Braid, fluro & rocks

[learnin]

Just started using braid this year.  Part of the clear water lake I fish looks to be an old quarry with a lot of sharp edged rocks.  I've taken some good fish out of that area with Senkos and finesse worms but it's hard on braid and fluro leaders so I've lost a few too.  I'm thinking of going back to mono for this part of the lake or will heavier braid and fluro work ok.

[Black Hawk Basser]

Maybe try a long mono leader.  In my opinion, fluoro doesn't hold up very well.  I feel the need to re-tie a lot with fluorocarbon.  I don't have many abrasion problems with 20 lb Sufix 832.  I can't remember the last time I had a break off.

[Beetlebz]

I switched to YZH and Big Game all around with a couple exceptions. Haven't had a break off in a year.

[Darren.]

Welcome aboard!

 

Hmmm. Usually a positive for fluoro is abrasion resistance...curious.

[Dirtyeggroll]

9 hours ago, Darren. said:

Welcome aboard!

 

Hmmm. Usually a positive for fluoro is abrasion resistance...curious.

Im pretty sure that the increased “abrasion resistance” or is just perpetuated misinformation. The Salt Strong guys did a pretty simple experiment and found even the cheapest of mono tends to be more abrasion resistant than some of the higher end fluoro.

 

 

[Deleted account]

9 hours ago, Darren. said:

Welcome aboard!

 

Hmmm. Usually a positive for fluoro is abrasion resistance...curious.

This is one of the most common misconceptions. Yes, because fluoro is "harder" than mono it will resist abrasion somewhat better, however, once damaged, even slightly, it will loose strength much quicker, ie mono and fluoro of the same strength with the same damage, mono wins. So unless you are going to retie with every little nick, it makes more sense to use mono. This is on top of fluoro's lower knot strength and propensity to deform when strained. I like BG and Ande, but most good quality monos will do. Don't forget, BG was designed to fight large salt water fish often rubbing the boat's bottom repeatedly while doing so. 

[Brad in Texas]

The most comprehensive test I have ever read was performed by Tackletour.com. It can be found here:

 

Fluorocarbon test

 

The results are quite clear. While only 4 out of 14 fluoro lines tested were more abrasion-resistant (while dry) than the same diameter Berkley Trilene XL, a popular monofilament line used here as a baseline, all 14 were better than mono when wet. 

 

Trilene lost 56% of its abrasion resistance when wet for just 10 minutes. Any advantage it had is lost in actual fishing conditions.

 

The difference between one fluoro and another? Just as one would expect that those that were softer to accentuate casting tested more poorly than those that were intended to be stiffer for leaders.

 

Another cool "mention" in the article? While formulas certainly vary from one to another, there are only three sources for fluorocarbons: 2 German companies, 1 Japan source. What we most often see is just stuff made by the same sources, private labeled.

 

*** Just one last observation about the comment about if you nick fluoro, it becomes more easily broken. There is certainly no material reason for this: the chemical bonds in fluoro greatly exceed those in most monos, so the remaining material should still out-perform a similar partial break in mono. So, what I think is actually happening is a nick in fluoro, harder to make to begin with, but that since it is harder, more dense, that it likely creates a little area that will then subsequently get snagged more easily. 

 

Brad

[J Francho]

34 minutes ago, Brad in Texas said:

*** Just one last observation about the comment about if you nick fluoro, it becomes more easily broken. There is certainly no material reason for this: the chemical bonds in fluoro greatly exceed those in most monos, so the remaining material should still out-perform a similar partial break in mono.

In my experience, I find this plays out on the water.  I in fact hooked a decent steelhead by accident, fishing a trap around deep dock pilings, one spring a few years ago.  That thing wrapped me around a zebra mussel encrusted, steel piling.  I could feel the line rubbing on the steel, and thought there's no way I'm getting this fish in.  I did, a nice 10 lb. steelhead for the smoker.  I checked my line, and sure enough, maybe 20 yards in, and for around 20 feet, the line was shredded.  Pull tests could not break the line by hand.  10 lb. Tatsu.

[Logan S]

10 hours ago, Dirtyeggroll said:

Im pretty sure that the increased “abrasion resistance” or is just perpetuated misinformation. The Salt Strong guys did a pretty simple experiment and found even the cheapest of mono tends to be more abrasion resistant than some of the higher end fluoro.

 

 

Test is useless since the lines are dry...How often to you fish with dry line?  If he did that test underwater I'd be pretty confident the result would be different.

 

In general, mono is similar or better than FC in abrasion resistance and knot strength when dry...But when the lines are wet it flips and FC usually performs better than mono.  This is becasue mono(nylon) lines absorb water while FC does not (at least not in significant percentages).  IE, FC stays the same whether wet or dry, but mono/nylon weakens when wet due to absorbed water.

 

In real word fishing, FC is generally the best line type in terms of abrasion resistance...But the ultimate abrasion factor is diameter, a thicker line will be more abrasion resistant than a thinner line - Even if one is mono/nylon and the other is FC.  This means if you're going to compare 2 lines you should start with the same diameter - Not the strength rating on the label since there is no standard for diameter to rating.

[Dirtyeggroll]

1 hour ago, Logan S said:

Test is useless since the lines are dry...How often to you fish with dry line?  If he did that test underwater I'd be pretty confident the result would be different.

 

I suppose someone needs to test it.

[Logan S]

1 minute ago, Dirtyeggroll said:

I suppose someone needs to test it.

Been done and referenced in thread already ...

3 hours ago, Brad in Texas said:

The most comprehensive test I have ever read was performed by Tackletour.com. It can be found here:

 

Fluorocarbon test

 

The results are quite clear. While only 4 out of 14 fluoro lines tested were more abrasion-resistant (while dry) than the same diameter Berkley Trilene XL, a popular monofilament line used here as a baseline, all 14 were better than mono when wet. 

 

[Dirtyeggroll]

7 minutes ago, Logan S said:

Been done and referenced in thread already ...

 

Clearly I missed that! Awesome!

[Team9nine]

This is a case of the jury still being out in regards to an absolute answer. If you read Luke's (Salt Strong) write-up, he did go back and retest again after a 15 minute spool soak (TT used 10+ min) and came up with basically the same answer. His answer was pretty much opposite of Tackle Tour's, which found a 56% drop in abrasion resistance of their baseline mono when wet, making it worse than nearly every fluoro tested. There are simply too many variables and too inconsistent methodologies used to be able to make any absolute claims in this regard. To the degree that formulation plays a part, there are some very tough/hard monos and fluoros, and some very soft ones. You would think abrasion resistance might correspond accordingly, and anecdotally it seems to, if not popular opinion siding with fluoros in general on the issue, but it is a tough one to be able to compare "apples to apples."

[WRB]

I think when bass anglers started using FC leaders with braid there is a reluctance to retie frayed line. When fishing mono or FC as the main line it's a common practice to check your line nearly every cast as a conditioned habit when checking the lure for debris etc. Damaged line regardless of the type needs to be removed and retied.

Abraision resistance and knot strength should be considered when selecting line. 

Tom

[Brad in Texas]

20 hours ago, Team9nine said:

This is a case of the jury still being out in regards to an absolute answer. If you read Luke's (Salt Strong) write-up, he did go back and retest again after a 15 minute spool soak (TT used 10+ min) and came up with basically the same answer. His answer was pretty much opposite of Tackle Tour's, which found a 56% drop in abrasion resistance of their baseline mono when wet, making it worse than nearly every fluoro tested. There are simply too many variables and too inconsistent methodologies used to be able to make any absolute claims in this regard. To the degree that formulation plays a part, there are some very tough/hard monos and fluoros, and some very soft ones. You would think abrasion resistance might correspond accordingly, and anecdotally it seems to, if not popular opinion siding with fluoros in general on the issue, but it is a tough one to be able to compare "apples to apples."

Yes, very tough and I wholeheartedly agree here, my quoting the Tackletour study nothwithstanding.

 

But, we here on this forum, for the most part I am supposing are staunch American capitalists in our attitudes . . . always looking for a money-making advantage in "business." So, in the business of fishing for a living, pro anglers, where results make a difference in the size of paychecks, fluorocarbon is the line of choice way over traditional mono for applications where either would work. 

 

This can't be isolated to make it all just about line breakage, for sure, but all of the qualities of one over the other: sinking rates, visibility, strength per diameter. Cost is no limiting factor here as I suppose a large majority of the top anglers have some sort of financial arrangement with a fluoro source, get their line for free. 

 

Still, Hank Parker had that great video recently, fished with a local in Maine as I recall, from this man's boat. Somewhere in the middle of the video, Hank said that while he was using all of the state of the art stuff, tackle, that his partner that day was using mono, also as I recall other "stuff" sort of dated like old standard lures. Hank said they were catching fish about at the same rate, that it just goes to show that all of the so-called advancements were of minimal value. Words and sentiments to that effect.

 

Brad

[LionHeart]

On 7/31/2018 at 7:42 AM, Brad in Texas said:

The most comprehensive test I have ever read was performed by Tackletour.com. It can be found here:

 

Fluorocarbon test

 

The results are quite clear. While only 4 out of 14 fluoro lines tested were more abrasion-resistant (while dry) than the same diameter Berkley Trilene XL, a popular monofilament line used here as a baseline, all 14 were better than mono when wet. 

 

Trilene lost 56% of its abrasion resistance when wet for just 10 minutes. Any advantage it had is lost in actual fishing conditions.

 

The difference between one fluoro and another? Just as one would expect that those that were softer to accentuate casting tested more poorly than those that were intended to be stiffer for leaders.

 

Another cool "mention" in the article? While formulas certainly vary from one to another, there are only three sources for fluorocarbons: 2 German companies, 1 Japan source. What we most often see is just stuff made by the same sources, private labeled.

 

*** Just one last observation about the comment about if you nick fluoro, it becomes more easily broken. There is certainly no material reason for this: the chemical bonds in fluoro greatly exceed those in most monos, so the remaining material should still out-perform a similar partial break in mono. So, what I think is actually happening is a nick in fluoro, harder to make to begin with, but that since it is harder, more dense, that it likely creates a little area that will then subsequently get snagged more easily. 

 

Brad

Wow, these guys don't mess around.

[Choporoz]

I harbor this ridiculous dream....that one day we will find that we've all been duped since forever...that all mono, flouro, hybrids and copoly are actually the exact same line originating from a single secret manufacturer out in a secluded Nevada desert....that every discussion about abrasion resistance, absorption, buoyancy, knot strength, stretch, etc has been been for naught.  It really is amazing that nearly every single noted characteristic of any of them has been well argued as being better than the others....amazing and amusing at the same time.

[Team9nine]

12 minutes ago, Choporoz said:

I harbor this ridiculous dream....that one day we will find that we've all been duped since forever...that all mono, flouro, hybrids and copoly are actually the exact same line originating from a single secret manufacturer out in a secluded Nevada desert....that every discussion about abrasion resistance, absorption, buoyancy, knot strength, stretch, etc has been been for naught.  It really is amazing that nearly every single noted characteristic of any of them has been well argued as being better than the others....amazing and amusing at the same time.

In particle physics, it's called the "Grand Unified Theory" or the "Theory of Everything." Until such time as we discover it in line manufacturing, I'll stick with fluorocarbon for most all baitcasting applications and braid for most spinning outfits 

[Stephen B]

On ‎7‎/‎31‎/‎2018 at 6:58 AM, Logan S said:

 

In general, mono is similar or better than FC in abrasion resistance and knot strength.

 

Definitely. You are exactly on point with my view. IMO we all try to make generalizations about line as it makes it easier to talk about such as mono is more abrasion resistant than fluoro which is true for the most part but ultimately it depends on which mono and which fluoro. I would bet if he tested Trilene XL Smooth Cast versus Sunline Shooter, Sunline Shooter would hold up better. However, a test of Trilene Big Game versus Seaguar Invizx, Big Game would hold up better. Each line was designed to achieve a specific characteristic as Invizx and Abrazx are designed for different applications. 

[learnin]

Did not realize this got as much response and haven't looked at it since last year.  Thanks to all who responded.

[LionHeart]

On 8/1/2018 at 9:23 AM, Brad in Texas said:

Yes, very tough and I wholeheartedly agree here, my quoting the Tackletour study nothwithstanding.

 

But, we here on this forum, for the most part I am supposing are staunch American capitalists in our attitudes . . . always looking for a money-making advantage in "business." So, in the business of fishing for a living, pro anglers, where results make a difference in the size of paychecks, fluorocarbon is the line of choice way over traditional mono for applications where either would work. 

 

This can't be isolated to make it all just about line breakage, for sure, but all of the qualities of one over the other: sinking rates, visibility, strength per diameter. Cost is no limiting factor here as I suppose a large majority of the top anglers have some sort of financial arrangement with a fluoro source, get their line for free. 

 

Still, Hank Parker had that great video recently, fished with a local in Maine as I recall, from this man's boat. Somewhere in the middle of the video, Hank said that while he was using all of the state of the art stuff, tackle, that his partner that day was using mono, also as I recall other "stuff" sort of dated like old standard lures. Hank said they were catching fish about at the same rate, that it just goes to show that all of the so-called advancements were of minimal value. Words and sentiments to that effect.

 

Brad

Not a bad point man.  I have to mention though, that pros are paid to endorse all kinds of fishing gear, whether they believe in it or not.

 

How many pros have you heard say they use Flouro because it is "low stretch?"  That misinformation is still prevalent among many anglers.

[Bankbeater]

When the mono is up around 12 pounds or so it really starts to lose any stretch it has. Below 10 then you can stretch it whether it’s wet or dry. 

[CrankFate]

On 7/31/2018 at 8:53 AM, J Francho said:

In my experience, I find this plays out on the water.  I in fact hooked a decent steelhead by accident, fishing a trap around deep dock pilings, one spring a few years ago.  That thing wrapped me around a zebra mussel encrusted, steel piling.  I could feel the line rubbing on the steel, and thought there's no way I'm getting this fish in.  I did, a nice 10 lb. steelhead for the smoker.  I checked my line, and sure enough, maybe 20 yards in, and for around 20 feet, the line was shredded.  Pull tests could not break the line by hand.  10 lb. Tatsu.

I’ve had this happen more than once with 50lb seguar Kureha #14 fluoro (JDM) and landed the fish, even fish up to 20lbs. I’ve also had smaller fish (2-4 lbs) snag me in the rocks and still land almost all of them without line breakage after 10 minutes trying to get them out. So I am a firm believer in fluorocarbon.