lipless swimbait, but...
35 replies to this topic
Posted 10 July 2007 - 06:12 PM
just finished this today, floater, 2 oz. 7" long. problem is that it doesn't swim. it floates horizontally and almost submerged. on retreive it just glides. it works great with a walk the dog action, glides a foot or two and when it stops it turns and then takes off in a new direction when you jerk it again. it makes a nice zigzag pattern i think i might put a small lip on it and turn it into a wake bait. so far i haven't been able to figure out the dynamics of a lipless bait. anyone have any tips? thanks
Posted 10 July 2007 - 06:19 PM
Leave well enough alone! You pulled a "Homer" and made a successful glider.
I love the finish, but I wonder if the hooks are a tad too small.
Posted 10 July 2007 - 06:23 PM
That is a sharp looking swimbait for sure! Very nice work. I wish I could help you but I'm still working the kinks out of my swimbait lol
Posted 10 July 2007 - 06:37 PM
i put a larger hook on it to start but thought they looked too big. guess i'll switch back. yeh, i'll leave it alone before i screw it up! will try it again with a new bait. like your avatar, i actually did that when i was about 3, bobby pin, still remember it.
Posted 10 July 2007 - 07:24 PM
So how does a successful swim bait swim? Does it naturally swim in an 'S' shaped pattern or does it require the jerk input to get the zigzag motion. I've never made one, only concentrating on lipped baits so far.
Posted 10 July 2007 - 08:21 PM
A lot of the swimbaits of this type do have a short vertical lip. Some rely on the old faithful boot type tail, while others have a jig type hook protruding from the back with it tie-eye coming out somewhere around just behind the lure's eyes, which looks as though it would either have to sit low in the water or sink to prduce a swimming motion. And i can see on a multi jointed lure where with very flexible joints that aren't too close together and are a bit rounded on the ends, that just the pressure of pulling it through the water may initiate some wag. It looks as though all these methods are currently in use among swim-bait manufacturers, although the last one is hydrodynamic guess-work on my part. But something must initiate the swimming motion, subtle that it may be. Is there a hydrodynamic engineer somewhere around?
Beautiful work on the lure jr!
Posted 11 July 2007 - 12:58 AM
Hey you did a great job on that lure. I haven't figured out the dynamics behind swimbaits either so I'm glad to see the discussion here.....
I have built a number of swimbaits but I am still learning what really makes them tick. Here is a couple of video clips vodkaman of some I have built....Version II has a bill, Version III is lipless.
Posted 11 July 2007 - 01:14 AM
Riverman,the action of those bait's look's great,the double joint makes a big difference to the action's it gives them a much more subtle action than the ones with a single joint in them.try a tail on the lipless one and you should get a glideing action out of it when it's twitched.
Posted 11 July 2007 - 08:07 AM
I am glad to see others working on swimmers also. I havent made one yet but it has been on my mind for quite a while now.
I also think that if you are getting a good walk the dog action from it I would leave it alone. It could also be used for deadsticking and twitch it to get the movement every now and then.
BTW nice job on the bait, it looks great.
Posted 11 July 2007 - 09:45 AM
Beautiful job on that bait:yay: ..I do agree you need too move the hook size up a couple sizes though..As for the action..I wouldn't worry about it..Walk the dog!!..Nathan
Posted 11 July 2007 - 03:39 PM
I have made a couple of lipless baits, floater and sinkers, and they swim great, I think that the amount of bend in each hinge is one of the keys to making lipless baits work. I try to make it so that the tail ends up being a little past 90 degrees to the head when it is fully curled. Maybe that makes sense and will help you out.
Posted 11 July 2007 - 07:19 PM
I think that I've figured it out (in my sleep last night). I'll start typing it out tonight. Sorry in advance, it's not going to be brief.
Posted 12 July 2007 - 03:29 AM
Thank you Riverman for the video links, I will try to get to an internet café this weekend to view them.
Dean McClain, you are correct that something has to be present to initiate the action but I believe the action is not the result of a laminar flow. This is not to say that this is not possible, only that my explanation differs. I am fairly confident with my solution as it explains a slow ‘S’ motion, also the ‘zig-zag’ of the ‘walk the dog’ jerk motion.
To understand what is happening to the glider, we must first consider certain aspects of the average fish. Why is the fish not shaped like a torpedo? Science has taught us that a blunt nosed cylinder is the most efficient shape for moving through water. Fish have been in the evolutionary chain for 100 million years. Darwin’s theory of evolution would indicate that they are closer to perfection than most other living species and yet the bodies are generally deep and humped. You could argue that because the average fish is slow moving, only capable of speed over a very short time, that the requirement for the perfect shape is not necessary to survival. In my opinion this argument is incorrect, the fish has achieved the perfect shape (explanation later in the text).
Why does the fish have a pressure sensitive lateral line? The accepted general view is that the fish uses this feature to sense danger from predators and locate movement of other creatures for food etc. this may well be true but is not the main reason for the lateral line (explanation later in the text).
Why do fish have scales? This question is one of the great anomalies, a very big unanswered question. Many believe that scales are purely armor for protection. My own theory differs from this idea and will be explained later in the text.
Other questions such as what purpose does the dorsal fin serve? And a question aired on this site a few months ago, do fish move their heads when swimming? Will also be answered.
I read a thesis document by Tryantafyllou a few months ago, sent to me by prof.dr. Arthur E.P. Veldman, who I contacted to gain permission to use his vortex video clip. This very heavy read discussed how fish use vortices while swimming. It did not discuss the whole story, but concentrated on aspects relevant to its subject. This document was the first clue.
If the fish uses vortices to swim, it must first create the vortex. If the fish was torpedo shaped then no vortex would be created due to the streamlined shape. The fish needs the hump back to generate the swirl of water called a vortex. This vortex is reinforced by the fish moving its head from side to side. The fish then leans into the vortex to ride it as it flows down stream. As the fish does this, its body bends. This bending action opens up the scales, which act like small cups, capturing the energy from the vortex, driving the fish forward. Finally, the fish presses against the vortex with its tail, extracting the last bit of energy. The vortex then splits into two smaller vortices, rotating in opposite directions. The next vortex forms on the opposite side of the fish hump and the process repeats.
In my opinion, the purpose of the pressure sensitive lateral line, is to inform the fish about the location of the vortex so that the fish can time its movements accordingly. The purpose of the dorsal fin could be to either add extra sensing of the vortex or to actually assist the formation by waving from side to side like a flag. If this theory is true, then evolution has indeed given the fish the perfect shape.
So how does all this information relate to our glider lure? I remember seeing a glider lure on this site a few months ago, I specifically remember the humped shape of the back. It struck me as being ugly in form. The purpose of the hump is now clear and the theory holds up.
As the lure is pulled through the water, the flow over the hump generates a vortex. This low pressure disturbance pulls the head of the lure to one side and the lure swims at an angle to the retrieve direction. As the vortex flows down stream, the next vortex forms on the opposite side of the hump, drawing the head in the opposite direction. The lure then swims at an angle opposite to the first, hence a slow zig-zag or ‘S’ type motion.
The theory also works for ‘walk the dog’ action. When the lure is jerked, the sudden sharp movement generates a strong vortex on one side, causing the lure to ‘zig’ at an angle. The lure comes to a halt and all vortices are gone. The lure is jerked again. But as the lure is already sitting in the water at an angle, the water is forced over the hump in the opposite direction. This forces the lure to change direction and the lure ‘zags’. Thus ‘walk the dog’ is borne.
If the theory is correct then there are a number of design considerations to be taken into account for a successful glider. The lure must swim slightly nose down so that good flow over the hump is achieved. This can be done by a forward ballast location and/or mounting the eye slightly rear of the nose. The back of the lure must form a hump about a third to half of the length.
The lure can be improved by exaggerating the hump towards its peak, this will help the vortex form cleaner. Also, the body forward of the hump could be flattened, this too would probably improve the vortex, scooping the water up and then pouring over the side. A pair of side ridges could be built into the body, from the nose, running down the lateral line and meeting at the top of the hump. These ridges need only be 1mm deep. They would have the effect of tripping up the flow over the side and strengthen the vortex, a bit like the flat plate lip on a crank.
I hope this all gives you food for thought and maybe one or two of you will try the theories out. Personally I am out of action as regards prototyping for the next year or so. Thoughts please!
Posted 12 July 2007 - 04:19 PM
Is there a difference between glider and slider? cause as I record the humped design is called Slider , the Slider has only one piece of lead situated towards the head , while the Glider has 2 pieces of lead, one in the first 1/3 of the body and another (smaller) in the last 1/3 of the body....I think that the glide and the slide are a combination between shapes and lead positioning.
Slider - is a humped lure with flat sides, the zig - zag movement is caused by the shape of the lure wich creates instability while retreived, this instability is controlled by the piece of lead (generally a long bar) so the lure doesn't move towards one direction (right or left) because of the flat sides combined with the hump the lure tends to slide, like a boat on big waves:
Glider - also a flat sided lure but the top of this lure is just a bit curved, has two pieces of lead the one in the front of the body being bigger, the glide is generated by the instability caused by the disproportion between head and tail (the head is bigger and heavier then the rest of the body wich is long) that's why the tail tends to be unstable but this instability is controlled by the little piece of lead in the back of the body, gliders
Hope I got this right, if not, my apologies:worship:
Posted 12 July 2007 - 06:34 PM
Vodkaman, I've read a few of your other lengthy explanations for stuff, and they make sense, but I don't think I agree with this one. I'm not a very scientific thinker like yourself, but this just doesn't make sense to me.
I don't have a lateral line, humped back, or scales, yet I can still move my body in the water. I think the fish moves by pushing against the water itself, not against a vortex. Watch fish in an aquarium, they can move just their pectoral fins to move them. It's just resistance from the water against the fins. They don't have to move their heads to create a vortex so they swim, the vortex is a result of them swimming. It's just that water is dense enough to make enough resistance to make you move the opposite way you push.
As for walk-the-dog action, I think that it's just that the lure doesn't land straight, or when it stops, it's off center. Weight placement and the fact that you're pulling it the other way make it change directions. I think you're talking about subsurface lures, but a zara apook is torpedo shaped, so there's no hump like you're talking about. I can also make the exact same action with a senko, or any other straight, round worm.
By the way, do you have that vortex video to post? Maybe I would see things differently if I saw it.
Posted 12 July 2007 - 08:28 PM
I have read carefully the explanations also. I have always wondered exactly why gliders glide. I define a "glider" as a bait that sinks but has a walk the dog action under water. Good examples would be a phantom or manta. You can make gliders work by weighting them in a variety of ways. One way is to put the weight in the dead center of the lure. I have always thought that by doing so the front and back of the lure would be lighter than the center thereby encouraging the front and back to swing each way on a pivot point, in this case the weight.
Most gliders are weighted in the front and back of the lure. When you jerk a glider the pressure of the water against the front of the lure naturally causes it to swing in the way with the least resistance. Once the lure has swung to one direction and you give it another jerk the resistance is such that it's easier for the lure to swing back rather than continue on it's original path. I am sure there is considerably more physics to this than I am considering but I also believe this explains a good part of it. The entire action is very similar to what makes a crankbait wobble. I do know after testing literally hundreds and hundreds of gliders that some rules hold true time after time.
1. Dense woods are more stable than light woods. By this I mean less belly roll, less likely to blow out when you work them fast. I believe this is because the weight is more evenly distibuted in a glider made from heavy wood. A light wood glider on the other hand will have most of the weight right where the lead is.
2. Round gliders "glide" easier and further than flat-sided gliders.....a manta being a good example, huge glide, very stable.
3. Longer lures generally glide considerably further than shorter lures.
4. If the nose of the glider is too narrow it won't glide.
5. If the wood used to make the glider is too narrow it won't glide
6. If the tail is too wide, it won't glide (the same can't be said for women).
As for the hump, it seems to reduce the glide length. Think about a magic maker or similarly shaped gliders, they dart left and right very quickly but the glide length is very short. Long thin gliders on the other hand without the hump have much longer glide distances.
How did we get started talking about gliders? I thought we were discussing swimbaits? lol.
Posted 12 July 2007 - 09:34 PM
Thank's again riverman, very useful information.
Unless a theory satisfies every condition, it fails. I will give thought to your numbered points and check them against my theories.
As regard vortex theory, it was easier for me to take this route, as it is still fresh in my mind after tackling the lip operation theory. The flat plate, sharp edge of the lip lends itself nicely to a crisp vortex formation and I am confident that the theory works. As for lipless lures, I do not have the same confidence as yet. It was worth while putting my ideas out there, as it has brought a wealth of information and ideas from you all, to the table.
In order to put this one to be, it requires as much information as possible, so if anyone has more observations on gliders AND sliders, please post it.