Another Palomar knot question

[Jcj90]

When tying the overhand knot are you supposed to snug it before you pull the loop through or leave it loose?

[li_bass_hunter]

I snug it. Leaving it loose makes the knot harder to cinch up 

[T-Billy]

4 minutes ago, li_bass_hunter said:

I snug it. Leaving it loose makes the knot harder to cinch up 

X2

 

[Team9nine]

 Leave it loose. Maybe this is why so many people are having issues with the Palomar. Everything should all cinch tight with one single pull when done correctly with almost no friction.

[gunsinger]

I leave it loose. 

[MN Fisher]

2 hours ago, Team9nine said:

Leave it loose.

When I used the Palomar, I always left it loose until ready to cinch down.

2 hours ago, Team9nine said:

Everything should all cinch tight with one single pull

..then everything at once, as Team9 says.

 

Now I don't use it - too much extra tag to cut off IMO, especially with large jerkbaits, Super Spooks, etc. With the MK, I'm cutting 1/2" or less of tag no matter what size lure I'm tying on.

[throttleplate]

loose and bring the loop up over the lure or hook and bring it to the top so it lays on top of mainline and tag end. Use lots of spit and tighten down pulling tag end,mainline at the same time or sometimes depending on thickness of line you may have to pull tag and mainline separatly to get it to cinch.

[islandbass]

I do not snug it until after I put the loop through but I also make sure each and every time that all line that should be on the tugging side before I even think on making the snug move. 
 

If the snug move is done before that, you’ll run the risk of having a bit of the knot on the wrong side of the eye and further tightening will not get rid of that what ever remains of the loop. Most of you will know what I’m trying to describe. You’re practically forced to start over, lol. 
 

One thing I do before I pull the line snug — This is more essential the bigger the loop is on account of the lure’s size. I will pull on the tag end solo to decrease the size of the loop considerably. And I mean small. Then I snug the standing and tag ends together gently. Fool and idiot proof. 
 

I should have mentioned this earlier. Make sure the lines opposite the loop are not crossed. Do so at your own peril. That is fool and idiot sure. 
 

Lastly, I laugh my rear off (and practically cringe) when I see people form the loop and try to insert the loop into the hook eye when the hook eye is small. And they work so hard to get that loop through. HELLOOOOOOH!!! ?

 

Insert the line through the eye and bring it back through. DOH! ? I’ve seen people do this live and in “instructional” videos on YouTube. I just want to put my hands through the screen and ring their necks, lol. It’s almost as awful as watching someone work a spinning reel inverted. ?

 

okay, I feel much better now, after getting skunked today during a 40 minute fishing stint. ?

[ChrisD46]

10 hours ago, MN Fisher said:

When I used the Palomar, I always left it loose until ready to cinch down.

..then everything at once, as Team9 says.

 

Now I don't use it - too much extra tag to cut off IMO, especially with large jerkbaits, Super Spooks, etc. With the MK, I'm cutting 1/2" or less of tag no matter what size lure I'm tying on.

Just now, ChrisD46 said:

*MK Knot :

[Team9nine]

11 hours ago, MN Fisher said:

 

Now I don't use it - too much extra tag to cut off IMO, especially with large jerkbaits, Super Spooks, etc.

 

With the MK, I'm cutting 1/2" or less of tag no matter what size lure I'm tying on.

 

1 hour ago, ChrisD46 said:

*MK Knot :

 

Extra tag line has never been an issue for me as you should always be removing 6” or so of used/damaged line every time you retie anyway, especially with fluoro whether you feel damage or not.

 

On the MK knot, while I haven’t tried it yet, I did come across a post by the person who claimed to have invented it that said he developed it for braid, and that’s where it worked well, but that it wasn't as good for mono (and hence, I assume, fluoro). I thought that was interesting considering I haven’t seen any strength test results on that one. 

[MN Fisher]

1 minute ago, Team9nine said:

Extra tag line has never been an issue for me as you should always be removing 6” or so of used/damaged line every time you retie anyway, especially with fluoro whether you feel damage or not.

I trim 2"-3" off with a lure change and it hasn't seem to harmed me...6" seems a bit much to me, but different strokes (shrugs).

 

2 minutes ago, Team9nine said:

On the MK knot, while I haven’t tried it yet, I did come across a post by the person who claimed to have invented it that said he developed it for braid, and that’s where it worked well, but that it wasn't as good for mono (and hence, I assume, fluoro). I thought that was interesting considering I haven’t seen any strength test results on that one. 

I've used it with all line types - even YZH. No strength tests, but it hasn't failed...only lure I've lost was when a pike bit off a lipless last year...otherwise it's held fine.

[Team9nine]

37 minutes ago, MN Fisher said:

I trim 2"-3" off with a lure change and it hasn't seem to harmed me...6" seems a bit much to me, but different strokes (shrugs).

 

I don’t throw mono/copoly, so haven’t tested it there, but with fluoro you’ll get “necking” that often extends more than 2”-3” from the knot/lure. You can measure it with a micrometer easily enough. I think this is part of the reason why so many people report sudden knot failures with fluoro. It’s actually probably not the knot, but the necking just in front of the knot, and you won’t feel any damage. It just occurs after a certain amount of stress-strain, and then suddenly you’re left wondering why your knot just failed on a hookset or large fish. Removing 6” each retie (necking usually occurs 1”-3” above knot) just seems to help eliminate the issue as long as you retie with reasonable frequency.

 

Quote

I've used it with all line types - even YZH. No strength tests, but it hasn't failed...only lure I've lost was when a pike bit off a lipless last year...otherwise it's held fine.

 

Good to know. Just found his comment on that knot in mono interesting. He didn’t explain why he thought it not so good in that line type ?

[roadwarrior]

1 minute ago, Team9nine said:

I don’t throw mono/copoly, so haven’t tested it there, but with fluoro you’ll get “necking” that often extends more than 2”-3” from the knot/lure. You can measure it with a micrometer easily enough. I think this is part of the reason why so many people report sudden knot failures with fluoro. It’s actually probably not the knot, but the necking just in front of the knot, and you won’t feel any damage. It just occurs after a certain amount of stress-strain, and then suddenly you’re left wondering why your knot just failed on a hookset or large fish. Removing 6” each retie (necking usually occurs 1”-3” above knot) just seems to help eliminate the issue as long as your retie with reasonable frequency.

 

[Mike L]

2 minutes ago, Team9nine said:

 

I don’t throw mono/copoly, so haven’t tested it there, but with fluoro you’ll get “necking” that often extends more than 2”-3” from the knot/lure. You can measure it with a micrometer easily enough. I think this is part of the reason why so many people report sudden knot failures with fluoro. It’s actually probably not the knot, but the necking just in front of the knot, and you won’t feel any damage. It just occurs after a certain amount of stress-strain, and then suddenly you’re left wondering why your knot just failed on a hookset or large fish. Removing 6” each retie (necking usually occurs 1”-3” above knot) just seems to help eliminate the issue as long as your retie with reasonable frequency.

 

 

type ?

Completely Agree!
 

I’ve mentioned this before but folks on this board continually bash flouro for reasons that have nothing to do with the makeup of the line itself so I’ve somewhat given up. 
 

 

 

 

Mike

[CrankFate]

I know a lot of people swear by it, but I wouldn’t risk using the palomar knot. It is not compatible with all lines and it isn’t compatible with all lures. It is the only knot that is very likely to untie itself, cut into itself or get cut by the eye of a lure. That makes three likely failure areas. It is always presented as the easier alternative to everything. IMO, the Palomar knot is the best example of how machine testing knot strength does not equate to real world performance. From seeing this knot fail many different ways, I have zero confidence in it. I know how impressive it is when you pull it by hand right after tying it. But after an hour of fishing, good luck. You might slam so many fish every outing that you can lose a bunch here and there. But I often find myself fishing for things that I’m lucky to get one or two of. Especially under those circumstances, it’s just not worth the risk.

 

 

[MN Fisher]

37 minutes ago, Team9nine said:

I don’t throw mono/copoly, so haven’t tested it there, but with fluoro you’ll get “necking” that often extends more than 2”-3” from the knot/lure.

I would think the necking could occur with any 'monofilament' (nylon, flouro, co-poly)...pulling the knot tight will put a strain on that last couple inches, depending on how close you hold the mainline to the knot when doing so.

 

I try to hold it very close when doing the last cinch down, so my necking is probably occurring in that first couple inches.

 

Food for thought.

[Team9nine]

1 hour ago, CrankFate said:

I know a lot of people swear by it, but I wouldn’t risk using the palomar knot. It is not compatible with all lines and it isn’t compatible with all lures. It is the only knot that is very likely to untie itself, cut into itself or get cut by the eye of a lure. That makes three likely failure areas. It is always presented as the easier alternative to everything. IMO, the Palomar knot is the best example of how machine testing knot strength does not equate to real world performance. From seeing this knot fail many different ways, I have zero confidence in it. I know how impressive it is when you pull it by hand right after tying it. But after an hour of fishing, good luck. You might slam so many fish every outing that you can lose a bunch here and there. But I often find myself fishing for things that I’m lucky to get one or two of. Especially under those circumstances, it’s just not worth the risk.

 

 

I personally prefer the Palomar, having used it on all line types for 25+ yrs w/very few issues. But, the Double-line Uni is a solid knot, albeit a bit large. I do use it on things like A-rigs though. Guys that fret over 5”-6” of excess “lost” tag line with a Palomar knot might go into cardiac failure with all the lost excess line from tying it though ?

 

55 minutes ago, MN Fisher said:

I would think the necking could occur with any 'monofilament' (nylon, flouro, co-poly)...pulling the knot tight will put a strain on that last couple inches, depending on how close you hold the mainline to the knot when doing so.

 

I try to hold it very close when doing the last cinch down, so my necking is probably occurring in that first couple inches.

 

Food for thought.

 

My guess is the elasticity of mono, and likely copoly, rarely ever comes into play in regards to necking. In fluoro, it doesn’t seem to be the tightening of the knot when tied that causes it (unless you’re simply over tightening your knots in general), as I have tested my fresh line knots with the micrometer and you simply don’t see it. But if you go out fishing for an hour or two, land some fish and have some good hard fights, then test the line with the micrometer, you’ll see it is there to varying degrees. I’ve seen some anecdotal testing that suggests as little as 3 pounds of pressure can be enough to begin to start this process in fluoro, so I think it is simply a difference in the elasticity and yield curves between the two line types. If only I had access to an Instron machine ? ?

[MN Fisher]

1 minute ago, Team9nine said:

so I think it is simply a difference in the elasticity and yield curves between the two line types.

You could be right on that. Nylon has more 'rebound' ability than flouro, and since my favorite co-poly (YZH) is flouro strands embedded in a nylon base - that could be why they don't suffer as much. The line stretches, but if it's not to an extreme, it rebounds back. Flouro (IIRC) starts stretching at a high force level, but it doesn't rebound...it stays stretched. And remembering @FryDog62's tests - flouro stretches more than nylon....it just starts later is all, which is where the 'FC doesn't stretch' myth came about.

[TnRiver46]

 Necking??? That’s what grandma called making out 

[MN Fisher]

1 minute ago, TnRiver46 said:

 Necking??? That’s what grandma called making out 

Heck - I was still calling it that in High School.

 

course I am an old-fart

[ironbjorn]

Before I say this, it's worth noting that I use FC on 3 spinning setups. Other than that I use BG and YZH.

 

But with that said, this problem wouldn't exist if we (we meant collectively) stopped believing 2 lies or myths or whatever you want to call it. 

 

1. That bass are line shy and the "invisible" properties of FC are useful.

 

And

 

2. That FC doesn't have, or has significantly less, stretch than monofilament.

 

The truth is, in my opinion, that FC is a bad fishing line material that companies, YouTube personalities and pros (for sponsorship reasons) sucker people into believing is necessary and worth the ridiculously high cost.

 

Using FC because "fish can't see it" while the bait you're using has lead, tungsten, shiny hooks, shiny blades, shiny wires or all of the above or more, is like ordering a diet Coke with your McDonald's, as if it really made any difference.

[MN Fisher]

6 minutes ago, ironbjorn said:

2. That FC doesn't have, or has significantly less, stretch than monofilament.

Frydog disproved that with his experiment a few years ago...

 

7 minutes ago, ironbjorn said:

worth the ridiculously high cost.

Seaguar's new BasiX coming out next year is going to help that - $10/spool is a decent price...now if it's even close to InvizX (my favorite FC currently), it'll be a huge step forward.

 

 

[ironbjorn]

1 minute ago, MN Fisher said:

Frydog disproved that with his experiment a few years ago...

 

Seaguar's new BasiX coming out next year is going to help that - $10/spool is a decent price...now if it's even close to InvizX (my favorite FC currently), it'll be a huge step forward.

 

 

I could have sworn that I was replying to a thread about being done with this knot while using FC. What in the...

[Captain Phil]

22 minutes ago, ironbjorn said:

Using FC because "fish can't see it" while the bait you're using has lead, tungsten, shiny hooks, shiny blades, shiny wires or all of the above or more, is like ordering a diet Coke with your McDonald's, as if it really made any difference.

 

A bass will strike a lure fished on anchor rope if it is hungry or angry enough.  Obviously that is an exaggeration, but line visability definitely makes a difference in the number of fish that will strike your lure.  When tournament fishing, you can't keep a fish unless he bites first.  More bites equals more fish in the boat.  Less bites means you are handicapping yourself before the game begins.   I have witnessed numerous times when an angler fishing with heavy line was out fished by someone fishing in the same boat with lighter line.   I have seen days when you couldn't get a bite on 20 pound test and load the boat with 8.  It's not only the visibility of a fishing line that makes a difference in your catch rate.  Diameter, flexibility, buoyancy, stretch, knot strength, cast ability and color all contribute.   Mono, Fluorocarbon and Braid all have a place in bass fishing.  We are lucky that we have the line choices we do today.  When my grandfather started bass fishing, all he had was black linen line and he had to lay it out to dry.

[Junk Fisherman]

2 hours ago, CrankFate said:

I know a lot of people swear by it, but I wouldn’t risk using the palomar knot. It is not compatible with all lines and it isn’t compatible with all lures. It is the only knot that is very likely to untie itself, cut into itself or get cut by the eye of a lure. That makes three likely failure areas. It is always presented as the easier alternative to everything. IMO, the Palomar knot is the best example of how machine testing knot strength does not equate to real world performance. From seeing this knot fail many different ways, I have zero confidence in it. I know how impressive it is when you pull it by hand right after tying it. But after an hour of fishing, good luck. You might slam so many fish every outing that you can lose a bunch here and there. But I often find myself fishing for things that I’m lucky to get one or two of. Especially under those circumstances, it’s just not worth the risk.

 

 

 

This is the knot I use for dropshotting after breaking off to much with a Palomar.  This knot makes it easy to have a long tag end and not have it impede your ability to tie it.  It is the knot Aaron Martens uses for a drop shot.

 

And there are just too many good knots out there to use a Palomar for your basic knot.  I’ve been using the simple Trilene knot for 20 years and is strong and dependable.