Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Hellbenderman

Ho Hum Mono vs. Fluoro

Recommended Posts

I had always been told that Fluoro had much less stretch than mono, but while watching Bill Dance, I think, they presented a chart which showed that fluoro actually stretched slightly more than mono. The added sensitivity of fluoro is not brought about because it is less stretchy, but because it is much more dense than mono and thus transmits strikes better with more sensitivity. Comments?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The added sensitivity of fluoro is not brought about because it is less stretchy, but because it is much more dense than mono and thus transmits strikes better with more sensitivity. Comments?

So is this why braid is so sensitive?  :-?

And I find it hard to believe that flouro stretches more than mono. After fishing with flouro for so long, if I go to mono it feels like fishing with a rubber band.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought Tackle Tour did some tests and said flouro stretches like mono too.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You always hear that flouro stretches less but it is entirely untrue.  It does, in fact, strech just as much and some cases more when dry.  It does, however, resist soaking up the water which causes mono to strch more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Several nylon mono and flurorocarbon line boxes state "low stretch" but don't state as compared to what. Maybe it was a rubber band they are referring to.

In the Tackle Tour tests, the fluorocarbon lines were affected by water soaking also.

I see several professional anglers state the low stretch myth of fluorocarbon lines, so they are duped by advertizement and it's sensitivity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting thread. Has anyone actually taken a 2' length of mono and fluoro.....tied loops in each end.....and tested the stretch with your hands? If you did, I think you'd see that the mono has a lot more stretch than fluoro. I did this two years ago. But regardless, other characteristics of the two lines are probably more important than stretch anyway. I mean, folks have been fishing with mono for more years than I care to remember! :) So there's got to be other things to take into consideration.

Like: Fluoro sinks fast......mono doesn't. Abrasion resistance is another characteristic to consider as well. And there's probably others. Lines are just tools we use to accomplish an end task. JMO!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will agree that flouro does strecth. But flourocarban is alot more sensative then mono. Plus the low vis of flouro wins over mono for me anytime. the only use i have for flouro is top water baits. My prefered fluoro line is BPS  XPS Flouro and Berkly 100% flouro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not a scientist so I can't lend any explanations to which line stretches more, but I'm with Crestliner, when you take mono in your hands and try to stretch it, it has much more stretch than fluorocarbon does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Interesting thread. Has anyone actually taken a 2' length of mono and fluoro.....tied loops in each end.....and tested the stretch with your hands? If you did, I think you'd see that the mono has a lot more stretch than fluoro. I did this two years ago. But regardless, other characteristics of the two lines are probably more important than stretch anyway. I mean, folks have been fishing with mono for more years than I care to remember! :) So there's got to be other things to take into consideration.

Like: Fluoro sinks fast......mono doesn't. Abrasion resistance is another characteristic to consider as well. And there's probably others. Lines are just tools we use to accomplish an end task. JMO!

Did you try this with every brand of fluorocarbon line? Not every monofilament  line stretches more than every fluorocarbon line on the market.

If only fluorocarbon would cast as nice as mono would.I haven't found a Fluorocarbon line i can cast with ease,and if you look on the box a lot of them say "easy to cast" which is pure bull.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with grim, I dislike how fluoro casts, I tried some 15# Seaguar INVISX and hated it.  The fact that Seaguar INVISX is one of the highest rated Fluoro's makes me reluctant to try another.  Instead it will be used on tip ups for ice fishing this winter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for all the great info, and it seems everyone has an opinion or an option that works for them. I first started using fluoro back when it first came out as leader material with mono fishing the gin clear inshore waters of NC. At the time, it was far too expensive to consider as an every day line. I also started using it as a leader for bass fishing with mono. One day, I found myself far from anywhere and had to spool some Seagar onto a Daiwa 1600SS Tournament spinning reel and just hated it. It was stiff and didn't lay on the reel well, and didn't cast well. However, after a couple days of being forced to use it, it got better, like it had a break in period or something, but I still preferred mono. I now use braid with a lengthy fluoro leader of up to 20+ feet on all my spinning reels. I will never use braid on my level winds, just too much trouble. While I suppose I could use fluoro on my level winds, I don't. I still use mono, but like my spinning reels, the level winds also get a lengthy leader of fluoro of 20+ feet. This seems to work well for me. I only have to deal with a few turns of fluoro on my reels and I get the benefit of long casts, a fast fall, the abrasion resistance and the sensitivity. Tie those knots well!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I will agree that flouro does strecth. But flourocarban is alot more sensative then mono. Plus the low vis of flouro wins over mono for me anytime. the only use i have for flouro is top water baits. My prefered fluoro line is BPS XPS Flouro and Berkly 100% flouro

I don't mean to be rude, but this is the only application I wouldn't use flouro.  Flouro sinks and will drag your lure under.

I do agree that flouro is more sensitive than mono.  I remember fishing my one rod with flouro on it and I then used my buddies rod (which was the same rod as mine), but he had mono on it.  To me there was a big difference in sensitivity with the rod having flouro being more sensitive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw that episode and he did say that Flouro had more stretch than mono, He stated that the reason we think mono has more stretch is because it has a rubberband effect, its like elastic. Flouro stretches more but doesn't bounce back like a rubberband like mono.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the one time I tried flouro, I didn't notice any significant difference in sensitivity over my normal XT.  Everybody seems to say it is so, I guess I'll try it again and see what happens as long as I have some left.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know I'll never buy it again, that much is certain.  Between my own initial impressions and the TT article(s), plus the fact it costs 3x as much, I just don't need it.  I'll use what I have left, maybe, and that will be the end of it for me.

I know plenty of guys seem to like it, and it seemed most of them used it on casting reels.  It (6lb Berkley 100%) just didn't work very well on my small spinning reel (1500 Daiwa).  I suspect it would be fine on my 2500 though.

I was surprised TT published such info, they shot it full of holes in my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Amazing.  I was told, mostly here, that fluro had less stretch, better sensitivity and better hookup capability, so I bought some and loaded it on a baitcaster.  Man, I thought that was better line.  I really thought it did all those things.  I am now running Zo Zuri hybrid at 10# on the Cronarch with a Citori rod and love it.

Now, science tells me it isn't so.  What should have been purely objective was I guess subjective.  I almost wish I had not been exposed to what seems the truth.  Guess I'll still fish the hybrid just cause I like it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Now, science tells me it isn't so. What should have been purely objective was I guess subjective. I almost wish I had not been exposed to what seems the truth.

I believe that the popularity of fluorocarbon line has been bolstered in large part by Kevin VanDam.

Like everyone else, I pay very close attention to everything that KVD says, because the man is uniquely talented.

However, KVD is a businessman first, and two of his largest sponsors are XPS fluoro and KVD Line Conditioner (for fluoro).

Separating objectivity from subjectivity means walking the tightrope between solid information and profit motive (have a lollypop).

Though most of us weren't aware of it, we came very close to breaking away from both fluoro mono & polyethylene braid.

Japan concocted a revolutionary new line material called "Zylon" that is exponentially stronger than fluorocarbon,

and even stronger than polyethylene braid (Dyneema). Unfortunately, it was subsequently learned that Zylon

is rapidly degraded by ultraviolet rays in sunlight. In any event, Zylon is used today in the best bulletproof vests,

replacing kevlar, because the outer jacket prevents UV deterioration. Of interest to anglers, line manufacturers

are presently working on ways to hybridize Zylon with polypropylene for use in fishing lines.

Keep your fingers crossed, because this will be the biggest fishing line breakthrough since 1939 when "nylon" was introduced.

Nylon is still the most utilized line material, being used in nylon mono, copolymer mono & copolymer cofilament.

By the way, DuPont was not the sole inventor of nylon, which was a joint effort between the

United States and Britian. The "NY" in nylon stands for New York, and the "LON" stands for London.

Roger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hmmm..

this information seems to have confirmed some thigns for me.

i recently got some berkly 100% on clearence and put it on my t-rig rod to test out.

it has performed well and far above my experiences with flouro in the past. however... i still cant justify the price difference.

what has been posted here and my own opinions seems to point to me continuing using yozuri hybrid. or any copoly. less expensive than flouro...better than mono.

thank you. i almost had myself talked into another spool of flouro.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True story. Last tournament of the year and I spooled on some 15 lb. Triple Fish Fluoro instead of my usual 17 lb. Stren. Tough bite but landed the 2nd big Bass of the tournament on the Triple Fish. I don't think I would have felt the bite on the Stren.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I didn't want to let this out but as we speak, I am working with several respected Asian fishoscientists who have developed a 100% invisible line, with no stretch that will "saw" right through granite like it wasn't there, much less wood, and so sensitive, it can detect a fish fart 300 yds away. Unfortunately, they lost track of the end of it and no one can find it! I'll keep you posted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • fishing

    bass fishing

    fishing forum

    fishing rods

    fishing rods

    fishing rods


    fishing rods

    fishing reels
    fishing gear

    Truck Caps

    fishing reels
    fishing reels

    fishing

    bass fish

    fish for bass
    fish

×