[muskietom51]

I'm working on a double bladed spinner bait, with I believe are#8 blades. The couple I have built seem to work the way i think they should But sometimes I really have to jerk the bait hard to get the blades moving, is this common with double bladed baits, or is there a fix, thanks Guys

[Spike-A-Pike]

I think it sounds like a lure body weight issue were it may be a bit tail heavy. The closer to horizontal and quicker it gets on plain, the faster/smoother those blades will start to spin. Clevis size plays an important part too. A good source for figuring out component computability sizes is the Canadian guild to Lure Making - Download - Canadian Guide to Lure Making

Good luck.

[reeves]

What weight size is this spinner? A #8 blade is pretty large, so it must be an ounce or bigger. Also is this a two wired bait? Would like to see a pic if possible.

[Spike-A-Pike]

I could well be wrong, but I was thinking something like this

This shows a little more of the details. I keep forgetting about those other spinner baits - Sorry George

[reeves]

Yeah Bruce, I see now what you mean. I am thinking of spinnerbaits and muskytom51 is obviously working on an inline. I have no experience with them, but it looks from the picture that the overlapped clevis setup would tend to interfere with each other???? should they be stacked instead????

[Spike-A-Pike]

Well George, some of the more contemporary musky in-line spinner designs, like the Llungen Lure's DC-8, DC-9, DC-10, and Musky Mayhem's Double Cowgirl, use that inter-locked clevis and blade arrangement. They have that definite "that ain't right" look about them, but it creates what they call a bulger bubble when the lure gets on plane (and looks very cool).

That was part of what I was testing in Clinton last spring; I found it very easy to over load the in-lines with too much weight and with the weight of thick skirt, it was nearly impossible to get those blades going. The other factor that needs to factored is using a large enough set of clevis' so as to allow them to spin freely.

And you thought I was just wearing that cheese wedge as a "fashion statement". Tight lines

[muskietom51]

Good call Spike a Pike I removed the keel weight on a coil an they planed out just right. Its been so long since I order the material I don't have a clue of their weights. They move alot of water, can't wait to run them over weeds. Oh an thanks for the tutorial on skirt making,makes it a whole lot clearer. Thanks again everyone

[Spike-A-Pike]

Glad it helped - Musky in-line spinners are a little different and it is critical to balance the entire lure. I was experimenting with lure weights, segments, and lengths early this Spring and really learned some design issues that that have to be addressed in order to make everything work together. I hear other constructors talk about problems with line twist that I have not experienced. Now, I feel I have locked that "perfect in-line" in my mind and by just spinning the blades and determining the balance as the lure body floats along the shaft. I have started taking those lessons forward into my bass and pike lures, and I'm debating if I can carry it forward into crappie and perch sized tackle. God luck and tight lines.

[diemai]

@ Spike-A-Pike

When I still was quite a rookie in luremaking many years ago , I also had to learn the hard way about inline spinners being too heavy at the rear and therefore not spinning properly .

Here are some of my quite successful pike spinner models of those years .

Since I wanted them to run deeper than commercial ones , I made the body heavier , at first I employed .357 Mag. casings , rigged a wire piece through them and poured lead in .

The first ones worked quite well for some reason , so I made about two dozens more , only to see them not spinning properly !

I've found , that they'd not swim horizontally but tail-down , so I assumed , that this would be the reason for their failure .

All the ones , that didn't work , I've cut apart again and used the casing bodies as sinkers for bottom set ups , fishing for carp and tench .

Anyway , I now had so many of those homemade blades unused and had to think over another solution .

So instead of those ammo casings I used aluminium tubing , 8 mm dia and 6 mm bore .
These contain less lead , also they are longer , so that the weight is not concentrated only at the rear .
These models worked pretty well and reliable , countless numbers of fish caught on such spinners through the years !

@ muskietom51

Glad , that you seemingly have already solved your problem !

Looking at your pics , I would have rigged one small bead between clevise and the tapered spacer piece , this would furthermore reduce friction and let the blades spin easier !

Good success , diemai

[Spike-A-Pike]

Diemai,
Those spinners have aged well. I think that I'm going to have to invest in a ruler with a metric scale on it to show the true scale of these musky in-line lures. On average, muskie lures start with a #8 blade style, but could use #9, #10, and #11 sized blades. Every year for the past 5 years, blade sizes have been growing to key in on bigger and bigger fish.

A 3/0 treble hook used to be a common musky hook, now it isn't uncommon to see hook sizes from 5/0 to 8/0. 20 years ago, I would make a pike/muskie in-line spinner and they averaged about 5 to 6 inches (12 to 15 cm). Yesterday, I was putting together a few lures - they averaged 10 inches (23 to 28 cm). I'm getting ready for my trip to Wisconsin later in September for some fishing and talking to a few bait shops to see if there is any interest in my designs.

The lures just seem to get a little larger every year. Just when you think, "Well, that's big; they'll never get any bigger than that..." And surprise, next year the designs are just a tad bigger. There may be an upper limit out there somewhere, but muskie lure designers don't appear to have reached it yet.

Thanks for sharing Diemai. Tight lines