sinyo

always failed in sinking crank,help!!!

57 posts in this topic

because all of your advice I'm already success with floating crank (it can swim well n catch fishes:teef:)

now I'm stepping forward to make some sinking crank, but it always failed in action(run straight like a torpedo):(

anyone knows why?

Edited by sinyo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Sinyo.

First question is why would you want to make a sinking crank, there is no advantage to it, other than it may throw further?

Post some pics showing the body and the lip, sizes, materials, ballast locations and any other relevant information. Then I am sure someone will be able to help you.

Dave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dave,

It looks like you have a lure making neighbor.

Two nuts in Indonesia, who'da thunk it? :lol::lol:

I thought we were mostly in the U.s. or Europe. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@mark: :Dfisherman not just from a few country, but a whole world

by the way I'm very lucky to have one neighbor that very talented

@dave: some of my friend told me that sinking lure will catch more fish than the float one...sorry I don't have the picture because I already threw away all of them

now my questions is:

  • is it true if making sinking more difficult than float ?
  • is anyone out there have same experienced like that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sinyo,

I hope you're safe, living in the same country with the mad genius, Vodkaman. :lol:

On the subject of floaters vs. divers, many more fish are caught on sub-surface lures. The plastic worm is, by far, the most productive lure in the world, apart from live bait, and it's fished primarily on the bottom.

Fish eat on the surface only at very specific times, and under very specific conditions, and, even then, most fish don't eat at the surface at all.

Before you try to make a sinking lure, try making a floater with a bill, so it dives on the retrieve. The buoyancy of a floater makes it possible to fish these lures through underwater obstacles, like brush and trees, if you use a slow retrieve, and pause when you feel the lure hit something, so it can float back up over the obstacle. Then you can resume your retrieve. It takes a little while to learn the feel for it, but, once you do, you'll find the better fish hang out in the gnarliest brush piles and trees, and you'll be able to dig the out.

Dave can surely help you to learn how to build lures with diving bills.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not able to comment on the problems associated with the failure of the lure you mention running the way you would like, but Dave is right that it is hard to help without a little more information.

Dave I disagree though that with a weighted crank "there is no advantage to it". I have learned in the last few years fishing tournaments and seeing 50-70 teams each time out that it is not always the standard baits that catche the most or biggest fish. Every event sees something outside the box raising eyebrows. Why can't a weighted crank do the same thing.

The great thing about being the builder is the chance to try new things and hopefully have the joy of seeing those baits work on the water. I have built some cranks that with just that little bit of extra weight made it a sinking bait and the action did not change. Now the bait can be presented lower in the water column, something that could not be done with the floating version.

Sinyo, keep experimenting and have fun in the process. Even the frustrations can be very rewarding in the end.

DaveB.

KelpKritter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@mark: dave already teach me about that;)

I hope U don't jealous because you live far away from that genius man:lol:

@daveB: I'll keep experimenting but not now or tommorow...

sometime we need little time for a break after we failed

now I'll focus only on diving bait till I have solution or courage to try it again...

thx guys for your advise n encouragement:yay:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also think sinking lures "have their place" in a varied tackle box. One consideration in building them is the sink rate. The more ballast you put in the lure, the faster it sinksk but the less action it has, so you need to calibrate the ballast with a "sink test" to get those qualities balanced right. After you waterproof the lure but before you paint it, put hooks on it (they are part of the ballast system too!) and hang lead weight on the belly hook. Put the lure in water and vary the amount of ballast weight until you get the sink rate you want. Then install it. Most sinking minnow lures are fished with rod twitches so they glide to the left and right underwater. Placement and amount of ballast can help get that action.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
.....a sinking crank, there is no advantage to it, other than it may throw further?

Dave

Dave that is a sweeping remark... Just to list a few, what about Rapala Count down, Magnums and RatLTrap (sub-category of crank) and a plethora of other less widely known sinking cranks. They have a place in the arsenal.

Now you tell me what are the advantages of a sinking crank. :?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LP, you listed for me a bunch of cranks, but no advantages, but yes you are correct, the statement was rather over stated.

My point is, take two identical cranks, one weighted to float, the other weighted to slow sink. Swim one from the surface, let the other sink to the bottom, then swim. They will both eventually end up at the same swimming depth.

Apart from casting, the advantage is that by letting the lure sink for say 10 - 15 seconds before retrieving, the lure will reach its natural swim depth sooner.

I think there has also been some confusion between the words 'sinker' and 'floater'. The statement 'floater' does not mean it swims on the surface, it just means it starts from the surface, always rising when the retrieve is paused. Mark has covered this plan well in his post.

If you add too much weight to sink the lure faster, you will kill the action. Again, this point was covered nicely by Bob.

So, what are the advantages, other than the two that I have stated, as I cannot think of any more.

Sinyo, never throw away baits that do not work, These are your learning tools. You should percevere with the bait, changing one thing at a time, until you get it to work. Then you stick it on your wall, to remind yourself of the problem/solution.

Dave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ sinyo

If I intend to make a sinking crankbait(I fish these in fall and winter slowly along the bottom around 45 feet/15 metres) , I would choose a less buoyant wood for it from the start .

For example , two cranks alike , one sinking ,.... I'd make the floater of abachewood and the sinker of beechwood , which is far more dense than the first wood mentioned .

This way I do not have to put as much ballast weight into the sinker , since too much weight might minor or even spoil the action entirely , as you have described .

Vice versa , if making a sinker from buoyant material , you'd have to put a lot of ballast to render it sinking , so this might be the reason for your failure .

In general lures of heavier wood have a little more "sluggish" action than buoyant ones , meaning that their frequency of wobble is a little lower , to get more action , you could maybe try and make the lip a little longer than you would on a floater .

good luck , diemai:yay:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@diemai: I think you give me the best explanation...I use very buoyant wood. I don't know exactly what you call it, but in Latin it call GUAZUMA ULMIFOLIA LAMK i choose this wood because it's very easy to shape(appopriate for newbie like me)

to make it sink I put a lot of lead in single hole right below lip slot, my point is to make it sink head first..

from now maybe I should use different kind of wood to make different type of lure;)

@dave: that's a good idea but it's too late...from tommorow I'll save my failed lure n learn more from it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...snipped

My point is, take two identical cranks, one weighted to float, the other weighted to slow sink. Swim one from the surface, let the other sink to the bottom, then swim. They will both eventually end up at the same swimming depth.

Apart from casting, the advantage is that by letting the lure sink for say 10 - 15 seconds before retrieving, the lure will reach its natural swim depth sooner.

...snipped

Dave

Dave I cannot agree with you on both of that. You are obviously not looking at sinking crank from the right perspective and the mechanics of a sinking crank is different from a floating crank too. The key is one is cranked to it's running depth and the other "countdown" to desired running depth.

To make comparison easier, just look at Rapala Original Floating Minnow and compare it to a Countdown. Obviously one floats and the other sinks. Now ask yourself when would you use a Rapala Original and when would you fish the Countdown. Both lures are essentially the same with the difference of just the weighting scheme.

Here are the X-ray of both lures:

Original:

9d97e19c.jpg

Countdown:

fe5fcbcd.jpg

Now got out and buy one of each and fish it. Then compare if they reach the same "natural running depth". Fish both in all types of water condition too, still water, running water, rapids perhaps. Your answer to the advantage of a sinking crank is at the end of this test. :wink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ sinyo

One more thing , that you could try with that buoyant wood is to put maybe 3/5 of the neccessary weight into the belly and 2/5 in the back of lure . Or 2/3 belly and 1/3 back ?

You need to try , also different locations for the weights on the lureblank !

I once received a 6" balsa blank from a friend in Finland , I have had the same problem with it ,... it was just too buoyant and I wanted it to dive at least 10 feet ,....but it popped up like a cork !

For testing I had taped weight to its belly to have the lure float up with its back just sticking out a bit , but this way it did not wiggle at all !

So I took a good share of the weight(bigger leadshot) and taped to the back and ,....Voila......the lure did wobble to my satisfaction !

So I drilled holes into the blank and glued in the weights at determined locations .

I read about this in the German edition of a Swedish luremaking book , otherwise I might not have thought about trying it !

good luck , diemai:yay:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ Vodkaman

In fall 2006 I especially went to buy some of the new sinking "Rapala Super Shad Raps" , the floating versions were already well proven pike lures over here .

But these only dive up to maybe 8 feet trolled , retrieved still less , so rather useless to fish the deepest holes of my favourite swim during the cold season .

Fish are most likely bottom located and also quite sluggish at this time of year .

These lures sink approx. 1 1/2 feet/second , I attached an extra long and heavy leader to get them down even faster , no time to waste on those short winter days !

I just tossed them slowly along the bottom at 35 to 45 feet , pausing them every few feet to let them sink back and rest for a second or two , maybe even longer ,.........and I had caught some real nice zander and pike that way .

Everybody there is using plastics for bottom fishing , so I just thought , that I might try something else ,..........since that time my armory of sinking crankbaits is steadily growing , even though I have also had an affinity against them before .

greetz , diemai:yay:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LP, well we will just have to agree to disagree, as testing those two lures for me would be a waste of time, as the lips are very different.

Here is an analogy. Take a plain lead sinker and troll it behind a boat at speed. How deep do you think it will go? My guess is not more than a few feet. The even fluid forces around the concentric weight are neither forcing the weight up or down. The only force affecting the weight is the resistance of the line passing through the water.

Another analogy. The fairground centrifugal ride. The faster the drum spins, the less significant the gravity force becomes as the centrifugal forces take over. It is the same with the lip/body fluid forces, they take over.

If the lure has a large ballast and sinks like a stone, then of course it will affect the depth. At the slow speeds of cranking, the fluid forces are not strong enough to overcome the gravity force of the ballast. But if you increase the speed, eventually, they will swim at virtually the same depth. But the differences in ballast between a floater and a slow sinker are soon cancelled out by the combination of fluid forces between the lip/body and the speed.

The lip/body geometry determines the depth, the faster the lure swims, the less significant the ballast becomes. At 2 cranks per second (1m/s) the ballast becomes insignificant, unless you tie a brick to it. If you want to get deep, the line thickness is more important, dropping 5Lbs off the breaking strain can get you an extra few feet depth.

As Diemai posted, the extra weight allows you to fish more of the water column (thanks Dan), by pausing and allowing the bait to sink down again, but that is about it. Also ref Diemai

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dave the advantage to a weighted or sinking crank is your able to fish a whole new water column at a slower speed.

there are several musky baits that I take advantage of this style of fishing. Its kind of like slow rolling spinnerbaits but you let the bait sink and you can slow crank over weeds or structure and keeping it in the strike zone alittle longer. You more jerk and pause these style baits for the best effect in my opinion.

Edited by jamie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My favorite sinking bait is the storm kickin minnow. These baits have good action and they slow roll well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ Vodkaman

Sorry , seems , that I did not express myself well enough , I meant , that the floating "Super Shad Raps" don't run deeper than 8 feet , the sinking versions go any depth you allow them to descend to !

My apologies for that:huh::yes: !

greetz , diemai:yay:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems this post has taken on two different arguements. One is the dynamic of a crankbait and how it works as stated by Vodkaman. I am not nearly as scientific about how a crankbait works so I will take his word on it. The other arguement, which is why I believe a sinking crankbait has it's place, is how you fish it. Getting a sinking crankbait to the depth you intend to fish and straight grinding will bring it right back up to it's intended running depth, but cranking it a bit and then letting it sink out again keeps it in the water column you desire to fish. To make the point look at a plastic worm which is clearly meant to be fished on the bottom. Unless it is fished very slow or even quicker and then given time to settle back to the bottom it to will come up off the bottom and straight back to the boat defeating the purpose of this lure. This is the same concept Dave presents with trolling a piece of lead. My point is you can make just about any lure do just about whatever you want if you set out to fish it in that manner. It may not be the traditional way but it probably will work none the less.

DaveB.

KelpKritter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
because all of your advice I'm already success with floating crank (it can swim well n catch fishes:teef:)

now I'm stepping forward to make some sinking crank, but it always failed in action(run straight like a torpedo):(

anyone knows why?

can you show a pic of your bait..You can also try taking some of the weight out of the belly of your bait and add a little too the spine of the bait. This subject was talked about in another thread and diemai I believe had a simular problem and fixed the swim of his bait by doing this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sinyo,

As you can see there are many differences of opinion:argue:. Some of which are so stubborn they cannot see things in a different light even when shown examples:flame:. That stubbornness is one reason I do not frequent this site nearly as often.

Now to offer assistance for you question; there are many means to obtaining a sinking lure that you will need to experiment with. The most obvious is add weight. You already found out this kills the action:pissed:. Another option is to reduce buoyancy without adding weight this can be accomplished in many ways, redesigning your lure profile, using denser materials, using plastics instead of wood, creating a hybrid lure by combining different materials, or whatever else you may think of.

Remember it was once said that man cannot fly nor will we ever walk on the moon and we do both quite regularly. So don't let ones negative comments:boo: disguised as good intentions :censored: get you down. All I really can say is keep trying and you will succeed:yay:.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@jamie: sorry I don't have the picture, I already threw it away, since I knew it's did not work..I always glued it with epoxy permanently before first swimming test(it's my biggest fault) , I knew some builder will drill the lead again to reduce the weight if it's too heavy, and yesterday I have tried buts it's so difficult because the size of lure I make is very small (3,5 cm in length and 6-7 mm in width) and I just use ordinary hand drill machine( thx god my finger still complete:halo:)

maybe I should use silicon glue before I sure about the weighting so if anything wrong it's more easy to remove the glue

@cheesehead: thx for the idea about how to make sinking lure ...but U need to know I'm not surrender because one "negative" comment, I just need to focus on one type of lure until I'm expert about it then I'll move to the next level..

and I think the "stubborn" guy U mentioned not completely stubborn he just want to express his opinion n he already admit his fault on post #10

I hope my thread doesn't cause a conflict in this forum

peace to all of you:tipsy:

Edited by sinyo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sinyo if you use a denser/heavier kind of wood that barely floats

build 5 alike lures on the first you DONT add any weight at all .

Finish it completely testrun it so it swims find the centre of movement ,the so called X-point in which it doesnt move seen from above THIS is your weighting point .

Now add a light weight to it so it sinks with the desired sinkingrate ,if done correctly you´ll have a perfectly swimming sinking lure .

You dont have to look at other x-rayed baits since they are calculated by a whole team of designers and computers if you follow my simple guide to building a sinking lure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ Swede

Would that "X" point be the same location as the center of gravity lengthwise :huh:?

I mean that point where you would hang the lure on a thread and it would hang absolutely horizontal , just similar to ancient scales !

greetz , diemai:yay:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now