regular mono vs Fluoro: no BS allowed!
- This topic has 23 replies, 14 voices, and was last updated Dec 16, 2006 at 2:04 pm by
.
-
Posts
-
Read many discussions about the fishing advantages of fluorocarbon tippet material.
Too many bull shit in my view from people who I doubt they can really tell the difference.So, cut the BS:
anyone brave enough to say it DOES make a difference in fishing (= catching MORE and/or BIGGER fish)?I’ve never touched those damn things because:
* I refuse to pay $10 a spool (30 yards)
* I change a lot of tippet during a day
* Fish haven’t told me to go home since mono is old-fashioned ;DJay
Yes, it makes a huge difference where I fish. You don’t have to pay $10 for 30 yards either. Buy Seaguar Carbon Pro 100% fluro in 2,4,6 pound test and respool it on a tippet spool. I think its $15 for 250 yards. I also keep a spool of “real” 7x just in case they get real picky.
I think we have three characteristics we would like to have here:
1) (added) strength / toughness / etc. without being stiff
2) faster sinking
3) less visability under water.
I too fish 95% with nymphs, BTW.
1) The waters I fish I usually use 4x-5x. 4x for bigger & faster waters, 5x for calmer waters.
I think in faster water the additional stiffness of 4x over 5x is marginal because fish don’t have the time to become picky. To overcome stiffness one can use brands that are softer, but that usually goes with less strength.2) Since I use weighted nymphs (bead heads mainly) I don’t care much for even faster sinking. In faster water I even add more weight using split shots.
What MIGHT be usefull is when you fish with lightly (or unweighted) nymphs on calm water like spring creeks.3) This is the part I’m most interested in. What’s the added advantage of this compared to regular mono? Do trout even CARE whether it’s visable or not? Fish see all kind of debris coming down its path. I doubt it can see the difference of a mono or a twig, wire, piece of hair, piece of a bicycle, etc.
When fishing with dries on calm (spink creeks etc) water, you grease the leader all the way to the tip. So the advantage of fluoro being almost invisable UNDER water seems to be BS since the tippet (the whole leader in fact) will be FLOATING?
Jeez, looks like the fluoro manufacturers are pulling our leg are they?
Jay
I don’t really fish the small stuff that much so I don’t think I can’t really speak for the visibility issue.
I use full flouro tapered leaders as well, its stiffer and turns big flies over better.
Why not just use mono that is one X lower (=thicker / stiffer)?
Jay
I continue to fish both, but am of the opinion that the benefits are negligible. My brother and I did a comparison a few years ago on the Norfork, both fished the same flies, the same area of water, same kind of presentation, only difference was I used flouro and my brother fished mono and our success rates were about the same.
I think the only real advantages of flouro might be, as Zach pointed out, is its density and its abrasion/breaking strength is a little higher. I also wonder if smudging mono with a Sharpie wouldn’t reduce its reflective properties–given that that is one of the reasons so many deride mono these days.
Ss
Yes, it makes a huge difference where I fish.
Do you THINK it makes a difference (‘placebo effect’) or do you really CATCH more fish?
I think I have to try a whole season using fluoro only to see what the differece is. Also I need to fish the same river I fish regulary in the past to be able to compare it. Hmm.. that sounds kinda boring BTW
I’m actually glad you brought this up. I’ve lately started questioning myself on using fluorocarbon, which I used almost exclusively in the past.
Honestly, I think even in the 6x and below range the fish are probably seeing the tippet anyway, they simply don’t mind. It’s all about drag… (in my opinion)
I’ve gone back to mono simply because it’s more supple than fluoro in comparable sizes. I noticed (and didn’t like) the stiffness of fluoro with midges especially. Pretty much the same reason that fluoro leaders haven’t become too popular for trout fishing outside of streamer use. I switched from 6x and 7x fluoro to mono and certainly don’t think I’m catching any fewer fish.
Mono + loop knot = lots of natural movement in the water column.
However, if I’m at all concerned about breakoffs from abrasion, I’ll go with fluoro every time.
If a guy THINKS it makes a difference, it makes a difference. It’s the same thing as having confidence in your fly. I have nymphed exclusively with Frog Hair fluoro this fall(mostly 4X) and have seen a big difference in clear water and am picking up fish in situations that have always given me trouble. With a skill set like mine, I need all the edge I can get… 🙂
My introduction to fluro was live baiting with downlines to Hybrid and Striper. About the time I first tried it, for reasons I don’t remember other then it was new, my catch rates went up tremendously. Keep in mind this is live bait fishing with downlines. Not much skill is required from the angler once you find the fish with the electronics. It was from that point on I used it religiously.
I have to disagree on knotting mono to fluro. I typically tie saltwater leaders where the 40 lb butt to @20lb is mono, knotted to a fluro tippet. I have never had a mono-fluoro connection fail, provided the knot was lubricated and evenly tightened down. Fishing in the YT this summer, I snagged an esl on some bridge rubble. Unable to wade to free the snag to do fast, cold and deep water, I attempted to break the tippet. The 22lb mono broke in the mid section, not at the fluro to mono knot and the 12 lb fluoro I assume did not break. I know that is not really statistical evidence of dissimilar material knot failure modes, but from personal experience, a well lubricated, well tied and evenly tightened knot is just as strong mono to fluoro as mono to mono.
Why not just use mono that is one X lower (=thicker / stiffer)?
because I want it stiffer but not thicker,(sounds like a viagra comercial or something) plus I’m not talking about stuff rated in X’s, I’m talking 8lb to 20 lb test range.
And sorry, I read over the part at the begining where you specify flouro tippet materials, I thought you just meant flouro in general.
Buzz
No problem, and I definitely believe there was a nick or stress point in the 22 lb mono that caused it to break before the fluoro. I have a friend who has one of those Japanese gauges that measure tensile stress on lines before they break. I’ll see if I can borrow it and I’ll start doing some tests and analysis on breaking strengths. I was thinking of using the following test protocol
Control Groups:
12lb mono unknotted breaking strength;conduct destructive test 10 times
22 lb mono unknotted breaking strength;conduct destructive test 10 times
12 lb Fluoro unknotted breaking strength;conduct destructive test 10 times
22 lb fluorp unknotted breaking strength;conduct destructive test 10 timesTest articles
22lb mono knotted to 12lb mono; conduct destructive test 10 times
22lb mono knotted to 22lb mono; conduct destructive test 10 times
22lb fluoro knotted to 12lb fluoro; conduct destructive test 10 times
22lb fluoro to 22lb fluoro; conduct destructive test 10 timesThat should give me enough data to come up with some trending and indicators.
That’s the ticket, Salty_Ryan!
Any other method other than using weights seems to be pure conjecture and judgement call. The fact you will do several runs makes the tests that much more conclusive!
Chatillon and Amtek make force gages that latch on to the peak breaking strength.
If I still lived in Michigan I would pay a visit to my buddy at Nils Jorgenson and borrow their machine!The only test I did was in a river in PA two years ago. I was nailing the fish while my buddy couldn’t buy a bite! We ended up rigging him up identically down to the bug and dropper length. No change. We even went so far as swapping rods. It is then he started in on catching all the fish. The ONLY difference was I had on Flouro and he was using mono.
That sold me and him on the practical difference flouro makes.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.