Pacemaker Fishing Forum

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.