jdaddy
Active member
Simple question: Monofilament or fluorocarbon tippet for dry fly presentation?
jayL
Active member
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2007
- Messages
- 9,947
Voted mono. Didn't appear to work.
Mono ftw.
Mono ftw.
jdaddy
Active member
damn rigged poll imo.
Maurice
Administrator
Staff member
Sumpthin seems to be wrong with the poll, for me anyway.
Correct me if I am wrong but isn't fluorocarbon tippet thicker per test size yet clearer per x size underwater. Therefor not the right value for dry fly fishing.
And stretch is less so that may help with hook up ratio...if they bite from being line shy.
Correct me if I am wrong but isn't fluorocarbon tippet thicker per test size yet clearer per x size underwater. Therefor not the right value for dry fly fishing.
And stretch is less so that may help with hook up ratio...if they bite from being line shy.
jdaddy
Active member
I broke my poll!! Get it?
tomgamber
Well-known member
what's the question? What I prefer? What I use? What is better?
I use mono because I have been fishing too long to use something that costs 4 times more than something that has worked for me for over 25 years. SO I guess my answer would be mono...if the poll was functional I mean.
I use mono because I have been fishing too long to use something that costs 4 times more than something that has worked for me for over 25 years. SO I guess my answer would be mono...if the poll was functional I mean.
jdaddy
Active member
I would imagine those are the same questions/answers for most folks. I tried to keep it as simple as possible. So simple I broke it I guess.
gfen
Active member
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2007
- Messages
- 6,639
Mono. Cheaper. Stretchier. Limpier. Your poll sucks.
FC might be tougher, but its more finicky, too. The final nail is FC is forever. The stuff you leave hung in snags is forever in the world, it doesn't go away.
Anyone submit a bug report on the poll to dkile?
FC might be tougher, but its more finicky, too. The final nail is FC is forever. The stuff you leave hung in snags is forever in the world, it doesn't go away.
Anyone submit a bug report on the poll to dkile?
jdaddy
Active member
Yes I did. Maurice pointed out that if you go to the main menu on the right and choose polls, you can see the poll, vote there and it will register.
SBecker
Active member
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2010
- Messages
- 5,660
Mono, but your poll is broke
pcray1231
Well-known member
Poll sucks. But mono. A few things....
All visibility advantages of fluoro would disappear on the surface. Fluoro claims to have a similar refractive index as water, making it less visible in water. But mono has a closer refractive index in air.
Fluoro is denser and sinks. That may help with the visibility to get it under water, but its gotta really hurt with drag.
Stiffness. There are ranges for both depending on brand, and these ranges may overlap here. But generally speaking, fluoro is stiffer, again hurting drag.
Yes, overall, fluoro has greater strength and knot strength. However, to get the same drag characteristics of mono, you have to go finer. i.e. 5x mono acts similarly to 6x fluoro. I think any strength advantages are then lost.
Fluoro has its places. Dry fly fishin for trout isn't one of them.
All visibility advantages of fluoro would disappear on the surface. Fluoro claims to have a similar refractive index as water, making it less visible in water. But mono has a closer refractive index in air.
Fluoro is denser and sinks. That may help with the visibility to get it under water, but its gotta really hurt with drag.
Stiffness. There are ranges for both depending on brand, and these ranges may overlap here. But generally speaking, fluoro is stiffer, again hurting drag.
Yes, overall, fluoro has greater strength and knot strength. However, to get the same drag characteristics of mono, you have to go finer. i.e. 5x mono acts similarly to 6x fluoro. I think any strength advantages are then lost.
Fluoro has its places. Dry fly fishin for trout isn't one of them.
salvelinusfontinalis
Active member
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2006
- Messages
- 7,284
If thats the way the question is asked, then mono.
Stop throwing spinners 50' on a 30' foot stream and this is a non issue. ;-)
Stop throwing spinners 50' on a 30' foot stream and this is a non issue. ;-)
gfen
Active member
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2007
- Messages
- 6,639
C'mon, people, what happens in OT stays in OT!
ALso, I'm going to measure that piece of stream to figure out how wide it is there. I will then unearth every thread in which this general statement appears to point out it is, in fact, about 50'.
tennjed
Member
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2008
- Messages
- 165
Mono
buffalo7
Member
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2010
- Messages
- 404
Never used FC.
sniperfreak223
Member
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2010
- Messages
- 643
Mono for dries, fluorocarbon for subsurface...mono floats better, and generally works out better for surface flies.
WildTigerTrout
Active member
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2010
- Messages
- 2,068
I use Mono for surface fishing and Fluoro for sub-surface.
TUNA
Member
- Joined
- May 18, 2009
- Messages
- 420
I use fluoro for 95% of my fishing. This past Saturday I fished Spring with 6x Fluoro and a tippet ring! Guess what, my size 24 Parachute Midge, with a dropper attached, did not sink. I caught quite a few fish, too. I have confidence in Fluoro so that is what I use.
S
SamIAm
New member
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2008
- Messages
- 21
Just a comment
FC has a refractive index of 1.42 with water being 1.33, nylon is around 1.56-1.58 depending upon the type of nylon.
Regarding it's light transmission.
That is the property to capitalize upon for the proposed senerio.
The time to use a fluoro carbon tippet with dry flies is;
For selective trout, on smooth flat water, in bright light.
The reason: is when nylon floats on the surface a miniscus forms which distorts the surface of the water and hence the transmitted light. Fish, which are cast over/caught frequently or just wary will key the distortion and ignore the fly for the bogus it is. I find the material most useful for mid to late morning hatches.with smooth consistant surfaces.
Regarding it's modulus (stiffness); there are more ways than a pile casts to get slack fro tea natural drift, be creative.
Also consider presenting the fly tail first which doesn't have to be from a down stream presentation.
Cheers
Rick
FC has a refractive index of 1.42 with water being 1.33, nylon is around 1.56-1.58 depending upon the type of nylon.
Regarding it's light transmission.
That is the property to capitalize upon for the proposed senerio.
The time to use a fluoro carbon tippet with dry flies is;
For selective trout, on smooth flat water, in bright light.
The reason: is when nylon floats on the surface a miniscus forms which distorts the surface of the water and hence the transmitted light. Fish, which are cast over/caught frequently or just wary will key the distortion and ignore the fly for the bogus it is. I find the material most useful for mid to late morning hatches.with smooth consistant surfaces.
Regarding it's modulus (stiffness); there are more ways than a pile casts to get slack fro tea natural drift, be creative.
Also consider presenting the fly tail first which doesn't have to be from a down stream presentation.
Cheers
Rick
pcray1231
Well-known member
Yes, and the refractive index of air is roughly 1.0, far enough different from either mono or fluoro that it ain't gonna make a difference. As far as the meniscus, yes, I know fluoro is hydrophobic, but to be honest in my home aquarium tests both are equally visible and distort the surface when on it, though fluoro has a tendency to sink more.
And then there's the surface film, which is a different substance than both the water and the air (hence why bugs can go to the surface easily but have trouble breaking through), and has a different refractive index yet (higher, though I've seen various estimates for how much higher and it varies depending on a lot of things). Not to mention if there's a small film on the water of a foreign substance, like virtually EVERY waterway has all the time. Most plant oils, for instance, have refractive indexes around 1.45-1.55. Things like salinity, temperature, dissolved oxygen, mineral content, etc. all affect the refractive index of water as well, though the effect is generally small.
You add it all up, and its a difficult question scientifically, to the point where you throw up your arms and trust your eyes in home tests, and I can say I see no difference in visibility ON the surface, if anything the mono is less visible cause it sits higher. Under the surface, its a different ball game, though even then the effect is overstated.
But in the end, it comes down to this:
Most fish are drag shy, NOT line shy. If you want to prove this to yourself, glue some various tippets onto Japanese beetles or hoppers and throw them into the drift. They all get taken just fine even with the pickiest trout, and even if you have 0x attached. But when you put it on your line, suddenly they're shy and finer tippets somehow help. Drag shy, not tippet shy, the finer tippets are causing less micro-drag. So:
I disagree wholeheartedly. Thats the worst time to use it. Here you want the highest floating, limpest material you can find.
Where fluoro has a marked advantage is in abrasion resistance, which is useful for toothy creatures, so I can understand the love from the saltwater guys as well as the musky/pike crowd and even large trout. It also doesn't break down over time, again if long-term strength is of concern. The lack of stretch can be an advantage for some things as well, but a disadvantage in others.
