Line Diameter to Break Strength

[Paul Roberts]

Looked into some tests people have done. This one looked fairly well done:

 

Couldn't get table formatted well. Just pick a brand and follow it over.

Brand/Model      Avg strength      Lbs Sq Inch/dry

P Line Evolution .011      13.912      146382.064

P Line CXX .0140      21.836      141846.656

Stren Magnathin .011      13.149      138353.778

Gamma Competition .013       18.249      137469.717

Stren Extra Strength .012      15.25      134825.25

Sufix Tritanium Plus 0.013      17.337      130599.621

Sufix Seige .012       14.744      130351.704

Izorline XXX Super .012       14.501      128203.341

Izorline Platinum .012      14.357      126930.237

Trilene Maxx .013      16.832      126795.456

Trilene XT .013 5      18.101      126453.586

Seaguar Fluoro 100% leader .01      9.888       125894.016

Sufix Elite .012      14.182      125383.062

Yozuri Hybrid .0125      15.08      123067.88

Big Game clear .012      13.776      121793.616

Berkely Big Game HT .014      17.676      114823.296

PLine CFX 100% Floro leader .012      12.649 111829.809

P Line Floroclear .012      12.618      111555.738

Cabela's Pro Line .012      12.445      110026.245

Cajun Red .012      12.107      107037.987

Maxima Ultragreen 0.012      12.101      106984.941

Stren Original .013      13.943      105032.619

Danielson Plus 7 .012      11.699      103430.859

Maxima Chameleon 0 .012      11.462      101335.542

Makima Ultragreen 0.014      15.519      100811.424

Ande green .012      11.142      98506.422

Maxima Chameleon .014      15.019      97563.424

The table gives break strength made relative to diameter by expressing it as lb/sq.in. (psi). The author suggested that anything with this value > 120,000 was good.

[Team9nine]

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

[RoLo]

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

You make an excellent point!

Especially with regard to "abrasion-resistance", line-diameter is King

Roger

[GRiver]

Thanks for the info...Been looking into changing line brand this spring, will use this to make up my mind.

[islandbass]

Quote

Looked into some tests people have done. This one looked fairly well done:

 

Couldn't get table formatted well. Just pick a brand and follow it over.

Brand/Model      Avg strength      Lbs Sq Inch/dry

P Line Evolution .011      13.912      146382.064

P Line CXX .0140      21.836      141846.656

Stren Magnathin .011      13.149      138353.778

Gamma Competition .013       18.249      137469.717

Stren Extra Strength .012      15.25      134825.25

Sufix Tritanium Plus 0.013      17.337      130599.621

Sufix Seige .012       14.744      130351.704

Izorline XXX Super .012       14.501      128203.341

Izorline Platinum .012      14.357      126930.237

Trilene Maxx .013      16.832      126795.456

Trilene XT .013 5      18.101      126453.586

Seaguar Fluoro 100% leader .01      9.888       125894.016

Sufix Elite .012      14.182      125383.062

Yozuri Hybrid .0125      15.08      123067.88

Big Game clear .012      13.776      121793.616

Berkely Big Game HT .014      17.676      114823.296

PLine CFX 100% Floro leader .012      12.649 111829.809

P Line Floroclear .012      12.618      111555.738

Cabela's Pro Line .012      12.445      110026.245

Cajun Red .012      12.107      107037.987

Maxima Ultragreen 0.012      12.101      106984.941

Stren Original .013      13.943      105032.619

Danielson Plus 7 .012      11.699      103430.859

Maxima Chameleon 0 .012      11.462      101335.542

Makima Ultragreen 0.014      15.519      100811.424

Ande green .012      11.142      98506.422

Maxima Chameleon .014      15.019      97563.424

Wow, I remember when the guy first did the test. This is a local fishing forum for me.  Great information to recollect.

[Paul Roberts]

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

Good response.

I tend to be reluctant to try new lines, bc I feel know what to expect from my Trilene. But adding FC to my game has had me shelling out the cash to find something I like. With nylons, I'm willing to stray from my XT, but only for a darn good reason.

I think strength (agree tested knot strength is better than tensile) is important -the starting point for me. After this I can look at all the other properties I might require. My thinking is that diameter is primary in terms of basic presentation--depth and speed control-- and I want that standardized.

I was recently frustrated in purchasing 8lb Berkley 100% fluoroc, only to find that it's the 6lb that meets my diameter standard (.010) for an 8lb. line! I had to go back to the store and get the 6lb.

Another variable is strength when wet. Tackle Tour found a this to be a major variable in their testing. So..it appears that the real test would be: wet knot break strength. Knowing this I would consider purchasing the lines that rated highest, at the diameters I am used to, keeping in mind the other qualities I might need. Complicated? I suppose, but much less so than the existing "rating game" we seem to be stuck with.

Another issue might be age/history of the line spools he used. TT gets theirs directly from the factory I believe.

Finally , I had to wonder: Just how consistent is a spring scale AFTER it's been abused like this over and over? I didn't check, but wonder how often he re-calibrated that scale. This could potentially blow his entire dataset.

[J Francho]

I go by line diameter as well. 8# CXX fishes like 10# XT. I generally use 8, 10, and 12# diameters.

If you are curious about abrasion resistance, I've caught most of my recent pike, including this one on 8 and 10# CXX, with no leader. I've yet to break off using topwaters, jerkbaits and hard swimbaits. Spinnerbaits and jigs, well that's another story....twist and melt for me.

If it helps any, I was a XT/XL guy for years. To me, it is the bench mark that all others can be measured to, since most everyone that has fished for years has used them. A few years ago, I tried Suffix, and I felt is was a bit better, maybe more consistent. I still like Siege for all my steelhead applications. I tried CXX on a whim, 15# actually, for t-rig worms. To say I was blown away is understatement. I caught fish, big fish, where the lione was actually peeling due to contact with zebes, and I was still unable to break it with my hands.

However, its not a nice to handle as the previously mentioned lines, especially on spinning gear. I also don't feel that it is that strong or abrasion resistant at diameters smaller than 8#. But that goes back to the diameter - abrasion resistance relationship that Rolo brought up.

[Paul Roberts]

I go by line diameter as well. 8# CXX fishes like 10# XT. I generally use 8, 10, and 12# diameters.

If you are curious about abrasion resistance, I've caught most of my recent pike, including this one on 8 and 10# CXX, with no leader. I've yet to break off using topwaters, jerkbaits and hard swimbaits. Spinnerbaits and jigs, well that's another story....twist and melt for me.

If it helps any, I was a XT/XL guy for years. To me, it is the bench mark that all others can be measured to, since most everyone that has fished for years has used them. A few years ago, I tried Suffix, and I felt is was a bit better, maybe more consistent. I still like Siege for all my steelhead applications. I tried CXX on a whim, 15# actually, for t-rig worms. To say I was blown away is understatement. I caught fish, big fish, where the lione was actually peeling due to contact with zebes, and I was still unable to break it with my hands.

However, its not a nice to handle as the previously mentioned lines, especially on spinning gear. I also don't feel that it is that strong or abrasion resistant at diameters smaller than 8#. But that goes back to the diameter - abrasion resistance relationship that Rolo brought up.

Excellent. Yup I'm a Trilene guy, for the reasons you state -bc that was the standard, once upon a time. I've been aware of the talk around P-Line and am seriously tempted. If it's SOOOO strong I should be able to replace .009 XT with .009 P-Line, or maybe even with .008??? That is what I want to chip away at.

Sufix is the other I've heard good things about, and from some good sources. And the ratings are high on Stren MagnaThin -but the ads for it talk "walleye" a lot -which makes me think it may be lacking in abrasion resistance. Another I've used is Trilene Sensation, and was surprised at it's strength to diameter (compared to Trilene XL/XT). But, it's a low stretch formula and appeared to be a bit brittle (less shock resistance) -maybe just something to get used to. And this was just my own impression in fishing it.

As to FC, so far BPS XPS has performed the best for me and is highly rated. The other I'm curious about (due to rating) is Maxima FC. But one test gave it a not-so-great knot strength rating.

Yes Roger, braid IS great stuff. I use it a lot. But...it floats, so I am playing with FC for deep water(and high wind) use. Thus my spending my time here on the lines forum. Discussing the nylon/CoP is simply mission creep lol.

[rubba bubba]

I tried CXX on a whim, 15# actually, for t-rig worms. To say I was blown away is understatement.

However, its not a nice to handle as the previously mentioned lines, especially on spinning gear.

What was the line diameter of the 15# CXX and translate that to the other lines you tested - i.e. if it equals a 20lbs XT, then those are the 2 lines you should compare and determine which you like better. I would be curious if you would be as blown away because the gap should be much closer.

On the Seaguar being the weakest comment - that's superfluous because it had the smallest diameter. Compare equivalent diameter Seaguar / other fluoros (diameter, not lbs ratings) and then see where it falls in terms of strength.

Comparing lines by lbs rating, if they have different diameters, is comparing apples and oranges.

[J Francho]

I tried CXX on a whim, 15# actually, for t-rig worms. To say I was blown away is understatement.

However, its not a nice to handle as the previously mentioned lines, especially on spinning gear.

What was the line diameter of the 15# CXX and translate that to the other lines you tested - i.e. if it equals a 20lbs XT, then those are the 2 lines you should compare and determine which you like better. I would be curious if you would be as blown away because the gap should be much closer.

On the Seaguar being the weakest comment - that's superfluous because it had the smallest diameter. Compare equivalent diameter Seaguar / other fluoros (diameter, not lbs ratings) and then see where it falls in terms of strength.

Comparing lines by lbs rating, if they have different diameters, is comparing apples and oranges.

Try reading the REST OF MY POST!. Jeez, some dudes just want to debate and debate. I CLEARLY stated this here:

I go by line diameter as well.  8# CXX fishes like 10# XT.  I generally use 8, 10, and 12# diameters.

I don't have the figures in front of me, but 15# CXX feels like 17# XT. Someone as critical as you should be able to look it up somewhere.

And, once again, in the realm of context, I was blown away by its abrasion resistance, or STRENGTH WHILE FISHING.

This is what you measurebators will never get - you actually have to try the freaking thing to actually get a meaningful impression, LOL.

Again, and again I say this: line preference is a VERY subjective thing. No quantifiable data will ever completely support any argument of why someone prefers on line over another.

:

[J Francho]

Excellent. Yup I'm a Trilene guy, for the reasons you state -bc that was the standard, once upon a time. I've been aware of the talk around P-Line and am seriously tempted. If it's SOOOO strong I should be able to replace .009 XT with .009 P-Line, or maybe even with .008??? That is what I want to chip away at.

Now you're dipping into line so thin, the strength to diameter relationship is negligible.  I don't see an advantage in the lines smaller than 8# (0.012).   

I'll put it this way, I replaced 10# Trilene XT with 8# P-line, and see a real improvement. 

I replaced 12# Trilene with 10#  CXX, and see a really big improvement. 

My initial spool of CXX was 15#, because it was close to the 17# Trilene I used, and it was overkill.  12# CXX works fine.

Here's a story about 15# CXX.  18.5 ranger + 89 lb. thrust TM + hung bullet sinker in wood = boat lost.  I had to cut it.  This was down on SML this past April.

For most of my small diameter applications, I've gone to braid.  15# Power Pro with a long fluoro leader (I like P-line CFX, Gamma, and TriplFish leader material) in 4 to 10# sizes is working really well for me.

Hope that helps.

[J Francho]

I looked up the diameters, and it actually surprised me how similar they are.  I suppose some of CXX "feeling" bigger was purely subjective.

Trilene XT 17# - 0.017" (.43mm)

CXX 15# - 0.016" (.40mm)

Trilene XT 8# - 0.012" (.31mm)

CXX 8# - 0.012" (.30mm)

Apples to apples.  'Nuff said.

[roadwarrior]

Well, since there's only one "right answer"

most of you guys are using the wrong line!

;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

[J Francho]

Well, since there's only one "right answer"

most of you guys are using the wrong line!

;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

LMAO....Your Yo-Zuri is also excellent line.  I've used Ultra Soft in smaller diameters before switching to braid.  While bench testing a certain someone's repaired drag, I got silly break strengths with what I presume was 12# Hybrid.  I could probably get used to using YZ, if it weren't for the 10 lbs. of CXX I have yet to use, LOL.

[Paul Roberts]

Excellent. Yup I'm a Trilene guy, for the reasons you state -bc that was the standard, once upon a time. I've been aware of the talk around P-Line and am seriously tempted. If it's SOOOO strong I should be able to replace .009 XT with .009 P-Line, or maybe even with .008??? That is what I want to chip away at.

Now you're dipping into line so thin, the strength to diameter relationship is negligible. I don't see an advantage in the lines smaller than 8# (0.012).

I'll put it this way, I replaced 10# Trilene XT with 8# P-line, and see a real improvement.

I replaced 12# Trilene with 10# CXX, and see a really big improvement.

My initial spool of CXX was 15#, because it was close to the 17# Trilene I used, and it was overkill. 12# CXX works fine.

Here's a story about 15# CXX. 18.5 ranger + 89 lb. thrust TM + hung bullet sinker in wood = boat lost. I had to cut it. This was down on SML this past April.

For most of my small diameter applications, I've gone to braid. 15# Power Pro with a long fluoro leader (I like P-line CFX, Gamma, and TriplFish leader material) in 4 to 10# sizes is working really well for me.

Hope that helps.

Get rid of mono??? :)

OK, I'm over the shock.

You make a good point. I actually have been using 10# braids for my light applications the last couple of years. The only thing left is my UL spinning rig -which has mostly been collecting dust -and my CB rig filled with 10XT. For topwater, I'm using 20# braid w/mono leader.

AND...looking at Brian's (Team9nine) results with straight fluorescent braid (no leader) -that's fluorescent yellow --we might just be able to get rid of the leaders too:

http://www.bigindianabass.typepad.com/big_indiana_bass/page/2/

"Squeezed about 4 hours of fishing in this afternoon and brought 48 fish aboard the tin machine. Best fish went 4 pounds, but the rest were 18" and under. Won't hear a single complaint from me though. Water clarity is very good for this lake, now aproaching 4'-5' on the lower end but the fish continue to bite strong on the flame green Fireline. I'm fairly certain/confident that the line color isn't in any way negatively affecting the bite at this point. "

But....NO MONO?? At all???

I'll have to let that sink in for a bit. Remember, I'm one of those "old dogs".

[J Francho]

Essentially, it is mono filament, just not dad's nylon mono.  I bet more of those so called monos aren't some type of copolymer anyway.  How could anyone get away with 40 years of no technology advancement?

And yeah, I guess the only traditional mono I'm using is for trout.  Its the only thing that seems to work in the cold.

[rubba bubba]

Try reading the REST OF MY POST!. Jeez, some dudes just want to debate and debate. I CLEARLY stated this here:

:

Relax Francis - I read the rest of your post (after all it was only 3 more sentences) and my question wasn't a debate request it was an opinion request. I was speaking specifically to you being blown away by the 15# after you referenced normally using 8/10/12 lbs XT. You mentioned 8# CXX fishes like 10# XT and so I wanted to know if whatever the equivalent XT would be for the 15# would still result in you being blown away or if you would think they'd be much similar. I haven't used either in that size and I'm always looking for a game-improving change.  You then answered it in your subsequent posts.

Good grief.

[Paul Roberts]

Essentially, it is mono filament, just not dad's nylon mono. I bet more of those so called monos aren't some type of copolymer anyway. How could anyone get away with 40 years of no technology advancement?

And yeah, I guess the only traditional mono I'm using is for trout. Its the only thing that seems to work in the cold.

I'm lumping nylons/CoPs together. FC and braid are different enough to separate -at least at this point.

Any use for braid for drift fishing?

[J Francho]

Drift? As in Hezog's western syle? In my opinion, no. Too much contact with rocks is bad for braid, even with a longer leader. At least with nicked monu, you stand a sliver of a chance, whereas frayed braid is toast.

Now, for float rigs, it great, as long as you are using a slow action rod and a spinning or casting reel with a very light, smooth drag. You can use a much smaller diameter mainline which equates to lighter, which means longer trots downstream, while keeping your mainline off the water for a better float.

I started out three years ago with fused Fireline, and did well. Until the temp dropped below freezing. Same goes for traditional braid, like Power Pro. My last few trips I have been using 15# PP braid.

Most centrepinners shun braid, due to the fact that they have no drag, per se. Since the spool spins freely, their finger on the lip serves as resistance, and the stretch in mono acts as a shock absorber, along with the long, light power, slow action rod, giving them a bit more time to react to the fish.

I'm not 100% sold on pinning, though its hard to deny the results. I'm currently researching a 12' UL/moderate casting rod and round reel as my full time trout rig. I still like use a few bottom bouncing rigs in certain conditions, and that rig would allow me to use either terminal rig.

[J Francho]

Try reading the REST OF MY POST!. Jeez, some dudes just want to debate and debate. I CLEARLY stated this here:

:

Relax Francis - I read the rest of your post (after all it was only 3 more sentences) and my question wasn't a debate request it was an opinion request. I was speaking specifically to you being blown away by the 15# after you referenced normally using 8/10/12 lbs XT. You mentioned 8# CXX fishes like 10# XT and so I wanted to know if whatever the equivalent XT would be for the 15# would still result in you being blown away or if you would think they'd be much similar. I haven't used either in that size and I'm always looking for a game-improving change. You then answered it in your subsequent posts.

Good grief.

Fair enough, then.  Hard to tell the tone.  It sounded as though you stated that P-Line CXX understates it line strength, showing larger diameters for comparable break strengths.  That doesn't seem to be the case, though I still think each line size fishes like the benchmarks next line up, or so.  Its got to be the inherent stiffness in CXX, even when treated with KVD Line & Lure.

Sorry, getting killed here at work.....bleeding into other things.  :-[

[RoLo]

I go by line diameter as well. 8# CXX fishes like 10# XT. I generally use 8, 10, and 12# diameters.

If you are curious about abrasion resistance, I've caught most of my recent pike, including this one on 8 and 10# CXX, with no leader. I've yet to break off using topwaters, jerkbaits and hard swimbaits. Spinnerbaits and jigs, well that's another story....twist and melt for me.

If it helps any, I was a XT/XL guy for years. To me, it is the bench mark that all others can be measured to, since most everyone that has fished for years has used them. A few years ago, I tried Suffix, and I felt is was a bit better, maybe more consistent. I still like Siege for all my steelhead applications. I tried CXX on a whim, 15# actually, for t-rig worms. To say I was blown away is understatement. I caught fish, big fish, where the lione was actually peeling due to contact with zebes, and I was still unable to break it with my hands.

However, its not a nice to handle as the previously mentioned lines, especially on spinning gear. I also don't feel that it is that strong or abrasion resistant at diameters smaller than 8#. But that goes back to the diameter - abrasion resistance relationship that Rolo brought up.

It's a little uncanny John, but your line experience has taken many of the same paths as mine.

Like yourself and Paul, I too am a Trilene guy, and used it exclusively for about 45 years

(Xtra Limp on spinning & Xtra Tough on casting)

We've tried many other lines in the interim, but always came back, there's not a bad thing I can say about any Trilene line.

For sheer blood and guts though, it's pretty tough if not impossible to beat P-Line CXX.

With spinning tackle though, where a little less memory is much appreciated, the mono I personally prefer is Sufix Elite.

For everything else, I prefer Sufix Siege, it's one great line. Now then, if the goal were centered on abrasion-resistance,

I'm not aware of any line that's meaningfully better than Sufix Tritanium. On the chart above, Trilene XT edged out

Sufix Tritanium in average strength, but I have trouble aligning myself with that metric. Okay, if zebes means zebra mussels,

then we have the Archilles heel that'll quickly separate the men from the boys (hope to get the chance sometime next year).

Everything changed just a few years ago, when I took the giant step from mono to braid.

Technically speaking, "monofilament" includes all line that isn't "multifilament", which is to say

nylon, fluorocarbon and copolymers that aren't cofilament (fused vs. jacketed).

After all is said and done, no line transition made a greater impact on my spinning experience than braided line.

Its line-diameter vs. test-strength is unparalleled, it's virtually non-stretch which in effect raises the tensile modulus of the blank,

enhancing the sensitivity and allowing "flick-of-the-wrist" hook-sets. And for spinning junkies like myself,

you can't help but fall in love with the "zero-memory" limpness of the line.

So what does that leaveLine Visibility? Ironically, in a recent thread Glenn stated that he didn't like Fireline braid

because he's a line-watcher and when wearing polarized glasses he can't see the braided line.

Yet, there are many anglers who fret over the visibility of braid and add a fluorocarbon leader (I never do).

Paradoxically, and in spite of its refractive index, I've seen fluorocarbon line in the sun that looked like an underwater icicle!

Back to braided line, I've tried Sufix braid, PowerPro braid and Berkley braid and though I like them all, my latest squeeze

is Berkley Fireline Tracer braid...yeah Tracer, so I can see the line ;D

Roger

[rubba bubba]

Fair enough, then. Hard to tell the tone. It sounded as though you stated that P-Line CXX understates it line strength, showing larger diameters for comparable break strengths. That doesn't seem to be the case, though

No harm. I indeed was questioning CXX's #'s as based on that table CXX was by far the largest diameter, and it has been brought up by others previously. That's not an attack on CXX, though (as if they are hatching some deceptive marketing ploy), just that when comparing CXX (or any line's strength) if people could speak to equivalent line diameters they should. It would seem CXX's numbers are somewhat off, but if true, I liken it more to how St. Croix's MH action rods are like most other's H action; not bad just something people need to be aware of; which is why I wanted your further opinion.

Does anyone have a table that lists many of the lines, diameters and ratings? It looks like XT is pretty similar in size but it's also known for it's stoutness. A table with Yo-Zuri and others would be nice. Maybe I'll compile one.

[Paul Roberts]

Drift? As in Hezog's western syle? In my opinion, no. Too much contact with rocks is bad for braid, even with a longer leader. At least with nicked monu, you stand a sliver of a chance, whereas frayed braid is toast.

Now, for float rigs, it great, as long as you are using a slow action rod and a spinning or casting reel with a very light, smooth drag. You can use a much smaller diameter mainline which equates to lighter, which means longer trots downstream, while keeping your mainline off the water for a better float.

I started out three years ago with fused Fireline, and did well. Until the temp dropped below freezing. Same goes for traditional braid, like Power Pro. My last few trips I have been using 15# PP braid.

Most centrepinners shun braid, due to the fact that they have no drag, per se. Since the spool spins freely, their finger on the lip serves as resistance, and the stretch in mono acts as a shock absorber, along with the long, light power, slow action rod, giving them a bit more time to react to the fish.

I'm not 100% sold on pinning, though its hard to deny the results. I'm currently researching a 12' UL/moderate casting rod and round reel as my full time trout rig. I still like use a few bottom bouncing rigs in certain conditions, and that rig would allow me to use either terminal rig.

There's a high floating braid out there, specifically designed for steelheading I hear. Curious, if anything; I prefer fly-tackle for most things trouty anyway.

[J Francho]

P-Line Hydrafloat.  Reviews from several ranged from ho-hum to hating it.  Remember though, steelheading is a bit slower moving than bass angling as far as equipment evolution goes.

And as for the flyrod for trout, one thing: SNAGGER!!!!

(Just kidding  ;D)

[Paul Roberts]

P-Line Hydrafloat. Reviews from several ranged from ho-hum to hating it. Remember though, steelheading is a bit slower moving than bass angling as far as equipment evolution goes.

And as for the flyrod for trout, one thing: SNAGGER!!!!

(Just kidding ;D)

Say what?? Them's fightin' words you know.