Tailoring the Super Fluke
I’ve been fishing with the Super Fluke for around 15 years or so. It’s my “go to” smallie lure from mid-spring to late-fall. I’m always tinkering with fluke colors, tactics, etc.. Over the last year and a half I have changed things up and am now ready to relay a few things that you may be interested in.
I decided that I wanted to simplify the rigging, especially in reducing the number of knots I’ve been using. I’m a fan of Berkley Nanofil line. I just really appreciate the way it handles, casts, transmits feel, and resists wind knots. I like to use 10 lb hi-vis chartreuse nofil. The hi-vis helps me in tending the fluke.
But now comes the dilemma. I always felt like it was really, really crucial to use a fluorocarbon leader because I thought that the stealth of this leader was not only desirable, but critical! In order to use the fluorocarbon leader with the nanofil, the first knot came into play. However, the fluke will severely twist your line after a days workout without a good swivel, causing all kinds of irritation later on. So the need to add a ball-bearing swivel between the nano and the leader was used. This was irritating all by itself because of having to be careful not to get the swivel in the rod’s top guide.
Now the second irritation was that I had to tie a knot to the swivel and then another from the swivel to the hook. Now I’ve got a total of three knots being used to rig a fluke – you know the problems with three knots!
I decided to do without the fluoro leader, and just use a swivel and fluke. But that would require two knots, right? Not good enough. So, I needed to incorporate a swivel to the eye of the hook and then I could use a single knot to tie on a fluke. I decided to use a ball bearing swivel with solid rings. First, I had to open the hook’s eye, then slip on the swivel ring, and close the eye. Voila!
Now I could tie the nano directly to the hook/swivel. One hook – perfect. I’m still a little shy about using the hi-vis line all the way to the fluke, so I’ve been using black marker on the bottom three ft of line. I’ll experiment with the necessity for that too, but later. But so far, after a lot of bass caught on this rig, I can assure you that it works wonderfully, and I don’t feel that I get any less bites at all. Give it a try and tell me what you think.
Sweet.
Excellent information. I cannot wait to try this out on Pend Oreille saturday.
You still throwing them on a spinning rod? If so, can you expand on the reasoning behind it. I prefer a baitcaster.
I do throw them just on spinning gear, John. I think its just a little easier especially with the windy conditions here on the Columbia. But, it shouldn’t make any difference as long as you can use the smaller diameter line with a bait caster. I think your gear will work just fine.
Great information Bob. I’m with you-the less knots the better. I’ve got a couple questions :
1. Do you play with hook size/gauge to give the fluke a little extra weight which would effect the rate-of-fall?
2. What knot are you using at the connection point? I’ve heard the double palomar is a good one for nanofil.
Hi Jeff. I use Lunker City insert weights for added weight. I use about 2/3 of the smallest one and slide it right into the nose from inside the slit. I typically use a 3/0 wide gap and don’t really feel a need to change the hook type.
I started using a trilene knot awhile back and it works without fail for me.
Just another rigging method I have been playing with. I use a 1/0 finesse hook (drop shot) with one of those spring bait keepers threaded into the nose of the fluke. I have noticed most of the time the smallies will hit the head of the lure. Hook ups have been great. Also, I pour my own soft plastic jerkbaits, when I pour them I add salt to just the bottom layer of the bait to help “keel” the bait. This also helps give it a slow fall in the water column. Hope this helps you.
Thanks for the interest and input, Tim. You know there are a lot of different fluke techniques out there, and it’s fun to hear about them. There have been many days when I just kept missing bass with the fluke. When it happens I’ve learned to come off the offset hook and use a size 1 circle hook. I start the hook in through the “chin” and out through the “forehead”, and that changes everything for that day. Ya just never know!
Not my forehead or chin though (ha)
Bob, back when we worked together in 2007 you started experimenting with a knot that had a loop when tied to allow one to discontinue using the swivel. What ever came of that experimentation? Every once in a while i still use it. Seems it would be more stealthy than the swivel you are using now.
I sure do remember, John. Yeah, its a great knot and I used it to tie to the fluke hook as it gave the fluke lots of free movement. But I had a braid-to-swivel-to fluorocarbon-to hook rig with that knot. That rig worked just great, and the ball bearing swivel kept the line twist out. But still – three knots! So I needed to get rid of all the knots (not really a need, just a want), so started with the set up I described in the article. Some folks don’t use a swivel at all, but I get all kinds of crazy line twists that way. Now I agree, stealth-wise the old method seemed better. But I think that it really means through the fisherman’s eye. The fish don’t seem to give a hoot. Kind of like tying directly to a crank bait or using a snap. Sometimes we (I) get too crazy on this kind of stuff. Top water plugs with three sets of trebles – no fish would attack that, right.
I have never used a swivel with super flukes. That is part of the reason for the baitcaster for me and super flukes, no swivel and no line twist issues like you get on spinning reels.