Wouldn't that be awesome? If they could somehow manufacture tiny strands of FC (or even mono) that were weaved together then coated/fused together to make a perfectly round profile, that would be the ultimate fishing line. It wouldn't have the strength or sensitivity that "braid" has but the invisibility would trump those characteristics in my opinion.

LMAO......

;D LMAO Well it seemed like a good idea anyway...

That box says its made out of Dyneema. And nowhere on it it says anything to make me think they weaved very small fluoro lines. I think the big thing is that it "sinks" like fluoro.

I may be wrong tho.

Dyneema = Spectra.  The Gore is probably the same stuff in the new Suffix.

http://www.sufix.com/usa/fishing_line/832/

Dyneema = Spectra. The Gore is probably the same stuff in the new Suffix.

http://www.sufix.com/usa/fishing_line/832/

I understand that, But what I think Philsoreel was trying to say was that it would be really neat if they braided Fluoro lines, not Dyneema/Spectra.

Yawnnnnn, semantics are so 2009.

I don't think that braiding lots of little FC strands together or just having one big FC strand makes a difference.

Bassclary-JF was joking

Trevor-You're missing the concept. What is braided line? Small strands of dyneema/spectra whatever woven together to make a super strong small diameter line. What if they could take small strands of FC and do the same?

Ohhhhhhhh.......

Yeah, theoretically, anything that is woven like that should increase breaking strength.

That would cetrainly be the ultimate fishing line. I'ld love to get my hands on something like that. As long as it acts more like braid (no memory, tangles, strength, etc) yet retains the invisibility of fluoro, I'm all for it.

Ohhhhhhhh.......

Happens to the best of us....thanks for the support though.

Yeah, theoretically, anything that is woven like that should increase breaking strength.

That would cetrainly be the ultimate fishing line. I'ld love to get my hands on something like that. As long as it acts more like braid (no memory, tangles, strength, etc) yet retains the invisibility of fluoro, I'm all for it.

I am aware of this. But I think this is more talking about taking loose fibers and making cordage out of them. Like single ply cordage, double ply, ect. If you were to go out, gather some hemp fibers, and start to twist, I am absolutely positive that the many small strands is better that the one big one. I think part of that is because they squeeze each other together under tension. But with FC, you can synthetically make one long, unbroken "fiber", I am not sure what rules apply.  :-/ But maybe I'm still missing the point.

Yeah, theoretically, anything that is woven like that should increase breaking strength.

That would cetrainly be the ultimate fishing line. I'ld love to get my hands on something like that. As long as it acts more like braid (no memory, tangles, strength, etc) yet retains the invisibility of fluoro, I'm all for it.

I am aware of this. But I think this is more talking about taking loose fibers and making cordage out of them. Like single ply cordage, double ply, ect. If you were to go out, gather some hemp fibers, and start to twist, I am absolutely positive that the many small strands is better that the one big one. I think part of that is because they squeeze each other together under tension. But with FC, you can synthetically make one long, unbroken "fiber", I am not sure what rules apply. :-/ But maybe I'm still missing the point.

When I responded to you earlier, I actually breezed through and missed YOUR point...my mistake

Yeah, I don't know what rules apply either. This is all just conjecture anyway. It's probably not possible but maybe something new will come around that's even better than anything we have to date. I'm an optimist.

"Anyone who has never made a mistake has never tried anything new." Albert Einstein

why do you think that this will happen?  and even if it did do you realize how expensive it would be to spool your reel.  nanotechnology is considered 100nm or smaller.  This is equal to 10^-7 meters.  I highly doubt an affordable line would ever be made at this size.

why do you think that this will happen? and even if it did do you realize how expensive it would be to spool your reel. nanotechnology is considered 100nm or smaller. This is equal to 10^-7 meters. I highly doubt an affordable line would ever be made at this size.

I am fully aware of what nanotechnology is. They can change the properties of elements at a molecular level so why not fluorocarbon? I never said that it will happen or even possible. I said what if?

this is only if you believe line visibility makes any difference.i used to think it did but after years of trying to see a relationship between visiblity and numbers of fish caught i see no connnection.some years you just catch more fish than others.

this is only if you believe line visibility makes any difference.i used to think it did but after years of trying to see a relationship between visiblity and numbers of fish caught i see no connnection.some years you just catch more fish than others.

I agree with you.  I have a friend that only uses hi-vis line Crappie fishing and he catches plenty of fish.  Would he catch more if he was using FC...who knows?

I emailed Spiderwire about the Fluorobraid hoping they might be coming out with a hi-vis version, but they said at this time there was no plan to.  It seems pretty logical that a line that was basically made to be used for slow techniques (jigs, plastics) would also be made available in a line watching color 8-)

Invisible braid i think is what you are looking for. Although nothing exist yet i would venture to say that it probably will in the future. It wasn't long ago that taking a picture what your boat was passing over was unheard of.

Woven FC might be the stiffest line ever...

this is only if you believe line visibility makes any difference.i used to think it did but after years of trying to see a relationship between visiblity and numbers of fish caught i see no connnection.some years you just catch more fish than others.

Ain't it the truth. And this year wasn't one of 'em :-[

this is only if you believe line visibility makes any difference.i used to think it did but after years of trying to see a relationship between visiblity and numbers of fish caught i see no connnection.some years you just catch more fish than others.

If is doesn't make a difference then why would any tournament angler ever use anything other than a superline, except for in rocks?

actually for visibility they use flouro.

actually for visibility they use flouro.

I think you may have misunderstood what I said...

this is only if you believe line visibility makes any difference.i used to think it did but after years of trying to see a relationship between visiblity and numbers of fish caught i see no connnection.some years you just catch more fish than others.

If is doesn't make a difference then why would any tournament angler ever use anything other than a superline, except for in rocks?

Pro's will always use anything they think gives them an advantage. Why? Because they don't have to pay for it. The big difference between them and us is the fact that we have to buy our products which makes us choose more discreetly whether a product actually is giving us more fish, or a better performance,thus justifying the amount of money we have just spent on the product. If an angler really doesn't think that fluoro gives him an advantage over mono then he certainly isn't going to shell out the money for the more expensive line..