monofilament vs. flourocarbon

[fishcast]

The topic on favorite brands of mono and flouro has sparked some more questions that are kinda different than that threads focus...

I know various brands differ, but as a general rule... Why SPECIFICALLY IN YOUR OWN PERSONAL TIME TESTED EXPERIENCE would you chose flourocarbon over monofilament for certain applications???

A lot of people throw around a lot of heavily advertised buzz words with flourocarbon (some of which I am sure is true), but what have YOU really found...

Using a couple different brands of flourocarbon about 4-5 years ago I experienced numerous times with break offs related to poor shock absorption.

During some backyard experimentation I found that the whole lack of stretch (compared to mono) was kinda true... It seemed to stretch similiarly to trilene xt, for example, but the weird thing (that made me think it was kinda sketch) is that the flourocarbon did not return to its original length after being stretched in the fashion that xt did....weird. After a good stretch i had more length of flourocarbon than when I started haha. Just seems like it'd be inconsistent on the water...

When comparing break strenghts (backyard setup with a weight scale) the 8lb test line flourocarbons both broke under their rating, and the trilene xt always broke over its rating like it is supposed to. I was using a uni knot, and I don't believe either line broke at the knots ever.

Also, when the flourocarbon I had was abraded, it looked liked little filaments sticking out everwhere from the mainline, and they could almost get peeled like string cheese...

After all that I gave up on it for most all applications.

Let me know your experience, and why a person would pay more for it in certain applications!

[Deitz Dittrich]

For me, because it sinks.. and is much harder to see in water.

[Cecil]

Big thing for me is that it sinks also. Which means its more dense, which means it is a more direct line to your lure (no underwater bow in your line) and thusly more sensative. And you get more depth out of your cranks as well.

As for the stretch, mono actually has LESS strectch than flouro does. But, flouro does not have the elastic properties that mono has. It will return to the original state, but not as quickly or in the manner that mono does.

Flouro 4-5 years ago is not nearly as good as the flouro now. Especially if you are talking about a line like Vanish, 100% flouro is much better line.

The ONLY time I use mono is for topwaters or if I want my crankbaits to actually run shallower.

[mainbutter]

Fluoro seems "harder" to me. While it does certainly get nicked up and needs to be replaced at times, it's performed admirably as bite protection against pike and muskies at only 20-25lb test leader. In this regard for me, it's not mono vs fluoro, but steel leader vs fluoro. Zero pike or 'skis have broken me off on fluoro since I started using it in 2009.

Of course mono makes great bite protection as well at higher tests. I use 100lb test mono leader for saltwater fishing where I often tangle with <15lb sharks. In this situation I choose mono over fluoro because of cost. I haven't been bitten off on 20lb mono by esox, but I've never used it for leader for them either.

As mentioned already, fluoro sinks. I find it helps me fish unweighted wacky rigged senko-style lures a little faster if I'm working much of the water column all the way back to the boat.

[RK]

Hiya -

Lots of stuff here...

I use fluorocarbon for a lot of things, and sometimes the reason varies. Bottom line though, I use it because in some cases, it gets me more bites.

Fir applications like jigworms, I like it because it sinks, not so baits get deeper, but because it won't blow around on the surface on a windy day like mono does. I can fish a lighter head in more wind, and that can get me more bites.

I also like the sensitivity. It's a more dense material, and so transmits feel better. That's not a marketing claim - it's just physics. I can feel a slack line bite better on fluoro than I can on mono (and you can't feel a slack bite at all on braid). For bottom contact baits like jig and pig, Texas or Carolina rigging, drop shot, football heads, etc., I can feel what's on the bottom better, and feel pick-ups better. I fish more effectively, and that can get me more bites.

I use it for crankbaits in some cases because I can get a little more depth out of a bait with a larger diameter line. I can get a bait as deep - or nearly so - with 12# FC as I did with 10# mono. Makes it easier to snap baits out of weeds, or haul fish out of coontail without breaking off. I do think the sensitivity matters here too - I can feel bottom or cover contact, or bites, better with fluoro.

I do think the visibility matters too, although that's likely oversold on occasion. But, I fish very clear water a lot of the time, and every little bit helps, especially with slow-moving or finesse presentations where fish really get a long look. For reaction baits like jig and pig or cranks, I use it for other reasons, and reduced visibility is a minor bonus.

Abrasion resistance is a double-edged sword with FC, IMHO. Some brands may be more abrasion resistant, but when FC does get nicked up, it loses strength very rapidly compared to mono. Shock resistance is also different than mono. I pitch with FC a lot, and had to adjust my rod choice a little so I didn't blow up the FC on a hookset. I also had to find a better grade FC than I started out using. With FC, you very definitely get what you pay for.

There are things I don't use FC for. I use mono for topwaters, obviously. I also use it for spinnerbaits and buzzbaits and shallow cranks. Sensitivity, visibility and sink rate are non-issues, and I like the little additional stretch mono has. With hard hits sometimes at short range, the additional forgiveness is a plus, I think.

Cheers,

RK

[BTL]

I feel pretty similar to the OP.

I first tried fluorocarbon in 2001 and didn't like it. I caught a bunch of fish with it, but to me it handled like Shakespeare mono that had been sitting on a reel for 2 years.

Tried it on and off ever since then, in several different brands, and I come to the same conclusion every time I spool it up. I don't like the way it casts, and I get frustrated with the random breakoffs. The fact that it costs twice as much as mono seals the deal for me.

Currently I only use fluorocarbon for leader material in conjunction with braided line. Works nicely in the heavier tests, but when I use under 17lb or so I find I have a little trouble with breakoffs, especially if I'm fishing at close range.

[delmuts]

I'm a newbie to using flouro.( just started using it last fall) Found out using it as a leader made all the difference when walleye fishing with braids. Went from no bites to catching fish; plus not getting bit off very often. Was having problems with no feel using mono for jigs.( when my braid would freeze) Comparing the flouro to my XT in 6# i had alot more feel. As said. It has it's plus and minuses, but can be a very usefull tool. Have 14# on a baitcaster that i plan to use for jigs, and some cranks. Waiting for spring.

[Deitz Dittrich]

Quote:

Fir applications like jigworms, I like it because it sinks, not so baits get deeper, but because it won't blow around on the surface on a windy day like mono does. I can fish a lighter head in more wind, and that can get me more bites.

Yup.. what he said!!!

[Juan Grande]

I'm thinking of switching from mono to flouro this year. For those of you who use the higher quality stuff like Seaguar, what do you spend each year putting line on your rods?

[GFNER]

I use a 9' Vanish snell when fishing walleyes all the time but tried it on one of my spinning reels years ago and hated it. It was only 8# but seemed really stiff and liked to coil off my spool all the time, similar to putting too much line on.

[RK]

I'm thinking of switching from mono to flouro this year. For those of you who use the higher quality stuff like Seaguar, what do you spend each year putting line on your rods?

Like I said earlier in this thread, with Fluoro, you pretty much get what you pay for. Last season I tried a couple different kinds of they high end, premium lines and loved them. This year I bit the bullet, and decided to go that route with the rest of my reels too. I just made the order, and it wasn't pretty.

But...here's the thing. Fluoro lasts far longer than mono. As long as you don't get it nicked up or get a bad backlash that kinks it up, you can use it at least all season, and sometimes get more than a season out of it if it's not something you use constantly. I basically replace it when I've retied enough that the spool is under full. I use to replace my mono once a month, so when you figure the longevity in, the cost doesn't seem so bad. And - the higher grade line does last longer as well.

I also only put on 80 or so yards, so you can get at least a couple reels full from one spool, depending on how big the spool is.

It's a bit of a shock going from $7 a spool mono to $27 a spool fluoro, but to me it's still worth it.

RK

[Comit 2]

Belly (of the line ) up or belly down.

If I'm casting say a texas rig, I do not want my line comming up next to the rig where the fish could run into the line. I'll use Flourocarbon. If I'm casting a spoon and I want it to come up off the bottom when I pump the rod (pump and fall). I'll use a floating line like Mono. With Flourocarbon and the line sitting on or near the bottom the lure will stay on or near the bottom.

I do not use much mono it is to much like a bungy cord (bobber fishing only). I will check out the Nano this spring. If it slides through a slip bobber I will not have to use Mono at all.