salmo
Well-known member
This may have been asked before, but can I use 6 lb. test good quality fluorocarbon fishing line for Euro Nymphing?
The truth isn't in materials as much as tolerances. That 6 lb fluorocarbon fishing line that says 0.010 on the box is probably anywhere between 0.007 and 0.013, depending where you measure, not just along the line but also roundness. The thinnest areas being about 6 lb, and that's what they're guaranteeing, but other sections will test like 12 lb breaking strength. And some just mislabel it to a degree for marketing purposes as well. "Our 6 lb test" is the strongest... Yeah, because it's actually 10 lb test, lol.
- 6lb fluorocarbon fishing line measures about .010".
- 6lb test fluorocarbon tippet material comes in around between .007" or .008".
The truth isn't in materials as much as tolerances. That 6 lb fluorocarbon fishing line that says 0.010 on the box is probably anywhere between 0.007 and 0.013, depending where you measure, not just along the line but also roundness. The thinnest areas being about 6 lb, and that's what they're guaranteeing, but other sections will test like 12 lb breaking strength. And some just mislabel it to a degree for marketing purposes as well. "Our 6 lb test" is the strongest... Yeah, because it's actually 10 lb test, lol.
The tippet is the same stuff, just more consistent in diameter, tighter tolerances on the tippet, which leads to smaller batches and more money. Larger tolerances are to make bigger batches and keep price low.
I have never been sold on the supposed invisibility of flouro. With multiple aquarium tests and holding a physics degree! That said, the density difference, lack of stretch, and abrasion resistance is real, so it has it's place.
I've played around with it in my fish tank, lol. I see no difference, I can see em both just fine, though I can't speak for fish eyesight. I've done the physics, yeah, the index of refraction is slightly closer to water, but it's not all that different and I don't really think index of refraction is what's driving visibility under water anyway. And if you wanna go there, nylon is closer to air, yet I haven't seen anyone suggest nylon is less visible in air! And if it's on the surface.... nylon might actually mute the sharp water/air boundary a bit, lol. Plus it floats higher, so if less nylon is in the water, it looks finer diameter?As far as fluorocarbon's invisibility in water; until somebody figures out how to pop fish eyes in their head it's something that can't truly can't be determined.
I use it because it doesn't flat spot when drawn up in a knot or get curly cues if it gets wrapped around a tree branch and it is typically stronger for the same diameter versus Nylon and has a longer shelf life.
I have used the higher end Seagar and PLine products, mostly because I have used them for other fishing needs and have them around.What is the best brand for invisibility and lack of memory?
Same here. The Seaguar Blue Label lines offer better strength/diameter but the 4lb and 6lb PLine offers good bang for the buck. More importantly, it's easier to get strong knots with both than with some other brands.I have used the higher end Seagar and PLine products, mostly because I have used them for other fishing needs and have them around.
...The flat spotting, lack of curly cues, strength/diameter, and shelf life are real things though, and I get and have no issue with your reasoning. Nylon (at least in copolymer form like most "mono's") is less dense, cheaper, biodegrades, and is more supple (so in theory, less drag, are fish line shy or drag shy?). And I seem to be able to tie knots better with it because it's not as slick. Everything's got it's advantages and disadvantages.
1st part. Maybe. I have always subscribed to it's drag that matters, not visibility. I think it was Harvey and Humphries did an experiment where they tied like a few inches of rope to japanese beetles, unattached to a rod, and threw them in. The fish gobbled them up. Yet attach it to a rod and nothing. It's about what the fly itself is doing, not the line. Likewise I have gone to these places, like the Tully, Valley, Little Lehigh, etc., where dudes are fishing midges with 8x and stuff. On small flies like that I use as thick as possible, so long as I can get it through the eye of the hook. On tricos and midges that's usually 5x or 6x, depending on the hook manufacturer. And I do just fine with them.I have a theory (that once again would benefit from fish eyes 😉) that a floating tippet looks a like a slash through the mirrored surface of the water if viewed from below versus one drifting an inch or so below. In my delusional world that slash is more objectionable to fish than no slash although no fish has ever told me it bothers them particularly...
.....
Fluorocarbon is also denser so it straightens out better on casts. If you ever cast a Tenkara rod with a level fluorocarbon line (which is just plain fishing line) and then used the same size & length line in mono you would get what I am talking about.
I also believe that having nylon riding on the surface can create a shadow and thus spook wary fish. Fishing dries under fluorocarbon tippet is a wise idea and is what I do, but my leader is nylon to help aid in floatation.Another thing, I like my tippet on dry flies to be NOT be floating on the surface.
I have a theory (that once again would benefit from fish eyes 😉) that a floating tippet looks a like a slash through the mirrored surface of the water if viewed from below versus one drifting an inch or so below. In my delusional world that slash is more objectionable to fish than no slash although no fish has ever told me it bothers them particularly...
To that end I use real mud, leader sinking stuff sold as Mud or Xink to get my tippet to sink. This is another reason I like fluorocarbon because it IS easier to get it to sink and before anyone mentions it, that doesn't "pull" my fry flies under.
Fluorocarbon is also denser so it straightens out better on casts. If you ever cast a Tenkara rod with a level fluorocarbon line (which is just plain fishing line) and then used the same size & length line in mono you would get what I am talking about.
As far as suppleness versus Nylon; fluorocarbon tippet material has got more supple over the years but I doubt it is supple as Nylon. However that isn't a big enough issue for me to deal with what I don't like about mono because I can work around that lack of suppleness with leader or casting tweaks.
As always YMMV...
I also believe that having nylon riding on the surface can create a shadow and thus spook wary fish. Fishing dries under fluorocarbon tippet is a wise idea and is what I do, but my leader is nylon to help aid in floatation.