Is fluorocarbon stronger than standard mono leader for the same diameter or is the advantage just in its disappearing qualities
It seems stiffer and and harder to tie (50-100) pound and is a heap more expensive, is it worth it or just a marketing plot?
Pretty keen to hear people's views on this, even a link to some info would be good, thanks
Theoretically, 80# fluoro has the same breaking strength as 80# mono; however, almost no line breaks at is listed strength. Fluoro does have one distinct advantage over mono in addition to its invisibility: It is much tougher and thus much less inclined to be cut by teeth or rocks.
Have done a lot of research on this topic and here is what I have learned.
1 Fluorocarbon, as described above, is much more abrasion resistant. It is considerably more dense then mono consequently it has much better resistance to rocks and tooth critters.
2 The high density of fluorocarbon also allows it to sink much faster then mono. This is a great help in getting your bait down into the water column were most of the fish are
..."Most"... of the time. Mono sinks very slowly fluoro by comparison sinks quite fast. To confirm this for yourself take a tall clear glass filled with water and put a
1 inch piece of mono and time its sinking to the bottom of the glass. Then do the same with a like piece of fluoro and the results will be obvious and very educational. Giving water a Specific Gravity of 1.0, mono is 1.15 and fluoro is 1.78
3 Fluorocarbon does not knot a well as mono. It is possible with mono to tie a join knot to the hook and have the line break not the knot. While with fluoro it is highly likely that the knot will almost always break even with the best of knots.
4. Fluorocarbon is much less likely to absorb water which can affect line and knot strength.
Have read where fluoro is not supposed to absorb any water but have studied line tests where water does have a slight effect on fluoro but not nearly as great as mono which has a positive affinity for H20.
5. Do not fall for the Madison Avenue hype that fluorocarbon is invisible under water. The refractive index of water is 1.33, for mono it is
aprox. 1.63 while fluoro is 1.42. In order for fluoro to be invisible under water it would have to match the refractive index of water which it does not. Thus fluorocarbon is just less visible not invisible.
From personal experience have found that fluoro is not so important on cloudy overcast or low light conditions. But it can become almost a necessity on bright sunny days. Have seen bites where if you were not using fluoro you just did not get bit. Have developed the habit of always using fluoro regardless of conditions. It can only help it cannot hurt.
And oh ya...... please do not beat yourself up over the $4 cost of a 10 ft. fluorocarbon leader. You just paid $360 for a day and a half trip, spent $20 in gas to get to the landing and back home. You wandered into the landing tackle shop and just spent $18 on stuff you did not need. Then you also departed with another $50 for beer, burgers, chips and cookies and fish cleaning. Then you wallet gets hit with a tip for the crew.
Which of the above helped you catch a fish?
My .37 cents worth for your consideration.
WaltThis message has been edited. Last edited by: Walt,
|Powered by Social Strata|