Pier and Surf Forum banner
1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Moderator
Joined
·
3,775 Posts
I havnt seen one. I buy Berkley Vanish in the 1/4pound spool for flounder fishing and throwing metal leaders. I think the "Leader" material is a bit stiffer though, the reason I dont use it for leader in smaller diameters.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
328 Posts
Invisable in water

Floro is supposed to vanish in the water. As well it seems to be more abrasion resistant than mono. If ya change out your leaders regularly it shouldn't make a difference, 'cept for price. Then ya figure in the rest of your gear what's another few bucks. Just my .02
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21 Posts
leader material is usually stiffer than 'line'. Its basicly marketing. A cheap line will be just as stiff as an expensive leader of the same test.
I've always bought cheap mono to use as leader for that reason, and I'm pretty sure the same thing applies to flouro.

If you can feel the line in the store that is best... just open up a package and don't tell anyone :) , find whatever you think you can work with, and nevermind the name brand, go with whatever is cheapest, its all flouro...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
568 Posts
I saved this article from a couple years ago.

Fluorocarbon fishing lines are based on a different formula than fluorocarbon leaders that makes them conducive for use on reels. Hence, they are suppler and less prone to memory, characteristics similar to a nylon monofilament. A disadvantage of pure fluorocarbon is its stiffness and memory, which make it impractical to use as a primary fishing line. It simply won’t handle or cast as well as a nylon monofilament or fluorocarbon fishing line. On the other hand, because fluorocarbon fishing lines are softer and more flexible than pure-fluorocarbon leader material, they’re not as durable
As a leader material, pure fluorocarbon offers several advantages over nylon monofilament. Manufactured from extruded polyvinylidene fluoride, fluorocarbon’s number-one selling point is that its refractive index — the degree to which light bends, or refracts, as it passes through a substance — is very similar to that of water. That makes it more difficult for fish to see. For example, some fluorocarbon formulae have a refractive index as low as 1.42, with water registering around 1.3. By comparison, the refractive index of nylon monofilament is around 1.52.
Also, depending upon the brand, fluorocarbon has a diameter that’s generally smaller than that of nylon mono of the same breaking strength, which makes it less noticeable. In addition to low visibility, fluorocarbon has very little stretch and a hard, smooth finish that is extremely abrasion resistant. Less stretch means more sensitivity, which allows you to detect subtle bites and “feel” the performance of baits or lures, including any contact they make with structure or the bottom. Low stretch also promotes solid hook-sets. And fluorocarbon’s tough finish stands up better to the abuse of structure and the raspy jaws and scales of certain game fish.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
774 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
BentHook's info pretty much says it all, there is a difference but the cost between the two is still not justified, but then again I'm cheap or thrifty??, thanks for all the replys...
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
328 Posts
Frugal

Might be a better word. When I spool my tricked out Abu to put on my new custom rod (see rod building forum) do you think I'm gonna go low end on the line? No way. May not be worth it but if ya want the best ya gotta pay. May not be worth it but if I've got over 7 bills invested I'm going with the "best" I can find. Jackman1950 AKA Philly Jack Yeah, I know I'm a darn fool but to each their own.
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top