Welcome Aboard!
You are not logged in.
Pages: 1
Mono VS Fluorocarbon - Simple Visibility Test
I want to know that:
I don't intend to offend anyone who swears by Fluorocarbon leader.
I use 2 - 12' leader (10 - 80# test)
Anyway,
I could clearly see the Fluorocarbon leader (on underwater footage) while the host of a fishing show mentioned invisibility of Fluorocarbon leader.
This happened few times.
Sometimes I fish and free dive at the same locations. Because I have seen mono lines underwater, I doubted the claims of Fluorocarbon invisibility.
So I conducted simple test at home. During the tests, I couldn't tell mono lines from Fluorocarbon leaders. There were no differences to my eyes
After the multiple tests with some different brands, I no longer buy Fluorocarbon leader lines
All my lures don't resemble real fish at all. And my lures are at the end of a leader.
Here are my simple tests:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8EHnxsLu69o
Offline
I fish fluoro on some of my setups for reasons other than the "invisibility factor". I like it because it stretches less than most mono and the kind I buy is more limp than most mono
Offline
Dan has a good point. When it comes to fluorocarbon, visibility is always the first thing everyone talks about. However, I do not believe it to be the most important attribute to consider when selecting a fishing line. Before worrying about visibility, I would consider the following:
1. Fluorocarbon does not degrade from exposure to UV radiation nearly as quickly as monofilament and it does not absorb water either. This means I can leave line on a reel for three months instead of three weeks without worrying about the line weakening. Just stretch it out and spray on some line conditioner to eliminate coiling and it's as good as new. Something to consider when calculating the true costs of your equipment.
2. Fluorocarbon is much denser than mono. This gives it several advantages. The one everyone likes to talk about is the sink rate. Sure that will get you an extra foot or two of depth when you're deep cranking. However the real advantage that this provides is increased sensitivity. Vibrations (feeling bites) will generally transfer more efficiently through a denser medium. And because fluoro sinks, the line will lay straighter in the water, as opposed to floating monofilament which bows upward. Better sensitivity, more efficient hook sets.
3. Although it varies greatly by line type and brand, I have found that fluoro generally has less stretch than mono or copolymer lines. Again, better sensitivity, more efficient hook sets, and easier to rip the bait free from grass and clear vegetation off the bait.
Yes, the light refraction index of pure fluorocarbon is a bit closer to that of water than monofilament's index is. Whether or not that translates to a more invisible line, I cannot tell you. I suspect that the difference is not as great as everyone imagines.
Offline
Mike says it all.....
"I suspect that the difference is not as great as everyone imagines."
If cost were not a factor, fluoro #1
For me, cost is a factor_I squander way too much on fishing toys
my experience is that fluoro goes to krapp faster from heat and light than mono
mono: cut off 4' and retie regularly. it is good enough...
Offline
Pages: 1