Vodkaman

Interesting video. I think I had the wrong idea about jerk baits, but I have never used one or built one. The video does demonstrate how the swim angle is relative to the retrieval speed, and backs up the argument that every lipped lure has a hunting speed, but this is just a side note. It looks like the most erratic action occurs when the lip is vertical, this too makes sense, as it is in this lip attitude that the hunt occurs. I guess it is nice for the lure to 'spring back' to horizontal, and for the lure to have a nice movement on a steady retrieve, but I think that these are small bonus features to the main event. Dave

Probably gave up Dave

@Curt - RI - Next year, assuming you are not so discouraged by all the multi-entries and the PNG files, you need to force the entries through the rules page. I just pretended that I wanted to enter the competition and just signed up to TU. I see 'Lure Contest' just under the main blue bar at the top of the page. I click and the next page shows the bright red link to the contest entry section. 'Lure Contest Info' just puts me back in the same page as I am in now. I don't even need to click on 'RULES'. But, if I did, I see a lot of small print of your basic type rules, but I am too excited to get on with the process and cannot be bothered to read, and so you now have yet another rule transgressor. The RULES page: 1 - get rid of the useless links; I have just come from 'Lure Contest Info' and I am already sitting in the 'Lure Contest Rules' page. 2 - Get rid of 'past winners' links, they are just more distractions. 3 - Get rid of the three lines of fluff; 'Here are the rules.....' 'They are very basic.....' 'so you'll understand.....' These lines add nothing to the rules knowledge and only serve as a distraction. The competitor reads these useless lines and gets the opinion that the rules are very simple and not worth reading. 4 - the actual rules texts are full of fluff requiring effort and time to read. Rules 1, 2 & 3 are so long winded and the least important rules, most competitors will not get to No4 were the 'meat' starts. 5 - Lead off with the deal-breaker rules: A - ONE ENTRY PER CATEGORY ONLY, multiple entries WILL be disqualified. B - ONE PHOTO PER ENTRY, multiple photos WILL be disqualified. C - JPEG IMAGES ONLY, other image formats WILL be disqualified. 6 - after the deal-breaker rules, list the rest in order of importance. Keep the texts short and minimalist, example - 'MEMBERS ONLY, join here (link)'. As an impatient competitor, I do not want to spend more than ten seconds on this page and STILL receive the important information. If the deal-breaker CAPS text is LARGE and red, then this aim will be accomplished. Again, FORCE the competitors through the rules page, this should not be an avoidable option. As the rules stand this and previous years, it was inevitable that you were going to get foul entries. You could also apply the same techniques to the site rules that every new member skips past and that we then have to explain the gallery function to. Dave

Oh god, please make March go away. Dave

Dan - all good points that need consideration. More rules would have to be written, and we all know that a high proportion of competition entrants cannot read. More duplicate entries today! Dave

Just to clarify, I am talking NEXT year's competition or beyond, and I am merely making suggestions. We currently have the 'Pretty' section in the hard baits category which I guess appeals to aesthetic crowds. But, TU should be about progress, R+D, lure development. I feel that these attributes of lure design are largely ignored. Yes, the hard water thing does make video a problem this time of the year, that is merely a timing issue. I just want the competition to mean something regarding lure progress. As things stand, this is an art competition. I want this competition and the TU site as a whole to mean more. Dave

My opinion is that the competition for 2022 needs some revision. I am very sure that every member entering the competition has access to video. It is plainly obvious that competitors consider that a single image of their creation is simply not doing justice. Multiple views are allowed within a single JPEG image, but this idea too does not do the lure justice. I suggest that an optional video of no more that 20s in length is more than enough to demonstrate the aesthetics of a custom painted lure. For the actual functional lures, apart from the images or video of the aesthetics, a functional video of the lure in action should be included, not more than 30s, after all, we are supposed to be designing functional lures and not simply artwork. From a personal point, I would like to see a CAD section and/or 3D printed section. I would agree that it is probably too soon for this section, but perhaps in a couple more years. This competition needs to be more realism based. At the moment it is way too much based on aesthetics. I would like opinions. Dave

The tank does not need to be a huge deal. It could be 3 sides 1/2" ply, a rebate to take the plastic panel on the narrow face. Lots of wood protection and sealant for the clear plastic sheet. Once the box tube is built and sealed, the base plate can be bolted/screwed on with a liquid gasket. Fit a tap into the design for draining, but I would keep it full and in a dark place, this will prevent algae. Note - weight of water 50Kg (110Lb). If this all sounds over the top then by all means stick with the bucket in the bathroom with the taped weights. I am sure you will have some success. Dave

If sink flutter is intended to be a feature of a bait then it must be worked in very early on in the process. Rough carvings to experiment with shapes to find their required sink rates. If this idea was to be a regular design feature then I would be looking at a specialized vertical test tank, something that you can video the fall and time the fall to get the rate. You will have to get your calculators out and do some Archimedes in order to be able to repeat the results consistently. Weight distribution is only important to get the horizontal fall, it can be concentrated or distributed, makes no difference. It is all about shape and fall rate. I would be constructing a 12"x6"x60" glass/plastic tank. Trial and error will get you to the first workable prototype, but from that you need to extract the density in order to achieve repeatability. As usual, all testing must be with hooks. Dave

That is how I have done it so far. It is VERY expensive. I have so many projects that require 3D printing that I am now looking for a printer. So far, unable to find anything locally but I have not looked very hard as yet. Import is not an option, Customs will double the cost of such an item. TU members have generously offered to print my stuff for me, but customs again will 'charge' me to such an extent that local printing services would be cheaper. I have about a dozen lure projects but so much more, a new design for a painless bicycle seat, a cheap medical ventilator, a humidity drinking water generator, solar hot water system, and more projects that I will have to search back for. Dave

Unfortunately no. That was around the time I was evicted and lost everything. My thinking hasn't changed much; I still think that cross section shape is important and fall rate is key. There is a minimum speed for those vortices to become regular but not necessary for at least some movement to be visible. The video below shows the whole story and makes things very clear. The minimum speed is dependent on the shape, but anything much greater than 4" to 6" per second should produce the desired effect. A wider body with a flatter belly should produce better effects. Dave

I really showed my inexperience when I was living in Sweden. It was a glorious weekend, T-shirt and shorts. I decided to go up to the lake for a day of trout fishing. The last mile was an up hill hike, but the anticipation of a wonderful day was so exciting. As I climbed over the ridge the excitement turned to despair as I viewed 50 acres of ice. Dave

From a design and aesthetic point of view, the end of the nose is ideal; looks pretty, looks deliberate and is easiest to hook on. But, lures are a balance of several elements of which tow eye position is only one. You can force one or two of the elements but you must be prepared to adjust others to find the correct balance. In this case the body shape and internals are fixed and you have the lip and eye to work with. Under the chin seems pretty safe, but for a first build, I would probably want to try several positions and lip lengths and widths, and learn from the results. I generally make my main adjuster the lip because it is the easiest to adjust. I simply make the lip way too long and then trim away making notes as I go. Dave

There are a couple of 'man-made' competition ponds stocked with catfish close by. The fish are generally 1Lb - 4Lb but occasionally much bigger. Cats are not my favorite, the standard bait is rotting fish guts. I never thought of using a crank or a popper, but the chances of me being allowed such a tactic is very remote. Competition fishing is very big here in Indonesia, ponds run at least two comps a day, sometimes 3 or 4, extending into the early hours depending on demand. Dave

It is great to see the entry photos but I too cringe at the multiple entries. Are the rules so difficult to comprehend. They must have read the rules to be able to enter the competition in the first place. Dave

Overhead video screens of lure actions would be a cool idea. Type in a code and see a video in the store. I don't buy lures, but if I did, I would want to see a video of the swim action, and a capture for a bonus. Dave

LMAO. There are far more people read this forum than you could ever imagine. It is a shame that more do not contribute, but they are skilled builders none the less. I do not view the gallery images as a rule, preferring to come up with my own fresh ideas on lures. But once a year I do indulge myself by viewing the competitor contributions. Impressive. Just a shame that they are mostly illiterate and unable to comprehend rules Dave

I haven't built a popper myself, but I do understand the concept; gather the water and squeeze it out the top to make some splash/plop noise. A vertical cylindrical shape would achieve this result, particularly with a lip at the bottom of the face. Many commercial poppers show an kinked/angled side profile which hints at the same idea; gather the water and force it upwards. Dave

You have made a solid start. Plainly, you understand the eye socket issue, and you will be applying these cutter thoughts to your future designs. As for the 2nd part, the buoyancy thing, I can see your line of thought because I went down that line myself, but wrong. The upward buoyancy forces are all about Archimedes, volume displacement of water. The total external volume of the lure generates an upward force of 1 gram for every cm³ of volume. The CAD COG of this uniform density volume will give you the COB. Dave

It must be SOOO frustrating for Curt. Personally, I would throw ALL the rule breakers out of the competition. Dave

DGFidler - good project. The CAD model of the flat sided body is as simple and uncomplicated as it gets. I only see one issue with the design and that is the eye socket. If you intend to use a ball-end cutter or a cutter with a radius then this result is not possible. Secondly, be careful regarding the calculation of the COG using the CAD software. The COG only takes into account the downward forces of the body material, the ballast, hooks, lip and other hardware. The buoyancy forces are not considered, and for a lure that actually floats, the center of buoyancy (COB), the sum of the upward forces is actually greater than the COG which is the sum of the downward forces. The COF or Center Of Forces will be about half way between the COG and COB. This is a complex idea that is going to hurt a lot of heads and burst some balloons regarding understanding COG. This detail will likely not be important to your bait, but when the lure is static in the water, the center of forces, the sum of the upward AND downward forces is not the same as the COG. The problem arises if the two forces are too close together, again most unlikely otherwise this would have been discussed before. The beauty of knowing the COG and the COB is that you can then accurately predict the float angle, the attitude that the lure sits in the water, be it nose up, nose down or level. It is then possible to alter the position of the hooks and ballast at the CAD design stage to control the float angle. I will write in more detail about this one day and try to make it clearer. But, the information is only of advantage to CAD designers, manual designers will have to use the 'suck it and see' method. Dave

Introduce a CAD design section and I will submit 20 images from different angles Dave

Such poor quality, certainly not around, or infinitely better now Dave

Curt - I am confident that this year will be different and EVERYONE will read the rules and follow to the letter. Good Luck Dave

I must have missed this video, first time I have seen it. The video highlights a few problems for the CAD designer in that you have to be aware of the milling process and the tool radii required. You can start with a very pretty CAD model, but after the machining process you end up with an unrecognizable mush. It would be a lot more interesting to see a video of the complete CAD design process that people use with the different CAD systems. Dave