Fluorocarbon lines - how useful are they for float fishing?

Fluorocarbon monofilament lines are now well established in many branches of angling, notably fly fishing, and as hooklengths for carp fishing.

For the more technical minded amongst us, perhaps a few words on terminology and the properties of the stuff might not come amiss at this stage.

The fluorocarbon used is PVDF - Polyvinylidene fluoride - which is only one of a series of polymers which are collectively termed "fluoropolymers". PTFE (Teflon) is another of this group of plastics.

PVDF has a number of advantages when it comes to it's use as a fishing line.

1: It does not degrade in the presence of water or UV light, which is one of the chief disadvantages of nylon.

2: It is much heavier than nylon and as a result sinks quickly and lays straight on the bottom. These are advantages which can be exploited in carp fishing.

3: It is less visible in water! This is certainly the biggest advantage of the lot. One has only to try a few experiments with good quality 100% PVDF and this can easily be demonstrated. The refractive index of water is 1.33. The average refractive index of most nylons and co-polymers used for fishing lines is 1.57. The refractive index of PVDF is 1.42.

I repeat - good quality PVDF!!!

Unfortunately there are lots of lines claiming to be 100% fluorocarbon which are not. If you are now going to ask me which fluorocarbons I should not buy, forget it. I will tell you which you should buy of course. For general work I use "Kryston Incognito" and for fine work: "Scierra C-Thru". Both have been tested for many years by a number of extremely competent coarse and game anglers.

In fly fishing, it is a decided advantage if the leader and tippet material are hard for the fish to see. It is also important that the leader material sink quickly, especially when you are using nymphs and dry flies.

I have lost count of the number of times I have seen fish in clear rivers which are spooked by the hooklength, especially when float fishing. I have noticed this particularly on the River Leam and Hampshire Avon. A change to fluorocarbon and bingo, we are back in business again.

A very competent match angling friend of mine changed to fluorocarbon hook lengths and began winning everything he entered. He was particularly successful on the tidal Trent. I don't need to convince myself any more.

So there you have it. A fluorocarbon hook length will help you catch more fish, expecially if used hanging vertically in the water as is done when float fishing.

An now the downside.

Fluorocarbon will not tolerate some of the knots which we have found to be suitable for nylon.

Because it will not degrade, it is for ever, so do not leave any of the stuff laying around in the wild.

Ron, I'm guessing you fully understood my post on the spades V's eyed hooks thread then, eh??

Its horses for courses really, life is full of compromises. Do you want invisibility or perfect presentation?

Personally when trotting on rivers, most of the time its for grayling, rivers Wey and Itchen being my preferred choices and the swims even when glides are found, tend to be very boily and turbulent in nature as such I opt for fine supple nylon lines like Power Reflo.

But like I said at the start, "horses for courses"; if I were to fish a smooth glide like found on slower deeper rivers like the Wensum or Great Ouse but which still have good water clarity then I can see a place for fluoro hook links.

I have not used Fluro' line , from my understanding the diameter of the line to a given BS does not stack up compared to quality High tech hook lengths,maybe someone can confirm this .

slime monster said:

I have not used Fluro' line , from my understanding the diameter of the line to a given BS does not stack up compared to quality High tech hook lengths,maybe someone can confirm this .

Click to expand...

npo they don't but if you think it's line diameter of fluoro that's the important factor you've missed the point entirely.

i've fished rods with identical set ups on numerous occasions with the exception that the hooklengths are fluoro on one and mono on the other,

the fluoro rod has always out caught mono by more than 3 to one.

as for the comment about fluoro mainlines acting as an optical fiber, due to the physics of light transmission in flouro and nylon then it is entirely possible that fluoro could do this. absobtivity of nylon is far higher than that of fluoro at normal visible wavelengths.

captain carrott said:

npo they don't but if you think it's line diameter of fluoro that's the important factor you've missed the point entirely.

Click to expand...

That would depend entirely on what you where fishing for Roach on the drop for example

slime monster said:

That would depend entirely on what you where fishing for Roach on the drop for example

Click to expand...

yep you've missed it matey think about compensation for relative densities with shotting patterns, not that the relative densities are detectable at such low volumes.

and you're not going to notice any difference in stiffness in a 1lb bottom made from either material

I shall agree to disagree on this one

Ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffight

slime monster said:

I shall agree to disagree on this one

Click to expand...

all i can suggest then is try it, you will soon see the light

"Fluorocarbon lines - how useful are they for float fishing?"

Pretty useless really, I've yet to find one that floats.

Fluoro hooklengths on the other hand might have their uses but when I'm float fishing, specifically trotting on rivers with pace, I prefer a variety of mono equivalents.

I've used Kryston Incognito for the past two years or so, mainly as hooklength material when fishing for barbel and chub. I have great confidence in it and its my hooklength of choice in many different scenarios.

I've also used it for the last 12 months as a leader when flyfishing. Specifically for stalking big double figure trout at Avington. I've caught plenty whilst using it.

But, whilst I am very comfortable and confident in its use, I remain unconvinced of the "invisbility" factor, or at least the claims. I can't see it when its in water but I've yet to find a fish that will positively tell me "I can't see it either"!

I've seen, at very close quarters, just how many fish are spooked by it. I've watched "calm" trout stop dead, veer away, exit stage left when they've approached the leader. Even with a very long leader stationery in the water (sinking but not retrieved - the fly/bug is well away from them, as is the fly line).

Whilst stalking it is common to find these trout patrolling right in the margins less than a rod length out. A good tactic is to place the fly/bug on the bottom in a position to intercept the fish. The fluoro is the only thing in the water. I've seen trout stop or bolt when they've approached the area.

Strangely, these same trout don't often get spooked if by chance they feel the fluoro/nylon, or even the fly/bug, rub against them. Avington is stuffed full of luxuriant weed and the bigger fish tend to spend an lot of time in amongst it.

Despite all that and still using nylon leaders occassionally, Incognito fluoro is my favourite choice of leader material.

Cakey said:

Ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffight

Click to expand...

an you stop stirring when people are trying to have a civilised conversation

captain carrott said:

i've fished rods with identical set ups on numerous occasions with the exception that the hooklengths are fluoro on one and mono on the other

Click to expand...

Watch your terminology chaps.

Most fluorocarbon fishing lines are monofilament too.

"Mono" short for monofilament means any single polymer filament produced by extrusion.

In nature a spider produces monofilament of a very special kind. In the spinning gland the liquid is forced under pressure through a tiny orifice termed a spinneret. When the liquid meets the atmosphere, it solidifies and becomes monofilament.

It's the same thing almost exactly when industrial monofilaments are extruded. Although some monofilaments are extruded under vacuum, not pressure. They are also extruded under high temperature and when they exit the spinneret, the polymer cools, solidifies, and becomes a single filament.

yes boss .......................

Ron The Hat Clay said:

Watch your terminology chaps.

Most fluorocarbon fishing lines are monofilament too.

"Mono" short for monofilament means any single polymer filament produced by extrusion.

In nature a spider produces monofilament of a very special kind. In the spinning gland the liquid is forced under pressure through a tiny orifice termed a spinneret.

Its' the same thing almost exactly when monofilaments are extruded. Although some monofilaments are extruded under vacuum, not pressure.

Click to expand...

that level of pedantry really isn't necessary ron, it is widely accepted that mono will generally refer to nylon monofilament. where as fluoro would refer to a pvdf monofilament unless of course it is specifically referred to as a fluoro carbon braid, i.e. formed of multiple strands woven or fused together.

Whatever you do do not get berkley vanish .

i don't know why it is but the best ones seem to be aimed at fly leaders for some reason.

apart from some drennan ones for pole fishing, which have served me well. though they can have a tendency to pigtail of you're not very careful when tying the hook on particularly if you put too mnay turns on the shank

As Ron said, the knotting requirements for fluoro are a bit different. I took a lot of convincing that a three turn half bloodknot (no tuck) would be a secure way of attaching my fly.

It was and is. I've had trout to almost 19lbs and barbel to 12lbs+. I'm now convinced and confident!

I did have a conversation with Dave Chilton about the knotting requirements but I can't recall the mechanics too well - the beer might have had something to do with it!

captain carrott said:

that level of pedantry really isn't necessary ron, it is widely accepted that mono will generally refer to nylon monofilament. where as fluoro would

Click to expand...

It's got nothing to do with being pedantic. It's got a hell of a lot to do with being technically accurate, something that was rammed into me by numerous lecturers in the past.

Fluorocarbon has a major negative property in that in bright sunlight it will transmit light along it's length from the surface of the water, down into the water, therefore spooking fish. For float fishing it should only be used as a hooklength beneith the water, not as a main line. Doing so would not only scare fish, it would also be frightfully expensive.

ron technical accuracy and the general everyday english language are not good bedfellows.

so i say again that level of pedantry is not necessary, using the normal everyday observed norms for terminology is perfectly acceptable and quite adequately conveys the information required.

or are you suggesting that every one should be using the words automobile or for preference horseless carriage powered by an internal combustion engine and omnibus in general everyday conversation.

i can't find anything about light transmission in pvdf monofilaments or a value for it's absorbtivity to be able to compare it with that of water though so whether it does actually channel light i couldn't comment.

common sense would suggets it would but common sense rearely applies to polymers when considering properties in transverse and longitudinal directions.

Ron The Hat Clay said:

Fluorocarbon has a major negative property in that in bright sunlight it will transmit light along it's length from the surface of the water

Click to expand...

Absolute cobblers Ron! For line to work as a fibre optic the light has to be shining down the line, entering through a smooth 90 degree cut in one end of it.

And, while we're at it, I'm not convinced that it's any less visible than clear standard nylon (check this in a glass of water if you don't beleive me). All this gumph about the same refractive index as water is typical fishing claptrap/hype. Line has a highly curved surface so only a very small proportion of any light hits that surface perpendicularly. Also the surface of any line is pretty rough from an optical viewpoint.

If we are really getting improved results from fluoro is it really because of its optical properties or is it because it's clear (but no more so than a good clear nylon) an it is heavier than nylon and so hugs the bottom better (or sinks better).