[bassrecord]

vodkaman your load times point-shaft distance may just give a coefficient number that is a good relative comparison. Maybe that is waht Mustad does with their MBF. Hmmmm. Thanks for explaining it. Sorry for being slow on the uptake <g>

Fish hooks often have odd shapes and twists in the bend. Reversed turns one way and kirby the other I think. I agree that either would not be as strong in your test as a straight bend. As I recall the advertising advantages for offset bend tout that bait on offset or kirbeyed hooks have more hookups per strike than straight bends. Again something I'd like to test although I rarely use bait except when fishing with the grandsons <g>

Thanks again.
John.

[David Reid]

John re your query I am hardly getting a chance at present to go fishing although I would love to say stuff everyone and to go and do so. It is generally the opportunity cost that is the problem.Most of it is choice as fishing tends to soak up money and I am concentrating on saving and investing in my business at present as I have a tosser here who has stolen just about everything I own. I feel like killing the guy but it is not the answer obviously as it would only get me locked up for a number of years. I dont really want to bludge hooks and that wasnt the purpose of what and why I said what I said. I just felt it may be a suitable way to test some hooks if necessary. Kingfish certainly have a way of straightening out and testing hooks like no other fish I have seen. They often hit like a freight train and take off so you often have to reset the drag on the fly. If you dont you can quickly get to the end of the line at around 300/350 M and have a bustoff. When you get one on the line you generally know it. Some fish you hook one and you often reel them in and they dont put up much of a fight. With Kingfish this is never the case even the rats put up stiff resistance and a good fight.
Re size I mostly use Mustad and also VMC and the occassional Gammy at times. Also the ocassional Owner at times but they are miles too dear here. All are good hooks and dont give too many problems. Traditionally we use bait or a live bait like kahawai (a form of native salmon really = Arripis trutta) or yellowtail (jack mackeral = Trachurus declivis, New Zealand Jack Mackerel T. novaezelandiae) but more and more of us are switching to soft plastics and using a good quality hook or jighead is increasingly becoming important. I prefer hooks to jigheads myself. You really learn if you lose a decent fish through poor quality how important hook quality really is.
I normally use hooks from 4/0 up to 8/0 and I know others use 10/0 at times for the bigger fish. I tend to use smaller rather than bigger hooks as that way my strike rate is better unlike some people who prefer the bigger hooks. Probably I have proportionally more bustoffs as a result (but thats probably my poor fishing ability maybe). Yes corrosion is a problem as its always a marine enviroment. I certainly wouldnt mind finding a decent SS hook. Proportionally for the same size they are stronger.

As far as testing anything like this I have a friend who is semi retired fishes as much as he can and more or less targets Kingfish the whole time now using soft plastics. He has been using soft plastics for Kingfish for around 15 to 16 months now (it may be a bit longer) but he sent me up an email recently saying he had just caught number 43 which for Kingfish is a very high figure. He is a really excellent fisherman and mostly is a Catch and Release fisherman which I thoroughly applaud as he is not stripping the resource that way. At Easter when I spoke to him and he was around No 38 he told me he had only kept 7 or 8 and most of those were given to groups of people for presents for feasts family celebrations etc. At present I am working on developing totally biodegradeable baits which I intend to manufacture here in addition to the plastisol ones and I feel for sustainability in the longrun are important. In many ways we really do live in Paradise here and I would hate to get 10 or 20 years down the track and looking back see the damage and impact upon the enviroment I had caused if I was to just pursue the plastisol path. It is a longterm goal but eventually I will get there.
If anyone does come across a really suitable hook I am certainly interested in trying and testing them and my friend is certainly the right guy at the same time. (certainly a lot better fisherman than myself). John, Vodkaman and others like I said keep going in the end if we do nothing else it helps keep the hook manufacturers honest. You have certainly put a lot of work into that Vodkaman and I applaud your effort (I have yet to read it thoroughly mind you).

[Vodkaman]

The more I think about this subject, the more negative I become. The shape of the bend is really starting to give me doubts regarding reliability of data. A technique that I regularly employ in engineering research is, if I am not sure of an effect a particular element has on the overall, for example, a particular lip shape. In my mind I totally exaggerate the size or shape or whatever the property is that I am interested in. usually the effect then becomes obvious.

In this case it is the effect of the shape of the hook bend. If the hook bend sharpens or tightens up before the hook point, does it affect the bending performance? Although in my mind this question has been gnawing away at my brain, I have chosen to ignore it, but I no longer can.

It is my opinion that the tightening of the bend will increase the resistance to bending over that part of the hook and the rest of the bend will take the entire load. This means that the hook and tight part of the bend maintains its shape, which is good from a fishhook point of view, but the rest of the hook bend will fail (straighten) more rapidly. If the hook was to snap, my guess is that it would snap at the start of the tight bend. The question is, does it all even out or is one design inherently stronger.

Using the exaggeration idea, imagine that the bend was a very large shape, looping back to the original hook point. This would bend very easily, so this analogy leads me to think that things do not even out and we have a testing problem. Each hook shape is presumably for a reason, higher hook up percentage or strength or easier to get the worm on etc. So to decry one shaped hook for one particular property, in our case, resistance to bending, when the hook was primarily designed for threading worms would be an injustice to the hook designer.

If all you are interested in is bending strength, then I guess that our test is valid. It would be extremely interesting to get a hook designers input on this thread around about now, before we get too deep. (This guy really waffles on!!!)

[bassrecord]

David said,

Re size I mostly use Mustad and also VMC and the occassional Gammy at times. Also the ocassional Owner at times but they are miles too dear here. .....I normally use hooks from 4/0 up to 8/0 and I know others use 10/0 at times for the bigger fish.

What hook model number do you guys use? Can you get jig hooks up to size 10/0? Are any jig hooks strong enough to hold your Kingfish? Does your plastics lures imitate the live bait you use for your Kingfish?

Since I get many ideas for my freshwater lures from you salt water guys and plastics bass fisherman, I'm always interested in learning what is new.

Ah. SS vs. High Carbon steel. The dilema many of us face! I hope the hook tester will give us more insight when comparing the two hook materials and evaluating the cost differences and trade offs.

Go fish!
John

[bassrecord]

This is a second reply. If it is duplicated, please forgive the error.

Vodkaman, if I understand your post, you are starting to have heartburn testing bend back point hooks. If a hook point is inserted in your drill hole, it may cause a fracture in the point area. In my tool the hook point would be inserted into a "V" notch the depth of the hook bend or gape. When force is applied "something" would have to give or move about gape length. The point may fail before the bend fails, or not. Maybe both fail at the same time. But that is what I want to test. I want to test from the eye to the point and all places in between.

My idea for Big bass is that if the hook point penetrates soft or intermediate tissue, the bend is tested more. If the hook point lodges in gristle, teeth, bone or other hard material then the hook point may be tested more.

But after more thought, I now believe that hook pont failure may include bending, fracturing or even separation. If a hook point breaks then my bass will get away so I'll add broken points as failures; 4. Hook points that break, bend or fracture while the hook is tested is a failure.

You express your angst very eloquently - I share your concern. In my younger days, most hooks came with bends that were Round, Limerick, Sproat, etc. types without any bend back. Then along came circle hooks. Today we have way too much bend back hooks IMHO because it reduces the effective gape width.

Look at how much bend back there is in the Mustad 7698.
http://www.fishermansoutfitter.com/m-23-Mustad.aspx?gclid=CPqBu_zP2owCFQJMYgodiEr_dg

Look at the Mustad Aberdeen Jig hook here. It has no bend back.
http://www.basspro.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/SearchResults?searchOption=products&hvarSearchStri ng=mustad&storeId=10151&catalogId=10001&langId=-1&CMID=TOP_SEARCH_GO&x=10&y=10

Vodkaman wondered if one bend design was better than another. We may find out with a hook tester.

He said,

Each hook shape is presumably for a reason, higher hook up percentage or strength or easier to get the worm on etc. So to decry one shaped hook for one particular property, in our case, resistance to bending, when the hook was primarily designed for threading worms would be an injustice to the hook designer.

Here we differ. I do not care what the hook designer was attempting to do or what his goal(s) were, I just want to know how his hook performs for my purposes.

He also said,

If all you are interested in is bending strength, then I guess that our test is valid.

I was hoping that a hook tester would test more than bending strength. I expect hook eyes to fail, shafts to bend, points to fracture - all of these may be more often than bends straightening.

Also I'm not convinced that today's machine-made hooks are "better" that hooks made 40-50 years ago. I hope to test that theory.

For my purposes, I'll probably only be testing round, Aberdeen or Perfect bends, It would be possible to test other bend designs on identical hooks except for bend shape.

Good luck!
John

[David Reid]

John & Vm, Have hardly hard a chance to look at this this week and am about 2 pages or so behind you both, havnt even read the dialogue yet merely glanced at it. Without thinking about it or giving it a lot of thought I suspect the best way to hold the hook and put pressure on it may be to secure it through the hook eye maybe with something like a shakle with a pin through the eye and then with a cone/funnel shape section over the hook point allowing slight movement (sideways or whatever so the stress goes on the weakest section of the hook rather than a predetermined location) applying the pressure. If the cone is also open at its smallest/tightest restriction this will allow the finest point to poke through and the hook to be self setting if you follow me. To accommodate quite a range of hooks it may need various size shakles and cones. Anyway just my 2c and something for you both to think about maybe in the meantime. Alternatively you could use 2 shakles the smaller one securing the eye and the appropriate shakle pin of the 2nd shakle allowing the bend to roll around the contour of the pin as the pressure is applied allowing the hook to straighten and/or break at the appropriate location.

[bassrecord]

A friend, Gary Cumro of GAC Design Inc. a custom hook maker is making a hook tester for me. It should be ready in a few weeks. We used the questions, comments and thought provoking ideas generated in this thread and are very appreciative, humble and thankful for your support.

As more information is available, I'll post here. Thaks again!
John

[Vodkaman]

I can't wait to see what you came up with. Thank's for the effort.

[bassrecord]

You're welcome and thank you for your fantastic effort and cogent thought!

As a service to members of this forum, I will destructive test hooks sent to me and I'll return them when postage is prepaid. I will personally be testing size 4 to 4/0 hooks but will accomodate hook testing for this group size 18 up to 8/0. I am offering to accept hooks for testing, will run the test(s), perform standard statistical calculations and re-mail the broken hooks to the sender along with the test results and analysis at no charge.


My personal testing will go something like this:
I have a box of 100 pieces of hook A, size 1/0, I have a box of 100 pieces of hook B size 1/0. Test the following Null Hypothesis:

Hook A is NOT WEAKER than Hook B if
a. no more than three hooks fail more than 10% less than mean AND
b. The mean break of A is NOT statistically different from the mean break of hook B

1. 10 pieces of hook A will be tested. Each piece results will be entered into an Excel spreadsheet. Simple average breakpoint will be computed.
2. 10 pieces of hook B will be tested. Each piece results will be entered into an Excel spreadsheet. Simple average breakpoint will be computed.
3. If 3 or more pieces of hook A or hook B broke more than 10% of the simplle mean, 11 more pieces would be tested and a full statistical analysis (including outliers) will be run on the 21 piece sample size.

So if B breaks on average before A, I will accept the NULL hypothesis = A is the best hook. I
f A breaks befire B, I'll reject the Null hypothesis and say that hook B is better than hook A.

Testing a single piece of hook A vs. hook B will not be anything other than an intelluctual curoisity. If hook A AND hook B BOTH exhibit MORE that 10% mean variance OR statistical significance CANNOT be established between hook A nd hook B, then an additional box of hook A and hook B will be purchased and the test repeated. If the 2nd test is inclusive, then BOTH hook A and Hook B will be determined to be OUT OF CONTROL and rejected for use.

I invite any comments on this approach and welcome your thoughs.
John

[bassrecord]

I'm sorry for this late post. I've let Gary down but I expect him to have the prototype hook tester ready within the next few weeks.

I'm back home after 9 weeks treatment for an infection from a form of meningococcal disease in my legs. After 8 days in ICU and 10 in the hospital, I was moved to skilled nursing home in Portland for 40 more days. With drips, oxygen, catheter, insulin shots and blood sugar tests 4 times a day, physical therapy, wound treatment, and heavy anti-bacterial medicine, and 2-3 weeks of home health care I'm finally on the mend and ‘good to go’. “Thank you for your prayers and concern. There is a God and His Son was with me in this ordeal. My family helped so much and I cherish them for their support.”

Gary is finalizing the tester. So if any of you want me to test hooks for you, let me know. I expect to have the hook test publically available to demonstrate at the Oregon FFF Northwest Fly Tying Expo in March.

Good luck!
John