dodgeguy

you post all this stuff up but yet never offer any proof.if you are actually correct it would be nice to see the proof.i do know they share some parts with silstar/pinnacle but then again chrysler/ford /gm use some of the same parts also.

http://www.basspro.com/servlet/catalog.TextId?hvarTextId=74494&hvarDept=100&hvarEvent=&hvarClassCode=1&hvarSubCode=1&hvarTarget=browse http://www.basspro.com/servlet/catalog.TextId?hvarTextId=51667&hvarDept=100&hvarEvent=&hvarClassCode=1&hvarSubCode=1&hvarTarget=browse http://www.cabelas.com/cabelas/en/templates/product/standard-item.jsp?_DARGS=/cabelas/en/common/catalog/item-link.jsp_A&_DAV=MainCatcat20166-cat20331&id=0042281121538a&navCount=1&podId=0042281&parentId=cat20331&masterpathid=&navAction=push&catalogCode=2UG&rid=&parentType=index&indexId=cat20331&hasJS=true

from what i have read big game has less stretch than either of the other 2.xl is stretchy and limp and good on spinning rods.big game is underated and generally breaks way above it's rated pound test.big game stinks on spinning.it's great on casting rods.it's highly abrasion resistant.i used it for 2 seasons and liked it.i am considering going back to it because it is less visible than braid.

http://library.thinkquest.org/28170/35.html Visibility under water depends on the amount of light reaching the particular depth. Illumination itself depends on the thickness of the layer, on the reflection and scatter of light rays in the water medium. 18% of them reach a depth of 18m and some 1% reach as deep as 100m. Besides this fact, a part of the coming from the sun is reflected by the surface of the water. The amount of reflected light depends on the angle between the rays and the surface of the water, also, on the quantity of air bubbles in the surface layer that have been formed by the motion of the water. The most important reason for the low visibility under water is the weakening of the refraction capability of human eyes. In the open air, it is sufficient because the refraction quotient of light is 1 and hat of the human optical system is 1.38. Water has a refraction quotient of 1.33, that is, close to that of the eyes. In this case, light is only slightly refracted and the image is formed far beyond the retina, corresponding to long-sightedness of 20 diopters. The function of the mask is to provide normal conditions for underwater visibility by introducing a layer of air with a quotient of 1. Contact lenses can be used instead of a mask. They must have, however, a refraction quotient greater than 1.4 to ensure normal vision under water. To function effectively under water, divers must understand the changes that occur in their visual perception under water. Many of these changes are caused simply by the fact that light, the stimulus for vision, travels through water rather than air; consequently it is refracted, absorbed, and scattered differently than in air. Refraction, absorption, and scatter all follow physical laws and their effects on light can be predicted; this changed physical stimulus can in turn have pronounced effects on our perception of the underwater world. Refraction In refraction, the light rays are bent as they pass from one medium to another of different density. In diving, the refraction occurs at the interface between the air in the diver's mask and the water. The refracted image of an underwater object is magnified, appears larger than the real image, and seems to be positioned at a point three-fourths of the actual distance between the object and the diver's faceplate. This displacement of the optical image might be expected to cause objects to appear closer to the diver than they actually are and, under some conditions, objects do indeed appear to be located at a point three- fourths of their actual distance from the diver. This distortion interferes with hand-eye coordination and accounts for the difficulty often experienced by novice divers attempting to grasp objects under water. At greater distances, however, this phenomenon may reverse itself, with distant objects appearing farther away than they actually are. The clarity of the water has a profound influence on judgments of depth: the more turbid the water, the shorter the distance at which the reversal from underestimation to overestimation occurs. For example, in highly turbid water, the distance of objects at 3 or 4 feet (0.9 or 1.2 m) may be overestimated; in moderately turbid water, the change might occur at 20 to 25 feet (6.1 to 7.6 m); and in very clear water, objects as far away as 50 to 75 feet (15.2 to 22.9 m) might be underestimated. It is important for the diver to realize that judgments of depth and distance are probably inaccurate. As a rough rule of thumb, the closer the object, the more likely it will appear too close, and the more turbid the water, the greater the tendency to see it as too far away. Training to overcome inaccurate distance judgments can be effective, but it is important that it be carried out in water similar to that of the proposed dive or in a variety of different types of water. In addition, training must be repeated periodically to be effective. Changes in the optical image result in a number of other distortions in visual perception. Mistakes in estimates of size and shape occur. In general, objects under water appear to be larger by about 33 percent than they actually are. This often is a cause of disappointment to sport divers, who find, after bringing catches to the surface, that they are smaller than they appeared under water. Since refraction effects are greater for objects off to the side of the field of view, distortion in the perceived shape of objects is frequent. Similarly, the perception of speed can be influenced by these distortions; if an object appears to cross the field of view, its speed will be increased because of the greater apparent distance it travels. These errors in visual perception and misinterpretations of size, distance, shape, and speed caused by refraction can be overcome, to some extent, with experience and training. In general, experienced divers make fewer errors in judging the underwater world than do novice divers. However, almost all divers are influenced to some extent by the optical image, and attempts to train them to respond more accurately have met with some, but not complete, success. Although the refraction that occurs between the water and the air in the diver's face mask produces these undesirable effects, air itself is essential for vision. For example, if the face mask is lost, the diver's eyes are immersed in water, which has about the same refrac- tive index as the eyes. Consequently, no normal focus- ing of light occurs and the diver's vision is impaired immensely. The major deterioration is in visual acuity; other visual functions such as the perception of size and distance are not degraded as long as the object can be seen. The loss of acuity, however, is dramatic, and acuity may fall to a level that would be classified as legally blind (generally 20/200) on the surface. While myopes (near-sighted individuals) do not suffer quite as much loss in acuity if their face masks are lost as individuals with 20/20 vision do, the average acuities of the two groups, myopes and normals, were found to be 20/2372 and 20/4396, respectively, in one study of underwater acuity without a mask. Scatter Scatter occurs when individual photons of light are deflected or diverted when they encounter suspended particles in the water. Although scattering also occurs in air, it is of much greater concern under water because light is diffused and scattered by the water molecules themselves, by all kinds of particulate matter held in suspension in the water, and by transparent biological organisms. Normally, scatter interferes with vision and underwater photography because it reduces the contrast between the object and its background. This loss of contrast is the major reason why vision is so much more restricted in water than in air (Duntley 1963, Jerlov 1976); it also accounts for the fact that even large objects can be invisible at short viewing distances. In addition, acuity or perception of small details is generally much poorer in water than in air, despite the fact that the optical image of an object under water is magnified by refraction (Baddeley 1968). The deterioration increases greatly with the distance the light travels through the water, largely because the image-forming light is further interfered with as it passes through the nearly transparent bodies of the biomass, which is composed of organisms ranging from bacteria to jellyfish. Absorption Light is absorbed as it passes through the water, and much of it is lost in the process. In addition, the spectral components of light, the wavelengths that give rise to our perception of color, are differentially absorbed. Transmission of light through air does not appreciably change its spectral composition, but transmitting light through water, even through the clearest water, does, and this can change the resulting color appearance beyond recognition. In clearest water, long wavelength or red light is lost first, being absorbed at relatively shallow depths. Orange is filtered out next, followed by yellow, green, and then blue. Other waters, particularly coastal waters, contain silt, decomposing plant and animal material, and plankton and a variety of possible pollutants, which add their specific absorptions to that of the water. Plankton, for example, absorb violets and blues, the colors transmitted best by clear water. The amount of material suspended in some harbor water is frequently sufficient to alter the transmission curve completely; not only is very little light transmitted, but the long wavelengths may be transmitted better than the short, a complete reversal of the situation in clear water. Changes occur too in the appearance of colors under water. For example, red objects frequently appear black under water.

once again.red hooks turn grey underwater unless in shallow water.red lures turn grey in deep water.red hooks are only red in shallow water..the line is translucent so it greys out quicker than a red hook.this makes it blend into the surrounding area not dissapear.it's like a guy wearing camo.he's still there but you can't see him because the camo makes him blend in.he hasn't dissapeared literally.

you must have used red lightning.red cast is extremely limp.it's the best mono line imho!!!according to diving studies i've read it will become almost impossible to see in all but the clearest water.this is due to the fact that the deeper you go the less light penetration you get.this causes the gray to blend in with the surroundings. next to flouro it is the least visible line.for those who hate flouro it is a great alternative.

the 5 inch senko in terms of #'s of fish.the jig in terms of size of fish.

hey JT,i want one of those supremes!!!!i hear they are around $99.that's amazing for a magnesium framed reel.

i said most not all.cajun red lightning is the stiffest line i have ever seen and it is a mono.ocean guys love it for trolling.it casts worse than any line i have ever used.on the other end of the spectrum is cajun red cast which is nice and limp and casts great.

this is one time i have to dissagree with you raul!!!most flouros are stiffer than most mono lines and there for do not cast as well.seguar is the most flexible flouro from what i have heard from guys who use flouro but stretch tests have proven it stretchs more than mono.that leaves you with the only advantage is the invisibilty factor.

happens some what to all line except braid.the limper the line the less it happens.then again lines that are more abrasion resitant usually have more memory.

if you want no loops use sufix braid.if you want a mono line use a limp line like cajun red cast.

That's just not true... I guess you think fuji guides and reel seats suck also? To everyone: there have been 4 people who had bad experiences with All Star post... out of over 7000, if anyone believes this to be a widespread problem, I would like to live in your sheltered world!! Especially when a couple of the complaints are from abuse or guide inserts falling out (which usually takes a good smack or stepping on). ...lol And no one actually claimed that the warranty period was still in effect, except redlinerobert. And I hope his is resolved quickly. If you are only concerned with a warranty, why would you buy a rod without a lifetime warranty? It makes no sense... you spend under $100 and then cry and whine that you don't get G. Loomis type service. The funny thing is that we have had threads that bashed Loomis and St.Croix customer service in the past as well. So like those, I will dismiss this one since the current tally is that .00057% (4 of 7000) of the membership now thinks (and not even all 4 complaints are legitimate, IMO) that All Star's customer service sucks. Lets all grow up and accept our own actions. If you bought a rod with a timed warranty and you break it through abuse after the time expires, don't cry about a replacement, open you wallet and shell out a few bucks. If I have offended you with this post, buy something with a better warranty and quit crying. ;D AMEN TO THAT!!!

here's a copy of the email i just sent. dear all star, one of our forum members has had a bad experience with your warranty department over the phone.here is a link to the thread on our forum.as a reputable company who has always been fair with me i hope you can help him. http://www.bassresource.com/bass_fishing_forums/YaBB.pl?num=1166043239/0 sincerely, john c. bernardo

that was me that gave you the address. mailto:service@allstarrods.com i'm going to post a link to this thread in an email and send it to them to see if they will help.i suggest you email them also.i forgot the woman's name.

president has a graphite frame.i hate graphite frames because they flex.medalist is aluminum and won't flex.i have broken necks on graphite framed spinning reels.

THANK YOU!!!

he didn't ask which shimbindo to get. ;D

i would get the bigger one.i would also buy a medalist instead.

http://www.basspro.com/servlet/catalog.TextId?hvarTextId=51844&hvarDept=100&hvarEvent=&hvarClassCode=2&hvarSubCode=6&hvarTarget=browse this one is a great spinnerbait/general lure throwing rod. $99.95 38-150-099-00 Read Item Notice 1 below 10-20 LB 3/8 - 3/4 OZ 6'8" MH HANDLE C TAS 806C

cool dude!!!

7-1 on the flip stick.

co-polymer lines are mono lines.they are just made with 2 different plastics.mono means single filament nylon line.

you're tying it wrong.you should have a 2-3 inch tag end.pull most of the spare line up from the main line not the tag end.also i super glue all my knots.they will never slip and the tag end won't fray.on cranks you can use snaps and save even more line.

yup,i hate tip wrap.but it's not like mono and flouro don't have issues either!!! ;D