Flouro Line Advantages

[columbiar]

Are there really any flouro advantages over braid except for invisibility?

[Alpster]

The flouro boys willl hang me from the nearest tree, but my answer to your question is NO. Flouro is more trouble than it's worth. You will find many threads on the boards about memory, knots, abrasion, break offs. There are just too many awesome lines out there (including braid) that perform flawlessly to put up with the hassles of flourocabon. I have caught fish on red, blue, green, yellow, orange, brown and black line and I'm not sure fish care what your line looks like. Invisibility is highly overated. JMHO

Ronnie

[LgMouthGambler]

If you want to fish fluoro, go with a hybrid like YoZuri, true fluoro isnt that great. The only advantage is when you need a really clear line for finicky bass.

[BASSHUNTER1961]

The flouro boys willl hang me from the nearest tree, but my answer to your question is NO. Flouro is more trouble than it's worth. You will find many threads on the boards about memory, knots, abrasion, break offs. There are just too many awesome lines out there (including braid) that perform flawlessly to put up with the hassles of flourocabon. I have caught fish on red, blue, green, yellow, orange, brown and black line and I'm not sure fish care what your line looks like. Invisibility is highly overated. JMHO

Ronnie

X2

[Diggy]

I have use 2 rolls and have been saddened 2x. Its now leader material if that much for me. Yo-zuri hybrid is my fluoro sub...no probs yet so far

[upnorthbassin]

I've tried a few different types. I haven't had many problems but I don't really care for it..especially in heavier line. Too stiff, too much memory. It works pretty good as a leader but these days I'm not really sold on that either. Right now I'm experimenting with yozuri hybrid and my initial impression is better. I won't completely rule it out but I can't really say too many great things about it either.

[skeletor6]

The flouro boys willl hang me from the nearest tree, but my answer to your question is NO. Flouro is more trouble than it's worth. You will find many threads on the boards about memory, knots, abrasion, break offs. There are just too many awesome lines out there (including braid) that perform flawlessly to put up with the hassles of flourocabon. I have caught fish on red, blue, green, yellow, orange, brown and black line and I'm not sure fish care what your line looks like. Invisibility is highly overated. JMHO

Ronnie

Hang you from a tree? That's funny. My evaluation of your post is that the advantages are outweighed by the disadvatages and there are better lines to use.

The OP asked a question regarding advantages to fluoro. As in, are there any advantages to using fluorocarbon. Sure there are advantages to using fluorocarbon.

1.) It is denser so it sinks (helps baits fall quicker, gets cranks down quicker, etc)

2.) Slack line sensitivity is better than all other lines. Many techniques require one to perform the technique with a slack line, at least during some point during the cast, fall, retrieval process. Braid is the most sensitive line on a tight line. It is also dead when the line is not tight. Therefore, fluorocarbon the best sensitivity during slack line presentations.

3.) Invisibility, the lines refractive properties are that closest to water's. Therefore, is the most invisible line via sight in water. Remember there are other line detection techniques used by fish other than sight such as the pressure the line creates as it sifts through the water etc. I feel a denser line would also cause smoother movement through water, but that's just a theory of density and it having a higher affinity to sift through water at higher densities. At some level this invisibility does matter, there are debates about it, but most will agree there are finicky fish that will avoid visible line under certain conditions. Many braid users also use a leader, because of braids visibility which supports my point. (also used so you can break off the bait/line and not lose a lot of line during the process)

Those are the main advantages I personally note in association with fluorocarbon. I am not going to list disadvantages, because most have already been discussed. Furthermore, when purchasing fluorocarbon you get what you pay for and it is more difficult to use in general. You must tie neat knots and pay attention to the condition of your line. If you buy cheap fluorocarbon I can almost guarantee you that you will not like it.

Braid and yozuri are cheaper and easier to manage and are great lines to use as well. The tight line sensitivity of braid makes cheaper rods feel very sensitive. Using high end rods with high end fluoro is optimal to use in my opinion. I have easily enough sensitivity to detect bottom structure and pickups on a tight line and also have plenty of sensitivity on slack line as well. I actually get most my strikes when the line goes semi-slack. So that is my personal favorite for jigs/t-rigs on a high end rod. Let me say that it has taken a great deal of experimenting, discussion and money to get to the point where I am at now. I use both braid and flurocarbon and feel they both have their uses on different applications.

For reference I have tried powerpro, suffix 832, and daiwa samurai braid. Yo-zuri hybrid 12#. Trilene 100%, Sunline FC Sniper, Seaguar Tatsu, Sunline Shooter fluorocarbon.

I'm currently trying to figure out which fluorocarbon is best for me between shooter and tatsu. If you add the price of all the fluorocarbons I bought up it is not cheap. Hence my point of fluorocarbon experimentation. I prefer Daiwa Samurai braid if you are wondering

Good Luck!

[BassinLou]

Good post Skeletor6. All valid points. The way I see it is, there is a time and place for the use of the 3 types of lines (braid, mono, fluro). However, the beauty of fishing is we all have the choice to use what works for us.

[Darren.]

Suffice it to say there are a LOT of opinions on the matter. And there are some good scientific papers on the topic as well. You can Google it and find some good stuff out there. In fact, just yesterday Big Indiana Bass posted another of his looks at fluorocarbon from a scientific perspective. Worth a read, as well as his previous posts on the matter.

But braid and FC are two different animals, obviously. Braid is limp, FC is not. Braid is "fabric/fiber" wound, FC is "not". Braid is solid color, FC is not. Etc...

Braid is excellent for mainline using a leader of whatever for various fishing purposes. This is my approach, and I have found it works best for me on my spinning gear (and I have it on my BC gear as well). This way, should you opt for it, you can buy a spool of expensive FC and it will last a long time since you'll only be tying on leaders, not spooling your entire reel with the stuff. The braid mainline will last and last and last...

As for sensitivity, there's debate all over the board here, and it's mostly around personal experience for those of us who get foggy-eyed when the science equations start dropping over refraction indexes and such. For me, I do think FC is probably the most responsive for slack line as skeletor said; however, I've had no problems with my braid+leader for this. Here's a key here, if water conditions are right (light winds, low waves, calm) the braid reveals the slightest twitches telling me something's hitting my line. I'm using 10lb Power Pro, too, so it really moves/jerks if my terminal end is getting sniffed by a fish. In rough conditions, FC is probably better than braid+leader. But again, that's debatable.

If money is an issue, don't break the bank on FC thinking it will make you the best fisherman out there. Much of that depends on you, your style, etc. Heck, there are people who have used mono their entire fishing lives and out caught all of us combined. Would they have done better with FC? Ha, therein lies the question, eh?

So just my .02. I've got spools of FC that sit around because I'm simply not using them. I didn't find them more advantageous over my P-Line Floroclear, Yo-Zuri Hybrid lines enough to switch out.

[ww2farmer]

I hate flouro as a main line, it's unmanagable and too expensive. I use braid exclusivly as main line, and use fluoro leaders, it's the best of both worlds. This was the first year I went 100% fluoro leaders on everything (except frogs, and cranks) insted of straight braid, I won't be going back. I had no issues with the connection knot (alberto) that were not my own fault, and landed over twenty 5+lb fish and three 6+ lb fish with it. Maybe not impressive in some parts, but for WNY, I'll take it. I can't help but think that the fluoro leaders played a part in that. When I used to fish straight braid, a half a dozen five lbers a year was the norm, with a six+ once in a blue moon.

[Team9nine]

Hang you from a tree? That's funny. My evaluation of your post is that the advantages are outweighed by the disadvatages and there are better lines to use.

The OP asked a question regarding advantages to fluoro. As in, are there any advantages to using fluorocarbon. Sure there are advantages to using fluorocarbon.

1.) It is denser so it sinks (helps baits fall quicker, gets cranks down quicker, etc)

2.) Slack line sensitivity is better than all other lines. Many techniques require one to perform the technique with a slack line, at least during some point during the cast, fall, retrieval process. Braid is the most sensitive line on a tight line. It is also dead when the line is not tight. Therefore, fluorocarbon the best sensitivity during slack line presentations.

3.) Invisibility, the lines refractive properties are that closest to water's. Therefore, is the most invisible line via sight in water. Remember there are other line detection techniques used by fish other than sight such as the pressure the line creates as it sifts through the water etc. I feel a denser line would also cause smoother movement through water, but that's just a theory of density and it having a higher affinity to sift through water at higher densities. At some level this invisibility does matter, there are debates about it, but most will agree there are finicky fish that will avoid visible line under certain conditions. Many braid users also use a leader, because of braids visibility which supports my point. (also used so you can break off the bait/line and not lose a lot of line during the process)

Those are the main advantages I personally note in association with fluorocarbon. I am not going to list disadvantages, because most have already been discussed. Furthermore, when purchasing fluorocarbon you get what you pay for and it is more difficult to use in general. You must tie neat knots and pay attention to the condition of your line. If you buy cheap fluorocarbon I can almost guarantee you that you will not like it.

Braid and yozuri are cheaper and easier to manage and are great lines to use as well. The tight line sensitivity of braid makes cheaper rods feel very sensitive. Using high end rods with high end fluoro is optimal to use in my opinion. I have easily enough sensitivity to detect bottom structure and pickups on a tight line and also have plenty of sensitivity on slack line as well. I actually get most my strikes when the line goes semi-slack. So that is my personal favorite for jigs/t-rigs on a high end rod. Let me say that it has taken a great deal of experimenting, discussion and money to get to the point where I am at now. I use both braid and flurocarbon and feel they both have their uses on different applications.

For reference I have tried powerpro, suffix 832, and daiwa samurai braid. Yo-zuri hybrid 12#. Trilene 100%, Sunline FC Sniper, Seaguar Tatsu, Sunline Shooter fluorocarbon.

I'm currently trying to figure out which fluorocarbon is best for me between shooter and tatsu. If you add the price of all the fluorocarbons I bought up it is not cheap. Hence my point of fluorocarbon experimentation. I prefer Daiwa Samurai braid if you are wondering

Good Luck!

This sums it up nicely. It has advantages, and it has its place in my arsenal. I've now used Vanish, Trilene 100%, P*line fluoro, Stren fluoro, Toray Bawo finesse fluoro, and Toray super hard fluoro. Toray is my favorite without a doubt, but I can't say I've had any problems out of the ordinary with any of them. Also use them as leaders with braid in many situations. Good stuff with some limitations just like every other line type.

-T9

[gallowaypt]

I hate flouro as a main line, it's unmanagable and too expensive. I use braid exclusivly as main line, and use fluoro leaders, it's the best of both worlds. This was the first year I went 100% fluoro leaders on everything (except frogs, and cranks) insted of straight braid, I won't be going back. I had no issues with the connection knot (alberto) that were not my own fault, and landed over twenty 5+lb fish and three 6+ lb fish with it. Maybe not impressive in some parts, but for WNY, I'll take it. I can't help but think that the fluoro leaders played a part in that. When I used to fish straight braid, a half a dozen five lbers a year was the norm, with a six+ once in a blue moon.

Would you say adding the leader made the line any more sensitive on a slack line? And what color waters do you primarily fish?

[skeletor6]

Would you say adding the leader made the line any more sensitive on a slack line? And what color waters do you primarily fish?

No....I'll address this below.

Suffice it to say there are a LOT of opinions on the matter. And there are some good scientific papers on the topic as well. You can Google it and find some good stuff out there. In fact, just yesterday Big Indiana Bass posted another of his looks at fluorocarbon from a scientific perspective. Worth a read, as well as his previous posts on the matter.

But braid and FC are two different animals, obviously. Braid is limp, FC is not. Braid is "fabric/fiber" wound, FC is "not". Braid is solid color, FC is not. Etc...

Braid is excellent for mainline using a leader of whatever for various fishing purposes. This is my approach, and I have found it works best for me on my spinning gear (and I have it on my BC gear as well). This way, should you opt for it, you can buy a spool of expensive FC and it will last a long time since you'll only be tying on leaders, not spooling your entire reel with the stuff. The braid mainline will last and last and last...

As for sensitivity, there's debate all over the board here, and it's mostly around personal experience for those of us who get foggy-eyed when the science equations start dropping over refraction indexes and such. For me, I do think FC is probably the most responsive for slack line as skeletor said; however, I've had no problems with my braid+leader for this. Here's a key here, if water conditions are right (light winds, low waves, calm) the braid reveals the slightest twitches telling me something's hitting my line. I'm using 10lb Power Pro, too, so it really moves/jerks if my terminal end is getting sniffed by a fish. In rough conditions, FC is probably better than braid+leader. But again, that's debatable.

If money is an issue, don't break the bank on FC thinking it will make you the best fisherman out there. Much of that depends on you, your style, etc. Heck, there are people who have used mono their entire fishing lives and out caught all of us combined. Would they have done better with FC? Ha, therein lies the question, eh?

So just my .02. I've got spools of FC that sit around because I'm simply not using them. I didn't find them more advantageous over my P-Line Floroclear, Yo-Zuri Hybrid lines enough to switch out.

I agree with a lot that you have to say. That is an interesting analysis of rough conditions versus calm. I believe it is easier to "line watch" braid and this would definitely be easier in calm conditions. Also, braid has a tendency to belly in the wind, which also lessens its effectiveness in rough conditions. The only part I would advise you to reconsider is what scientific testing truly is. The big indiana bass article you are referring to is not very scientific at all. I have read his results and for one find the guy biased against fluorocarbon lines. Objectivity is necessary in all forms of scientific procedures. It can effect data, it will certainly affect ones interpretations and discussion of their findings. Furthermore, he does not clearly indicate his methods and materials, his hypothesis and his graphs are vague. I must follow scientific processes and often must write and find scientific articles for many of my graduate level classes. If I created a test like he did, I would be lucky if my professor even gave me credit.

The best testing out there that I have seen has been done by tackletour in their showdowns. They give a much better idea of their methods, spell out their materials very well. State why they are performing the tests and give unbiased results. Still there are many unanswered scientific questions regarding many fluorocarbon lines. I feel if we could find accurate processes to test "sensitivity" of not only lines, but rods then we could allow for much more objective results. How it stands now, the best way to get information about a specific line is by collective observation. Having many people going out there, testing a certain line and explaining what they liked and did not like. The gathered consensus of these observations will probably give you a good idea of what the line will be like if you hear enough opinions. I use both braid and fluoro and braid w/fluoro leader (never done fluoro with braid leader lol), and used hybrid line. I feel the line one uses is very important in the fishing process. I strive to find out for myself which is the best line to use under certain conditions to give myself the best edge when I am out there fishing.

Thanks for presenting your ideas!

I hate flouro as a main line, it's unmanagable and too expensive. I use braid exclusivly as main line, and use fluoro leaders, it's the best of both worlds. This was the first year I went 100% fluoro leaders on everything (except frogs, and cranks) insted of straight braid, I won't be going back. I had no issues with the connection knot (alberto) that were not my own fault, and landed over twenty 5+lb fish and three 6+ lb fish with it. Maybe not impressive in some parts, but for WNY, I'll take it. I can't help but think that the fluoro leaders played a part in that. When I used to fish straight braid, a half a dozen five lbers a year was the norm, with a six+ once in a blue moon.

I too use braid with a fluoro leader as do many on this board, but not exclusively because I feel it is not the best of both worlds. I will explain very vaguely why (this should help answer your question gallowaypt!)...

Braid (Pros in Blue) (Cons in RED)

Tight line sensitivity is great

Slack line sensitivity is terrible

Very strong line

Not abrasion Resistant

Manageable, ties strong knots

Very Visible

Fluorocarbon (pros and cons)

Decent tight line sensitivity (I'll call this neutral)

Good slack line sensitivity

Abrasion Resistant

Memory issues

Knot tying issues

Breaking Strength isnt that of braid

Visibility is Very low

Fluoro with braid leader

Great Tight line sensitivity

Slack line sensitivity is terrible

Abrasion Resistant

Breaking Strength isnt that of braid

Knot issues

Visibility is very low

Now if we had the best of both worlds it would look like this!!!

Best of Both Worlds

Great Tight Line Sensitivity

Good Slack line sensitivity

Abrasion Resistant

Strong knots

Breaking strength is that of braid

Low visibility

Very manageable

YES, I will admit that I left out some points. My goal was to show how it is not the best of both worlds. Braid with fluoro leader is great because it allows you to get the fluorocarbon low visibility and abrasion resistance while also allowing one to use braid which has excellent sensitivity on a tight line and that lasts a very long time and is manageable to cast. Although it does dig into the spool, but I won't go there that isn't the debate. The main idea here is that you will not get the slack line sensitivity of fluorocarbon in a braid with fluoro leader. If you did, then I believe you would see almost everybody using this combo for everything. Hopefully, some day we can have a line that has the slack line sensitivity of a tight lined braid, that actually has the abrasion resistance of fluorocarbon and the strength and manageability of braid. If you did that, you would make a lot of anglers happy, including myself

[SirSnookalot]

I agree with Alpster, for me there is no benefit whether I'm fishing freshwater or saltwater. There are many that fish no leader and catch plenty of fish, line visable or not. I always use a leader and F/C has not increased the number of strikes I get. I don't worry too much about lure depth, if I did a simple split shot takes care of that. Snook for example are supposed to be very line shy, we have guys catching them on wire all day long regardless of water clarity, so much for that myth. In fact some very experienced anglers use wire just to get the lure down a bit deeper. I use braid for all my fishing because I like it, but in reality I catch just as many fish with whatever kind of line I use and whatever brand I use. Quite honestly if one has an issue needing something super sensitive, you really need a fishing lesson and not a different line.

[fishking247]

trilene XL or power pro for me. hate fluoro

[Darren.]

Skeletor, thanks for your opinion, wasn't really looking to be schooled in scientific testing. I'm well aware of what's involved, and I find Brian at Big Indiana Bass has a wealth of experience under his belt regardless of how he presents it in a simple blog post. He's done plenty of other testing that validates his opinion and experience citing studies, etc. Not gonna argue that point, or your experience in science. And yes, I've read Tackletour's reports, VHAWK's line testing analyses, and many others over the years.

Point of fact is that we agree that different lines can be used for different applications.

Fluorocarbon does not guarantee a better outing than mono.

But the bottom line is that the man with experience is never at the mercy of the man with an argument.

[Team9nine]

The big indiana bass article you are referring to is not very scientific at all. I have read his results and for one find the guy biased against fluorocarbon lines. Objectivity is necessary in all forms of scientific procedures. It can effect data, it will certainly affect ones interpretations and discussion of their findings. Furthermore, he does not clearly indicate his methods and materials, his hypothesis and his graphs are vague. I must follow scientific processes and often must write and find scientific articles for many of my graduate level classes. If I created a test like he did, I would be lucky if my professor even gave me credit.

LOL - Skeletor6, you completely misinterpreted the intent of the articles, as well as the specifics behind them. You are trying to hold them to a higher standard than the message they were meant to convey. And the guy who wrote them actually loves fluorocarbon line, especially the Toray brand products and InvisX has it's place as well.

-T9

[moguy1973]

Unless you are fishing extremely clear water, line visabilty shouldn't be much of a concern if you ask me. Think about what the Alabama rig is. It's a bunch of thick wires attached to the baits. Can't get much more visible than that.

[skeletor6]

Suffice it to say there are a LOT of opinions on the matter. And there are some good scientific papers on the topic as well. You can Google it and find some good stuff out there. In fact, just yesterday Big Indiana Bass posted another of his looks at fluorocarbon from a scientific perspective. Worth a read, as well as his previous posts on the matter.

But braid and FC are two different animals, obviously. Braid is limp, FC is not. Braid is "fabric/fiber" wound, FC is "not". Braid is solid color, FC is not. Etc...

Braid is excellent for mainline using a leader of whatever for various fishing purposes. This is my approach, and I have found it works best for me on my spinning gear (and I have it on my BC gear as well). This way, should you opt for it, you can buy a spool of expensive FC and it will last a long time since you'll only be tying on leaders, not spooling your entire reel with the stuff. The braid mainline will last and last and last...

As for sensitivity, there's debate all over the board here, and it's mostly around personal experience for those of us who get foggy-eyed when the science equations start dropping over refraction indexes and such. For me, I do think FC is probably the most responsive for slack line as skeletor said; however, I've had no problems with my braid+leader for this. Here's a key here, if water conditions are right (light winds, low waves, calm) the braid reveals the slightest twitches telling me something's hitting my line. I'm using 10lb Power Pro, too, so it really moves/jerks if my terminal end is getting sniffed by a fish. In rough conditions, FC is probably better than braid+leader. But again, that's debatable.

If money is an issue, don't break the bank on FC thinking it will make you the best fisherman out there. Much of that depends on you, your style, etc. Heck, there are people who have used mono their entire fishing lives and out caught all of us combined. Would they have done better with FC? Ha, therein lies the question, eh?

So just my .02. I've got spools of FC that sit around because I'm simply not using them. I didn't find them more advantageous over my P-Line Floroclear, Yo-Zuri Hybrid lines enough to switch out.

Skeletor, thanks for your opinion, wasn't really looking to be schooled in scientific testing. I'm well aware of what's involved, and I find Brian at Big Indiana Bass has a wealth of experience under his belt regardless of how he presents it in a simple blog post. He's done plenty of other testing that validates his opinion and experience citing studies, etc. Not gonna argue that point, or your experience in science. And yes, I've read Tackletour's reports, VHAWK's line testing analyses, and many others over the years.

Point of fact is that we agree that different lines can be used for different applications.

Fluorocarbon does not guarantee a better outing than mono.

But the bottom line is that the man with experience is never at the mercy of the man with an argument.

How can one make the claim of "good scientific papers on the topic" and then give a link to Brian Edman's blog where science is not being conducted in a "good" manner? I clearly demonstrated how Edman's scientific testing was flawed. I judged the validity of his testing based from a scientific perspective. Never once was I critical of his experience. I do not know him, I can not judge his experience. I was judging his science. You made those claims, not me. When someone tries to draw conclusions based off of science that is not valid I will not trust those conclusions.

You are misinterpreting what I was being critical of. I was being critical of Brian Edman's Science. Never once did I claim that he was inexperienced and that nobody should trust him because of it. I was judging his science and scientific methods and that his conclusions that he draws from this scientific testing. Never once in there is his experience bashed or did I claim that experience has nothing to do with it. I actually said the best results we have are from individual observations and the communication between these observations. These observations are gained through experience.

"man with experience is never at the mercy of the man with an argument" (anonymous). While it is nice that you repeated a quote that inspires many theosophical debates, I find it inapplicable when one is judging the validity of scientific testing.

I am sure Brian Edman would have a lot to say based off of his experience. I even attested to the fact that the best evidence we have about fishing lines is in the individuals who fish them. Forums like the very one we are on are a great place to gather a larger sample of individual observations and draw conclusions based off of them. All the "advantages of fluorocarbon" that I had labeled out in the first post that I made and the table that I gathered are based off of the common concensus that most have on this forum. That is how I created the tables. I did not create them through scientific testing.

LOL - Skeletor6, you completely misinterpreted the intent of the articles, as well as the specifics behind them. You are trying to hold them to a higher standard than the message they were meant to convey. And the guy who wrote them actually loves fluorocarbon line, especially the Toray brand products and InvisX has it's place as well.

-T9

I believe you are misinterpreting my intentions. My intentions were to claim the data he gathered and the conclusions he drew off of his data were invalid. Nothing else. Also, I intended to demonstrate through my tables which I admittedly said were vague, to say that braid with fluoro leaders do not offer the "best of both worlds". As a member here had that question and I helped answer it for him. I once too had that exact same question, because the claim that braided line with fluoro leader gives the best of both worlds can be misleading. (i.e. slack line sensitivity)

Furthermore, I understand Mr. Edman's intentions, I never thought this was a discussion of Mr. Edman's intentions? Simply, it was being said that good scientific evidence was out there to represent these lines. I simply do not agree with that point. Fluorocarbon line is the best example of how variate one brand from the other is in manageability, sensitivity (slack and tight lined), knot strength, breaking strength, etc. Your mentioning of toray and invisx are great examples of the variations between different brands.

Now if you want to discuss the intentions of Mr. Edman we can. He intended to back up his statement "many of the fluorocarbon claims by manufacturers and anglers alike is largely a bunch of bull" with his testing that he did. Take this quote for example. " Bottom line is that it still looks like for every stretchy mono, there is an equally stretchy fluorocarbon - and for every low stretch fluorocarbon, there is also a low stretch mono that acts similarly. So, until someone generates actual data that tips the "stretch balance" in favor of fluorocarbon, as opposed to just claiming it or posting it as gospel in some message forum, I'm not believing any of it, and you shouldn't either - call BS on 'em, and apologize later only if they can produce the data I'm guessing most probably can't."

This, in my opinion, is his strongest statement that he made in the blog. Still, I do not agree that his data was enough to prove it. Furthermore, has anyone ever notice once you stretch mono/fluoro once, than go to stretch it again, it does not rebound the same? I would not call that equal stretching in any way. Furthermore, I would like someone to show me an equal diameter mono with the stretch characteristics of Sunline Shooter or Toray Superhard? So to say that fluoro and mono are equivalent is incorrect. I am sure that many of us who go ahead and use fluorocarbon and find it advantageous for many applications are just "fooled" by the manufacturers claims and only use it as so. I find comments like that just wrong. With fluorocarbon you get what you pay for and you get the advantages and disadvatages that come with it. I am sure the many professional anglers and anglers alike who use this line and have been deceived to think they are getting advantages (placebo effect) and are actually just getting mono equivalent properties.

I use fluoro, braid, and mono when the conditions and techniques call for it and find them all to be unique and have different properties. Like I have stated if you go ahead and by a crappy fluoro, you will learn to hate fluorocarbon. You cannot buy cheap if you want to buy fluorocarbon. This I have learned through my experience and I am sure Mr. Edman has as well since he loves Toray's line which is anything, but cheap then he goes ahead and tests Stren fluoro.

[Darren.]

Time to step back and relax. Breathe a little. Way too serious here.

[Bankbeater]

My biggest gripe with flouro is when you get an overrun and it kinks up. The overrun comes out easier, but the line is weakened from the tangle.

[BASSHUNTER1961]

How can one make the claim of "good scientific papers on the topic" and then give a link to Brian Edman's blog where science is not being conducted in a "good" manner? I clearly demonstrated how Edman's scientific testing was flawed. I judged the validity of his testing based from a scientific perspective. Never once was I critical of his experience. I do not know him, I can not judge his experience. I was judging his science. You made those claims, not me. When someone tries to draw conclusions based off of science that is not valid I will not trust those conclusions.

You are misinterpreting what I was being critical of. I was being critical of Brian Edman's Science. Never once did I claim that he was inexperienced and that nobody should trust him because of it. I was judging his science and scientific methods and that his conclusions that he draws from this scientific testing. Never once in there is his experience bashed or did I claim that experience has nothing to do with it. I actually said the best results we have are from individual observations and the communication between these observations. These observations are gained through experience.

"man with experience is never at the mercy of the man with an argument" (anonymous). While it is nice that you repeated a quote that inspires many theosophical debates, I find it inapplicable when one is judging the validity of scientific testing.

I am sure Brian Edman would have a lot to say based off of his experience. I even attested to the fact that the best evidence we have about fishing lines is in the individuals who fish them. Forums like the very one we are on are a great place to gather a larger sample of individual observations and draw conclusions based off of them. All the "advantages of fluorocarbon" that I had labeled out in the first post that I made and the table that I gathered are based off of the common concensus that most have on this forum. That is how I created the tables. I did not create them through scientific testing.

I believe you are misinterpreting my intentions. My intentions were to claim the data he gathered and the conclusions he drew off of his data were invalid. Nothing else. Also, I intended to demonstrate through my tables which I admittedly said were vague, to say that braid with fluoro leaders do not offer the "best of both worlds". As a member here had that question and I helped answer it for him. I once too had that exact same question, because the claim that braided line with fluoro leader gives the best of both worlds can be misleading. (i.e. slack line sensitivity)

Furthermore, I understand Mr. Edman's intentions, I never thought this was a discussion of Mr. Edman's intentions? Simply, it was being said that good scientific evidence was out there to represent these lines. I simply do not agree with that point. Fluorocarbon line is the best example of how variate one brand from the other is in manageability, sensitivity (slack and tight lined), knot strength, breaking strength, etc. Your mentioning of toray and invisx are great examples of the variations between different brands.

Now if you want to discuss the intentions of Mr. Edman we can. He intended to back up his statement "many of the fluorocarbon claims by manufacturers and anglers alike is largely a bunch of bull" with his testing that he did. Take this quote for example. " Bottom line is that it still looks like for every stretchy mono, there is an equally stretchy fluorocarbon - and for every low stretch fluorocarbon, there is also a low stretch mono that acts similarly. So, until someone generates actual data that tips the "stretch balance" in favor of fluorocarbon, as opposed to just claiming it or posting it as gospel in some message forum, I'm not believing any of it, and you shouldn't either - call BS on 'em, and apologize later only if they can produce the data I'm guessing most probably can't."

This, in my opinion, is his strongest statement that he made in the blog. Still, I do not agree that his data was enough to prove it. Furthermore, has anyone ever notice once you stretch mono/fluoro once, than go to stretch it again, it does not rebound the same? I would not call that equal stretching in any way. Furthermore, I would like someone to show me an equal diameter mono with the stretch characteristics of Sunline Shooter or Toray Superhard? So to say that fluoro and mono are equivalent is incorrect. I am sure that many of us who go ahead and use fluorocarbon and find it advantageous for many applications are just "fooled" by the manufacturers claims and only use it as so. I find comments like that just wrong. With fluorocarbon you get what you pay for and you get the advantages and disadvatages that come with it. I am sure the many professional anglers and anglers alike who use this line and have been deceived to think they are getting advantages (placebo effect) and are actually just getting mono equivalent properties.

I use fluoro, braid, and mono when the conditions and techniques call for it and find them all to be unique and have different properties. Like I have stated if you go ahead and by a crappy fluoro, you will learn to hate fluorocarbon. You cannot buy cheap if you want to buy fluorocarbon. This I have learned through my experience and I am sure Mr. Edman has as well since he loves Toray's line which is anything, but cheap then he goes ahead and tests Stren fluoro.

Someone forgot to take their meds... You really need to get a life.

[LgMouthGambler]

Im just glad its not me this time in a Shimano debate, lol. I think every type, brand, and color line has a place for certain people, just the same as the reels.

[roadwarrior]

Geez...It's fishing line.

Good night Irene.

-Kent a.k.a. roadwarrior

Global Moderator