Good luck getting into a debate with iabass... Mine lasted 3 days in the end I was wrong but it was about football.

My experience dovetails with Heron's experience.

 

Back in the 50s a rash of plastic replicas flooded the market which were highly detailed 'dead-ringers'

of crayfish, shiners, crickets, salamanders, hellgrammites and more. Like a kid in a candy shop,

I fell hook, line & sinker, but truthfully I don't remember catching much of anything on them.

Sure enough, they all disappeared one-by-one. 

 

The Yum Crawbug has been the most lifelike crayfish replication for the past 20 years, but is it popular? 

The Zoom Pro Chunk, looks like a flat, steamrollered banner, but it far outsells the Yum Crawbug,

which I believe TW no longer carries.

 

All that said, I'd be the first sucker to pay more for any lure that boosted my confidence.

But based on past experience, superficial realism doesn't have much influence on my confidence.

If your lure enters the strike window of an active bass and it moves like a living creature, it's going down the hatch.

 

PS:

On the other hand, if your lake is teeming with those chartreuse & white creatures,

you know, the ones with the silver flappers and the tentacles in the rear:

then by all means 'match the hatch and tie on a spinnerbait  

 

 Roger

Fish here like shiny flappers wearing short skirts. 

Fish here like shiny flappers wearing short skirts. 

Most of them must be males. 

Realistic baits will out fish non realistic baits probably at least 10 to 1 when it comes to big bass.

Here is the thing though. Many guys think a bait looks realistic to them because it has some details or a good paint job but it is still far from realistic. 99% of most cranks and similar baits are not realistic at all even though they may have a photo finish. They still look like a lure and not a fish. It would be like painting a picture of a Ferrari on the side of truck and expecting people to think its a Ferrari. No its still a truck. I will use the Huddleston as my example. Here is a bait that actually is realistic. Its looks like a trout. Its the correct SHAPE, SIZE, and COLOR. When bass eat that bait I am pretty sure they think they are eating a real trout. Its not a reaction bite. They are feeding. That bait is realistic and its results speak for themselves.

The biggest problem with this argument is guys comparing a regular crank bait to one with a realistic looking paint job. The truth is neither one of them is realistic at all so they produce similar results. If you want to debate the effectiveness of realism then choose a bait that looks like a real fish, swims like a real fish, is the correct size of that fish and realistic paint job. Then you will see how effective realistic lures can be. Consider this. I make a couple baits that are made for dead sticking. They just float on the surface, with none or very little action by the fisherman. They get bit by big bass based soley on their realism. Most bites are slow and deliberate. I have seen it many times, The bass will slowly swim to the front of the bait and eat it head first. The bait is not being worked. its just floating. Its the realism that fools those fish.

For all regular non realistic, non swimbait lures. I think that simple patterns work as well or better then a detailed finish.

Realistic baits will out fish non realistic baits probably at least 10 to 1 when it comes to big bass.

Here is the thing though. Many guys think a bait looks realistic to them because it has some details or a good paint job but it is still far from realistic. 99% of most cranks and similar baits are not realistic at all even though they may have a photo finish. They still look like a lure and not a fish. It would be like painting a picture of a Ferrari on the side of truck and expecting people to think its a Ferrari. No its still a truck. I will use the Huddleston as my example. Here is a bait that actually is realistic. Its looks like a trout. Its the correct SHAPE, SIZE, and COLOR. When bass eat that bait I am pretty sure they think they are eating a real trout. Its not a reaction bite. They are feeding. That bait is realistic and its results speak for themselves.

The biggest problem with this argument is guys comparing a regular crank bait to one with a realistic looking paint job. The truth is neither one of them is realistic at all so they produce similar results. If you want to debate the effectiveness of realism then choose a bait that looks like a real fish, swims like a real fish, is the correct size of that fish and realistic paint job. Then you will see how effective realistic lures can be. Consider this. I make a couple baits that are made for dead sticking. They just float on the surface, with none or very little action by the fisherman. They get bit by big bass based soley on their realism. Most bites are slow and deliberate. I have seen it many times, The bass will slowly swim to the front of the bait and eat it head first. The bait is not being worked. its just floating. Its the realism that fools those fish.

For all regular non realistic, non swimbait lures. I think that simple patterns work as well or better then a detailed finish.

I agree with much of this.   Certainly realism would require much more than just a nice paint job.  I also wonder how much accuracy in the bait's movement also contributes to its success.

 

But in your experience, do you have the same conclusion about say, craw baits (if you use them)?  Have you noticed anything that shows a craw bait design of high realism (like maybe a Huddlebug, 3D Craw, etc.) produce more than a caw bait that is not realistic at all? 

My matt lures ripped

My matt lures ripped

Its a soft bait. Ripping does happen with all soft baits. Get your self some Mend-it and you can fix all your ripped soft baits many times.

I agree with much of this.   Certainly realism would require much more than just a nice paint job.  I also wonder how much accuracy in the bait's movement also contributes to its success.

 

But in your experience, do you have the same conclusion about say, craw baits (if you use them)?  Have you noticed anything that shows a craw bait design of high realism (like maybe a Huddlebug, 3D Craw, etc.) produce more than a caw bait that is not realistic at all? 

 I would rather use a simple jig then a craw bait but I bet a Huddle bug would out fish most of the other realistic craw baits. Where I fish using live dads is legal so I would rather use a live craw. Trout, bluegill, baby bass etc. are illegal so I use the closest thing I can buy or make.

Already did that 5 or 6 times, it's beyond repair it served me well though.

The bigger and slower I go, the more realism I want. Realism can be defined in many ways.

Sometimes it will add a huge advantage. Other times it makes no diffrerence at all. I have found it to be very situational and can apply to both reaction and non-reaction strikes alike.