Is Fluorocarbon Leader More Abrasion Resistant Than Traditional Mono Leader?

By: Luke Simonds on November 28, 2017
Found In:

fluorocarbon line vs mono

It’s line testing time again!

And just wait until you see the video below with the somewhat shocking results

This latest test is directed at the commonly held belief that fluorocarbon leader is more resistant to abrasion than monofilament.

Based on feedback from the Salt Strong community, I tested the difference in abrasion between fluoro and mono for the following two scenarios:

  1. They both have the same rated strength (20 lbs)
  2. They both have the same diameter (20 lb mono vs. 25 lb fluoro)

And so far, this test has been the most shocking of all because my prior belief was completely thrown in the gutter.

Here’s the backstory:

Over the past couple of months, I started a quest to determine what the best line is in terms of its true value.

The overall goal of these experiments is to better understand the facts vs. the marketing-induced hype.

So far, some of the results have been very surprising because they completely uncovered some HUGE myths about our beloved fishing line.

And for me, this latest test is at the top of the list.

Line Testing Summary

After publishing several line analysis experiments using the testing platform shown below, the most common suggestion was to perform some tests on fluorocarbon line against traditional monofilament line.

So I began doing some research to see what the hype between the two lines seemed to be so that I could determine what tests to start out with.

So I’ll walk you through the thought entire process from test creation to final conclusion in this article.

But first, let’s quickly talk about a much-needed clarification:

What’s The Difference Between Fluorocarbon and Monofilament Fishing Line

monofilament vs fluorocarbon

This is a very common question that we receive, and the quick answer is that they both are monofilament lines.

Fluorocarbon line is just a subset of monofilament that is becoming more and more popular as of late.

It’s becoming so popular, that most people think of it as its own class of line… so I’ll frame this post as if they are two classes since they are most commonly thought of that way in terms of expected performance in addition to their perceived value and sticker price.

In general, fluorocarbon is favored by many anglers because it is commonly known to be superior to traditional monofilament line for the following core reasons:

  1. Less visible in the water – This claim is made mostly due to the density of fluorocarbon being closer to that of water which makes for less refraction of light. Fluoro typically has a thinner diameter relative to its strength, so that feeds into this core benefit as well.
  2. More resistant to abrasion – This claim seems to be made across the board, and I can only assume it’s due to simply equating that increased density means increased abrasion resistance [this is the factor that I examined in this test]
  3. Better performance characteristics – There seem to be a lot of hype around fluoro being better due to it having less stretch, a faster sinking rate, and a variety of other things that we’ll cover in a different post.

For now, let’s just focus on the abrasion characteristic because that’s what this latest experiment is all about.

Online Research Results On Fluoro vs. Mono Abrasion

Here are some snapshots of the information I found when performing some research online courtesy from our dear friends at Google.

The online reports seem to be overwhelmingly favorable to fluorocarbon when it comes to abrasion relative to monofilament line.

Here’s an example from a detailed post about fluorocarbon vs. mono line where it clearly shows that fluorocarbon is the superior choice due to its density/hardness:

image source: google.com

And here’s another top-rated result from the research where it states that fluorocarbon is more abrasion resistant than mono when their diameters are equal to one another… not quite as lofty a claim as before, but still very confidently showing fluoro as the superior line.

image source: google.com

I went through a good amount of articles, but never once did I see a test done on this important aspect of a leader line, so that’s when I just knew that I had to try it out even though the answer seemed so obvious…

So with that said, let’s dive into this latest experiment:

Is Fluorocarbon Leader Really More Abrasion Resistant Than Mono?

The test is shown in detail in the video below.

As you’ll see, I performed two tests isolating the following characteristics for the two tests:

  1. Rated Strength (2o lb leader lines used in this test)
  2. Line Diameter (resulted in a 20 lb mono going against a 25 lb fluorocarbon line)

Click the video below to see what happened:

Conclusion

After being blown away by the fact that the traditional monofilament line beating two different brands of fluorocarbon that was supposed to be stronger, I did some more research to see if I missed something.

One thing I found in this research was that monofilament can lose some of its strength after being submerged in water for an extended period of time.

So I soaked mono in water for over 15 minutes before testing it again against the same two fluorocarbon lines, and it still won by roughly the same margin.

Of course, this single test with just a few lines can’t prove once and for all if monofilament is or is not more abrasion resistant than fluorocarbon because I’m sure the results vary depending on the lines used…

But in my opinion, this experiment at least squashes the theory that fluorocarbon line are all stronger than monofilament lines.

There will be a lot more testing, so please let me know if you have any suggestions for improving the future experiments.

And let me know what lines you’d like me to try out as well.

Fish On!

P.S. – Please be sure to share this post with any of your friends who use fluorocarbon leaders so that they know their trusted leaders may not be as strong as they thought… this test sure made me reconsider the leaders that I use.

Related Posts:

See More Fishing Line Tests/Reviews

 

Do you want to join the only online fishing club that:

  • Is open 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days per year…
  • Actually shows you real spots and trends so you can outfish your friends…
  • Guarantees you catch more fish or you don’t pay…

Then join the Insider Fishing Club today!

117
Leave a Reply

avatar
59 Comment threads
58 Thread replies
3 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
58 Comment authors
Capt. DougAnonymousLuke SimondsPatrick fahieMark Ciciulla Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest
Notify of
Capt. Doug
Guest
Capt. Doug

Can you please do the same test with 40, 60 and 80 lb. These are much more common leader strengths and it would be very interesting to know if your conclusions carry through. Thank you

Mark Ciciulla
Member

Ande mono leader material obviously has good abrasion resistance. I am interested to see Mason brand hard type leader material or Rock hardtop nylon leader material perform the same test against some of the other major brands. Durability is one thing, stealth is a whole different category. I always thought fluorocarbon lines gave the advantage of invisibility for anglers pitching to wary fish. Many anglers will step up the leader to 40 lb on a 25lb main line to assist avoiding cutoffs. I was also interested to see if the less shiny coated lines such as value priced Ande Ghost do in an invisibility test compared to their premium mono line.

Rocky Fields
Member

Luke Good stuff here and great group. Glad I joined been busy outside work an trying to catch up.
I do have a guestion for you after seeing and watching many of your videos learning a lot on knots an rigging. I have not seen a swivel used ? I have always used a small swivel somewhere on my line. Is this necessary or not ? I have just changed over to braid, have.always used Mono.
Thanks much an Tight lines
Rocky

Dennis
Guest
Dennis

I just registered and may have missed other test you’ve done. This one was an Awesome eye opening test. Have you done any abrasion test with braided lines? How about breakage test with mono, Floro and braided? Really interested in those results.

Darryk
Guest
Darryk

I was also thinking that one of the lines may “roll” more so than the other, maybe to make sure this isn’t case, you could try spinning the sandpaper covered dowel as opposed to sliding it back & forth, seems to me this method would be more conclusive.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

Couple of things. First, this is an inquiry not a quest. Second, to be an experiment you need a control. This would be lines with no sand paper on smooth surface. Lastly, to make a conclusion you need many more trials with at least three spools of each.

Quentin Broom
Member

Wow! Thats a surprise!

Raleigh Thomas
Member

Wow, that testing was very eye-opening! The vast majority of my fishing inshore is for Snook, and snapper and Tarpon if available. I love fishing for Reds and trout, but leader choice is a lot less important for those species. ( Reds are not as leader-shy, and Trout don’t have the sandpaper mouths of Snook/Tarpon. ) The main issue in using floro is abrasion resistance supposedly much better, with visibility a close second. This testing sure upset the apple cart in my mind! I use 95% braid on my reels, so the stretch factor of floro vs mono leaders is kind of a moot point. ( I use 6 lb. or 8 lb. mono for Trout on some reels, so the stretch of mono helps protect light line somewhat from break offs.) I guess I fell for the hype because ‘everybody’ knows ’floro is tougher’, right? LOL! And ‘ more expensive HAS to be better.’ THANK YOU for your totally common sense testing, and non- affiliation/sponsorship promoting FAIR tests. A HUGE factor in my joining your Club, and FYI I’m a 57 yr. old 6th Gen. Fla. Native, been SERIOUS about fishing since 10 yrs. old or so. We can ALL learn more about fishing from each other, and you guys kick butt! As a good friend ( that is an awesome Guide too ) always says, ‘ if you aren’t learning something every time you go out, you aren’t paying attention!’ Her ( yes, ‘HER’!) powers of observation on the water are totally amazing. Glad to join your group, and let’s go CATCHING! 😊👍
Raleigh Thomas.

Jeff Wink
Guest
Jeff Wink

Fluorocarbon ‘visibility’ and abrasion resistance vs monofilament line is marketing hype which works by charging like a Gucci purse for FC. Go back to one-size-up mono and save your money…the fishing industry used Apple’s Steve Jobs tricks to convince it that FC is superior. All glitz and no substance.

Vince
Guest
Vince

Very interesting stuff Luke!
I was wondering if the stiffness of fluoro vs mono had something to do with the test methods as most of the mono I use feels “softer” than the fluoro I use. I couldn’t help to think that maybe the mono was gripping the sandpaper more so it would “roll” with the sandpaper a little bit better than the fluoro in which case it would be like sawing thru a wooden dowel that wasn’t secured.
Either way, thank you very much for this test. I may have to try committing going through a season using nothing but mono to see if it’s worth changing to the cheaper alternative now after seeing your video.

Sean Bradish
Member

Are you using mono leader now?

Pablo Diaz
Member

As a kid, always used mono for all my reels. With the push for abrasion and sensitivity started using the new lines. After these videos may need to rethink my decisions. Great video and sadly enlightening

Ken P.
Guest
Ken P.

Thanks Luke,

I definitely understand the advantage of the decreased visibility.

Here in SoCal we have had an incredible bluefin fishery the past couple years. One of the main techniques for fishing for them is with a flatfall lure. When on 150-250# fish the standard set-up is using 100#+ spectra with a 150#+fluorocarbon leader crimped to a heavy duty swivel tied to the spectra with the flatfall attached via spring crimp. The purported reason for using the fluorocarbon for the leader is because of its purported superior abrasion resistance.

My concern is that according to your experiment this may not be the case. Not only might there be increased risk of leader failure, but I’d be paying a significant amount more (>$1/ft vs pennies/ft for mono) for potentially less abrasion resistance. I have tried to ask a local radio show – Let’s Talk Hook-up about it and they just say that fluoro is definitely superior.

Ken P.
Guest
Ken P.

Now you’ve got me REALLY stressed out about this. I have been trying to spread the word of your findings, but people don’t want to listen. I am very curious about the “wet” line results. Did you soak the leaders for the tests, and if so how long? Did you post a video on it? I have tried to find if others have done any tests/experiments on this. I found one (not sure of the testing method) where they claimed while mono might have been similar while dry, that it lost 52% of it’s abrasion resistance after soaking for 10 min. Here is the link to that article.

http://www.tackletour.com/reviewfluorocarbontestpg4.html

I’m really freaking out about this. I need some resolution!

Thanks!

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

As mentioned, a bunch of mono line lengths were stuck together in a tube above a globe. These were sold as christmas lights many years ago. the tips of the line emitted the colour of the globe used. Since water testing has been done, what about the affect of sun exposure since the lines are exposed to it quite a bit even to the fact some people hang there outfits up in sheds affected by heat as well. Great article.

Xgeneration
Guest
Xgeneration

Under different water temperatures! I forgot to put that in my last statement!

Xgeneration
Guest
Xgeneration

Very interesting result! But you left one thing out! “Water”! I’m interested see that test underwater! I bet you get a different result!

Walt
Member

Yes,,, standard mono and better yet the Copolymer type lines are superior to fluoro in abrasion resistance . Have known this for quite some time from my own abrasion testing. It is a hard pill to swallow for most anglers because of the madison ave. brainwashing we have all endured regarding the benefits of fluorocarbon. Also fluoro carbon is just slightly less visible under water. Many visibility comparisons of mono and fluoro at depth have proved that flours is almost as visible as mono. The refractive index of fluoro is only at best .2, thats two tenths , better then mono. Water is 1.33 , mono is aprox 1.52 and fluoro is aprox. 1.42. So in reality the less visible factor is of minimal consequence. The best benefit of fluoro IMHO is that it’s much denser then mono. The main advantage to this is that it will sink about 3 times faster then mono. You can prove this yourself by taking a 1 inch pc. of each material and put them in a tall clear glass filled with water and observe the sink rate. You will be amazed. Also that increased density allows for increased sensitivity. While fluoro stretches almost as much as mono it takes force almost equalivant to its breaking strength to achieve max stretch. Mono stretches much easier.and faster. Being that here on the Left Coast we do a lot of live bait fishing the increased sink rate gets the bait further down in the water column which is where most fish live most of the time. Its increased sensivity is beneficial to bite detection.

And one last consideration. The use of a fluoro or mono leader requires an attachment knot to your main line be mono. That join knot stops light piping. That is the transmission of light down the mono to the lure lighting up like neon sign under water. That join knot stops the light piping down to the lure. This of course is not an issue when using spectra to a leader. To demonstrate for yourself light piping take 1 ft pc of mono, go in a completely dark room, and take a flash light and press the lens of the flash light to your belly with one end of the mono under the lens sealing off any light from escaping into the room. You will observe the light traveling through the mono outside the flashlight. If you have observed any on line videos of under water cameras taping fish striking a trolled lure you without fail notice that the mono going to the lure is lit up like a light saber . Light piping is the main physics used in fiber optics which is nothing but a very thin strand of glass which transmits information via modulated light thru it.

My .37 cents worth for your consideration,
Walt

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

This test was interesting but I do Wonder if Fluoro would have a different result if the test was done under water. Fluoro is very different from mono and even if you tie a knot with Fluoro, if you don’t wet the line it weakens it. Just a thought..

Tom Kopec
Member

I have been following the knot and line discussion for some time as I am relative new to saltwater fishing (moving to SW FL from NW Montana). My Question/comment concerns the FG knot. I have tied it as the instructions show however I have experienced several lure losses. I tie 20lb floro leader to 10-20lb braid and after several hours of flinging a Yo-Zuri or Rappala out there the braid just loosens up and I’m out another $10. I cannot see what I’m doing wrong. I’ve resorted to using the double Uni, but I don’t like the rough connection slipping thru the eyes on a cast. PLEASE if you have any suggestions I would greatly appreciate them. ( I’m getting ready to switch back to mono and tie directly.) Thanks and MERRY CHRISTMAS.

Capt. Cliff Gilchrist
Guest
Capt. Cliff Gilchrist

Put super glue on it.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

Sounds like you are not doing the half hitch with flouro before finishing the braid hitches.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

Thanks for the test and the results.
I fish the coral reefs off Florida.
I’ve found the floro no better than regular mono.
In fact the Yo Zuri 40# I use as leader material seems to be better????
The wording on the spool says it’s a blend of line???
I’ve bought floro leader material and have never noticed any real difference.

Thanks again.

Steven Free
Member

Thank you Luke for your concern I also have to get a new head gasket installed in my truck I tell you when bad things happen ole murphys law is right there letting it happen but the good thing is I do have the money to get it done so no bigger anyways I’m sure yourslaying the reds trout and snook besides I know reading your posts and saltstrong coarses that this time of the year is your favorite I envy you taking a chance to start a company and being able to make it a great success all in the name of inshore saltwater fishing amazing to say the least I never thought i would talk to someone that loved to fish as much as me and agrees that football is boooorrrriiinnngggg ha ha to me and I know you feel the same there’s something about being on the water that changes a man into a better person it soothes the soul makes one appreciate nature and what the Lord has created for all mankind an angler is different then the rest of society that doesn’t fish anyways I love what you guys do and will always support you in all your endeavors thank you and God bless saltstrong forever more😁

Richard Fiorentino
Member

great video . Do you think using a swivel instead of a knot to attach the leader affects the lure action and effectiveness? Appreciate your feedback . Between vision and dexterity at my age the knots are an issue, but will get them tied at home and use a snap for changing lures if it helps my catch.

Nick Strickland
Member

20# PINK ANDI …sorry

Nick Strickland
Member

Andre line…sorry

Nick Strickland
Member

Thank you for this. I’ve been saying this for years. 20lb pink and. Best snapper leader there is. F

Jacob Wendel
Member

Very interesting, I have always turned up my nose at mono. Can you devise a test for cut resistance with a sharp object to simulate a snook’s gill plates? Cut resistance is slightly different than abrasion I would think.

Patrick fahie
Guest
Patrick fahie

I’m looking for a musky leader and sharp teeth are what concerns me. Cut resistance test would be greatly appreciated.

BRIAN KEITH STOLLEY
Member

Hey, Luke. I really like these line tests! This one in particular got my attention for two reasons: 1. I have a rod loaded with mono and another with fluoro, and 2. I lost a nice strike yesterday because of a bad connect between the mono line and fluoro leader (FG knot would have been premier but I was on the dock and in a quick transition while they were biting and…my bad. I had 4 manatees splashing around and was trying to grab windows of opportunity.) Anyhoo, I’ve pulled in some redfish and channel trout in North Carolina marshes without leaders on fresh bait and lures from time to time in the heat of the moment just like I have with fresh water trout which has sometimes had me questioning the whole “leader thing”. I ask why I am putting an added potential weakness in the line with an additional knot. Learning of the FG knot has rather killed that concern yet still, the question now becomes: if my mono line is tougher than I thought, what is the advantage of the “leader thing”? This question becomes especially relevant when I’m out in the mangroves in my kayak.

Steven Free
Member

Bad day today I went to pick up my boat at my place because I have been living at my girlfriends and was going fishing tomorrow so I usually get it at my place and bring it to hers and then leave in the morning and going to her place I noticed in my rear view mirror my drivers side trailer tire was wobbling luckily I was only about 2 blocks from her house so when I made the turn to go into her neighborhood the tire was seriously leaning to one side so I pulled over about 3 houses from her on the opposite side of the street and got out to look and when I touched the tire it about fell off and after using the Jack it did I thought it was just loose but no the whole I guess spindle or whatever it is called on the trailer that the lugs are on connected to the trailer it remained attached to the tire after coming off the trailer not good and even not being mechanically inclined like me says it’s going to be very expensive but that’s fishing I was so planning on going tomorrow it was an 88 out of a 100 on the solonar tables chart but all I can say is at least it didn’t happen on the free way going fishing tomorrow not only my trailer would of been seriously damaged but probably my boat as well anyways no salt fishing for me until I get her working again talk to you later take care😑

Steven Free
Member

Hey Luke long time no talk but I just wanted to tell you I greatly appreciate your video on this topic and all the others I got the honor today to attend a shorter version of your inshore coarse with capt .ca Richardson he was here today in my neck of the woods the jacksonville area it was mainly about casting and lure retrieves but he covered other areas as well I was about the only one though who was a saltstrong member out of about 30 to 40 anglers and I talked to several and told them all to join saltstrong I wore my saltstrong shirt with pride you guys rule the inshore coarse industry your all so amazing and I thank you from the bottom of my heart for sharing your great knowledge with all of us inshore anglers its not very often when you find something on the internet that isn’t a whole lot of b’s let alone worth every penny you pay for it is a great honor and privilege to be a member I wish I could of met you with capt Rich but hey who knows maybe someday I should be a spokesman for your company lol anyways thanks for as usual the great info from all your videos take care and godbless😁

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

You should do an underwater video showing the visibility of each line under the water in clear water conditions.

Jacek
Guest
Jacek

This does not relate to salt water fishing but to Musky fishing. Leaders made from 130 lb fluorocarbon are less likely to injure fish when it rolls and since is not visible in the water improves strike chances . All Muskies are release live so it is a great leader material.

Joe Sheaffer
Member

Luke, here is the big question, do you really think flouro will result in more strikes in everday fishing? I’m sure it probably makes a difference in very clear water, but for most situations hat is your gut feeling? Great job, love this stuff.

Kevin Stevens
Guest
Kevin Stevens

One of the best monos I’ve used is cortland cam o flag the only drawback is that it has a lot of stretch which might impair hook sets but it is fairly inexpensive for the quality

Robert Bulla
Member

Love it, I’ve been thinking of switching back to mono. My roots are the same as yours Luke, central Fl bass and now salt. Plus all my bass reels are spooled with mono…LOL…I guess I’ve been deceived by all the “hoopla”as well for salt, spending too much for flouro leaders. Thanks

Gary Rankel
Member

For topwater lure use, lots of “experts” seem to recommend mono because it tends to float while fluoro sinks, suggesting that the sinking line negatively affects lure action. I personally like using a fluora leader with my thinner profile Ima Skimmer, because the sinking line allows me to jerk the Skimmer’s head below the water surface, causing it to pop back up slightly above the surface, appearing to mimic a bait fish trying to escape. This technique doesn’t work nearly as well with the more widely used (fatter profile) topwater lures which pretty much just go side to side in the typical walk the dog mode.

Dmitry
Guest
Dmitry

> This claim is made mostly due to the density of fluorocarbon being closer to that of water
It’s not density, but refractive index.

Doug Davis
Member

Obviously when fishing with cut bait on the bottom we can use mono, but under what other types of presentation of artificials would mono be reasonable to use as leader material?

Richard Doane
Member

Instead of sliding the rod back & forth, just roll it & see what happens

Tom Kopec
Member

Very interesting. Not trying to keep kicking the horse, but did you try standard mono line vs. floro leader? BTW, I’m gonna foward this test to some of my non connected friends.

Corey Cobb
Member

Interesting stuff!
I’m not ready to throw my fluoro in the trash, but this throws shade on the old assumption of abrasion resistance.
Is there any way to quantify how much more abrasion the mono can take?

Bottom line… the most important factor is getting a strike – followed by bringing in the catch. If fluoro increases strikes by 10% but lessens abrasion resistance by 10% then fluoro is still the big winner.

Obviously, these are just fake numbers to make a point, but you get the idea. It’s similar to why you wouldn’t just use 80lb leader for everything inshore.
Keep up the good work!

Corey Cobb
Member

Sorry. Should’ve watched before I commented. Dang, that was a significant difference!

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

Thanks Luke for all your work and for helping to spur such great discussions!

Charles BLUME
Member

Eye opening test, thanks. Seems mono is stronger and less expensive but it’s more manageable. Forget the leader and FG knot😁 spool up!

Chris Stanard
Member

This is great information, Luke. Thanks for doing these tests.

Have you thought about just turning the rod? I think it would remove some variability.

Nicholas George
Member

Are you going to do a strength test also? Similar to what you did with Seaguar red vs blue?

Chillers Chillers
Member

Very interesting testing – Thank You. But…How many times have we been “Rubbed off” at the leader? For me it’s never so I’ll stick with flouro for the other two benefits (Low viz & Low Stretch) Do keep testing and sharing please. Thanks David @WestCorkBass

Ron Mahoney
Member

I already left one comment as a reply to one of Luke’s wise replies, including that these tests are truly valuable as well as interesting. Luke, can i send you some Maxima Chameleon mono to test, it claims extra abrasion resistance and my use seems to confirm that. It is certainly less flexible that other mono. I could even send some equal diameter Maxima Ultragreen, which is the same diameter per pound test, claims more limpness and lower visibility. Maybe there are other lines you’d like to test but don’t want to buy and own a cajillion spools of line, just ask for 10 feet or whatever and I’m sure your legion of fans will send you what you want!

I also want to complement the comments of a bunch of insiders, some really intriguing questions and added information, and I think Luke does a great job of replying to them too.

Norman Black
Member

All of your line strength test are fair and well thought out, so much of hunting and fishing products these days are sold as if “if it’s new, it’s better” so you must buy it. Thank you for the honesty, Norman a insider plus devotee

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

So here is the question….with the mono being stronger but the fluoro being less visible and having a greater ability to sink; would it be more valuable to use a thicker fluoro for abrasion purposes as it is less visible? At the end of the day, what do you to suggest to “us” inshore fishermen? Thanks, Jon

Sam Craparo
Member

Most of the snook l loose are cut on the gill plate. Would be interesting if you could come up with a test to replicate a gill plate cut

David Rhodes
Member

Awesome experiment. I think I will change back to monofilament unless I see new evidence. I don’t get to fish that much so I never minded spending more on leader material. But ,clearly, I don’t need to waste money on leader material that is no better than traditional mono. Keep up the good work!

Charles Wynn II
Member

Luke, I was actually researching this as well as few months ago. I will double check, but I think it was the Tackletour site where they compared several flouro lines and included Trilene XL mono as a baseline. They tested knot strength, tensile strength, stretch, and abrasion resistance. The results were similar to yours with the mono being very competitive in most categories and winning some. The results of the different flouro brands was very interesting as some performed very poor and some very well with many in-between. Where the flouro really stood out against the mono was after being soaked for a period of time…the mono’s performance was affected way more by absorption and was beaten handily by several of the flouro lines. I know you did a soak test as well but I believe they soaked the lines for a longer period. Just wanted to share this as you may want to see if soaking them for a longer period truly has a big effect. If so you may want to consider doing all tests post soak going forward as none of us are fishing dry lines. Hope you find this of value, thanks again for all you guys do!

Charlie

Jim Tobin
Member

That was an eye opener. It might explain the leader breaks that we get fishing big yellow fin tuna in Baja the last 2 years. I’ve been very impressed with the skill you have in explaining how,what,why in the testing I’ve seen so far. Keep up the good work.

Edward Lombard
Member

Howdy, Luke: Interesting test!! It got me to thinking….which is dangerous in and of itself. But, I’m wondering if manufacturers of the fluorocarbon lines wouldn’t be required to do some field testing before marketing. At face value, your tests indicate manufacture and marketing was based solely on empirical models i.e. computer generated graphs, tolerances and stuff. Hard to believe Berkley, et.al. would proceed to production without field testing and comparisons. That said, IF they did field test the product those results would be hermetically sealed somewhere, guarded 25/7 by ninjas and samurai swordsmen. So, no way to verify anything without losing and appendage of some variety.

My thought is this. “Fish-on” status of any line will cause it to immediately stretch a little, i.e. weight of the fish, snag, rock, ear, chin, hand, etc. against the angler reflex setting the hook. Fish-on is a very different environment than a dry test, with dry sandpaper. (Next test: introduce water while you’re moving the dowel/sandpaper and add more weight and longer lengths). So, I’m wondering about the response of fluorocarbon vs nylon in that fraction of a second where abrasion is introduced under substantial tension. While you had the lines equally weighted, was it enough weight (and lubrication) to mimic the pull and sharp teeth/gills/jaw/skull of a desperate fish. In other words, there could be a threshold of abrasion-under-tension where fluorocarbon holds up better than its thinner counter-part. I’m visualizing a comparison between say, a 4-pound mono and a 20-pound mono. When a huge snot-rocket hits that 4-pound line it’s going to stretch faster and break sooner than the 20-pound mono (both without leaders). As a line stretches it becomes thinner and more prone to defeat with the introduction of teeth and other obstacles. It’s possible that fluorocarbon shines under harsher circumstances in a wet environment under stress.

I really do NOT want to believe I’ve wasted all that money over the years. . . HA!@LOL

Thanks for reading this far. Enjoyed the test and certainly produced food for thought. I’ll remember it for sure.

Rich
Member

Please run a test on Power Pro 20 lb braided line. I switched all poles to braided 20 lb and 30 lb line four years ago.

George Bischoff
Member

Hi: what I heard, and why I have been trying fluorocarbon, is that its refractive index makes it harder to see in the water. Also, especially as a fly leader with sinking flies, it sinks faster than nylon monofilament. These attributes are reasonable…never heard that it was a tougher/more durable material. Honestly, if I catch a decent fish, I have no issues with tying a fresh section of leader on…better than losing a fish. I did that for years when freshwater fishing for bass, etc., especially as most of the time I used 4, 6, 8 or 10 pound lines. Retying is a norm.

James Cheyne
Member

Luke, just thought of maybe a more realistic test that more closely relates to this discussion. Improvise a device similar to this one in which you can utilize rocks, wood, and plants. I am already thinking of a way to design this type of set up. It would be interesting to see how these lines hold up to the underwater structure we all encounter while pursuing our passion.

James Cheyne
Member

Sometimes the classics are better then the high tech. Not that there isn’t a case for flouro line, there is, however this proves that sometimes the old stand by is just a better overall value in the end. Thanks for another good demonstration.

Mac Jank
Member

Can you run the same test with 20 pound Berkley Trilene Big Game Clear mono? It is what I have used exclusively for my leader on my inshore rods both spinning and baitcasting with 20 pound Sufix832 or Diawa J-Braid.

Chillers Chillers
Member

Hi Mac, That’s pretty much what I use over here in Ireland for our (Sea) Bass