Preferred Way Leveling Glide Baits
22 replies to this topic
Posted 16 March 2012 - 03:16 PM
After reading lots of post on building glide baits, I am still not sure what is the preferred leveling angle. The few I built they are slightly head down, almost horizontal, and they work good. I am only doing drop bellies 5 inches and up. I have 4 that I tested that I purchased and the model that was tail down glided the best, also was the slowest sinker. I like to be a perfectionist and this drives me crazy, I wish I wasn't
Which of the following would be preferrred
A: tail slightley down
B: head slightley down
C: perfectly horizontal
Posted 16 March 2012 - 07:15 PM
@ Gino Testone
I've read , that a horizontal level looks like the most natural , .......but I guess , that just sligly head , -or tail down won't matter as well , as long as the lure performs well in it's gliding action .
But the gliding performance is not alone caused by the way the lure levels , rather more by it's body shape and location of ballast , all influenced by one another , naturally !
Lead ballast is the "engine" of a glidebait , ..........it is accelerated by the initial jerk with the rod and due to its much higher and concentrated mass compared to the surrounding lurebody material , it pushes or pulls the lure forward , depending whether it is located in the front or in the rear of the lure body , ....or both .
A weight in the rear pushes the glider forward(like a surface stickbait) , ........to still allow such a lure to level horizontally , naturally the rear portion of the body must be more voluminous to be able to carry more ballast .
On a jerk the accelerated weight pushes the lurebody forward , the lighter front body portion lacks guidance and stability in the water , thus sooner or later the bait darts sideward , ............ on the next jerk the lure tends to track back again towards the line pull direction , ...thus the glide bait performs a zig-zag glide path retrieved with rythmic jerks of the rod .
A weight in the front portion of a glide bait works a bit different , though results are the same , ........on a jerk it pulls the lure straigt forward
,...... the sideward glide in this case is generated by a flat and deep lurebody working like a rudder , .........catching up with the water surrounding it and leading the bait to dart to one side , ....again the second jerk would force the lure back towards line pull direction , thus the lure swims a zig-zag course .
The higher front portion is off course more voluminous compared the slender rear , thus can carry the major ballast still keeping the lure at a horizontal level .
Many gliders also have weights front AND rear , .......these are mixtures of the two options decribed above , ...........I've seen glide baits with ballast glued in almost down the entire length of the belly , .......I don't think , that these would perform too well(even made my own trials of such) , ...the ballast requires to be concentrated at not more than two locations for best results , .....my deepest belief , period!
Here a video of my trials on non-concentrated ballast , ......the lures do not perform , because above described features are not given , .......no suitable trimming possible this way :
Here is another video displaying two lures(amongst many others) that do undermine my above statements .
Look out for the lathe-turned "FattButt" glider , ......it has most ballast in it's rear PUSHING the bait forward , .......just a little lead in front for horizontal levelling , the angled nose also enhances the sideward and also downward outbreaks , the lure maintains depth quite well .
The flat-bodied " Heiddy" has it's only ballast at about the deepest part of it's belly , which virtually PULLS the lure along , the high front part of the body acts as the "rudder" forcing the "Heiddy" to dart sideward :
Sorry for bad quality of this vid , ...hope that I've explained things in a way for people to understand , ...........greetz , diemai
Posted 16 March 2012 - 08:13 PM
I wonder how effective this bait would be in the south against schooling bass? Never really seen a "glider" till I joined TU. Looks interesting
Posted 16 March 2012 - 08:16 PM
diemai The last video was good for me to see. Very educational. I am inspired to hit the garage tomorrow morning.
Edited by Sonny.Barile, 16 March 2012 - 08:17 PM.
Posted 16 March 2012 - 08:35 PM
Same here Chief, I just thought they were big crankbaits....no? Are they trolled for fish?
Posted 16 March 2012 - 08:36 PM
What has been your experience with placing ballast horizontally in a glider.
Posted 17 March 2012 - 02:02 AM
................good luck , ....so obviously my describtions were understandable !
@ Firechief , @ bassguy
Such gliders became very popular in Europe through the past 20 years or so , .......at first they came over from the north of the US being typical muskie baits , ........sooner or later European anglers and manufacturers began to scale down these massive American 8" or even 10" heavy logs of a lure to more convinient sizes like 4" to 7" .
Nowadays some manufacturers also even offer them in sizes of 2" to 3" , .....thus they can also target other predatory species than pike , ...in particular perch and zander(european walleye) , ......we do not have any bass around here central and northern Europe , only some small stocks in Spain and Italy .
Here a rather seldom catch on a glidebait(jerkbait) , ...at least in that particular water :
That "Heiddy" jerkbait mentioned in the two of my videos is the same model named "The Roach" in the describtions on that Dutch site linked below .
Gliders(in Europe we call them "jerkbaits")have become very popular amongst pike anglers since , also amongst European lure tinkerers , as they do not require as much work compared to crankbaits or even swimbaits .
Special rods are required to cast and work such baits , at least for the bigger and heavier ones , ......the poles need to be short to be able to be pointed downward to jerk or twitch those baits back in , .......needless to say , that the rods also need to be very stiff .
But my smaller , homemade baits I'm also working with my 9 foot spinning rod , not the ideal , but I can go more versatile with this rod , handles any kind of smaller and medium sized lures .
These kinda baits often require individual retrieve patterns , ....some need strong jerks with the rodtips , others work best with just small taps from the wrist , ......others can also be reeled in straight or even trolled , ...each model requires some practise of the angler to get the most appeal out of it, ........sounds difficult , but isn't , ...just some trials in in front of the boat , ....done !
@ seeking 54
Sorry , but I do not quite figure out about your question , ....do you mean the way how to put ballast to achieve a horizontal sinking position of the bait ?
Learn more about such baits , also access building plans on this Dutch site , ....version in english(look for "jerkbaits") :
good luck , .........greetz , diemai
Edited by diemai, 17 March 2012 - 02:23 AM.
Posted 17 March 2012 - 09:14 AM
The effects of going horizontally.
In the case of a drop belly glider, boring through the belly ( front to back ) at the widest part of where the shape of the belly starts to drop.
This would cause the ballast to sit higher in the bait. Having the same quantity of ballast positioned horizontally vs vertically.
In your experience would this be detrimental to the action?
Edited by seeking 54, 17 March 2012 - 09:18 AM.
Posted 17 March 2012 - 12:02 PM
Thank You very much. Very helpful information great videos. For now I decided to level horzontally with a very slow sink rate due to going to use them in shallow water and be able to pause with out dropping to the bottom right away.
Thank you to everyone
Posted 17 March 2012 - 12:57 PM
OK , ......I see what you mean now , ......never saw any glide bait balanced this way on any forums before , only made a similar prototype once :
But I guess , that the curved body of my experimental lure plays it's part as well , at least the ballast is about located in center , fore and aft .
One certainly can achieve a desired sink rate this way , but I'm assuming , that a bait can't be made to glide nicely , also not a straight-bodied one .
The ballast would about sit on the lenghtwise center axis , a bit lower or higher , ...depending on the cross-section profile of the bait .
In every case the ballast would not generate the possible best "keel" function , as it does not sit close to the deepest point of belly , ...thus the lure would be more likely to capsize rather that dart forward powered by the initial jerk of the rod , .........so a good share of the jerk's "drive" to force the lure to dart forward is wasted this way .
I'm not saying , that such lure would not have an attractive appeal at all , .......I guess it surely would come up with some kind of action , ......but it's sideward glide path would be very narrow , ......I rather think , that it can be worked with very subtle tabs from the wrist to perform some kinda "dying minnow" action , just darting a very short distance unpredictably into any directions , probably even almost "on the spot" , .......and when paused , it would also fall back into the given swimming level .
Just my , ..........greetz , diemai
Posted 17 March 2012 - 03:27 PM
If I understand what you're saying, the deep belly in the front part of the lure offers more water resistance on the pull, so it slows faster, even as the thinner tail section keeps going, and that initiates the side to side glide.
Surface walkers achieve that by putting more ballast in the back, so the back keeps going do to increased inertia when the lighter front slows.
Man, I wish I had sat next to you in school!!!! Hahaha
Posted 17 March 2012 - 06:58 PM
Yes , Mark , ...that is about what I was trying to say !
Surface walkers do hang more or less tail down , ......but if you want to achieve same action on a glidebait still sinking in a horizontal level , you need to keep it's rear more voluminous to be able to carry more ballast there .
This was my target of design with the above mentioned "FatButt" glider , .........years ago I had also made a pike shaped sinking glider , .......the slender fish's looks really does not lend itself for a fatter and more voluminous rear portion !
To overcome the problem I've still kept about the side view shape of a pike but viewed from the top I had drastically tapered the front portion as from halfway down the length leading into a pointed nose , .........this way the rear part became more voluminous and I was able to place more ballast into the rear than the front , .......which generates the desired zig-zag action !
And as far as for the school , ....I was quite a dumbass in natural science topics , ........did much better in language lessons(English , German and French) , .......in fact I did not like nor enjoy my schooltime that much !
Cheers , Dieter
Posted 17 March 2012 - 10:28 PM
diemai Which Heiddy are you showing in your lure test video? 9 or 11cm model? The lure plan calls for beech but that is unavailable here. I am going to try the 11 cm model in red oak. (same density) Also, do you use the prescribed weight position? I may need to use slightly less lead because I want to experiment with larger hooks. I have some 2/0 4x strong trebles. Maybe with the extra weight of the larger hooks I can use a lighter wood? Maybe poplar?
Edited by Sonny.Barile, 17 March 2012 - 10:30 PM.
Posted 18 March 2012 - 06:29 AM
@ seeking 54
It works nicely , .............casting it every season , but never caught on it for some reason , ...maybe the color ?
But it's casting performance is unmatched , ......due to the heavy rear it shoots out like a missile , particular important for fishing from the bank , ....gotta do more in different colors , I guess .
My "Zig-Zag" gliders have proven to be more successful , yet cast pretty well , too , ........the lower lure on the picture is one of thes , though with a bit fatter front portion and a rather blunt nose :
But these do employ the principle of the "pulling" ballast , as the majority of lead sits in the thicker front portion , the pointed nose causes the lure to dart into all directions unpredicably .
To gain sufficient space(or depth) for the weightholes fore and aft , I've installed the line tie and rear eyescrew pointing upward as much as possible , ....not straight on the center axis with their shafts , .......this also provides more strength against getting pulled out .
It is rather a 9 cms version , I guess , made from teakwood ,.........you can build any size between 2 1/2" and 6" , anyway , .....you'd only have to match your material to the size of the glider .
Another option to vary the buoancy of your blanks is making them a tad thicker or thinner as described , ...talkin' bout max. 10% to 15% of given thickness , ........if to much difference , it surely would take too much influence on the action of your bait .
Smallest versions should be made of a very buoyant material and biggest ones of a less buoyant material , .......this is assure a proper function of the bait , ........f.e. a small bait less buoyant might not take enough ballast for proper function without sinking like a brick , .......on the other hand a big bait of very buoyant material might require a big load of lead to even get it to slowly sink at all , .......probably not enough space to glue in all of this ballast at proper location , also sucha bait might become too sluggish in it's action .
As far as for determining the required balast weight and it's proper location on the lure's belly I'd apply a temporay clearcoat onto the lureblank or prime it in white(to prevent water sepage during testing) , rig hooks and use an approbiate paperclip on the linetie to substitute the weight of a rigid single-strand wire leader essential to work these baits .
Now I'd tape a leadchunk under the belly(with electric insulation tape) , put the blank in a water bucket and see , what it does .
I can now alter the size/weight of the lead weight until I'm satisfied with the sink rate and also alter the location on the belly until the lure sinks at a horizontal level(or as desired) .
Now I'd mark that spot , ........after disassembling hooks and leader I'd drill a hole or furnish an accomodating pouch with my "Dremel" and glue in the lead chunk , using glue or some kinda putty to close the hole entirely , sanding back to body outline after curing .
One has to consider that the finished lure would still sink a little faster than determined before , as one would have drilled away some buoyant material , ....also later paint,-and topcoats would add some weight to the lure .
So if you want a glider with a very slow sinkrate , it's back portion still has to slighly break through the bucket's water surface with ballast temporary taped on .
I this case I also would not rig the most thick wired hooks for testing , .......if you would estimate wrong and your finished lure would still rise up slowly or suspend , assembling thicker wired hooks would finally get you to your desired slow sink rate .
I take the building describtion sketches only as a guideline on where to put the ballast , ......I always trim my gliders individually , lure for lure as described above .
I remember one occasion that I was lazy to do this , ...had three lures made after the same template and cut from teakwood kitchen boards looking quite alike , .....only tested one of them in the above mentioned manner and placed the same amount of determined weight into each one , ...only to find , that only the lure being tested worked to my satisfaction later , the other two did still float up !
One bait I could fix with thicker wired hooks to finally get to sink slowly (I prefer faster sink rates approx. 1 foot/sec for deeper waters , anyway), ........but on the other one I really had to tinker again to get it to proper function .
Any kind of wood is a natural material and may vary in it's density and weight , ......even when cut from one board , ........this is why I always take the effort of trimming each and every glidebait individually .
Hope this helps a bit , .......good luck with your efforts , .........I remember my very first "Heiddy" pike of about 27" quite a few years ago , ........it attacked that 4 1/2" lure that viciously , so that the tail hook came to entirely stick out of the fish's gillplate !
greetz , Dieter
Posted 18 March 2012 - 09:47 PM
The curved glider seems to have a lot of potential just from how you described it's action and the way you retrieve it. This may very well be a finesse lure that's most effective in certain conditions ( approaching cold front, colder late season water temperatures) .....could I perhaps suggest the following colors; all white, black with gold scales, all white with chrome or silver scales, firetiger.
For me, these colors have been successful with muskies.
Let me know.
Posted 19 March 2012 - 10:08 PM
Thank you for your help.
I began building a Heiddy yesterday. I have the body done with screw eyes epoxied in. Today I put a coat of sealer on and tomorrow I will try a bucket test with hooks and some lead.
Posted 20 March 2012 - 01:11 AM
..............thanks for your color suggestions ,...... local pike might like these , too , ..........I really have too few lure in such of your described(or similar) color combinations , ........nowadays I often go for more darker color designs , as our local waters have become more clearer through past years !
But if I won't try , I won't find out , .....always working on different kinda lures (not neccessarely gliders though) , ....that I might paint that way , thanks for pointing out !
Good luck , Sonny , .........things should turn out alright , ......the "Heiddy " is quite a foolproof lure model , .......eager to see and hear about your results .
BTW , .......did you figure out that the lure's name "Heiddy" is put together from parts of the surnames of the two designers named Hein and Eddy ?
As far as I'm concerned , this lure was never commercialized , put out on the internet for home tinkerers exclusively .
Good luck , Dieter