Fluoro Line Visibility in Question

Paul (Brummie) Williams · Jun 13, 2008

OK....i have done it every year for the last 5 at least!

Put floro in my fish tank to see if it disapears! NO IT DON'T!

I have tried it.....but i DO NOT think those who catch on it do so because it is invisible to fish, i have tried a few brands now and i can easily see it in water.......if i can the fish can!

Sorry, but i'm convinved if it gives you the edge it aint because it disapears!!! so is it just another "confidence" thing or does it have other properties/

Oh.....and it's the most unreliable line i have ever used!!

Fred Bonney · Jun 13, 2008

I use it all the time, andhad my best season last year.

Including a light braking strain for my stillwater float fishing hooklink!

"if i can the fish can!" Are you sure Paul, can they see the same things we can?

Wolfman Woody · Jun 13, 2008

<blockquote class=quoteheader>Paul (Brummie) Williams wrote (see)</blockquote><blockquote class=quote>

Put floro in my fish tank to see if it disapears! NO IT DON'T!</blockquote>

Ah, but maybe the brands you've bought so far are ripping you off with inferior products!

Backing up Fred's comment, the fish aren't in a tank and the line isn't lit with a fluorescent tube. It's sunlight and maybe there's the difference.

Wolfman Woody · Jun 13, 2008

Have you tried Incognito yet?

Wobbly Face (As Per Ed) · Jun 13, 2008

Last season I switched and experimented with mono and Fluoro. No difference in catch rate at all between both. Granted, fluoro is thicker in diameter per breaking strain, but sometimes the stiffer properties are an advantage.

Fred Bonney · Jun 13, 2008

or, ESP Ghost?

Ric Elwin · Jun 14, 2008

Does anyone believe that fish see our line, associate it with danger,so don't take our bait?

My theory is that if the bait behaves unnaturally fish may be alarmed. Then, as they say in Manchester, they 'do one'.

Maybe because the hook is too heavy for the bait in question, or the line is too stiff, so things don't seem natural.

I'm pretty convinced that any fish will take a bait it wants to eat on a hook of any size,attached to line of any thickness or clarity or otherwise, provided thatwhen it picks the bait up, all feels well.

I used to catch many Roach on big lumps of luncheon meat on 10lb line and size 2 hook (aimed for Carp), while 90% of the lake would have sworn on their relatives lives that you couldn't catch on there unless you used a size 22 to 1lb line

steve smith · Jun 14, 2008

Fluoro isnt magic, its probably less visible to fish at best, it wasnt developed for what we commonly use it for, it was developed for trout fishing and theyre looking skywards when they take the fly so they arent looking at fluoro against the bottom.

I think its stiffness gives it anti eject properties and this is more to do with its success than invisibility, i dont use it much now ive found a mono which is more user friendly and very reliable[ Memorex] my catch rate hasnt fallen at all, best of all you get 75m for less than 3 quid.

Hooklengths are a confidence thing in my opinion, when i suspected barbel which had been pressured a lot had learned not to take 14mm pellets, i fed 8mm pellets and used a single 8mm on the hook, even on 12lb mono i caught roach[and a few barbel]not loads but enough to stop me using single 8 mm pellets on the hook.

Chris Bettis · Jun 14, 2008

Maybe the fish can see it, maybe they cannot.

What they will see is the shadow caused by any line and they can feel any line and both do not induce takes neither does a bait acting in a strange way, and that can be caused by the hook being too heavy.

I think we must all be very aware of the tackle companies efforts to make money from us and keep in mind that a lot (not all) of tackle is to catch us, the anglers, and not to help catch fish.

In doubt look at the present carp bait situation. In practice sweetcorn will outfish any bait and never seems to blow out, neither do maggots. Read Kevin Maddox book 'Carp Fever' and see what he has to say about bait being the least important factor in catching fish.

Fish location, not making loads of noise, keeping out of sight etc are far more important than the type of line you use..

Paul (Brummie) Williams · Jun 14, 2008

I can still see no real reason given by the lads who rate fluro....other than they think it works for them.

Yes Woody.......i have tried lots of makesin the tank, under lights and also in the pond out side.........i can see em!!

My point is that IF it outfishes (as some seem to think) other hooklinks, it may be other properties that give it an edge...eg, stiffness, slippyness etc, but certainly not it's vanishing trick?

Ric.....yes, i do believe that fish can learn to associate line with danger......not perhaps the line so much as the unnatural effects it can create,tho i'm convinced they know the line is there .....including tight lines from rod to lead passing thru the water in bright conditions.

I still believe fluro is as visible as any other line....perhaps more at times under certain light conditions.

I admit that the newer "generations" of fluro are more reliable than earlier ones........but it's about time the trade told us exactly what we are paying for.

Philip · Jun 14, 2008

Hi Paul, I reached a very similar conclusion after dropping a number of brands in the margins and I could also see them. I also hated the fact they were so stiff and everything sat very unnaturally and as you point out in terms of reliability they are truly awful…its like one tiny kink or nick and it breaks, often anywhere along its length.

Maybe people who move onto it & experience a better catch rate are seeing that because as someone else pointed out for, a while at least, – its different…like using a stiff link if everyone else is using braid…the fish don’t know how to deal with it. People were raving about it as the best material for surface fishing but I still think multistrand beats it by a mile there.

I know quite a few lure anglers are using it for fish like Zander and Perch and they seem to swear its lessvisablewhenviewed agaisnt the sky from below like in the trout exampleso maybe there is something in that...mind you I also seem to remember it was Graham in the past I think who suggested even then he would take the shine off it with a fine wire wool as it was the reflection that scared the fish...

Cakey · Jun 14, 2008

I still believe Carp spook on what they cant see .........not what they can see

Windy · Jun 14, 2008

<blockquote class=quoteheader>steve smith wrote (see)</blockquote><blockquote class=quote>

Fluoro isnt magic, its probably less visible to fish at best, it wasnt developed for what we commonly use it for, it was developed for trout fishing.... </blockquote>

Ummmm.... no, not so.

'twas developed by the Japanese for long line deep sea fishing, mainly for Tuna etc. and for species where the visibility of big thick line is definitely an issue. Hence its match to the refractive index of water.

A lot less important for lines of 5 lbs thickness and under.

JimmyFloyd · Jun 14, 2008

I switched to Krystonite three years ago and I really rate it - but I think its effectivenessdepends on the conditions. Rivers and lakes have a varying degree of particles suspended in the water dependent on the usual factors of sediment and lighting levels. I reckon this is a big factor.

I regularly stalk carp in the margins of a local lake and have had different reactions to krystonite from the same fish in the same swim on different days. These are very cautious fish on a wellfished venue.On a summers evening without direct sunlight in the swim I have watched carp swim straight into my slackmain line without evening noticing - and then on other days I have watched the same fish in the same swimspot the line in direct sunlight and spook. It was almost certain that I hadn't been spotted as I took the usual precautions.

On a bright sunny day with clear water I don't think there's a product on the market that's invisible - but under overcast conditions I definitely rate flouro carbon and flouro coated main lines. Mind you my best fishing buddy swears by a line that looksbright yellow and he's adamantit's invisible to the fish - he certainly catches his fair share of whackers on it too.

In the end I suppose if you've got confidence in something and it works for you then use it.

Avon Aquatics - Ryan · Jun 14, 2008

If you look at most modern fluorocarbon lines, they don't claim to be invisible underwater,

anyway, a certain line (berkley vanish) claims to vanish under water however, this does not mean it will go colourless, it just means it blends in - buy some camouflage gear (Shimano tribal for instance) and some would say wearing it, it is invisible against trees bushes etc in the background. See what I mean.

Ryan

steve smith · Jun 14, 2008

Windy i stand corrected, ive always beleived fluoro was developed for trout, both species[tuna, trout] will still be looking at the line from below when hooked most of the time though.

I still like fluoro and have landed loads of fish on it, but i think anglers are to obsessed with its invisibility.

slime monster · Jun 14, 2008

<blockquote class=quoteheader>Ric Elwin wrote (see)</blockquote><blockquote class=quote>

Does anyone believe that fish see our line, associate it with danger,so don't take our bait?

My theory is that if the bait behaves unnaturally fish may be alarmed. Then, as they say in Manchester, they 'do one'.

Maybe because the hook is too heavy for the bait in question, or the line is too stiff, so things don't seem natural.

I'm pretty convinced that any fish will take a bait it wants to eat on a hook of any size,attached to line of any thickness or clarity or otherwise, provided thatwhen it picks the bait up, all feels well.

I used to catch many Roach on big lumps of luncheon meat on 10lb line and size 2 hook (aimed for Carp), while 90% of the lake would have sworn on their relatives lives that you couldn't catch on there unless you used a size 22 to 1lb line</blockquote>
at last common sense

Mithrandir · Jun 14, 2008

<blockquote class=quoteheader>Paul (Brummie) Williams wrote (see)</blockquote><blockquote class=quote>.....

Put floro in my fish tank to see if it disapears! NO IT DON'T!.......</blockquote>

Maybe you should stop fishing in your tank and get out on the water.

You may find that light refraction from side illuminating fluoro will change its visibility.

Line is designed to be used where light from above is all you get, and as fluoro and water have the same refractive index it is " invisible".

Have you tried a piece of fluoro and a piece of normal line side by side in the tank and compared them??

slime monster · Jun 14, 2008

i have said it before and i,ll say it again even a blind fish is aware off line in its vicinity

in heavily couloured water you do not notice a significant increase in line bites

they know its there .....do they know what it is ? of course not or we would be wasting our time going fishing .

Fluoro Line Visibility in Question

Paul (Brummie) Williams

Guest

Fred Bonney

Guest

Wolfman Woody

Guest

Wolfman Woody

Guest

Wobbly Face (As Per Ed)

Well-known member

Fred Bonney

Guest

Ric Elwin

Well-known member

steve smith

New member

Chris Bettis

New member

Paul (Brummie) Williams

Guest

Philip

Well-known member

Cakey

Guest

Windy

Well-known member

JimmyFloyd

New member

Avon Aquatics - Ryan

New member

steve smith

New member

slime monster

Senior Member

Mithrandir

Well-known member

slime monster

Senior Member