fin

I've got several. Love 'em. I tried to put a prop on the back of one of them years ago, but it didn't work well.

I've got a couple of those. If the blades turn on those, it's really hard to tell. It's too small for my taste. Wow. That must have been a heart attack when that musky hit. I've caught some nice fish on the Torpedo, nothing like that though. Looks awesome, but I can't imagine it would survive a good hit. I don't know why I've never seen one of those. I've got a couple skitter pops. I looked at Rapala's video and it didn't look like it churned water very much, not even close to a whopper plopper. I've got several 90's and a couple 130's, but no 75's. It's only a half inch shorter than the 90, but I guess that's the closest thing out there to what I'm looking for. I'm surprised nobody is making anything smaller. It looks like Berkley doesn't even make anything smaller than the 90.

What size? Jointed?

Like the size of a Tiny Torpedo (2"), maybe just a little larger. Propeller baits only (I guess you can call a Whopper Plopper a propeller bait). Something with more churning power than that little propellor the TT has. Sorry my question wasn't worded more simple and to the point. I've got plenty of topwater stuff, small to large, I'm just asking about small propeller baits specifically. Is there anything new?

My records are text format. I wish I had started with a spread sheet. So I couldn't really say without doing a lot of scanning, but I tend to agree based on my selective memory. I've caught a lot of small ones on poppers, and I've caught larger fish on walking baits, but not as many fish overall on walking. The blades question is not as clear cut. I switch back and forth a lot and have caught a lot of nice ones on both styles this year. If you're catching them more on CC in clear water, that goes against tradition.

I've been throwing a whopper plopper 90 a lot lately (too much, probably), but today I threw a Tiny Torpedo. I haven't thrown one since last season. My first reaction was, what's wrong with this thing? Is the blade spinning? It took me a while to realize I was just spoiled from all the commotion the WP makes. After a while I got my technique back, but it got me to wondering if there's anything as small as the Tiny Torpedo but with more churning/agitation/commotion? Maybe a different type of prop? I'm just wondering if there's anything new out there like the size of the TT with a WP type prop on it. I've got several double prop lures. They're a little bit too big/noisy for what I'm talking about. I'm looking for the insect that fell in, or the tiny frog swimming look.

You can't be that tall ? I'd go with the 6', especially fishing from shore. You'll get a better stroke walking the more vertical you go. I look like I'm putting when I'm walking. Walking baits all cast far naturally, so you don't need the length for that. But you might get better speed on your baitcaster, which is important, depending on what reels you have.

I think this is an important factor to keep in mind. If you're scared to throw a lure in a certain spot because it's so expensive, it loses a lot of value.

I've made a few cheap blade baits, and I've found bending the blade is necessary on some more than others. It's like a tuning thing. The trailer/weight can even have an effect on it. Some times less of a bend gives faster start-up, sometimes it's the opposite, but it definitely has a major effect.

Of course, but that spot is probably the least visible spot on the lure to the fish. I honestly never paid much attention to eyes myself, and I certainly don’t disqualify a lure because I don’t like the eyes. I’m just a little surprised with how most lure makers, who go through so much trouble to make perfect paint jobs put so little effort into the eyes.

There seems to be a style where the eyes are on the front, close together on top of the head, like the green Bagley Balsa B in the picture above. That looks to be totally for the fisherman, more for style and tradition than for the fish. Probably not even visible to the fish from their angle.

A weightless worm maybe, but other than that, not really. It's just going to add some weight. There's a lot of downsides to using a swivel though, and your line is still going to get twisted even using a swivel. If you don't have a boat to use to untwist your line, you can drop your line from a high place, like a bridge, or tall building, with a weight on the end. Eventually it will straighten itself out. Depending on the shape of your weight, you can tell when it stops spinning.

That seems to be the consensus around here. A few years ago, that wasn't the case. The thinking is that the bass can obviously see the line, but they don't have enough sense to know what it is or what danger it represents.

Call me crazy, but I like that better than the red eyes for a gizzard shad.

I'm guessing the difference is the line guide/level wind.

Slow the video down to .25 speed and you can see much clearer. No hookset, then you let the line get slack right near the boat right when she whips her head 90 degrees. When you hold the rig up to the camera, it's hard to tell which bait she bit. It should be obvious. Thanks for not adding loud music to the video! ?

Why don't rod makers seal cork to begin with? There must be some downside?

I wouldn't go shorter than 24", and no longer than the length from your reel to the end of the rod, so the knot doesn't pass through the line guide if you're using a baitcaster. For spinning, the longest I usually go is about 6 feet. I can't remember why I settled on that length, I remember there's some downside to using too long of a leader. Curl, I think.

Probably staying up all night worrying cause they know they're gonna get bit.

If fish were smart enough to know what hooks are we'd all be screwed. They don't know what eyes are either, not like we do, but eyes mean more to them than a hook.

I've had this happen to me quite a few times. Not necessarily birdsnests, but whatever malfunction, leaving the line sitting there for over a minute or so, maybe inadvertently jerking on the line a little while trying to fix the malfunction, and then when finally retrieving the line, finding a nice fish on the line.

Same could be said about a lot of baits, red lipless is the first that comes to mind. Very productive, and it's supposed to symbolize a crawfish, but it doesn't really look or act like a crawfish unless you bounce it off the bottom, and even then, it still doesn't look much like a crawfish. Then there's that video of some guy catching a bass on a wrench. And the beer can lure. You can go on and on with the exceptions. I don't know what goes on in a fish's head. I know I have more luck with baits that more closely resemble things in their environment, but they'll still bite the craziest things sometimes. Underwater, in the right lighting and conditions, that pink jerkbait might look like something familiar, or the color might not be visible at all.

Will somebody test this for me and tell me if it's true? lol

Slower is almost always better, no matter what time of year. Big bass are lazy, they aren't going to chase your bait. They sit and wait in ambush. It's very hard to slow down after you've been fishing faster. Counting helps if you're fishing soft plastic. I've found that 3 seconds is a good pause.

I agree with all that, and I think even with a suspending jerkbait, if it doesn't move right, it's not going to get bit. And in most situations, the fish won't be able to even see the eyes on the bait. The way I see it, you don't want anything on your bait that tells the fish NOT to bite it. It's not so important that a lure be totally realistic, but it's very important that the lure doesn't send a bad signal to the fish. If that makes any sense. So I don't see why the luremakers wouldn't make the eyes right. And yeah, the eyes, like on the SPRO, are totally for the fishermen.