bladesandbaits Posted March 8, 2019 Report Share Posted March 8, 2019 I wish Dean McClean would surface. Every crankbait I have made by Dean hunts and I've had them 10 years. 90% of the bites come on the first 2 or 3 cranks of the reel handle. On another note. I have been fishing the original Megabass S- crank alot.( Not the KO).It moves off center and returns nice and this is more probounced when bounced off cover. The body style is pot bellied and the steel balls are deep in the belly behind the front hook hanger. The bill is square but wider out to the end than most production square bills . The rear hook hanger comes out just above the tail. If you take a step back and examine the bait carefully it doesn't look traditional and is actually kind of wierd looking. Its clear that there are multiple factors in the design that contribute to the overall performance but they have clearly figured it something else out that's not visual as the knock offs I have used don't react the same. Regards, Blades 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jesse Allison Posted March 9, 2019 Report Share Posted March 9, 2019 VodkaMan, this is my first post but i have been scouring the hardbait forums for quitesome time now and I greatly appreciate all the effort you put into the information you share with us all here! I have like so many others here grown very addicted to building and painting crankbait's and jerkbait's! Thanks to you and this forum I have been able to build some pretty successful lures and when I am experimenting with new ideas and can't quite figure something out I can reference these forums and usually always find the answer. Thanks again, Jesse 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark poulson Posted March 11, 2019 Report Share Posted March 11, 2019 (edited) In a follow up, I made two more shallow running 2.5 baits, with longer bills. The first one's bill was a tad under 1" (the thickness of a pencil line) out from the front of the lure. It hunts at a low or moderate retrieve, moving back and forth from a straight line retrieve about 6", from what I could see in the dirty water. On a high speed retrieve, the bait rolls. The second one's bill was 15/16" out from the front of the lure. It hunts at both low and high speed retrieves The water is too dirty to see how much. Both baits has as identical as I could make them bodies, bills, ballast, and lip angles. Clearly, the length of the bill is what affects the bait's hunting action, at least in my prototypes. My hat's off to Vodkaman Dave! He solved it in a reproducible way, so I have a great starting point for any cranks I make that I want to hunt. So I know have four baits that hunt, two shallow (3-4'), and two deeper (6-8'). I'm going to paint the shallow ones with a red craw pattern, and the two deeper ones with a bluegill pattern. The other two deeper baits that don't hunt, but swim just fine, I'll probably paint in a chart. sexy shad pattern, since that simulates lots of the baitfish here on the CA Delta. Edited March 11, 2019 by mark poulson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vodkaman Posted March 11, 2019 Author Report Share Posted March 11, 2019 Mark - good job, you have the hunt problem beaten into submission. I am already re-thinking the 3rd harmonic pendulum hypothesis as this puts the ballast too low. I am sure there will be something there but building a lure around it would be a problem. I will still pursue the lazy 'S' motion independently. My current thoughts for the wild hunt; is that the CoG must be in line with the roll rotation axis; a line drawn from the tow eye perpendicular to the lip. This still places the ballast very low, which is in line with what I remember of the bait from 12 years ago. This is still triple point; combining yaw, roll and pitch. Still hypothesis though as I have been a little tardy in moving on to the second prototype, probably due to apprehension. For the second prototype I am using one of a batch of fifty bodies that were rejected by a customer. I would be loving the irony if the rejected body produced the first Triple Point Hunter Dave 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark poulson Posted March 11, 2019 Report Share Posted March 11, 2019 I did have the same moving ballast in all the baits, up 1/4" above the line tie to rear hook hanger line, and 1/4" behind a line drawn perpendicular to that line up from the 3 gram belly hanger/weight combination. My next prototype would have been with no moving ballast, and a 4 gram belly weight, repeating the longer bill experiment, if these hadn't succeeded. Fortunately, I don't have to go to through that exercise. While I enjoy making baits, I'd much rather find one that works, and just duplicate that one. I am lazy! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vodkaman Posted June 17, 2019 Author Report Share Posted June 17, 2019 (edited) Update - this project has not been forgotten, but producing a prototype without a workshop is soul destroying. Also, unless I can actually predict were the 'triple point' is, how can I actually build anything. So, I have decided to skip the manual prototype stage and go straight in with a computer CAD design, were I can actually calculate the CoG and CoF (centre of flotation), and alter the design characteristics to pull everything together. The design for the first effort is complete, but not perfect. the triple point is still 3mm too high, but close enough for a first attempt. The lure body shape is very strange, going against standard protocol, namely a thick belly and narrow back. I am sure Mark will groan when he sees the images I have just completed the first mold master design and have started sending out emails to 3D printing companies for quotations. The body will be a hollow pour of standard fiberglass type resin, readily available for me here in Indonesia. The master 3D printed mold will be used to produce Bondo halves that are reversible to give both halves of a production mold. For the first prototype, the lip is designed to require trimming to tune the action, and will be corrected on subsequent mold prints. If I had any sense at all, I would not post anything until after the first tests, but I am not afraid of making a fool of myself, also I have confidence in the theory. The molds have built in injectors in order to achieve complete pours, a technique that I have developed over the years. I have not incorporated vacuum technology, but that might change with the second prototype if everything works out well. For the first prototype, one mold will produce two bodies. Here are a few computer images of what prototype 1 will look like, including a pic of the mold master. A bit of a give-away, but no secrets here. The last image is a test model, to check that the demolded parts are as expected. Edited June 17, 2019 by Vodkaman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vodkaman Posted June 17, 2019 Author Report Share Posted June 17, 2019 (edited) I have included a hole for the installation of a rear end hook. This is not part of the triple point design but will be tried out during testing. I know you guys love lots of hooks The body is 75mm (3") length. Dave Edited June 17, 2019 by Vodkaman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hillbilly voodoo Posted June 17, 2019 Report Share Posted June 17, 2019 First time I opened this thread and definitely some useful information. You are clearly more technical about things than I am. Really I just come up with an idea build it and throw it in the water to see what it does. Only 3 years ago I started putting more thought into lure building Unfortunately I am now trying to recreate actions of past one offs myself. It’s a different game than past building with the attitude “let’s see if fish will eat this” with no plans of recreation. Being sloppy and creative actually caused me to stumble on some interesting actions By what you are describing in your first post I have made lures in the past that had at least a variation of the action you are looking for. Might still have a lipless that does the lazy “S” as well. We might be trying to accomplish a similar action If my low tech tinkering accomplishes something I will let you know. Odds are you will beat me to it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vodkaman Posted June 17, 2019 Author Report Share Posted June 17, 2019 My lazy 'S' was a lipped lure with a very low ballast location. Way too low to make an aesthetic representation. Nice action though. I have lots of respect for your input posts and what you are doing, not wishing to sound patronizing, I mean it Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vodkaman Posted June 17, 2019 Author Report Share Posted June 17, 2019 Yes, I am a technical builder. Some would say way too techy. BUT, I will also say that tech is not required to come up with something spectacular. Experience and imagination will also get you there. Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hillbilly voodoo Posted June 17, 2019 Report Share Posted June 17, 2019 I can’t even remember how I accomplished the lazy “S” and would have to dig through old lures testing each to find it. Could not tell you how I made it even See for 10years I owned a trout farm so I would sit there and make crude wooden lures. Pocket knife, dremel, and sand paper no plans just make it and throw it in the pond. I never made the same lure and built about 10 a day. No thought or paying attention to what I was doing just kept building. My trout seen lots of lures lol acomplished a lot just can’t figure out how I did it. I wish I took the time to understand what I was doing in the past. We have a different way of getting things done but seeing the way you go about things I find help full with my projects Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vodkaman Posted June 17, 2019 Author Report Share Posted June 17, 2019 Fascinating. I would love to have a go at reverse engineering one of your successes. Perhaps come up with an explanation for its action. So many people think it has all been done before. I am of the opinion that we have hardly scratched the surface. Nearly all lure designers are fixated on what has been done before, the way things are with minor variations. To produce something new, you have to 'break the mold'. Imagination comes first, certainly before tech. Yes, I am a techy, but you have to have an idea first. The problem with being techy is that a lot of ideas never make it to the water's edge, and that is a mistake, because we are trying to define NEW tech Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vodkaman Posted June 17, 2019 Author Report Share Posted June 17, 2019 The problem with trial and error, which is a powerful tool, is that you can hit the 'edge' of something brilliant, as I did all those years ago, but fail to reproduce the event. Tech takes that event and brings an explanation, an understanding of what happened. With that understanding, that rare event becomes reproducible. The only example of this fact is hunting, which was a well known phenomena but was not explained and not reproducible. And now with tech, it is available to anyone who wants it! Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hillbilly voodoo Posted June 17, 2019 Report Share Posted June 17, 2019 Most of my best actions have been lost, ripped apart trying to figure it out or fished till destroyed. I do have a few still but I need to find them. Was actually looking for that lazy “S” plug but have not found it yet. Some are ugly but they move I need to work on my organization Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hillbilly voodoo Posted June 17, 2019 Report Share Posted June 17, 2019 5 minutes ago, Vodkaman said: The problem with trial and error, which is a powerful tool, is that you can hit the 'edge' of something brilliant, as I did all those years ago, but fail to reproduce the event. Tech takes that event and brings an explanation, an understanding of what happened. With that understanding, that rare event becomes reproducible. The only example of this fact is hunting, which was a well known phenomena but was not explained and not reproducible. And now with tech, it is available to anyone who wants it! Dave Welcome to my world and why my focus in the last 3 years has been refining my skills, understanding why, and reproduction of my lures Trying to be sure that once I get things to do as I want I can reproduce it this time Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vodkaman Posted June 17, 2019 Author Report Share Posted June 17, 2019 I can feel a collaboration coming on. your imagination and my tech Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hillbilly voodoo Posted June 17, 2019 Report Share Posted June 17, 2019 If I get it right and can’t reproduce a lure we may need to talk My A D D has 6 different prototypes going at different stages right now and fighting myself to complete them before I start another But I need to go test my repair on my boat. Only have a few good months of open water fishing in my part of Canada Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vodkaman Posted June 17, 2019 Author Report Share Posted June 17, 2019 (edited) This is not a time based thing, there is no urgency between you and me. I have things to do also, things that I am working on in totally unrelated areas. This message goes out to anyone; you have an anomaly then present it, either to me or choose someone. Maybe I can help, maybe not. TU is a BIG community, not everyone is trying to rip you off. But going public is a risk. Personally, as demonstrated in the above post, I have long lost interest in the fiscal pursuits of the lure game, although this was not always the case. I too had dreams. I am willing to help, but I am not going to design a lure for you, as some people whom I have worked with in the past seem to think. My charge rate for employment work is $100 per hour, so even if I produce the triple point lure, few will be able to afford it In theory, tech is a young man's game. I am 'too old for this shit' apparently. Dave Edited June 17, 2019 by Vodkaman 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nathan Posted June 17, 2019 Report Share Posted June 17, 2019 Good stuff Dave..KCDano would eat this up!!..Nathan 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark poulson Posted June 17, 2019 Report Share Posted June 17, 2019 7 hours ago, Vodkaman said: Update - this project has not been forgotten, but producing a prototype without a workshop is soul destroying. Also, unless I can actually predict were the 'triple point' is, how can I actually build anything. So, I have decided to skip the manual prototype stage and go straight in with a computer CAD design, were I can actually calculate the CoG and CoF (centre of flotation), and alter the design characteristics to pull everything together. The design for the first effort is complete, but not perfect. the triple point is still 3mm too high, but close enough for a first attempt. The lure body shape is very strange, going against standard protocol, namely a thick belly and narrow back. I am sure Mark will groan when he sees the images I have just completed the first mold master design and have started sending out emails to 3D printing companies for quotations. The body will be a hollow pour of standard fiberglass type resin, readily available for me here in Indonesia. The master 3D printed mold will be used to produce Bondo halves that are reversible to give both halves of a production mold. For the first prototype, the lip is designed to require trimming to tune the action, and will be corrected on subsequent mold prints. If I had any sense at all, I would not post anything until after the first tests, but I am not afraid of making a fool of myself, also I have confidence in the theory. The molds have built in injectors in order to achieve complete pours, a technique that I have developed over the years. I have not incorporated vacuum technology, but that might change with the second prototype if everything works out well. For the first prototype, one mold will produce two bodies. Here are a few computer images of what prototype 1 will look like, including a pic of the mold master. A bit of a give-away, but no secrets here. The last image is a test model, to check that the demolded parts are as expected. Dave, One of the most successful crankbaits of all time, the Luhr Jensen Speed Trap, has the same wide belly/narrow back cross section, and it is still amazing in how well it catches fish. In addition, it is almost arrow head-shaped, widening from a pointed nose to a wide belly 2/3 of the way back, before tapering back down a pointed tail, all the while maintaining that wide belly/narrow back cross section. I made a solid copy from PVC, and it works! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vodkaman Posted June 17, 2019 Author Report Share Posted June 17, 2019 Just so that you all know, KCDano is a lure guru that helped me enormously with his knowledge and encouragement when I first joined TU. We exchanged more than a thousand PM messages and many hours of Skype messages. A true hero and embodiment of what TU is all about; helping and encouraging progress in this endeavor that fascinates so many of us. Dan hasn't been around for a few years, so I hope he is healthy and well. Dave 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vodkaman Posted June 17, 2019 Author Report Share Posted June 17, 2019 (edited) Mark - very interesting. the lure is not so different. Your theory of a wide upper body is of course correct for a stable lure action. I would never dispute that. Hell, I don't even know if this thing will even swim Dave Edited June 17, 2019 by Vodkaman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark poulson Posted June 17, 2019 Report Share Posted June 17, 2019 (edited) Dave, I think the narrow back/wide bottom cross section of the Speed Trap forces the water to flow down along the sides of the lure, and creates low pressure areas (eddies) as it passes the relatively flat bottom. That might have something to do with how stable the lure swims, even on a really fast retrieve. Whatever causes it, it is a killer lure! Edited June 17, 2019 by mark poulson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vodkaman Posted June 17, 2019 Author Report Share Posted June 17, 2019 Mark - I agree. Rattle traps generally have a flat or concave nose section. This starts the vortex. The fat, abrupt belly section completes the action, allowing the vortex to complete and move the lure. It is all about the vortex Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hillbilly voodoo Posted June 17, 2019 Report Share Posted June 17, 2019 Hey Dave here is one of the baits I am working on. It is biased off a lure that gave me an erratic action with lots of tail movement. Can’t remember the lip shape of the original and the original was metal lip. This one has not seen water yet and better a narrower lip will be better. Lip is removable I use a layers of masking tape to pressure fit till I find what gives the desired action. This way I can bring multiple lips with me and test them all that day Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
