govallis

The RG-AB is no longer found in stores for a good reason. I bought one last year end. It worked well. One day I fall on a slippery soil ground and the reel no longer work. The reel looks no damage at all (because it was dropped on a soft ground), but one tiny piece was broken off from the main gear. The reel works again after I cleaned out that little piece, but it is no longer smooth. So I threw that one into the garbage can and bought another. This one never get the line evenly on the spool and bird nested a lot. After I reduced the washer from 1.1 mm to 0.5 mm, it seems no longer do bird nest, but the spooling is still not even and with a fat bottom while line is not tight or fat top while tight. This reel is extremely smooth but not durable and/or never get the line evenly on the spool.

Ever since I started fishing, I noticed that the line likes to go to the bottom side of the spool - the corn shape (fat bottom). This is because the line is not tight when I retrieve, especially with light lures such as a weightless rigged Senko. A thinner washer does not help much and it makes the line goes more to the upper side when line is tight. The result is: bird nest, especially in a windy day. I thought that was the nature of spinning reels and just had to live with that, until I happened to see Okuma Safina SPa-35 on sale for $20 in a local store and somehow bought one. The strange thing is, the cheap Safina SPa-35 does not have such an issue, it always get the line evenly on the spool, while the line is tight or not. I then bought another, exactly same good! Even more strange, I then bought two SPa-25 and they are nothing like the SPa-35, just like all other reels I have used, such as the Daiwa RG2500-AB. I wonder, if you guys ever found a 25 size reel that's like the Safina SPa-35? Or any idea why the SPa-35 does so well so I can mod other reels to do as well? The following photos compare the $20 SPa-35 to the $60 Daiwa RG2500H-AB. You can see, the Daiwa has a fat bottom while line is not tight and a upside-down corn shape while tight. Note that I already reduced the washers from 1.1 mm to 0.5 mm, otherwise the two Daiwa I have were even worse and bird nested a lot. The two SPa-35 come with two washers installed and I did not change anything on them.

See my post above. If it looks evenly when you spool at home, you still need a thinner washer for real casts, especially for light lures. So far the Safina SPa-35 is the only exception.

Look at your spool. If the line piles up more on the bottom side, you must use a thinner washer; if more on the top side, then go thicker. I have found that almost all spinning reels need a thinner washer and many of them, sadly, still not enough even if you remove the washer(s) entirely. When you use light lures, the line is loose and thus it drops down to the bottom side more. So, you must use a thinner washer than it appears to be when you spool it at home. Okuma Safina SPa-35 is the only reel that gets line evenly on the spool, no matter you use light or heavy lures. Even the SPa-25 version can't do that; so it is not just the washer. All my future reels will be the Safina SPa-35 for that size and I'm still looking for a smaller and lighter reel that's entirely trouble free like the SPa-35.

CXX is much more expensive and not fluoro coated, I see no point of it over the C21. Tried 12# moss green CX and caught about 30 panfish. It cast extremely well for 1/64 lure (Trout Magnet), even better with a 1/16 oz sinker and small bubble. No problem at all, all fantastic. I'll need more time to see how durable; if that's no problem neither, then Pline is stupid to phase out this line by filling stores with Floroclear. I was trying to see if I need 8#, main line or leader, for panfish. Seems I don't need. The 12# is thinner than the C21 and cast extremely well. The line must be thin and limp enough for the tiny lure to perform well, otherwise could not have caught 30 within two hours. Hopefully this line will stay so supple after more use. The line had very good bite detection too, even for panfish, a lot louder and firmer than C21. Just this alone is worth the extra $4, no need to mention the added invisibility, water absorption and abrasion resistance by the floro coating. If this line can stay with its characters for couple months, then this is really the perfect line for everything, really has the both virtues of fluorocarbon and copolymer.

C21 is the same, turning milky white after some time. That's one of the reasons for me to try fluorocarbon coated. I took a look at the Maxima, I did not know it was copolymer. Its on-paper diameter is larger, like the C21. For example, 12# is 0.33 mm instead of 0.31 of CX. Memory seems bad and I never had a memory problem with C21. I'm not going to try more lines, especially expensive ones. If CX disappoints me, I'll simply go back to C21. At least I pay the least and it does not have major issues. My local store often has it on sale for less than $4 and one spool lasts at least a year for me, really cannot complain. C21 --- Measured --- On package 15# --- 0.36 --- 0.34 12# --- 0.33~0.34 --- 0.29 10# --- 0.30~0.31 --- 0.27

For more than a year, I have been using a single spool of C21 12# on two 30 spinning reels, no problem at all, fresh and salt water. Yes, the same spool, never replaced with a new spool. As I said above, I used Red Label as a leader and lately I realized how stiff it is. I was trying to use fluorocarbon coated lines to replace the red label for leader, then I thought why not use it as main line too? I'll see how well the CX will do. If it works well, then it'll be very sad to see it phasing out. If it fails too, I'll go back to C21 for both main line and leader and scaled down to 10# that has the same actual diameter of 12# CX.

In the last week, I already have had 2-3 unexpected breaks with Floroclear. This reminds me the Vanish. Ever since I changed to Red Label, I have not got a single break for a year now. The Red Label is too stiff, even though I use it as leader only. That's why I started looking for something between fluorocarbon and copolymer. So I'm done with the Floroclear, even though I love it on everything else, especially the silk casting. I went out and bought 8# and 10# CX. Hopefully they won't break like the Floroclear. The measured diameters, again, are much larger than the numbers on the package: CX --- actual diameter --- claimed diameter 8# --- 0.26 --- 0.23 10# --- 0.30 --- 0.27 12# --- 0.31 --- 0.29 15# --- 0.37 --- 0.34 Floroclear --- actual diameter --- claimed diameter 8# --- 0.26 --- 0.25 10# --- 0.30 --- 0.29 12# --- 0.31 --- 0.31 15# --- #.## --- 0.36 Now I can firmly say: "CX has a smaller diameter" is a false claim. As you can see, these two lines are exactly the same on diameters. The CX just have smaller numbers printed on the package. Another interesting thing is, 12# is barely 0.01 mm larger than 10#. Actually one is more like .31+ and the other 0.31-. The last time I noticed such a thing was the South Bend mono sold in Walmart, the difference between 10 and 12 is barely measurable, while the latter is indeed slightly stronger. So, there is virtually no point for the 10# version of these lines. Also, 15# is a lot larger than 12#. So unless one really needs the extra strength, don't go 15#. The difference between 12/10# and 8# is also significant, so it makes sense to go 8# when a thinner line is needed. I'd say for these lines, 12# is the optimal; go 8# or 15# if really needed.

I found some. 12# Moss green and 15# Hi-Vis. I measured their diameters, exactly the same as Floroclear, 0.31 mm and 0.36 mm. The CX just has smaller numbers on the package, 0.29 and 0.34, while the measured values match those on the floroclear package. So, there is no point to go for CX's smaller diameters. On the back of the moss green, it does list "virtually invisible" as one of the features. So there is no worry about the invisibility, must be the same to floroclear too. As for stretch, I guess not much difference neither, but I'll test them out.

They do make it in clear, just very difficult to find in stores.

Recently I started using Floroclear and love it. So I would like to try the CX Premium for its smaller diameter, but almost no local store carry it, or only the color ones available. Wonder why stores all prefer Floroclear to CX? I read many negative posts here about the former. Both are fluorocarbon coated, but why Pline never mark the CX as "invisible" as well? I like smaller diameter but if invisibility is lost then I won't try hard to find the CX. On the other hand, Floroclear is not marked as less stretch; is it significantly more than CX? I found it is much less than C21 and mono, very acceptable to me.

Today hooked up a 3 pound about 20 feet away from the bank and landed it. I checked, hooked very well, no bent at all. So, the light wire aberdeen hook is no problem and I'll keep using such snag-free hooks. WRB and Catt are right.

I was using 5" Yum Dinger and the hook was not bent after loosing the fish.

It is indeed an aberdeen hook, for making jig heads, Eagle Claw Lazer Sharp 60° LIGHT WIRE ABERDEEN JIG HOOK. Far cheaper than the Twistlock and snag free. I almost never lose fish, but I had not done much bed fishing though.

Okuma Safina Pro, Big5 has it for $50. The rod does not have an insanely long handle, very difficult to find these days. Medium action. The 35 reel is simply too good to be true - no any problem at all. For a $20 cheap reel, there is a lock nut like those in Daiwa, so the handle never lose up. Metal spool, again for a $20 reel, extremely even spooling, never seen with far more expensive reels. Never bird net, cast far. Cannot say enough good words about this reel, regardless of the $20 price. https://www.big5sportinggoods.com/store/details/okuma-safina-pro-spinning-combo/0950139150120/_/A-5598214 See how evenly the spool is, 12# co-polymer line. This is after I fished today, was using very light lure for yellow perch. With other reels, the line will be more piled on the bottom side like a cone. See how full I spooled this reel, still no worry about bird nesting. No idea how this cheap reel is done so perfectly. Showing in the picture is a Shakespeare Excursion rod. It has a normal handle length, 8" from the butt to the reel mount, compared to 11" of most rods and 1" shorter than the Safina Pro rod. IM6 graphite, medium action, sensitive enough for me to detect the lightest bites. When Walmart clearance them for $9, I bought 6, 3 of 6'6" and 3 of 7', no longer worry for the rest of my life how much longer and longer the stupid pro-driven manufacturers make the handles. These are the rods to get if you don't enjoy paying more. The new version no longer have a cork handle which is also 1" longer. Excursion rod (old version) + Safina Pro reel, only $29 total, trouble free fishing, from panfish to bass and lingcod.

Lost two fish yesterday, both hooked up near the bank and then lost them. Recently I started using 4/0 light wire aberdeen hooks, because they are snag free. I wonder if this is the nature of bed fishing, or the light wire hook?

Thank both of you! I compared the product photos to this real thing and I believe you are 100% correct. Too bad no 4" version.

Someone left it by a pond and I like its action. I want to buy some, maybe 4" ones, this one is 5". Do you recognize this bait, who makes it? Thanks!

A snap does make a suspending jerkbait to sink, but no knot can. I used to make small snaps with thin stainless wires, but I no longer, because they often lose fish and lure. Now I use 11 mm long small snaps, the smallest I can find. This knot is longer than other knots, but you don't have to do 8 turns. I use 4 turns for some applications, still strong.

I went to Walmart to buy some sinkers and saw the solid and hollow core lead wires. I saw them before but never got the idea till today. With these for so cheap and versatile, why I buy any sinkers again? I have been looking for cylinder sinkers in vain, these are and beyond! Cut a piece from these wires, I get any kind of sinker I need.

I always use a small snap, the smallest I can find. I also always use a small swivel, the smallest I can find. Both tied to the AG chain knots. Lately I've been thinking of why this knot is so perfect. The answer is: when you tie other knots, you have to pull very hard, which hurts the line. With this knot, you never need to pull hard, except the last run but that's not going to hurt the line. The key to do this knot right is exactly that: never pull hard. The 8-12 repeats make the knot, not force.

Cheaper than Senko and MUCH more durable. I honestly don't know why, it doesn't look so different than other hogs such as those from Strike King and Berkley, but this thing simply catches fish while other hogs seldom do. My Plano 3500 no longer have a room for other hogs.

Tom, I used to use something similar to the Pline Duramax. It is weedless, but too expensive and not so convenient. Duo-lock itself does not grab weeds that much, the knot does if its tag faces up. All knot tags must face down. This is why I never use Palomar, its tag faces up for most applications.

I also always use a leader. But weak knot is not the solution for that purpose, because all knots except FG chain can break anywhere between 0% and 100%. So I use a thinner line where need to break first.

This knot is actually extremely simple, more simple than uni and Palomar you mentioned and others. You simply repeat the same turn for 8 times, nothing to learn, nothing to remember, nothing to forget. No moisture needed. When I don't care too much about the strength, I repeat only 6 times even 4 sometimes. The very only downside is I have to use my teeth, but not a problem at all.