|
|
Posts: 1504
Location: Oregon | I am refinishing several for a customers right now. some of them are weighted in the "old method" where a series of small weights are placed very low on the lure while others just have one large weight in the front and back.
Anyway, I got to wondering how much difference there is in the action of these two weighting methods. I have never fished a HR Glider so I am not all that familiar with the difference in action.
For those that have fished the HR Gliders, I'm curious how much difference there is in action between these two weighting methods. Is the difference in stability, roll, and drop very subtle or completely different?
Jed V.
Edited by RiverMan 11/6/2007 9:18 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 141
| Im going make a guess here because I only weight front and back end, but I assume a series of weights along the bait would dull the action and result in a more subtle "wobble" rather than the usual tight turns that front and back gives.
Edited by DaveG 11/7/2007 10:07 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1504
Location: Oregon | I figured several guys would chime in right away on this post since so many folks in the buy/sell sectioin of M1 are always asking for the older style gliders. Oh well..........thx Dave.
Jed V. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 392
Location: KY | Good question Jed
It seems most people on this board hold there cards close to their chest. I wish more where willing to share their knowledge openly.
I will take a stab at your question. I have been thinking about the same thing for a while. Let me qualify my answer first. I am a novice builder and have never thrown an HR glider. I have a couple dozen gliders from other makers and have made a handful of my own. Please don’t slam me too hard. Let me know if you think I am wrong though.
I have inserted a picture for reference. I hope it is clear.
“The "old method" where a series of small weights are placed very low on the lure while others just have one large weight in the front and back.”
#1 and #2 represent the two methods you describe. My experience tells me there is little difference between the two. Notice the center of buoyancy is the same for both. Engineer types will talk about moment arms where mass further from center is harder to turn. I don’t buy into that for a glider. It is my opinion that water exerts a larger force on the lure in this case making the difference in moment arm negligible. I think they would walk-the-dog the same.
Now to further the discussion. Consider #3 and #4. For #3 the amount of lead and the distribution along the bottom of the lure cause the center of buoyancy to be above the center of mass on the glider. I predict this lure would have a high degree of stability, but would not roll when pulled or wobble on the drop. #4 has lead distributed above the center of buoyancy. It would flip upside down without hooks. Lets say the hooks bring the center of buoyancy back to the center of mass. I predict this lure would be very lively, would roll when pulled, and have a nice wobble on the drop.
What do you think?
Thanks,
Bruce
Attachments
----------------
 GB.jpg (73KB - 809 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 139
| Prior to 2002, Jim Wilson used to put anywhere from 9-13 small weights in his lures. The baits weren't as wide and had a much better action. In 2002 Jim started making more lures, and went from all of the small weights to one big weight in the front and one a little smaller in the rear. Anyways, I kind of of just re-stated what was already said, but wanted to mention that the action really isn't much different at all (almost unnoticable), but makes all the difference in catching fish. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 369
Location: Omaha NE | As darkwing stated, Jim Wilson used anywhere from 4-13 weights in his lures prior to 2002 exculding a few made in 2002. I believe Jed is refering to a 10" Hughey when he says "have one large weight in the front and back" because I have six 10" Hugheys that are dated prior to 2002 which each have a similar weighting method.
Edited by Musky911 11/7/2007 3:54 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1504
Location: Oregon | Cool drawing Bruce! I have run more glider tests than I can remember. I have weighted gliders in virtually every way I could think of other than number 4 above. Although I have found some "general rules" it seems that there are far more variables than one might think. For example, two lures of identical shape and weighting methods but different wood types will without doubt behave differently. I think much of this has to do with what Archimedes discovered concerning why ships float.
According to Archimedes, two identically shaped lures made of different woods (one light one heavy) and weighted to just barely sink should weigh exactly the same. The light wood will require a bunch of lead and the heavy lure a little lead but both lures will weigh the same at the point of where they sink, slightly more than an equal volume of water. So, how does this change lure action? Lighter woods have more weight right where the lead is at. Heavier woods on the other hand will have require less lead to sink and therefore the "total weight" will be more evenly distributed...throughout the wood and lead.
What's interesting is the two different times I tried weighting a glider like example 3 above it actually had more roll! I fully expected that with all the weight very low in the lure that the roll would be reduced. For the particular body style I was building this didn't turn out to be the case but I need to run more tests.
And then there is lure shape...........
Jed
Edited by RiverMan 11/7/2007 7:00 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 392
Location: KY | Jed
"Lighter woods have more weight right where the lead is at. Heavier woods on the other hand will require less lead to sink and therefore the "total weight" will be more evenly distributed...throughout the wood and lead."
Good point. A lure made of light wood like cedar has the potential to have more built in action, if the lead is put in the right place(s). I believe it has to do with the relative position of the center of buoyancy to the center of mass. It’s our job to figure out where the right places are. LOL
"What's interesting is the two different times I tried weighting a glider like example 3 above it actually had more roll!”
This seems counter intuitive to me. Did they have more roll than a comparably shaped glider weighted like #1? I suspect the roll had to do with the body shape. Body stiles like the HR Shaker and your beer belly glider seem to roll over on their side as they walk-the-dog. Did the lures wobble while sinking? With all the lead along the bottom of the lure I would expect the buoyancy of the wood near the top to keep the lure very stable while sinking.
Thanks for sharing your experience!
Bruce
Edited by BruceKY 11/7/2007 8:21 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 941
Location: Freedom, WI | Bruce - I found that heavier wood has more action but eratic. Lighter more consistant. Weight placement on the heavier wood is more important. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1504
Location: Oregon | I would have to look back at my notes Bruce but as I recall it was a beerbelly glider that I weighted with a bunch of weights along the bottom. I will have to try a shape with less height from belly to back and see what happens. In some ways I would agree with what Roger said that heavier wood is more erratic but I can think of examples where this wasn't the case......from my experience. In general I have found lighter woods to be more "lively" and have always thought this was a result of the very heavy sections of the lure where the lead was at fighting with the very light sections.
A lure with a flat bottom will tend to wobble as it drops and so will some lure shapes.
I just tested two lures. The two lures are identical in length, thickness, height, and wood. The two lures were also weighted the same, the only difference is the body shape. One of them has a fair amount roll, the other almost no roll at all!! Go figure.
Jed |
|
| |
|
Posts: 680
Location: Muskoka Ontario,Canada | I think that shape has more to do with the actions than the weighting.The panfish shapes such as Crappie or Bluegill turn faster and have less "glide" where the more cigar shaped bodies glide very well. A hybrid shape like my 8" humpback Perch has an action somewhere in the middle of the two.
One weighting issue I will comment on is that many other manufaturers so called "custom" baits that I've painted up for customers where not even balanced properly. They all had the weights in one spot in the belly and were obviously not tested before they were originally painted. Balancing the baits front to rear is crucial in a glider as otherwise they will nose dive or rise to the surface when twitched.
That's why I charge premium prices and take so long to complete my orders. Gotta make sure they work before worrying about pretty paint. 
Edited by Musky Snax 11/16/2007 6:43 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 392
Location: KY | Jed
I was looking at your website this morning. Good stuff. I thought it was interesting that you changed the 8" beer belly.
"I made some changes to the shape of the 8-inch BeerBelly in 2006. The thickness of the lure was reduced and the tail was tapered. The result? The BeerBelly8 is now far more stable and can be worked much faster without coming to the surface or excessively rolling."
My experience is similar. I made the lure below and found it required a very slow presentation. It wants to turn 180 and roll excessively if moved too quickly. It is 1" from nose to tail and about 7 1/2" long. I have another blank cut out that I will try tapering at the tail to see if I get similar results.
Thanks for sharing.
Bruce
Attachments
----------------
TMG.JPG (86KB - 191 downloads)
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 680
Location: Muskoka Ontario,Canada | Wow Bruce, that looks like a great bait for stained waters such as Lake Nippissing. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 392
Location: KY | Or muddy spring waters in southern reservoirs |
|
| |
|
Posts: 133
Location: Lake Tomahawk, Musky Central, USA | JIM WILSON what ever happend to that guy..my dad did some fish for him and we got a ton of his baits..but he kinda just vanished |
|
| |
|
Posts: 4266
| The only place that I see his lures are a place out of Canada. |
|
| |
