Flourocarbon tippet worth it?

[WinterrunRon]

I know this subject has been discussed in the past, however, it's been a few years and would like to revisit the subject since we all have a few more years experience under our belt.

I'd like to limit the discusson to trout (hence the trout forum) and nymphing because my main and only concern is the line's ability to allow you to catch more fish due to it's highly acclaimed refractive index approaching that of water. Bottom line, if it doesn't offer the advantage to catch/land more fish, I'll save the extra $10 bucks for some other piece of equipment.

I honesty have not encountered a situation where I can conclusively say yea or nea based upon my catch rate on any give day. Seems to me you'd need to have simultaneaous fishing and identical setups, identical drifts starting with identical casts and... nearly impossible in my mind. With nothing more than a mask, I can tell you I can clearly see both under water. So this "invisibility" factor has me scratching my head.

I would really like to hear from real world experience, not what's listed on the box as advantages. So we can skip all the other "advantages/disadvantages" inherant in the line and focus on does it help in catching/landing more fish by outperforming mono based upon your experience.

In general, every fly fisherman I know or guide I've fished with that fishes clear trout water uses flouro. I would think if you're guiding, there's no reason to incur additional costs unless you're confident it helps your business. And if your business is catching fish...

You have a experience to share?

[Adam Grace]

Ron, unfortunately I cannot say whether fluorocarbon catches more fish for me but it lasts longer (abrasion resistance issue) and it sinks better too (more dense). When I use fluorocarbon I rarely have to change my tippet due to abrasion, I think that this leads to less fish loss when compared to mono. Sorry that I couldn't comment on the clarity issue.

[JGB]

Is there not an environmental issue too? Does flouro degrade like mono? Does flouro ever degrade?

Have experimented a little in the past, but have stopped. Much more of a pain in the a$$ as far as knots and stiffness...

Better suited for salt applications?

Seems like a big deal(and $$) over minimal performance difference...

Ralph done any underwater studies on it?

JGB

[Bill Kiene semi-retired]

I think that it is a thing to try in very clear water in lakes or spring creeks and on the clear tropical saltwater shallow flats.

Because it sinks it is not supposed to be good for dry fly fishing.

Some of it is pretty tough.

Seaguar and Rio seem to be the most popular.

Hal Janssen uses it for some his hand tied leaders because it is supposed to sink faster than nylon mono.

I like it because it is supposed to last almost forever. Over the years I have spools of nylon tippet material all over the place and have no idea how old it is. With FC I don't have to even think about that....

At Kiene's we don't push FC on people.



PS: The big wads of fishing line in our streams, rivers and lakes are not from fly fishers...........I doubt if fly fishers account for 1% of the fishing line left in the environment. Most of us take it home with us....

PS2: It is here to stay........We do sell a lot of it.

.
.

[Ralph]

JGB-
I have spent quite a bit of time filming and simply observing fluoro and mono underwater. I have never encountered a situation where you could tell the difference between the two. Various brands differ in glossiness and visibility (as well as stiffness, abrasion resistance, and knot strength), but the variables don't seem to be in any way related to the use of fluorocarbon or monofilament. If you are looking for a nearly invisible line, by far and away the most difficult line to see in gin clear water is Stroft monofilament (NOT their fluoro!). Stroft is widely used by European competitive anglers, but is not available in the states since Rajeff stopped importing the stuff. It is still found in some of the steelhead shops in the Northwest, but once that runs out you'll have to buy from the UK on line.
From a fishing standpoint, I have yet to find a situation where fishing success changed when switching between mono and fluoro. IMHO the economic and environmental penalties of fluoro don't pencil out.

Update: Stroft is being carried by UNI for North American distribution. Stroft GTM monofilament is the stuff I played with last season. Pretty remarkable. Rumor has it that it is possibly the same material used in Trout Hunter tippets (which placed 1st in George Anderson's tippet shoot out). http://www.uniproducts.com/eng/produ...?noc=33&nop=77

[Lance Gray]

I use it and it's great. Here is why.

Abrasion as Adam says. It holds up better rubbing against the boat, rocks, logs and such. It's super tough.

Knots, it has a little harder surface than mono. The knots hold better and seem not to slip. I use the tie-fast tool for all my knots and that grip knot loves Flourocarbon.

It last for ever (the enviromental bad thing) but that is good for guys that don't fish that much. You don't have to replace your tippet when it degrades like mono does. You actually spend the same amount of money in the long run and you don't loss fish because of rot.

Ralph is right - I don't really think fish see it or don't see it. The main thing is that the person using it - has confidence in it and that helps.

Some people say that it's more senitive. I haven't found that.

There is some flouro material that is better suit for applications. Rio Flouro is very soft - less stiff than other brands and I like that for stillwater or fishing very small flies - like Putah Creek.

I think it's worth the money and as a guide I use a crap load every year. It does everything I want!!

[WinterrunRon]

My favorite two aspects of using flouro are:

1. Ditto on abrasion resistance. Stuff is tough, tough, tough!
2. A close second is the way it doesn't pig tail when cinching down knots. My favorite mono is Orivs Super Strong, but it's very susceptable to pig taling if you're not super careful when forming the knot. I often don't go slow enough and it's not uncommon for me to have to tie the da-gum knot more than once.

I wasn't familiar with it's shelf life, but that's a big plus in my book. Never have to worry about it being out of date. I'm using Orvis Mirage due to Yellowstone Anglers Tippet Shootout. Stiffer than RIO but marginally stronger.

But I'm still not hearing of personal experiences that can support the invisibility factor. Are we putting this in the myth column?

[Lance Gray]

My favorite two aspects of using flouro are:

1. Ditto on abrasion resistance. Stuff is tough, tough, tough!
2. A close second is the way it doesn't pig tail when cinching down knots. My favorite mono is Orivs Super Strong, but it's very susceptable to pig taling if you're not super careful when forming the knot. I often don't go slow enough and it's not uncommon for me to have to tie the da-gum knot more than once.

I wasn't familiar with it's shelf life, but that's a big plus in my book. Never have to worry about it being out of date. I'm using Orvis Mirage due to Yellowstone Anglers Tippet Shootout. Stiffer than RIO but marginally stronger.

But I'm still not hearing of personal experiences that can support the invisibility factor. Are we putting this in the myth column?

I have no evidence on the invisibility part. I think we catch more fish with it - because of the reason I stated. Other than that. I have no idea on it!!

[WinterrunRon]

My followup post wasn't directed at you, Lance. I was just stating, in general, that no one has yet offered an experience to support catching more fish with flouro.

[Lance Gray]

My followup post wasn't directed at you, Lance. I was just stating, in general, that no one has yet offered an experience to support catching more fish with flouro.

I know I just forgot to mention that!!

It's all good.