Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[RalphH]

Visible examination and mathematical analysis using Mie theory (the scattering of electromagnetic waves such as light by a spherical medium) suggest there is no substantive difference between fluorocarbon and conventional nylon monofilament.

https://www.slideserve.com/lesley/mathematical-theory-of-fishing-line-visibility?fbclid=IwAR18UJcgETyGf2Q1FFDNSWSS05B988OIlwpndMQ56h2NJXg9TClcO0lWmmA


BTW I checked the publication date of this article and it was August 20, 2014 not April 1, 2021. 

[DanL]

Haha Ralph you're going to upset some people.

the presentation has been circulating around for a while, and people should read it but the TLDR is that while the refractive index of fluorocarbon is closer than monofilament to water, it is not close enough to make a significant difference, unless the line diameter is extremely small. Unfortunately the math in the presentation is too advanced for me so I can't properly critique it.

I've never seen any credible evidence demonstrating fluoro is 'invisible', and claims to such are from those trying to sell it. Many anecdotal stories how someone switched to mono and suddenly started slaying, so feel free to take that for what it's worth.
 
Many years ago, I worked at Science World where we had a demonstration where a glass figure would disappear when placed in a water/mineral oil mix. The refractive indexes of the glass/fluid were very closely matched, and the figure truly became completely invisible. It was a very cool demo, the most complex and flashiest figure would just vanish. At least to my eye, a simple demo of fluoro and mono in a glass of water shows that fluoro is in no way invisible. I might be able to convince myself that the fluoro is somewhat harder to see, but that's probably just my confirmation bias, or other factors like line tint/diameter etc.

However I think that if it gives someone confidence, then they should 100% absolutely use fluoro. Visibility-wise, it's not going to be any worse than mono, and may have marginal benefit in certain water and light conditions.  At worse you spend a little $ for a little extra confidence, which is not a bad thing.

just my $0.02

[RalphH]

I am reminded of the cables controversy in the audiophile community - people obsessed with the sound qualities of high cost music systems. There are people who claim & believe fanatically that expensive speaker cables, interconnects and even power cables can make a huge difference in sound quality despite the piles of theoretical and perceptual studies that demonstrate no statistical difference.

I bought fluoro when it first came out and right away noticed I could easily see it in the water. The only real difference I have noted is it's lower knot strength.

[clarki]

I took an online flyfishing class recently and the presenter stated that mono was better for dry fly presentations as it floated better, whereas fluoro was best suited for nymphing and sub surface presentations.

 

[CohoJake]

Visibility aside, I like that fluorocarbon is a stiffer line with less stretch and it sinks - I like using it for long leaders when fishing a bead under a float or roe. The added abrasion resistance makes it my go-too for boulder-strewn rivers. Years ago I used fluoro as mainline on a spinning reel, and promptly ruined the spinning rod from the line burning through the guides (playing pinks) - lesson learned, I'll never use fluoro as mainline again.

[RalphH]

F.C. is a bit denser than water so will sink a bit more efficiently than mono. The weight on the leader or the fly makes a much bigger difference. Some people recommend a 6 inch tippet of F.C. for dry flies and emergers so the leader doesn't leave a "snake" imprint in the surface meniscus. Most people agree the critical thing is the thickness of the tippet which reduces drag or "micro drag" to use the groovy pseudo fly angler intellectual term.

Oh should mention that full F.C leaders seem to lay out at the end of the cast with more efficiency - which is usually not what you want when dry fly fishing

[obie1fish]

I'm kind of in the same boat as DanL: I tried the water glass comparison and it's not invisible, but I think it's less visible than the mono lines I use, and considerably more reliable for consistency in quality. So I use FC for leader. More opinion and preference than science, but there ya go.