Team9nine

I used the Stren 100% fluoro quite a bit this year and have nothing negative to say about it. For bass fishing, I used mostly 17# test on a baitcaster for jigging of various sorts. For crappie, I used the 6# on spinning. Cabela's has a sale on it right now and I have two new spools headed my way as we speak, FWIW. -T9

Here you go Paul (Jul. 2007): About 25 years ago, BASSMaster magazine ran a series of articles on monofilament line testing. Now we see line tests in magazines and online quite frequently. However, the neat thing about these tests were some of the variables covered that you don't typically hear about. In one particular test they documented transfer of energy through monofilaments at different distances using two different line ratings. The test setup was basic but neat. Attach one end of your monofilament to a gauge down in the water at depth and then have a person set the hook at different distances and see how much energy is transferred to the hook. They did this with 8 pound and 20 pound monofilaments. They found several things. One was that as distance from the hooksetter increased (i.e. a longer cast), final force at the hook decreased. The closer the "fish" was to you when you set, the more force you delivered to the hook. Another was that 30' was the crossover point between the two different pound test ratings. In other words, at 30 feet, the force exerted at the hook was identical between the 8 and 20 pound test lines. The further you moved out past 30 feet, the more the advantage of using 8 pound line increased. Anything shorter than 30 feet and the 20 pound mono resulted in more force at the hook. They explained this via stretch and the "bow" effect. The heavier the line the less the inherent stretch. However, this is overcome apparently at the 30 foot mark. This is then explained by the "bow" effect, basically not having a straight line to your bait at distance. You cast, the bait sinks, but it has to drag the line with it. Eight pound test being thinner, is pulled more easily through the water column and subsequently gives you a more straight line to your bait resulting in better transfer of energy, to the point of overcoming its stretch bias. Kind of interesting and a little eye-opening. To this day you'll still hear people refer to these explanations when talking about the subject of lines and hooksets, though many of the materials have changed (braids, fusion and and fluorocarbon). After all this time though, I realized there was also one explanation I never heard given or considered. Maybe someone at some point has thought of this, but I haven't come across it yet in all my readings. That is the factor of surface area. Every line for a given length has a given surface area. The longer the length of line in the water, the greater the surface area. This surface area has a resulting amount of drag. You have probably experienced this before and just never thought about it. Have you ever let a bunch of line trail off your spool into the water and trolled it behind your boat to undo line twist? Notice how the more line you let out, even with no bait attached the more your rod starts to bend because of this drag? Enough line out and it can feel just like winding in a fish or heavy object. The chart attached (click for full chart) gives you the surface area in square inches for a given pound test/diameter of line and a given length of that line in the water. Double the diameter of your line or double the distance of your cast and your surface area increases proportionately. Now imagine the difference required to catch a bass that eats your bait at 80' on 14# test line versus one caught finessing off a bed on 6# test at say 40' distance. Surface area of your line is tripled and that resulting difference in drag has to be overcome. Just something to think about the next time a fish clears the air on a long hookset and throws your bait

That correlates exactly with my point Roger, just stated it in a different way. There are so many other "things" that a bass could try and associate negatively with being caught, it would be unlikely that they would immediately single out something like line. That said, things that might stand out the most (be most obvious or salient to the fish) like very hi-vis line could eventually become less effective if some bass eventually started associating those obvious cues to negative experiences in high pressure waters, especially the larger more "instinctive" bass. Good second point also. I myself have generally played the odds by where using increased line diameter usually means increased weight of the lure to compensate for that drag, but you can only play that game to a certain end before you start losing some of the time. -T9

Just over 200 bass on the flame green FL and more recently the red PP since Halloween. My warped theory on all of this right now is that bass have to learn (be conditioned) to correlate the line with the negative experience (being caught), not necessarily a quick process in the wild. It's also proven that they can identify and distinguish all colors of line once so trained (conditioned). So my theory is that since very few bass anglers, at least around my parts, ever use the very Hi-vis lines (flame green FL, Berkley XT Solar, yellow PP, golden Stren, etc.), the fish haven't "learned" to react/relate negatively to it yet. Everybody likes to throw green or clear line, and so I think sometimes it's more difficult to catch bass on these lines than on the hi-vis lines due to the extreme difference in angler use (conditioning/over-exposure). -T9

The flame green Fireline or yellow PowerPro will fix that visibility issue up right quick 8-) ;D

I've seen this one before. Well done test, and you know how much I appreciate "self generated" data, but I've personally never been a big believer in tensile strength as the best measure of a fishing line. The biggest argument I have against the tensile strength tests is that when fishing, regardless of bait or lure on the end of the line, there is a knot used to attach said item. As such, a straight line test as all tensile strength tests are carried out doesn't mimic what is actually happening on the water. The minute a knot is introduced into the picture, the breaking strength of that line has suddenly changed. And, there are way too many variables around knots and knot tying to be able to accurately predict outcomes. Additionally, there are so many other characteristics that make a line "good" or better than another in a certain situation such as handling characteristics (limpness/stiffness), abrasion resistance, etc. that tensile strengths never really come into play, IMO. There were a couple interesting observations though that I did get from the data. First, unless you're real picky about the Seaguar numbers, every line tested that was rated as 10# test broke at a higher test than what it was rated as - comforting in my eyes. Another, nice irony that the "weakest" line in the bunch was the thinnest tested (Seguar), and the "strongest" line tested was the largest diameter (P-Line CXX) as absolute breaking strength- Table 2 data. -T9

Deep cranking weeds is a bit tougher and a lot more headache generally than cranking other types of cover. Deep cranking is usually relegated to the weedline, and there it depends on the type of weed and the structural formation it sits on. On really steep weedlines that border a sharp drop you can often get by paralleling the outside edge. This is also true of hard bottom areas adjacent to a deep weedline that "stops" the weeds from growing further. Typically though, your best bet is to crank perpendicular to the weedline looking for points or pockets in the weed growth that are key holding areas. Here you need to match your bait closely with the taper of the weedline as it extends underneath the water where you can't see. Then, every cast becomes a unique thing telling you how to react with your next cast. If you throw and bog down in the weeds, your next cast needs to be shorter because the weeds extend out at that point. If you throw and fail to contact weeds, your following cast should be longer because you might be at an indent in the weedline. If you can cast and just barely snag and snap through weed tops, you made a good cast. Another thing to consider is what type weed are you trying to fish? Soft weeds like milfoil are much tougher to fish than more crisp weeds like hydrilla, coontail or cabbage. While you can "push" your way through crisper weeds with a wide wobbling bait, you need a tight wobbler for softer weeds and better "feel". Also, highly buoyant baits like balsa cranks are really good for ripping through weeds as their bouyancy helps the bait clear lightly grasping weeds on it's own. Lastly, keep conditions in mind. Deep cranking is often best on cloudy or breezy days, prefrontal conditions where fish are aggressive and cruising weedlines searching for prey. Post-frontal conditions where fish bury inside weed edges makes for a tough (but not impossible) cranking bite. Bottom line is don't get frustrated too quickly. Cranking weeds is a lot of work, but can also be a very rewarding. -T9

;D Thanks Brokeju. And flechero, I'm not worried about resale value of my reels as I've been fishing the same Team Daiwa's for about 15 years now. I have added 2 or 3 Shimanos to the mix in that period also. I completely tear apart, clean, lube and repair (if needed) every reel every season, and that practice has served me well. And we've discussed the merits or lack there of of drags and their purpose on this site before, so I won't rehash the old arguments. Most people's minds won't change because of a new discussion. Like you said, to each, his own. I've never broken a line or a rod that I could attribute to my drag, so if it ain't broke, I ain't fixin' it. -T9

That's why I used the little smiling emoticon at the end of that line (for sarcastic value). :-? That said, I've always cranked my drags down by hand to the point of not slipping under most all fishing conditions, even since back before they put one-way bearings in reels, and have never had one fail me yet since they have added them. Much like TMike, I'm a thumb-barrer or back-reeler depending upon specific outfit in question, which is apparently a rare breed these days. Drags just enter a series of variables that I don't want added into my fishing equation. -T9

Step 1. Get a pair of channel locks Step 2. Tighten that drag finger tight at first Step 3. Use channel locks to "seal the deal" 8-) -T9 (Apparently one of only 2 or 3 people on this site who don't use drags)

Been going 'old school' with it and catching a ton of bass on hair jigs this year. -T9

Good comments above. The quickest and simplest way I've found to darken a lead weight is to simply carry a couple colors of Sharpies in your boat or tackle box. You really only need black, but play with brown, red or green if you'd like. Takes all of 10 seconds to dull down a lead sinker "good enough" when needed. -T9

I've caught quite a few "blind" bass over the years, some singularly blinded and others double-blinded. So they certainly can live without some eyesight and get along under many circumstances. Your pictured fish and its size is also proof of that. That said, studies show that completely "blinded" bass suffer a 20% reduction in their ability to feed successfully in controlled conditions, probably greater in the wild, and would therefore suffer a competitive disadvantage which could prove fatal in some scenarios. -T9

A lot of it is personal preference. I usually go with something in the 4'-7' range just because I want to be able to retie baits a few times as needed without having to retie the fluoro/braid connection. I know some who go more and others who go less. As for knots, uni-uni works fine, though I prefer to double the braid line before tieing my unis. I think it makes for a more solid connection. J-knot is another good one. -T9

If pitching/flipping or fishing close in, then a vertical "cross their eyes" hookset is fine. If you are casting out any distance and more horizontal than vertical, a sweep set will have a better hookup ratio on a jig. -T9

Blessed are those who have mastered the art of thumb-barring; there are so few of us 8-) -T9

For bass, nearly worthless (IMHO)..... For confidence, if it works for you, then that's great! -T9

Best way to learn is to hook up with someone who already knows to show you on the water. Can take a lot of trial and error otherwise. If you go back over something you marked and it's no longer there, it was probably fish that have moved off. Structure stays put. After a while you'll get a better feel for the difference in readings. try and go over know stuff, even shallow enough that you can visually see in the water and see how it marks. Drop a lot of buoys and throw lures on what you marked to "feel" what is down there. You'll eventually learn the difference between brush, stumps, rocks, etc. pretty well. Also learn to use grayline. It can be your best friend -T9

There is no one water temperature that bass bite best at. Metabolism does speed up with water temp though, meaning they have to feed more often, but that doesn't necessarily translate into better fishing. Living up north, I've learned to realize that there is no such thing as too cold of water for biting bass. Some of my best days have been with water temps in the low 40's. Even had decent days through the ice -T9

Not likely...still too early. Odds of nest success and fry survival at those temps are pretty poor. -T9

Yep, we got them to build tools/machines with precision so that we can eliminate potential issues with using one's thumb as a drag. Using a quality reel's drag provides for a much more consistent release of line when necessary. No thought is required. Set the drag and forget it. There is also zero reason to tighten the drag down to achieve an effective hookset. It doesn't take near the pressure that people seem to think to drive a hook through a bass's mouth. Ike also annoys me when he "feeds the fish line". I can't think of a single reason why this would help at all. He's got a high quality reel that is more than capable of releasing the line as needed. "Feeding it line" is just a waste of time. LOL, nice comeback tyrius, but until those thumbs can build a mechanical drag that can compete with the mind and it's ability to interpret, sense, think and anticipate, I'll stick to cranking down the drag and doing it myself. If I want to try and overpower or turn a fish using every available ounce of resistance that line can give me (hopefully) without breaking, that can only truly be accomplished with a cranked down drag. Beside, I didn't buy 12# line to only be able to use 6# of it ;D To each their own. If it works for you and makes you happy/confident, then that is the right system for you. -T9

Fun is in the eye of the beholder, and drags for bass fishing are highly over rated, IMHO. Crank it down - use it all: set it and forget it! -T9

Dr. Pepper (12 oz. cans) Snickers bars *notice pluralization 8-) -T9

For discussions sake, a few more comments. I have at home and have read the entire research paper, not just the Science Daily article/synopsis of the study, so I've seen and am familiar with all the little details involved with the study. 1 - I still stand by the statement of not a landmark study as based on the defintion of landmark: "an event that marks a turning point". I don't see where the "turning point" is in our understanding of bass because of this study. Long, disciplined, well-designed, neat, etc. - Yes. As for who I was referencing it is state DNR fishery biologists. 35 of our 50 states have absolutely no type of closed season or restriction in place for fishing bass off the beds, largely because the belief by these professionals is that especially in southern and western waters, at the populatoin level there is little to support this type restriction. The Indiana study just released can be found here: http://www.in.gov/dnr/fishwild/files/Bass_on_Beds_Final.pdf The last comment was a bit of a setup. They propose the question in their summary, and I copy it verbatim for you here with their explanation: I ain't buying that explanation... On the refuges, that is a mixed bag. I've seen one study on largemouth that showed larger adult populations in refuges, but there were actually more non-mature bass in non-refuge areas. Modeling studies with bluegill suggest that closed areas don't protect large males sufficiently to maintain their population. There are some studies in saltwater that suggest benefits to refugia if the closed area is large enough and permanent. So we really don't know for certain in that area, and I'm guessing most fishery biologists wouldn't want to err on the side of caution by enacting regulations on waters that would restrict that access of anglers due to the unpopular nature of such a decision. -T9

I certainly wouldn't call it a "landmark study". Interesting, yes. The whole spawn issue is widely disagreed even amongst the various state agency personnel. Our own state (Indiana), and neighbor to the state where this research was done, just recently published a paper arguing against a closed season here on the basis of previous studies and biologies. Plus there is the question of if bass catchability were truly inherited to a high degree, after nearly 40 years of tournies and increasing pressure, how is it we can still even catch these green fish to the degree that we do? Their answer to that question was less than satisfactory in my mind. -T9