kybasspro Posted March 26, 2016 Posted March 26, 2016 Is there any reason to get mono over flouro if you can afford flouro? Quote
papajoe222 Posted March 26, 2016 Posted March 26, 2016 A lot depends on the techniques and equipment you you'll be using. Your experience level factors in to some extent, especially with casting gear. Mono has less memory issues, fluoro is denser and transmits what's going on at the end better. If you only have one outfit, I recommend mono as it can and has been used for just about everything. Although fluoro shines for some presentations, it is a poor choice for others. Quote
kybasspro Posted March 26, 2016 Author Posted March 26, 2016 7 minutes ago, papajoe222 said: A lot depends on the techniques and equipment you you'll be using. Your experience level factors in to some extent, especially with casting gear. Mono has less memory issues, fluoro is denser and transmits what's going on at the end better. If you only have one outfit, I recommend mono as it can and has been used for just about everything. Although fluoro shines for some presentations, it is a poor choice for others. Thank you Quote
Super User Deleted account Posted March 26, 2016 Super User Posted March 26, 2016 1 hour ago, kybasspro said: Is there any reason to get mono over flouro if you can afford flouro? Knot strength, Yield strength, shock strength, handling. No fly away breakoffs after kinking it on backlashes, did I mention knot strength?... Quote
Super User MIbassyaker Posted March 26, 2016 Super User Posted March 26, 2016 1 hour ago, kybasspro said: Is there any reason to get mono over flouro if you can afford flouro? Nobody has yet convinced me there is any good reason to get fluoro over mono. And I can afford flouro. 2 Quote
Super User Catt Posted March 26, 2016 Super User Posted March 26, 2016 6 minutes ago, MIbassyaker said: Nobody has yet convinced me there is any good reason to get fluoro over mono. And I can afford flouro. Exactly! Quote
Super User MickD Posted March 27, 2016 Super User Posted March 27, 2016 If you use flouro on surface lures the line will sink and drag the lure down on the twitches thus destroying the desired action. FC has a density of about 1.5 x that of water. Mono is about 1 x that of water. It doesn't float, but it doesn't sink either, just hangs around the surface with a surface lure. Quote
Caliyak Posted March 27, 2016 Posted March 27, 2016 6 hours ago, MIbassyaker said: Nobody has yet convinced me there is any good reason to get fluoro over mono. And I can afford flouro. Still waiting....... Quote
tbone1993 Posted March 27, 2016 Posted March 27, 2016 I would say because its super clear, more sensitive, and thinner than its mono counterpart in the same lb test range. This makes it more manageable on a spool. That being said fluorocarbon is notorious for memory. If you want to do it on the cheap just spool your reels with 50% braid and 50% fluoro. You can even go 95% braid and the last 5% a fluoroleader. No reason to fill a spool completely with fluorocarbon unless you like wasting line. Quote
Global Moderator Bluebasser86 Posted March 27, 2016 Global Moderator Posted March 27, 2016 22 minutes ago, bigturtle said: braid beats everything come at me Say hello, to my little friend. He thinks your braided line is cute 1 Quote
bigturtle Posted March 27, 2016 Posted March 27, 2016 4 minutes ago, Bluebasser86 said: Say hello, to my little friend. He thinks your braided line is cute im sorry you have to deal with those things, i dont have to. Not yet atleast Quote
Global Moderator Bluebasser86 Posted March 27, 2016 Global Moderator Posted March 27, 2016 Just now, bigturtle said: im sorry you have to deal with those things, i dont have to. Not yet atleast I don't wish them on anyone, but I will say, the fishing has exploded in the lakes that have them now. They're a huge headache to deal with because they cut your line, any line, like a razor blade. I think it's because our lakes are so murky and they've cleared the water up so much that it's helping the bass see better and be more effective catching their prey. Whatever it is, the lakes that have them are producing numbers and sizes of bass they never have before. Quote
Wbeadlescomb Posted March 27, 2016 Posted March 27, 2016 I've tried several kinds of flouro I'm convinced that it's just a marketing scheme like red hooks Quote
Bigchunk Posted March 28, 2016 Posted March 28, 2016 Fluoro for everything but topwaters, more sensitive and better abrasion resistance. People are always saying the knots are weak. You have to wet you line when you clinch. And don't rip on your spool when you get backlash. Quote
tbone1993 Posted March 28, 2016 Posted March 28, 2016 21 hours ago, Bluebasser86 said: I don't wish them on anyone, but I will say, the fishing has exploded in the lakes that have them now. They're a huge headache to deal with because they cut your line, any line, like a razor blade. I think it's because our lakes are so murky and they've cleared the water up so much that it's helping the bass see better and be more effective catching their prey. Whatever it is, the lakes that have them are producing numbers and sizes of bass they never have before. Helped the bass population but seems to have had an impact on the bait fish. Double edged sword. One species thrives while others have gone down hill. Quote
CenCal fisher Posted March 28, 2016 Posted March 28, 2016 this is the best article I have found on the floor vs mono debate http://www.bigindianabass.com/big_indiana_bass/the-truth-about-fluorocarbon.html Basicaly floro has superior abrasion resistance and resistance to UV degradation. Mono has more stretch which can be good if you have a stiff rod, has stronger knots and the biggest advantage is probably the price. Floro isn't invisible under water Quote
Global Moderator Bluebasser86 Posted March 28, 2016 Global Moderator Posted March 28, 2016 1 hour ago, tbone1993 said: Helped the bass population but seems to have had an impact on the bait fish. Double edged sword. One species thrives while others have gone down hill. Not here, shad populations have gone crazy as well. I really feel like the smallmouth are starting to eat zebra mussels here as well. I don't put them in the livewell often, but when I do, there is almost always empty adult zebra shells in there by the end of the day. Maybe they're just bycatch when a smallmouth sucks up a crawdad or something, or maybe they're learning they can eat the things. Quote
tbone1993 Posted March 28, 2016 Posted March 28, 2016 2 minutes ago, Bluebasser86 said: Not here, shad populations have gone crazy as well. I really feel like the smallmouth are starting to eat zebra mussels here as well. I don't put them in the livewell often, but when I do, there is almost always empty adult zebra shells in there by the end of the day. Maybe they're just bycatch when a smallmouth sucks up a crawdad or something, or maybe they're learning they can eat the things. Shellcrackers eat em up. I always wondered if stocking them would be a good alternative to fight them. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.