fluorocarbon sceptic

Ok, anyone wanna buy a 250m spool of 20lb Berkley Vanish . . . . :oops:

Woops..... Sorry dude, If it makes you feel better I had to buy quite a few spools before I figured out it was rubbish through the range. :oops:

i used to be sceptical but when i began flfishing for mullet i had to use 3 lb co polymer mono to get any sort of a response...then i began using frog hair flouro and now get awa with 6lb and has had no ill effects on my catches

Frog hair is excellent, but very expensive. I use it for buzzer for Trout.

Kev

Well Mac,
I'll be using the Vanish and i'll report on how i get on over a period of time. . . .i may have gotten the only good spool that was made . .
:wink:

pete, i rememebr a report you wrote recently where the snoods were 8lb i think
and i was wondering how the hell does that not end up in a big tangle? fluorocarbon?

It was indeed John, you couldn't even contemplate using mono on long light snoods like that, asking for disaster!

really?:wink:

However, I have a spool of 38Lb Berkely stuff, its the stuff thats gold out of the water and clear under it.... Its fantastic stuff. I've used it for all sorts without any issues whatsoever over the past year or two

it's berkley transition. it's not bad!

The spool of vanish that I got was garbage as well, snapped so easily on the knot, even with there recommended knot.

I have 250 yard spools of pline, seem much superior to the vanish i have

i'm highly sceptical of the merits of so called fluorocarbon lines
is it really invisible in water? if so does it matter to sea fish?

Amazing! How did you get the hook to stand up on its own like that? :wink:

spanner in the works: fish see a different spectrum of light to us..
so what we see doesn't mean fish can, even though the fish can see things we cant, Uv being one.. :shock:

For one 'clear' object to disappear in another they should have the same refractive index (the degree the object refracts'/bends light). Drop a clear lens into a glass of water and we can notice it because of how lights behaves not because of the colour.

Obviously too the object should not refLECT a wavelength i.e. as Steve says UV, which is invisible to US but screams out to fish. But in this case it is us who can notice the line. ...........

Red will appear black at relatively shallow depths and I would guess at all depths to most fish as it is not a colour they would need to see as it red light doesn't get down too far where as UV does which is why we wear sun block while swimming........(sorry should I have put a yawn alert on this post? :wink: )

isnt that the whole theory behind fluorocarbon that its refractive index is close to that of water

theres an interesting article on fluorocarbon here
http://www.georgepoveromo.com/fluorocarbon.htm

The refractive index of saltwater is higher than that of freshwater, I wonder if that makes a difference?

was going to purchase a couple of spools for alround general-sea fishing
snoods and rig-bodies, snoods 30-35 lbs, rig-body 60lb, any suggestions
on the best line to buy,
regards steve.

Hi,

Frog Hair

Seaguar Carbon Pro

PLine

All very good brands

Liam

think its aload of crap myself , shoulda seen the stuff we used in the late seventies 30lb straight thru, never had any probs catchin cod , plaice, doggies, have a look at the longlining video for cod on this site :shock: :roll:

the late seventies

hmmm - late seventies - so many fish around then you could have walked to wales and not got ur feet wet :D :D :D :D :D

ahh the good old days, anyone see any time machines on ebay :?: :roll: :lol:

Is there any difference between the older Berkeley Vanish and the new "improved" Berkeley Trilene Fluorocarbon??

both of them are no where near the breaking strains quoted,,,, :!:

i'm using my last spool for rotten bottoms :roll: :roll:

think its aload of crap myself , shoulda seen the stuff we used in the late seventies 30lb straight thru, never had any probs catchin cod , plaice, doggies,

:lol: well said thelegent!!! I've been fishing since the sixties and as you said it was all main line straight thru/ to the hook and weight ( witch was usually a big nut or bolt )........if you find that time machine i'll go half's with you 8) jes i will be day dreaming all day now... :roll: :roll: :roll:

think its aload of crap myself , shoulda seen the stuff we used in the late seventies 30lb straight thru, never had any probs catchin cod , plaice, doggies,

:lol: well said thelegent!!! I've been fishing since the sixties and as you said it was all main line straight thru/ to the hook and weight ( witch was usually a big nut or bolt )........if you find that time machine i'll go half's with you 8) jes i will be day dreaming all day now... :roll: :roll: :roll:

might goback to the 30lb line and nuts and bolts, certainly cheaper, dont think fishes eyesight has improved over the years unless theres underwater specsavers :lol: :lol: havent found the time machine yet but i give ya a shout if i do 8)

been useing berkley vanish 14lb. b.s. for snools with the last few days, cant complain, 17 bass,8/9 flounder no brakeoffs, it snapped once while tightening the knot................over 4 sessions i used vaireing snool lenths.every single fish i got on the same snool on same trace on same rod..weird :shock: over same sessions i fished with 4 different mates, they all blanked..............