Whats the deal with this 100$ line. I use 8.99$ scientific angler WF. Can there be that big of a difference?
Glad you asked. I received a Sharkskin line (#5wf) as part of an award. I also received a TFO Large Arbor Prism 4-5 reel and new TFO rod. I put 100 yards of 20# backing on the reel then wound the Sharskin line on the reel. I had to strip the line off and remove 55 yds of backing in order to get the full 100’ of flyline on the reel.
Here are my thoughts on the line:
-
It shoots extremely well with very little effort on my part. This is a big plus.
-
100’ of fly line is an unbelievable amount of line for a 5wt outfit. I can’t think of one good reason for that much flyline at this low weight.
-
With only 45 yds of backing on the LA reel, the line binds the reel if it is not wound perfectly on the reel. I will be cutting off 20’ of Sharkskin line so that I don’t have to watch the reel each time I wind the line.
-
The Sharkskin line is annoyingly noisy. If it were not such a great shooting line, I would get rid of it. I still may do so.
Since I have the pulpit, I will add that I hate the large arbor design. I think it is just a gimmick to sell reels of a different design. If this Prism 4-5 reel were of standard design, I believe I could have put the full compliment of backing and line on the reel. I’m actually going to try to transfer the line and backing to a STH MR-POP2 spare spool to see what the fill looks like.
I cast my Sharkskin line in a friendly competition at the MI-FI last Friday and cast 68’-2" during practice using my TFO 8’-6" 4-piece rod. At the same competition last year, I cast just about the same distance using JC’s Gatti 9’-0" rod with a standard fly line. I’m sure this is because of my limitations as a distance caster, but I never have need of that kind of distance during normal fishing trips.
In closing, I don’t see the value in the Sharkskin line for everyday fishing. I believe SA has other lines that meet the needs of the everyday angler for much less money, and they don’t ‘sing off key’ when you cast them.
Joe
I have just the opposite take as Joe. After test casting JC’s Sharkskin line at the Idaho Fish-In last year I bought one for my wife and one for myself, in 5 wgt, heron blue color. The line, as Joe said, shoots really well, better than any other line I’ve used. It floats higher so mending and roll casting are easier, at least for me.
As far as the noise, I barely notice any noise, but then I’m hard of hearing in certain pitches so that may account for it.
The line, according to SA, is supposed to last three times as long as a regular line. If it does, then the $100 price tag is a relative bargain. My wife and I both love the Sharkskin lines and won’t give them up.
I got a five weight Sharkskin on-the-cheap because a friend of mine couldn’t handle the noise.
Once in the river the sound it makes is hardly noticable to me.
The benifits I find so far are as others have stated, low friction, high floating and simply a grand fishing line.
If anyone else out there who can’t hack the sound it makes drop me a line. I’ll take it!
Joe, a true large arbor reel will have as much capacity as a standard reel… sometimes more. There are manufactures who make add-on ‘large-arbor’ spools that fit on their conventional reel frames but all they’ve done is make the hub larger. Doing that without widening the spool simply takes away line capacity.
I like true large arbor reels and really learned to like them when the line was wound tight around the small diameter hub of a conventional spool. Can you say ‘Shirley Temple’? 
But, then Orvis came out with a wider/larger hub and they call it a MID arbor, to go with there LARGE ARBOR (which doesn’t hold allot of backing) 
I am still waiting for reports on long term damage to guides and rods with the Sharkskin. For now I keep using my RIDGELINE and darn happy with it:P
I’m not certain if the TFO Prism reel design was intended for a Sharkskin line with its additional 20’ of line. I shouldn’t pass judgment on it until I find that out.
I have SA Sharkskin in the 4 wt. I use it on both my 4 wts, Sage FLi 480-2 and ZXL 490-4. For small streams and pools which require short distance casting I find it takes little effort to cast 15 to 45 feet compared to SA trout. I also find when the wind kicks up that I can cast much farther with less effort using this line as well. The sound of the line is not an issue for me, but then again I do not hear certain sounds unless one of my ears is directly in line with the source of the sound.
I just realized I have one in the 6 wt as well, but I have not used it much this year.
Would I buy another, yes. I plan on buying a 5 wt.
I am poised to replace my other lines as soon as they wear out. My 3wt may be ready by fall (on the second side of my DT). I am thinking about taking up carp fishing also and if I like it, my 7 wt may be outfitted also.
Don’t know about your Carp waters, but in no way would I use Shark on mine! Moss and whatever that yukky stuff is, caking on my $100. fly line?! Besides, the line would cost more than the rod I use for Carp Fishing LOL!
If it gives me the extra distance and stealth it’s worth it. Isn’t that why you buy the line? To fish it? From what I understand, this line is made to be fished hard and it will shed the gunk because of its texture. I wouldn’t buy a piece of gear that needed to babied, I think that is what SA had in mind while creating this line. Anyway, moss and yucky stuff, nothing a cloth can’t take care of after fishing.
Babying the line was not what I was referring to, in fact the complete opposite. And as far as distance and stealth? if I can get 60’ easy with a good Rio line that has a smooth finish in that it won’t collect moss like a furled leader or a knotted leader, well that is the stealth to me I guess.
I clean all my lines after use, so that isn’t a problem either. But during is another story.
As far as SHEDDING the GUNK…does it?
I am not putting down the line at all. I guess when I feel I need to cast 100’, then I will have no problem purchasing some, but for now…I am good;)
And I am one of those PEOPLE, that don’t have a problem buying $600.+ rods, so the price of a AWESOME line wouldn’t be a problem either.
I am just waiting the usual YEAR to get a full both side report.
I took the time to cast the new Shark Skin, in 5-6-7 weights.
Using the same rod, I then cast the Airflo “Ridgeline” in the same weights.
“Shark Skin”=$100.00 ea.=$300.00
“Ridgeline”=$60.0 ea.=$180.00
With the $120.00 I saved, I can either buy 2, more, Ridgelines or gas for the rig so I can go fishing with the lines I bought.
Other than dragging an alley cat through my guides, casting the Shark Skins, I personally didn’t see enough differences in the two lines to justify the additional cost.
The great way that the Ridgelines “throw debris” off when casting them, their suppleness and floatability make them a great line for my type of fishing and hard use.
I have to fish a lot of pretty dirty water, before my cleaning rags even begin to show any residue after days of fishing with the Airflos. I’m sure, this is also true of the Shark Skin lines, but to me, “how often I have to clean a line”, isn’t a big $40.00 difference factor I’m really concerned with!
That is what the reports say so far, I have no first hand experience with it in muck. As soon as I try it out in some, I’ll let you know.
Thanks, I will be looking for your review.
I doubt I will venture there cause I totally agree with flybinder (Love that RIDGELINE) but anything is possible and I am always open to something new.
I haven’t tried one of these lines yet because of the price. Right now my limit on lines is around the 45.00 max range. Being a bamboo rod nut, right now Cortland 444 peach, 444 Sylk and 333ht lines plus a few of the comparable Scientific anglers lines and a few from Orvis. Most of them are dt. When I see lines on sale I will buy them and store them till needed. Now if I could afford 100.00 or more on lines I would definitly try one or a real silk line.
Joe mentioned that the wf line is 100’. Cortland 444 and later lines are 110’, I also feel this is too long but it’s a wf line there is no problem if you cut 20 or even 30’ off the end of the running line I’d rather cut the line than sacrifice backing capacity. Anyone know how long the DT lines are? I have to ask if your actually using a true la reel or a standard reel with a LA spool as in the Teton Tiogas. There is a huge difference in backing capacities between the 2 types of reels.
As to the noise I think any line not perfectly smooth will make noise. Cortland years ago have a line that had raised bumps on it’s surface to increase distance a precurser to the ridged line idea, braided or furled silk lines are noisey also.
I agree very few of us fish at distances over or around 60’ but the ability to cast that far really helps on those wierd areas where your casting 25’ but have 40’ of line on the water to get a drag free float or when fishing the surf with a strong head wind.
Hope this helps.
Tom
You could always think of it this way. Will you catch eleven times as many fish as you do with the $9 line? If ANY person on this forum can say they would with a straight face…
Did it cast better for me? No, but I was tired, it was raining, and I had an unfamiliar rod (and one I don’t particularly like) in hand. Then again, most of time when I fish, I am tired and conditions are less than optimal. And I have never caught a trout in a lawn, anyway.
Did the noise matter? Yes, definitely. I still have my hearing, and that was an annoying sound, one which I see no need to endure while I fish. People who can’t hear noises do not automatically, in my opinion, have the right to inflict those noises on others, by the way. Just because you can’t hear it doesn’t mean the next person can’t.
Did the cost matter? Yes, definitely. $100 buys a lot of stuff, including almost one whole tank of gas.
Some thoughts. How many of the people who have and use this line paid $100 for it? This is the same question I ask people about spendy waders and such, and amazingly, many people get them at pro deal prices or their friends who get them at that price passed it on. I pay for my own gear, so I don’t buy $600 rods and $100 lines.
Some people are willing to pay a large amount of extra money to get that extra 5% advantage they see such tackle giving them. The potential to cast an extra couple of feet, for instance. Not everyone, including me, feels that way, but you can sure push people’s buttons if you state that you are happy and do fine with what they consider inferior equipment. Or that you do not like something they like, even. (This applies to me as well, obviously)
For me, hearing the “you should use the best gear possible” argument is similar to saying that since I drive, I SHOULD be driving a Bentley, since after all, it is a better car than the half ton Chevy pickup I have. It goes faster, rides smoother, and costs several hundred thousand dollars more. But it is a BETTER car, yessirree, so we should all drive one. But if I have to have a pickup, then I SHOULD have that $48,000 one that has the new Onstar, side airbags, fancy this and that, because the perfectly functional truck I now use isn’t the newest, shiniest, most tricked out one that exists. I am less of a driver because I have an old, dirty, beat up truck, yep.
Buy the tools you need to do the job, and use those tools. Having a better tool does not automatically make you a better angler. There is a big difference between knowing how to use a tool because you are skilled with it, and having the best tool and thinking that imparts skill.
If SA, or anyone here, still thinks I don’t know what I am talking about and should fish with and love this product, I will be happy to field test a line to death, see how long it lasts, see if it changes my catch rates, see if it eats my guides. But I am not paying for that test out of MY pocket. I will stick with the lines I already use.
Dennis
Thank goodness you didn’t try fly fishing back when silk lines were the only game in town… the noise they made would have probably made you take up golf or shuffleboard! 
Man I love reading stuff like this. Scientific Anglers makes lines that cost $.8.99 and they make lines that cost $100.
I’m sure there’s no difference. Same line different packaging.
It amazes me how many peoples only concern is the price.
You can drive a 10 old pick-up truck with 200,000 miles or a new Ferrari. Same thing, just a motor covered with glass, plastic & steel. Both just take you to work & back.
Scientific Angler’s makes lines for many different markets. They know there are anglers who only want the cheapest stuff they can find and make lines for this market. Trust me, they get what they pay for! Then they make lines for anglers who are looking for maximum performance from their lines. The sharkskin line floats very high on the water surface. I find this to be huge advantage, I can pick up a lot of line easily. It mends like nothing I’ve ever fished, with so little water contact it’s easy to manipulate. It loads the rod and casts farther and easier with fewer if not one 1 back cast.
Many of the posts listed here have never cast, fished or even seen this line, yet they insist on commenting. Maybe looking at the price tag isn’t the best way to shop.
Ray,
I always love reading your responses…Nothing fancy, just “meat & potatoes”…sort of like Joe Friday on “Dragnet” used to say…“Just the facts, ma’am.”. You may just have changed some minds about this line.
Thanks,
Mike
OK I’ll bite on the subject of SA Shark Skin. I picked up a 5wt. about 3 months ago from my local fly shop for ($50) that was used once, what the heck the price was right. Someone had bought from the shop originaly and the guy just couldn’t handle the noise. I haven’t cleaned or done anything to it since I’ve had it, it mends great, shoots great and floats great (yes it makes a noise) can’t hear anything anyway so my wife says…
I like it, I wish I had one in a 4wt, but I’m not paying a “C” note for it yet.
After I wrote this I did go out and clean the Shark Skin line and there was some stuff that came of the line of course, but the Mog-Mog that came of the line apears to me hasn’t affected the performance of the line that I can see, I’m heading out this afternoon to little stream to see if the cleaning did help…