How much bullet weight is necessary

[5/0]

If you need a 3/8-1/2 oz bullet weight invest in tungsten. In my experience that weight in lead/steel can be pretty big. For lack of a better description, they overpower some plastic baits IMO. Tungsten is more expensive, but much smaller.

[Hammer 4]

10 minutes ago, 5/0 said:

If you need a 3/8-1/2 oz bullet weight invest in tungsten. In my experience that weight in lead/steel can be pretty big. For lack of a better description, they overpower some plastic baits IMO. Tungsten is more expensive, but much smaller.

This ^^^ and a good place to get  tungsten weights is at SiebertOutdoors.com , they are a site sponsor too.

[Team9nine]

19 hours ago, Bluebasser86 said:

I like to use the lightest weight I can get away with. 

 

11 hours ago, A-Jay said:

Weight size varies in accordance with depth, cover density, bottom composition 

and on scene weather conditions at the time of said presentation.

 

A-Jay

 

6 hours ago, WRB said:

As long as you can detect strikes you have enough weight.

Tom

 

The above excerpts pretty much sum it all up for me ^^

 

The thing everyone has left out of the discussion is the biology  and mechanics of feeding. If you've ever felt a tap or know you had a hit, but there was nothing there when you swung (we all have), you'll understand. A bass tried to "eat" your bait, but the "relationship" between bait and bass was off.

 

Bass adjust their feeding technique and mechanics based upon prey type from previous experience. The lightest weight you can get away with and still accomplish a proper presentation for cover/substrate, with good enough feel/feedback, combined with acceptable triggering speed is probably the best weight to use. The fun is in figuring out just what weight that is at any given time 

[Log Catcher]

I always use the lightest weight I can get by with. For me it is about the rate of fall. I feel like I have better luck with a slower fall rate. I use a lot of lead but I do have some tungsten sinkers. I agree with @5/0. Anything over 1/4 ounce I would go with tungsten. I always peg my sinkers.

[J Francho]

15 hours ago, MGF said:

That's true but buoyancy might be the issue here. When in the water a neutrally buoyant object is perceived as weightless...even though it may have plenty of weight.  

 

An object's buoyancy is the weight of the object minus the weight of the water that it displaces...that's why a large steel ship can float just like if it were weightless.

None of this stops a bass from eating my 2+ oz. punch rig.

17 hours ago, WRB said:

Food for thought; a 10 lb brick weight 6.6 lbs underwater.

Tom

PS, Archimedes principle 

 

Only if the brick is weighed from a spring scale above the water.  You aren't actually measuring mass, though.  

[fissure_man]

3 hours ago, J Francho said:

None of this stops a bass from eating my 2+ oz. punch rig.

 

No, but if you could get away with a lighter weight without sacrificing presentation efficiency, you’d likely be better off.

 

Totally different scenario, but the clearest example I’ve seen of weight alone making a difference has been while vertical fishing for walleye or perch with small minnows. In this case, simply skewering a minnow on a bare jig head and suspending it near bottom, no other ‘action’ to speak of (a reasonably well-controlled test environment). When sitting on a school of small and less active fish, ‘nibblers’ can run you out of minnows in a hurry, particularly if you’re in a boat full of folks impatient on the hookset. This can be almost completely solved by losing the heavy jig heads and fishing something like a drop shot with a little slack, or a lindy rig. No change in number of bites, but the hook up rate goes through the roof.  IMO this is similar to the ‘feeding mechanics’ angle mentioned above – it simply takes more effort/suction to pull in the minnow anchored to a heavy jig head, and they don’t have the whole deal in their mouth when you feel the bite. 

 

3 hours ago, J Francho said:

Only if the brick is weighed from a spring scale above the water.  You aren't actually measuring mass, though.  

 

Mass vs. weight argument could be easily solved by settling on definitions. Mass certainly does not change whether an object is above/below water; weight may or may not change depending on how you define or measure it. Spring scales never measure mass, they measure force which we can conveniently use to estimate mass when the object is much much denser than the fluid it’s immersed in (air). This isn’t always valid, as in the Hindenburg example, or when an object is underwater. Weight most commonly refers to the force of gravity on an object, which does not change when an object is submerged. However, in the context of the question at hand, is it not sensible that ‘weight’ should refer to an ‘apparent weight’ or ‘buoyed weight’ (net downward force), taking into account that bass and their prey are underwater where the buoyant force is extremely significant? Forces are felt, mass is not.

[J Francho]

2 minutes ago, fissure_man said:

No, but if you could get away with a lighter weight without sacrificing presentation efficiency, you’d likely be better off.

 I don't think so.  I often think the advice to go as light as possible isn't nearly related to getting bit as it is to angler preference, especially so when fishing the rig without pegging.  For bass, it hasn't been an issue starting at 3/8 oz. and often using heavier for over 30 years. I'm not saying quit using lighter weights, just saying don't let anything stop you from using heavier. 

 

As far as weight goes, I'll stick to the dictionary:

 

1 : the amount that something weighs Her weight is 115 pounds. 2 : the force with which a body is pulled toward the earth. 3 : a unit (as a pound) for measuring weight. 4 : an object (as a piece of metal) of known weight for balancing a scale in weighing other objects.

 

For the sake of this discussion, #2 works, and is interchangeable with mass.

[fissure_man]

We can pretend that buoyancy is irrelevant, but there’s a reason we don’t make sinkers out of wood ?‍♂️

[J Francho]

If you have to make false equivalencies to make your point go ahead.  I can't imaging the difference in buoyancy between a fish and a sinker (they sink - it's in the name) has anything to do with this discussion or getting bites.  Help me out here?  Never mind, don't.

[Sphynx]

For every angler I have heard use the theory to use as light a weight as possible because it keeps a bait in the strike zone longer, I have heard another angler perfectly convinced that using a heavy weight to force a quick reaction by limiting the time for choice is more effective, I also have seen both theories result in both skunks, and fish being landed, so I am not entirely convinced that the size of your sinker is really all that much of a contributing factor as far as the fish is concerned, or perhaps it is simply that other factors mean so much more that the difference is immaterial in a practical sense beyond getting your chosen presentation where you want it.

[Catt]

4 hours ago, J Francho said:

I don't think so.  I often think the advice to go as light as possible isn't nearly related to getting bit as it is to angler preference, especially so when fishing the rig without pegging.  For bass, it hasn't been an issue starting at 3/8 oz. and often using heavier for over 30 years. I'm not saying quit using lighter weights, just saying don't let anything stop you from using heavier. 

 

Rate Of Fall ?

 

The bass may not want weightless, they may want a 1/2 oz rate of fall.

 

I have a wide array of weights from 1/64 - 1/2 oz, then it's flipping-n-pitching-n-punching!

 

I think the original question was is a 3/8 oz to heavy, the answer no it's isn't.

[ATA]

On 1/12/2021 at 8:54 PM, Tyler. said:

I fish a lot of deep lakes and have some bullet weights from 3/8 to 1/4oz. Is 3/8 too much weight to be pegged at the nose of a worm or brush hog ? It gets it down to the bottom and in deep lakes that helps but is it too much weight for a fish to hold on to it?

 

Should I use those weights in C-Rig applications instead of pegging at the nose?

here in CA I am using 3/8 most of the time, and in summer when we have thick pad, I am using 1 even 2oz sometimes to get down there. I always think 3/8 will Mae in most of the time.

[fissure_man]

@J Francho The OP’s question was about whether or not a 3/8 oz sinker might be “too much weight for a fish to hold on to,” presumably getting at whether or not (or at what point) a heavy sinker might be rejected by the fish as being unnatural or for any other reason. Claim was made that other bass prey weigh more than 3/8 oz therefore there should be no concern.

 

Whether or not the conclusion is correct at 3/8 oz, the logic is flawed. The simple fact is that lead or tungsten sinkers are unnaturally dense in comparison to any bass prey, and the difference is magnified by immersing them in a dense fluid (water). Why insist on comparing mass when one object suspends and the other sinks faster than a rock? Reducing sinker size in general produces a package that is more similar to the bass’ prey in terms of overall density and, probably, the way it reacts to being ‘slurped’ by the bass. Whether or not (or at what point) this becomes important to the effectiveness of the presentation is up for debate, which is (again) the original point of the thread.

[WRB]

FWhen I was a young teenager to earn a merit badge and spear fish we had to prove our ability to swim and dive using a face mask and snorkel. The test was free dive 25 feet and pick up a rock painted white, bring to the surface and set it on the floating platform. The white rock weighed 10 lbs!  

I was surprised how light the rock weighed in the water swimming it back up from the bottom and how heavy it felt trying to put it up on the platform. The instructor told us things in water weigh about 2/3rd as much. He was right.

T-rigged worms using sliding bullet weights for me is a slower presentation then jig fishing. I like worms to sink slower and work it back slowly along the bottom stop and shake it. I use enough weight to keep in contact, this has always worked for me.

Tom

 

[J Francho]

4 hours ago, Catt said:

 

Rate Of Fall ?

 

The bass may not want weightless, they may want a 1/2 oz rate of fall.

 

I have a wide array of weights from 1/64 - 1/2 oz, then it's flipping-n-pitching-n-punching!

 

I think the original question was is a 3/8 oz to heavy, the answer no it's isn't.

I get the ROF concept.  Mass, profile, shape of the bait, etc all affect that, and I do think it makes a difference. The discussion drifted off to lala land, wood sinkers, and the buoyancy of the Titanic. 

The answer to how much is enough is: that much. Because. 

[WRB]

1 hour ago, J Francho said:

I get the ROF concept.  Mass, profile, shape of the bait, etc all affect that, and I do think it makes a difference. The discussion drifted off to lala land, wood sinkers, and the buoyancy of the Titanic. 

The answer to how much is enough is: that much. Because. 

You questioned if a 1/2 bullet weight=weighs 1/2 in water, answer 3/8 oz.

What does that mean it feels like it feels, we all use fishing weights in water.

Tom

[Jonas Staggs]

2 hours ago, WRB said:

FWhen I was a young teenager to earn a merit badge and spear fish we had to prove our ability to swim and dive using a face mask and snorkel. The test was free dive 25 feet and pick up a rock painted white, bring to the surface and set it on the floating platform. The white rock weighed 10 lbs!  

I was surprised how light the rock weighed in the water swimming it back up from the bottom and how heavy it felt trying to put it up on the platform. The instructor told us things in water weigh about 2/3rd as much. He was right.

T-rigged worms using sliding bullet weights for me is a slower presentation then jig fishing. I like worms to sink slower and work it back slowly along the bottom stop and shake it. I use enough weight to keep in contact, this has always worked for me.

Tom

 

 

 

Those are the good old days! Boy scouts would probably get sued for something like that today I would imagine. 

[mcipinkie]

To the original OP's question - It really isn't that simple.  Depends on the bait you're using, the depth you're fishing, the current/wind, how you like to fish, what the cover is, and a dozen other issues.

 

I work just the opposite of most of the posters here, except we're saying the same thing backwards from each other.  I throw the heaviest weight I can get the fish to bite.  Heavier weights are easier to cast, easier to maintain contact with, punch through cover better than lighter baits.  If the fish will bite a 5/16 weight, that's what I like to fish.  If they want something dropping slower, then I have sinkers down to 1/16.  This is for Texas rigging.  Always peg my weight.  If I need more, have up to 1 1/2 oz.

 

Carolina rigs start at 3/4 oz and go up or down depending on what the fish tell me.

 

There is not a stock answer.  This is part of fishing.  You got to figure it out.  It may not be the same tomorrow.

[TnRiver46]

13 minutes ago, mcipinkie said:

To the original OP's question - It really isn't that simple.  Depends on the bait you're using, the depth you're fishing, the current/wind, how you like to fish, what the cover is, and a dozen other issues.

 

I work just the opposite of most of the posters here, except we're saying the same thing backwards from each other.  I throw the heaviest weight I can get the fish to bite.  Heavier weights are easier to cast, easier to maintain contact with, punch through cover better than lighter baits.  If the fish will bite a 5/16 weight, that's what I like to fish.  If they want something dropping slower, then I have sinkers down to 1/16.  This is for Texas rigging.  Always peg my weight.  If I need more, have up to 1 1/2 oz.

 

Carolina rigs start at 3/4 oz and go up or down depending on what the fish tell me.

 

There is not a stock answer.  This is part of fishing.  You got to figure it out.  It may not be the same tomorrow.

I also tend to go as heavy as possible

[Hammer 4]

I tend to use whatever works best..

[MGF]

13 hours ago, Sphynx said:

For every angler I have heard use the theory to use as light a weight as possible because it keeps a bait in the strike zone longer, I have heard another angler perfectly convinced that using a heavy weight to force a quick reaction by limiting the time for choice is more effective, I also have seen both theories result in both skunks, and fish being landed, so I am not entirely convinced that the size of your sinker is really all that much of a contributing factor as far as the fish is concerned, or perhaps it is simply that other factors mean so much more that the difference is immaterial in a practical sense beyond getting your chosen presentation where you want it.

As always "it depends". I think "fall rate" is important but sometimes fast works better and sometimes slow works better. I'd rather concern myself with function over some silly overgeneralization taken out of context. A wise man once said "What works, works."

 

 

 

 

[MGF]

9 hours ago, WRB said:

 

I was surprised how light the rock weighed in the water swimming it back up from the bottom and how heavy it felt trying to put it up on the platform. The instructor told us things in water weigh about 2/3rd as much. He was right.

 

Tom

 

The idea is there but he wasn't correct. A battle ship is much heavier than the 10 pound rock but it floats. The apparent weight (buoyancy) of an object is as previously described in this thread.

 

A course in free diving or scuba diving should include a thorough explanation of buoyancy.  

[Catt]

On 1/12/2021 at 10:54 PM, Tyler. said:

but is it too much weight for a fish to hold on to it?

 

This is the original question I was answering!

 

And the answer is still...No!

[Bankbeater]

The weight I use depends on the water depth, where in the water column are the bass I want to catch, and what is between me and the bass.

Most of the time I will use 1/8 to 1/4 ounce weights, but sometimes I fish 1/2 to 1 oz. I fish a lake where the larger bass stay near the bottom, and the little bass are up in the water column.  The little bass will grab a slow sinking bait before it can get down to the large bass.

[Sphynx]

4 hours ago, MGF said:

As always "it depends". I think "fall rate" is important but sometimes fast works better and sometimes slow works better. I'd rather concern myself with function over some silly overgeneralization taken out of context. A wise man once said "What works, works."

 

 

 

 

I'm a pretty big believer that the only rules that matter in the end are what the fish tell me matter, I don't care if the water looks like a mirror and it's 95 degrees and bluebird skies, if they are munching spinnerbaits, then a spinnerbait is the right lure.