Price of Fluorocarbon tippet-- A Rant

[NachoOne]

Thanks Dave I did not know that. I love learning from others.

[johnstoeckel]

There are also "house brand" fluorocarbon spools available from some shops which are considerably less expensive. These run about $10 for a 50 yard spool. I've been using these the last couple of years and have noticed any difference in quality compared to the name brands.

[NJTroutbum]

Most all "Tippet" FC is much more limp than standard spinning gear FC. Leading me to believe that at least some of the cost could result from an additional step in manufacturing. It's all priced higher than mono though across the board.

For years I did all of my streamer and nymph fishing with Maxima Chameleon mono, which was very similar in attributes.

It's all about what you want, and if it's worth the money to you.

I fish both wet and dry with FC exclusively now, with no intention of going back to mono, regardless of price.


I use FC almost exclusively for both wet & dry fishing now. And no intention to go back to mono regardless of price.

[Apachetrout]

I like Fluorocarbon tippet for midge fishing on lakes and it does seem I get bit more with fluoro than mono tippet. But I am tried of buying 3 or 4 spools of fluror tippet and spending 50 + dollars for it. So this summer I went back the the Maxima mono green tippet in 5x and 6x. It seems that I am getting bit on regular basis, so I am not going to use fluoro anymore and stick with the Maxima tippet material. There are several lakes I fish that have asked angerls not use fluoro due to it's 100 year half life.

Lanny

[idlerick]

On three separate occasions I was one of two lake anglers fishing the same nymphs at the same depth in the same area. I was catching fish regularly and my partners were going blank. I was using 4X F/C and they were using nylon. When they finally switched over, they matched me fish for fish. While I am therefore a firm believer in F/C in lakes with static flies & indicators, I don't think it holds any advantage at all in rivers or with streamers, buggers, etc. I also like it in saltwater, but for different reasons and not in a fly tippet material.
I buy the 100 M Guide Spools of 4X Rio FF+, about $35 apiece. One spool lasts me well over a year, and, as someone said, it doesn't go bad on you. I think everything sold to the fly angler is overpriced (heck, the fly shops get 100% markup on almost everything they stock), but to me, FC is worth the cost. My little truck gets pretty good mileage, but when I fill it after a trip, it runs about $45. I could take fewer trips, but I think my gas money is well spent. Same with F/C.
Guess each of us has to evaluate for ourselves.

[Silver Creek]

Fluorocarbon vs nylon fallacies:

1. Spinning fluorocarbon is the equivalent of tippet fluorocarbon. As many have already said, it is not. For equal diameters, not only is the tippet material stronger, it is limper.

2. Fluorocarbon will NOT sink your flies. This has been tested and proven to be false. Fluorocarbon when treated with floatant will NOT sink. In fact, nylon's specific gravity is also higher than water. It floats because of surface tension and NOT because it is lighter than water. Drop fluorocarbon tippet onto a sink full of water. It will float.

Most nylon mono has a specific gravity between 1.1 and 1.2 compared to fluorocarbon at about 1.8. So fluorocarbon is 50% denser than nylon mono. One might think that this would cause the fluoro to sink but what it does is that it causes the fluorocarbon to indent the meniscus more.

Since the depression of the meniscus increases the visibility of the floating line and it increases the refraction of light onto the river bottom, it makes the line more visible. As we know, when sunken, fluorocarbon is less visible that nylon.

Fluorocarbon vs. Nylon | Fly Fish America

"Being slightly heavier than water does not mean that nylon monofilament is going to sink, at least not quickly or very well. Surface tension?where the water?s surface behaves like an elastic film?must be broken before an object will sink. A object?s density and contact angle with the water?s surface are the two most significant variables in its ability to break surface tension and sink, and the ?just slightly heavier than water? specific gravity and zero contact angle (i.e., laid out flat) of a nylon monofilament leader or tippet are not sufficient to do it most of the time. If pushed or pulled under the surface by a weighted fly or roiling current, nylon monofilament will sink . . . but very, very slowly.

Fluorocarbon has a specific gravity in the range of 1.75 to 1.90. Tungsten it ain?t, but it is significantly more dense than nylon. But is it sufficiently dense to quickly and reliable break surface tension and sink all by itself, even at zero contact angles, and even in the smallest diameters? No, it?s not. Our testing reveals that most brands of fluorocarbon tippet material in 0X to 8X diameters are no better than nylon at breaking surface tension and sinking on their own. Larger diameter fluorocarbon materials do demonstrate a slightly better ability to break surface tension without the assistance of current or other external influences, but for practical fishing purposes fluorocarbon has little benefit over nylon on this measure."

The truth is that fluorocarbon will not make dry flies sink NOR is it measurably better than nylon in getting nymphs to sink. Both statements are wrong. Surface tension is what floats both flies and leaders that are heavier than water and lead or tungsten is what makes nymphs sink. Over the average cast and drift, whether the tippet is nylon or fluorocarbon has no effect on making a dry fly float or making a nymph sink.

3. Nylon monofilament gets weaker as it absorbs water. It actually swells. Fluorocarbon does not absorb water. It maintains its strength and that is the second reason to use it for nymphing.

4. Fluorocarbon does not degrade with UV light. There no need to replace it each year.

5. Fluorocarbon is more abrasion resistant than nylon.

So the advantages of fluorocarbon are less visibility under water, maintains wet strength, abrasion resistance, and does not degrade. Is it worth it - that is your decision. You can make it float by treating it but it's advantage is when it is sunken over picky trout.

[NachoOne]

Wow, I love learning thur other life experiences and not have to learn it on my own, it just takes too much time. This is a great read, Thanks!

[lastchance]

The only thing that troubles me about flouro is that people discard it on the stream and it doesn't degrade.

[Uncle Jesse]

The only thing that troubles me about flouro is that people discard it on the stream and it doesn't degrade.

..

Unfortunately you cannot control that, however I will prove myself wrong by making a broad sweeping statement and say, most fly fishermen do not discard any more fishing line on stream than they can help. When I discard a piece of line it is 2" long and fell in the stream when I clipped it or is connected to an underwater structure or a tree limb, both which happen with too much regularity. Things discard along streams and lake cranks up a entirely new rant however.

[Dave E]

There are Fluorocarbon lines and Fluorocarbon coated lines ( Mono ), which also have a reason for existing. Not all makers of Fluorocarbon coated lines make that distinction clear in their product literature and I think it's helpful to know what you're shopping for and purchasing.

http://flyanglersonline.com/about/seaguar/

For starters, here's a link to a Q & A section provided by Seaguar about the production, properties and characteristics of Fluorocarbon, that might help fill in some of the gaps.

http://seaguar.com/seaguar-community/fishing-line-q-and-a.htm

Enjoy, Dave