D-Bait Schematic?

[bigrd71]

I am new to this and have decided to try a flat sided crank like Gary Dee's D-Bait as my first lure. I have traced the D-bait, cut, sanded, and installed hardware. I have made 8 of them out of balsa and basswood. Everything is looking good, but i cant get the weighting correct. I have searched and read for hours on hardware placement and weighting, but something still isnt right. If anyone has any veteran advice or if anyone still has the schematic posted earlier on this site it would help tremendously. Thanks for the help and all the info posted on this site.

j

[BobP]

Just FYI, Blackjack posted the D-Bait schematic, but I don't think it included any info on ballast position or weight.

[lurerookie]

BobP is right on that one. I copied part of that thread to print out and take to the shop and used it make some of my first baits. There was some conversation about weighting and as I recall that suggestions went up to 1/8 or so, but that sounds pretty hefty to me. I put in about 2/3 of that and they work pretty well.

Here is the text that I saved in a reference file from Blackjack's tutorial as well as the picture/schematic. All credit to him for the great tutorial.

Since everyone seems to want this pattern I'll post it here!! The original bait is a thru wire bait, but I have modified it as to make it a no brainer. You can resize to whatever size you would like the different color lines are for:

Blue line= angle of the lip slot

first red line = the depth of the lip slot cut

second red line = the location of the bellyweight

the green lines = are used to drill the line tie and the rear hook hanger the green lines are perpindiculars (right angles so that when you place the bait in a vise to drill the line tie and rear hook hanger are placed perfectly

[Lure--Prof]

This seems like a good time to ask the following question: As a custom for-profit lure builder, how would you feel if someone, without permission, placed a schematic of your original design on the internet for literally anyone in the world to take advantage of? Another question has to be: How does this play from an ethical point of view, within the scope of Tackle Underground's mission?

Dean

[BobP]

Dean, I understand where you're coming from. Call me an "ethical relativist" or just stupid but JMHO, the only thing I've seen lately that's "original lure design" is the wire weed guard that Lee Sisson invented for crankbait lips, shown in this month's Bassmaster. And I'm probably thinking it's original design only because someone hasn't yet told me that it was ACTUALLY derived from someone else's earlier bait As a buyer of too darned many wood lures (and a maker some too) nobody is gonna sell me on the concept that they've come up with a new way to put wood, lead, wire and Lexan together that is so unique and BETTER that they should enjoy patent protection. I personally have never seen a crankbait that is not derivative of earlier crankbaits made by someone else. I'm willing to buy or build durable crankbaits that fish well, look good and catch bass. In other words, I want a consistent high quality fishing tool. The best custom crankbait makers sell exactly that - high quality - and not unique designs, IMO.

[Lure--Prof]

Those are good points Bob!

Dean

[lurerookie]

First off, I think that it is an interesting discussion and that a couple of things should be noted in this particular case. The first is that Blackjack's schematic is a representation that he made and noted that it is not thru-wire as is the original. So is the schematic a representation of his bait donated to TU? The second point is that in any industry building a better mousetrap is always problematic when you are not able to "protect" that idea from duplication as it seems is the case with lurebuilding. It doesn't make it any more ethically sound however and I understand where you are coming from.

I was mostly drawn in by reading posts by many of the "tenured" builders here that discussed making a better bait through experimentation and care vs. what can be purchased in most cases. For me personally (I'm recreational only), if somebody copied my design of mine I would be flattered, but I don't think I will see that happening any time soon. Good discussion topic and sorry for rambling, but a 9th consecutive game of go fish awaits in the next room and I am procrastinating.

[BobP]

Yeah, I'm not trying to get up anyone's nose, especially TU members who work hard to develop and produce baits for sale. I don't see any ethical problem with "copying" commercial baits as long as I don't sell them to the general public. Besides, I know I can't EXACTLY copy anyone's production bait. I don't want to! If I want one exactly the same, I'll just buy it. I'm looking to take the good attributes from the commercial bait and incorporate/modify them in a bait that works better and lasts longer. That's what crankbait builders have been doing since the first crankbait was carved a century ago.

[Lure--Prof]

I suppose my point in asking my original question, really is this: At what point do we as builders cross that wide wavy gray line from invention to imitation?

I don't think I can disagree with any part of what you're saying, Bob. I think many of us here make our own versions of new and sometimes significantly improved-on lures we've used in the past. I'm sure that one would cross the line when making an exact reproduction of a lure, and passing it either as an original, or "as good as the original" without giving due. Perhaps the line is one of those difficult to define, but "we know it when we see it" kinds of things. I'm just trying to explore this topic from both sides, because I think that many of find ourselves to various degrees, both copying, and originating.

Dean

[BobP]

I see your point, Dean. Fact is, I can't give you a pedigree of the features on most baits. Some design purists may get torqued if someone posts a pic of their version of a Zoom Tapp or whatever. I understand but personally don't think it's valid criticism. I have several versions of Tapp, all by different commercial builders. I don't know which ones were design thieving scalawags but I like mine best. It does what I want, looks how I want, and I enjoy catching fish on a bait I hand crafted. It's not for sale. If commercial baits were built to my standard, I'd never have begun building crankbaits in the first place. Conversely, if I built baits for money I'd have to compromise on many features to produce enough volume to make it viable. So it's hardly a clear cut question however you look at it. What it boils down to is; if you feel guilty about a design, you probably are. If I feel your design is unethical, I'm just imagining myself in your shoes - I'm not actually wearing them. So I may be wrong. (Note to self: don't let wife read)

[bigrd71]

Thanks for the pic and i hope i didnt get things stirred up. I am new to this and have a few ideas of modifications to my favorite crank the D-Bait. I will be more carefull about how close to copy the original, it never crossed my mind. I have 5 different shaped bills to try and may have gotten closer to solving the balance issue last night. I used a heavier wire to to make the hangers ( 19 guage i think) and it is sitting better in the water and tracking better. thanks again for all the help from the forum members, i have only been reading a few weeks and allready feel like family. I will post a pic when i get it wigglin the way i want.

j

[BobP]

Bigrd71, sorry we "hijacked" your thread and veered off subject through no fault of yours. I just thought it was worthwhile discussing an issue that has been bubbling along for awhile on TU, and your query happened to float across. The D-bait is also one of my favorite crankbait designs and I make something similar. Looking forward to pics of your version when you've finished it.