Jump to content
Large Bellie Glide Baits
23 replies to this topic
Posted 07 April 2012 - 07:13 PM
I have been working on some large bellie glide bait. The bait is 6 inches long by 2.5 inches in the bellie. I was having trouble to get them a longer glide, the biggest problem I was having was that the bait would swim out of the water on a longer pull. My first taught was to add more ballast that did not solve the problem,jus a little better. I experimented also wit new location of the toe line screw eye nothing worked to my satisfaction. The all time I was thinking and checking notes that I took here on TU. One thing that stuck in my mind was that lighter wood bait have better action, the other taught was that due to such a wide bait that made it top heavy. I decided to make the bait lighter by drilling 5 holes on top of the back 1/2 diameter all the way down to the shaft wire, some hole 1 inch deep. Once the holes were drilled I cut sliver of dowel pins about 1/6 thick than plugged and glued the top of the holes. For quick testing i used another tip from TU I sealed the repairs with CA glue that works really great to get you back on the water quickly.
Now for the good part
The baits now glide fantastic, I had two of them I done one first matter of fact I was so disappointed that I could not get this glide baits to work I almost did not test the bait figuring was not going to work. I was wrong. I repaired the second bait this I drilled 3/8 holes due to the back was tapered the first was straight, both now work really good and they will not swim out of the water.
Even dough I figured out the problem my logic to make them lighter does not really makes sense to me and top heavy does not really work for me, because when I added more ballast still did not solve the problem. Taking wood from the top made the bait lighter and more buoiant that did not make any sense either.
The baits are made from red oak and took out 12 grams of wood and this made a huge difference. It is like night and day. In the way I am glad that this happened, you sure learn a ton when things go array and go to work to figure out how to make something work properly
Posted 08 April 2012 - 09:29 AM
Interesting to hear how your process worked out. Thanks for posting.
Without a photo, it's difficult to know exactly what you did, but maybe you made the tail section lighter, so it sat more nose down on the pause.
Whatever you did, it worked.
I agree that we usually learn more from our mistakes in lure making, and in life in general.
Posted 08 April 2012 - 11:12 AM
Maybe capping the holes made it even more buoyant by trapping in some air.
Posted 08 April 2012 - 04:27 PM
Here is the picture of one of the 6 inch shad bait that I drilled the holes on the back of the bait. I also done this on 3 other baits same style but 5 inch long. The result it is like I said earlier like night and day.
Posted 08 April 2012 - 04:32 PM
The picture was not on my last post. Maybe this time
Posted 09 April 2012 - 12:02 AM
I have read on here that the ballast weight on a jerk bait is like a motor in a bait that pushes or pulls the bait throught the water with momentum so it makes sense that the lighter the body of the bait the more effecient the "motor" will be.
Posted 09 April 2012 - 08:15 AM
Seems to me by making the top of the lure lighter you've changed the ballast ratio and it had the same effect as adding more ballast.
Posted 09 April 2012 - 09:23 AM
That is exactly my first reaction to change the ratio of the ballast nothing worked including tail down, level head down and also extremely large ammount of lead. This seems only to effect shorter fatter lures, so I am convinced that shorter wider bait become top heavy so I figured by taking weight from the top would solve the problem.
I really love to get suggestion that is how we learn from each others, like they say two heads are better than one. I also like to share my succes due to TU has helped me to advance myself and become a good bait builder
Thank you everyone
Posted 09 April 2012 - 12:19 PM
Just out of curiousty how does that bait act without the hooks on it? And also if you needed to make it more buoyant you could always fill a cavity with a quick dot of spray foam... With all the reading I've been doing on here about how things float and adding weight and so fourth I've come to the conclusion sometimes weight may not be the answer... but something that makes it float better... I'd be curious to see how a lure like that would turn out made out of PVC(azek) Just my thoughts
Posted 09 April 2012 - 12:53 PM
When I mentioned changing the ratio I wasn't talking about moving the ballast or changing the attitude of the bait as to how it sits in the water. I meant the ratio of weight from top to bottom. By making the top of the lure lighter you have essentially made the bottom heavier. Say you took a lure and drew a dividing line down the middle and called the top half "A" and the bottom half "B". Now lets say that section "A" weighed 4 grams and section "B" weighed 8 grams. That would be a ratio of 2 to 1. Now if you drilled holes in the top section and plugged them off leaving air pockets to make section "A" weigh 2 grams while the weight of section "B" remained at 8 grams you would then have a ratio of 4 to 1. You haven't added anymore ballast, but by making the top of the bait lighter you've changed the weight to center of mass ratio and essentially made the bottom of the bait heavier. I'm not an engineer and could be wrong, but if I am hopefully one of our more educated members will explain it.
Posted 09 April 2012 - 06:05 PM
I remember, a while back, someone here was playing around with laminating a lighter wood on top of a heavier wood to achieve the same bottom heavy effect. I don't remember who, or when, or how it turned out. Ain't getting old swell??!!!! Hahaha
Posted 09 April 2012 - 06:39 PM
Just thought I would throw in my two cents,...
An objects ability to glide over a liquid surface is most influenced by DRAG, for it's gliding capability (distance). Simply put for our purposes, the higher an object sits in the water, (lower contact surface area) with the smoother the surface (form drag), the better it will glide given the amount of forward energy. One of the best examples of this is the Zara Spook and more recently the Sammy. Given the right amount of force at the right angle, it is possible to make this lure glide 5' or more! Just think about if you had to make your boat faster with less energy. Sit higher in the water!
Now as far as tracking stability, (how straight does it track) that is about the shape of the contact surface. The more surface area, following the plane of your intended direction, the more stable it is in that direction. Longer boats drive straighter! ( the reason torpedoes are shaped the way they are?)
So,.. essentially what you did when you lightened the top half of the lure was you lowered the waterline (less drag) and the center of gravity, (more upright orientation) which allowed for less drag on the sides of the lure and more efficient planing lift from the flat surface on the bottom of the lure. Ta Daaa!! Well done!!
PS. just a quick point of order,... Ballast is primarily for,... using gravity, to help maintain an upright orientation to earth. and not much else. In the lure business, Ballast BAD! If you need ballast you are either fighting physics or a bad design. HEE HEE,!! Oh for good reference go to Wiki and plug in drag coefficient, there is a cool chart of drag coefficients for hull (cross sectional) shapes. Might be helpful.
Posted 09 April 2012 - 08:22 PM
The real question here is what action exactly are you trying to achieve when you say glide bait? A spook and a Sammy are not really glide baits they are top water walk the dog style, typically rear weighted. Most glide baits for Musky have a sink rate of about one foot per second, and walk the dog underwater with short rod taps. They are weighted in the center, split equally front to rear or all lined up from front to rear. Yes a wider bait makes a better glider than a thin one such as 1/2", 3/4". 7/8" to 1" is better but I think at 6" long you may be getting too wide if you are wider than 1". Also, just the nature of the beast that a drop belly glider will not glide as well as a longer straight profile. A drop belly does have a shimmy on the fall that a straight one will not have.
Bodfish, I think that your statement about ballast being a bad thing in the lure business may be a bit too general. Although I do agree that building materials need to be chosen with specific purpose in mind and get you to a point that the least amount would be needed, if any, but too many designs benefit from a little weight here or there. And what about a moving ballast for optimum cast ability?
Keep it up Gino, gliders are not the easiest to dial in, but when you get it , they are a hard bait to beat!
Posted 09 April 2012 - 09:32 PM
Yes Rowhunter, now I am a bit confused, I assumed the reference to Bellie (Belly?) glider meant "surface". Incorrect? If so you are right the Spook is not an ideal example. Gliders are not very common here and are usually custom "surface" lures. My experience with building them has always incorporated a modified cylindrical shape (torpedo) using no ballast but the shape design and hook hardware as a keeling device instead. I would usually cut a small planing area just below the line eyelet to push the nose up upon applying pulling force.
As far as ballasting in general you are correct, it has it's moments and applications. My opinion is based on a manufacturers POV. For me I try and avoid it by design to help streamline the building process. I have never been completely convinced or impressed by systems that try and use "floating" ballast for inertial stability while casting. Just not convinced the results are worth the additional engineering. Some shapes are just difficult to cast. It seems counterintuitive to add weight for casting that may inhibit optimum action on the retrieve. Hmmm,.. well thats just me.
Posted 09 April 2012 - 10:30 PM
I'm pretty new to the inner workings of glide baits, but it was my understanding that gliders were baits that performed sub-surface. I've not built any musky baits and have no knowledge of them other than what I've read here at TU. I have however been experimenting with what I understand a glider to be and trying to apply that to bass sized lures. The findings from my experimentation have pretty much been what Rowhunter explained in his post. I've had better results with baits that sit level and with centrally located ballast. I have been able to get slender baits as well as drop down belly lures to work. The drop down belly lures have worked better for me because I can place more of the ballast in the drop down belly than I can a more slender lure. In the minnow shaped lures I've had to spread the ballast out over a larger area and this seems to cut down on the amount of action they have. The bass sized lures I've been experimenting with are not going to "glide" as far as the larger, musky sized baits due to the fact that they don't have nearly as much weight in them to produce the momentum required for the longer glide. I have however been able to achieve a very pronounced underwater "walk the dog" action in the smaller, lighter baits with the drop down belly. At this point I'm more or less guessing, but it seems the underwater walk the dog action has more to do with the balance of the lure with a centrally located ballast. It's like the lure wants to perform it's side to side pivot where the greatest amount of weight is located. If that weight is spread throughout the length of the lure it doesn't have a decisive point to pivot on. I have no mathematical formulas or any higher learning degrees to base these thoughts on other than the S.W.A.G. method. (scientific wild a$$ guess) If I'm headed in the wrong direction with my thinking I'm hoping someone with more knowledge and experience can help get me back on the right path.
Posted 10 April 2012 - 04:07 AM
I am a muskie hunter and this is all I fish for.
Here is a definition of muskie baits in the muskie world
Glide Baits : Are subsurface baits, most of them have a sinking rate of about a foot /second. They are used with a solid steel thin leader about 8 inches long. a pull of the rod tip will pull the bait forward in to a glide, note the rod tip after the pull actually goes toward the bait. the solid steel leader helps the bait swing rigth to left
Some top notch baits Hell Hounds, Amma Bamma, Modivator, Phantom
Jerk Baits: This baits came out before glide baits. This bait starts at the surface, when jerked with a hard sweep of the rod we try to get the bait down to about any where from 2 feet to 4 feet down and on a pause the baits backs up to the surface again. The classic jerk bait Suick, Bobbie, Manta, Burt and the list goes on
Surface / Prop baits One of my favorite baits expecially for night fishing. This are strictly fished on the surface, I think bass guys refer to them as wake baits. Classic baits Creeper, Globe, Bucher Topraider, My favored Hawg wobler. Zara spook type bait weagle, Poes giant Jackpot
Twich Baits: also fished on the surface, Usually the lip has a steeper angle that will cause the bait to woble, very good fished over weed beds shallow rocks usually built like a minnow type bait some have flat sides and quite large Cranes, Big Game Tackle Bucher shallow raider
Swim Baits: This is also a subsurface bait One that comes to mind Mike Hubert shaddilack
Bucktails: To me this is the classic Muskie bait Subsurface bait, but with a fast reel you can burn the surface, you will see a bulge of the bucktails on the surface of the water
Spinner baits: A classic bass bait used for muskie but much larger and heavier. I like to use it over deep weeds and just tip the top of the weeds
Crankbaits: This to me is also another bass baits but made larger for the muskie guys
Posted 10 April 2012 - 02:53 PM
A buoyant subsurface crankbait often with a lip nearly perpendicular to the body (although swimbaits can also be wakebaits) thereby causes the lure to swim directly under the surface where it either causes a pronounced bulge or the tail leaves a faint wake.
At least that's what I've seen referred to as a wakebait, the more pronounced bulge is similar to "bulging" your bucktails or spinnerbaits. Or similar to how you'll see the wake of a fish follow your surface bait before the strike.
Edited by Sbaits, 10 April 2012 - 02:54 PM.
Posted 10 April 2012 - 03:50 PM
I think its more a matter of center of gravity and distance of weight from CG rather than just weight. I bet Vodkaman has an opinion on this one. I know he has done some experiments on how CG and relative distance of weight from CG affects the wobble of crankbaits.
Posted 10 April 2012 - 06:12 PM
Keep it simple guys, were not dealing with plutonium here.....make a few blanks, bore some holes, insert some ballast, go out and throw them. That's where your knowledge will come from. Trial and error not complicated theories.
Good for you Gino for figuring it for yourself!
By the way Mark, that was mahogany laminated with Brazilian ebony.....
Posted 10 April 2012 - 10:05 PM
If you can establish a relationship and understand basic terms realed to what you are doing it will allow you to put your field experience to better use.
"You can feed an infinite number of monkeys for an infinite amount of time while they randomly pound on an infinite number of typewriters or you can just buy a copy of your favorite works of William Shakespeare directly from Bill." ~Bob La Londe
Edited by Bob La Londe, 10 April 2012 - 10:10 PM.