Fine hooklink material

[S-Kippy]

Reflo seems to be winning it. As I said I've used it in higher diameters and it was pretty good so maybe the finer diameters will be OK as well. I fancy trying Stroft too......I've used that when trouting and was quite impressed until I discovered Incognito.

My only slight reservation with Reflo is the diameters which were a bit dodgy and I always thought it looked thicker than it claimed to be. Hopefully this new Precision stuff will be more accurate.

 

[Graham Elliott 1]

Silstar match Team.
Does it for me.

 

[tigger]

Silstar match Team.
Does it for me.

Snap...me too!

 

[S-Kippy]

Snap...me too!

Snap ? What sort of a recommendation is that ?

 

[Richox12]

Lines are ALL pre-stretched - that's how they are made in the first place. People seem to get really 'hung up' on this 'Hi-Tech' 'Pre-stretched' terminology. Just get some 0.10mm and place some No 10 shot along a short length about 2mm apart. Place 10. Then stretch it and watch the shot move away and the gaps get a lot bigger. Apart from something like PET all nylons we use do this.

The other thing is it's not a huge help if your thin hooklength is radically thinner than your mainline as the mainline won't help to absorb anything as it'll be too thick to stretch itself before the hooklength breaks. Mind you, you have a flexible rod and your arm to use as well.

 

[tigger]

Lines are ALL pre-stretched - that's how they are made in the first place. People seem to get really 'hung up' on this 'Hi-Tech' 'Pre-stretched' terminology. Just get some 0.10mm and place some No 10 shot along a short length about 2mm apart. Place 10. Then stretch it and watch the shot move away and the gaps get a lot bigger. Apart from something like PET all nylons we use do this.

The other thing is it's not a huge help if your thin hooklength is radically thinner than your mainline as the mainline won't help to absorb anything as it'll be too thick to stretch itself before the hooklength breaks. Mind you, you have a flexible rod and your arm to use as well.

Apparently mono designed to be used for hooklengths has been stretched more than standard mono so it has less stretch causing it to crack off easier. Obviously a thinner diameter mono won't have so much stretch anyhow as there's lees of it to stretch.

Regarding the mainline to hooklength, you just need to use your common sense and use a mainline with a good amount of stretch left in it and don't use to fine a hooklength to a higher B/S mainline. I tend to use the same strength hooklength (or higher even) to the mainline I use...so a 6lb or above hooklength to a 6lb mainline. I've not yet seen a similarly rated mainline snap before the low daimeter mono. I will sometimes use a 4lb bottom to a 6lb mainline knowing that my mainline has a good stretch so combined with my rod and my arm it gives plenty cushioning for the bottom.

 

[sam vimes]

Lines are ALL pre-stretched - that's how they are made in the first place.

I'd agree that all mono is extruded to manufacture it. However, I understand that this is not what pre-stretching refers to. I've been lead to believe that some monos are stretched after the initial extrusion has taken place. The degree of stretch applied can vary. This pre-stretching changes the characteristics of the mono concerned considerably, hence threads like these.

I'd suggest that anything that's known to be stretchy, or anything that seems quite thick for its stated breaking strain, is likely to have had no, or little, pre-stretching. Maxima is a fine example, though one slightly skewed by significant under-rating. It stretches an awful lot, especially when compared to many more modern lines, and would be considered fairly thick even if its stated breaking strain was closer to reality.

 

[S-Kippy]

And another thing !

A line that might be suitable for pole rigs where you have the cushioning effect of elastic might not be so accommodating when you are trotting where you are striking bites as opposed to lifting gently into them.

I've been digging through my box and found a few that deserve another go....and I've bought another couple of brands based on advice from here. I'll give them all a go and see how I get on. Like I said I am spectacularly fussy about line and that [at least in part] is due to foolishly falling for the marketing of some brands over the years.

The worst I ever tried [Sensor excepted] was Super Shinobi which was utter pants and not cheap.

 

[Richox12]

Apparently mono designed to be used for hooklengths has been stretched more than standard mono so it has less stretch causing it to crack off easier.

But, in my experience, they ALL stretch - a lot. I have yet to find and measure any which didn't stretch something like 25% to point of break. The differences are tiny. You'll crack-off if you strike too hard with a rod that's too stiff - especially close in. I cannot remember the last time I was EVER broken on a river by a fish on Feeder or Waggler or Stick or Avon. I've been bitten off by a chub (my own fault -grrr) but not snapped because of the line being 'pre-stretched'.

---------- Post added at 12:32 ---------- Previous post was at 12:28 ----------

I'd agree that all mono is extruded to manufacture it. However, I understand that this is not what pre-stretching refers to. I've been lead to believe that some monos are stretched after the initial extrusion has taken place. The degree of stretch applied can vary. This pre-stretching changes the characteristics of the mono concerned considerably, hence threads like these.

I'd suggest that anything that's known to be stretchy, or anything that seems quite thick for its stated breaking strain, is likely to have had no, or little, pre-stretching. Maxima is a fine example, though one slightly skewed by significant under-rating. It stretches an awful lot, especially when compared to many more modern lines, and would be considered fairly thick even if its stated breaking strain was closer to reality.

Correct. But nylon mono (and especially materials like PU) needs to be stretched post extrusion to align the molecules and give it some strength. Even after this is still stretches. A lot. Maxima of today does not seem to be the same nylon as Maxima of old. Current Maxima stretcheeeeeeeeeeeees a lot. Very different to what it was. So called Hi-Tech monos have been around for 30 years in the UK alone.They are not HI-Tech any more.

---------- Post added at 12:36 ---------- Previous post was at 12:32 ----------

I'd agree that all mono is extruded to manufacture it. However, I understand that this is not what pre-stretching refers to. I've been lead to believe that some monos are stretched after the initial extrusion has taken place. The degree of stretch applied can vary. This pre-stretching changes the characteristics of the mono concerned considerably, hence threads like these.

I'd suggest that anything that's known to be stretchy, or anything that seems quite thick for its stated breaking strain, is likely to have had no, or little, pre-stretching. Maxima is a fine example, though one slightly skewed by significant under-rating. It stretches an awful lot, especially when compared to many more modern lines, and would be considered fairly thick even if its stated breaking strain was closer to reality.

Correct. But nylon mono (and especially materials like PU) needs to be stretched post extrusion to align the molecules and give it some strength. Even after this is still stretches. A lot. Maxima of today does not seem to be the same nylon as Maxima of old. Current Maxima stretcheeeeeeeeeeeees a lot. Very different to what it was. So called Hi-Tech monos have been around for 30 years in the UK alone.They are not HI-Tech any more.

 

[tigger]

But, in my experience, they ALL stretch - a lot. I have yet to find and measure any which didn't stretch something like 25% to point of break. The differences are tiny. You'll crack-off if you strike too hard with a rod that's too stiff - especially close in. I cannot remember the last time I was EVER broken on a river by a fish on Feeder or Waggler or Stick or Avon. I've been bitten off by a chub (my own fault -grrr) but not snapped because of the line being 'pre-stretched'.

---------- Post added at 12:32 ---------- Previous post was at 12:28 ----------

I think being bitten off by chub is pretty much a old wives tale. The razor sharp ferangles ain't quite right lol. I've shoved my finger down loads of their gobs purposly trying to get bitten and i've felt them putting pressure on but that's it lol. I would imagine the chub grated your line close to it's mouth "as they do", often leaving the hook in an obect.

 

[Richox12]

Possibly just common angling terminology even with a hooklength which is fraction of it's length and very rough over a few cm (2cm or 3cm) - nowhere near any snags but in open water (I said it was my own fault !!).

 

[rayner]

Maxima of today does not seem to be the same nylon as Maxima of old. Current Maxima stretcheeeeeeeeeeeees a lot. Very different to what it was. So called Hi-Tech monos have been around for 30 years in the UK alone.They are not HI-Tech any more.

They are Hi Tech, probably not new but definitely a higher technology is used in there production than normal mono's.
Maxima as far as I'm concerned hasn't changed since I started using it at the end of the sixties. That's exactly why I still use it.

 

[trotter2]

I cant see any noticeable change with maxima I started using it in the 70s.
Personally I think its the same stuff like Bayer perlon.
For me that's a good think,if they changed it I would probably not use it again.
Don't try and fix something that's not broken.

 

[Richox12]

They are Hi Tech, probably not new but definitely a higher technology is used in there production than normal mono's.
Maxima as far as I'm concerned hasn't changed since I started using it at the end of the sixties. That's exactly why I still use it.

I started using Maxim in 1978 and I had to save a lot to buy it !! I used the old Aiken Bayer Perlon (small blue spools which every national winner swore he used !!!) as an alternative because it was cheaper and even used Shakespeare Omni. Back then the Maxima and Bayer differed only in colour (price obviously !!) and surface finish. Maxima was matt and Bayer gloss - hence the Bayer was better for float work and the Maxima grated through the rod guides (hard chrome, then Seymo and even Fuji). Now Maxima just keeps stretching which it never did in my experience and Bayer never did either.

So many people keep referring to normal mono, std mono, hi-tech mono. They are all nylon monos. All extruded and all pre-stretched. And ALL still stretch just by different amounts - initially. Some seem to stretch more easily or readily than others but, being nylon, they all seem to eventually stretch to something like 25%/30% at break - except Maxima which, last time I checked, was closer to 35%.

 

[rayner]

I started using Maxim in 1978 and I had to save a lot to buy it !! I used the old Aiken Bayer Perlon (small blue spools which every national winner swore he used !!!) as an alternative because it was cheaper and even used Shakespeare Omni. Back then the Maxima and Bayer differed only in colour (price obviously !!) and surface finish. Maxima was matt and Bayer gloss - hence the Bayer was better for float work and the Maxima grated through the rod guides (hard chrome, then Seymo and even Fuji). Now Maxima just keeps stretching which it never did in my experience and Bayer never did either.

So many people keep referring to normal mono, std mono, hi-tech mono. They are all nylon monos. All extruded and all pre-stretched. And ALL still stretch just by different amounts - initially. Some seem to stretch more easily or readily than others but, being nylon, they all seem to eventually stretch to something like 25%/30% at break - except Maxima which, last time I checked, was closer to 35%.

We will have to disagree with our findings.
Just one point.
If there are no Hi Tech lines now, then how does what I call an Hi Tech come out as a much thinner with a higher braking strain than bog standard mono. Could that be because pre stretched lines are what they say they are.

 

[Richox12]

We will have to disagree with our findings.
Just one point.
If there are no Hi Tech lines now, then how does what I call an Hi Tech come out as a much thinner with a higher braking strain than bog standard mono. Could that be because pre stretched lines are what they say they are.

I think it's just that we have carried on using the term Hi-Tech well after it was true and relevant. Back in the day when lines (probably except Platil Strong which, for my money, was THE first 'Hi-Tech' line) were base nylon (just grade 6 I think - and remember that Bayer were making nylon for furniture not fishing but we just accepted what was available) and all were, pretty much and on face value, roughly the same B/S to diameter it was seen as 'revolutionary' when someone made a line which was different to the norm being noticeably stronger per any given diameter. Then others followed suit right up to today when you can get all sorts and stronger thin lines are normal.