figured out something will surprise you. Just a change in wood type with all other things being the same will dramatically change lure action.

I would suggest that you choose a shape you like and then run some tests. Don't bother clearcoating the lure before testing, just give it a couple quick dips in wood sealer and give it a cast. Experiment with weight placement, hook placement, wood type, wood thickness, etc. Watch the lure glide, wobble, turn, etc. The experimenting is the most fun part of the process.

Jed V.

Edited July 12, 2009 by RiverMan

[MattDean]

Thanks for all the replies, I have made a 5inch copy of the 'Cobbs Crazy shad' and for the first time on a glider I got the action I was looking for. I rounded of the edges more than i did before and tapered in towards the nose and weighted it to sink slowly and I got myself a lure I am more than happy with, When scaling up a lure like this to say 7" do you increase all the dimensions accordingly or do you just add the length and keep the belly depth similar to the 5" one? Or is it just a suck it and see situation?

[diemai]

@ MattDean

I have made a few flat-bodied jerkbait models in different sizes , I always minored or increased the initial design sketch on a photocopier , also calculated the new width of body accordingly .

But I must say , that the action might significantly change for bad ,..... had this happen , when decreasing 4" to 5 1/2" baits to 3" or even little less .

I think , this was because I simply could not place enough ballast , as the small lures turned out to be not sufficiently buoyant anymore(even though I used lighter wood than I took for the bigger ones) .

Don't think , that this would also happen that way , when increasing a 5" to 7" or similar sizing , smaller jerks are more finacky after my experience .

Another way to fool around with is to leave the general outline in scale , but alter the width of a lure , I had read about this in the German issue of a Swedish origined crankbait making book .

The author described such in terms of changing lure sizes , when mounting different lips to the baits(lips of different size , material and weight)and also for different purposes of the lures(a deep diver furnished a little narrower in cross-section for less buoancy , etc.....) .

good luck , diemai:yay: