OK everyone,
What’s the difference between the 30 yard spool of 6# fluorocarbon tippet and the 200 yard spool of 6# fluorocarbon fishing line? They both cost the same (about $12 a roll).
Is this one of those “marketing” things where you call it fly fishing and double the price, or is there an actual difference in the material?
Kevin
Check the diameter. The spinning line is almost certainly thicker for a given pound test. I don’t have any 6# fluorocarbon, but that’s how it works for mono. There really is a difference.
An interesting question. I don’t have the answer, but unless they are the same brand/manufacturer, it is fair to assume that there could be a difference…not all 6# flouro fishing line is created equal.
It’s equally fair, and possibly more likely that marketing is the greatest difference, but you can’t assume it will cost more just because it’s flyfishing related. While buying fly-tying materials at a local fly shop I recently discovered that they carry rubber strip material for bass bug legs, which is the same material I buy at the archery shop for “cat whisker” noise suppressors…except the price at the fly shop is only half the price the archery shop charges. Go figure.
The regular mono line, 6 lb test, is .009 Dia ~
The 4X tippet (6 lb test) is .007 Dia ~
I’ll use the regular mono line for a tippet when fishing for bream or bass, but trout it will be the tippet.
We are talking flourocarbon here, right?
If it’s pure flourocarbon (should say so on the spool) then it will have almost the identical ‘refractive index’ as water does.
That means that fish can’t see it under water (that’s the ‘reason’ we use it, right, it’s invisible under water?..otherwise, we’d just use mono for our tippet material).
So, even if it’s a couple of thousandths ‘thicker’ it won’t matter, since the fish can’t see it anyway.
If you look at this logically, then the two, if they ‘break’ at the same ‘test’, are identical in practical terms…
I have a spool of 8 pound pure flourocarbon fishing line that I use for level leaders behind my sinking lines for trout fishing with streamers in still water. Works great, even though the water is crystal clear. I use four pound ‘Vanish’ line for tippets while nymphing in rivers…I catch lots of fish on it…it is ‘thicker’ than flourocarbon ‘tippet’ of a given test, but since the fish cant’ see it, it doesn’t matter to me (or the fish, apparently).
Only thing that the high end flourocarbon tippet can do for you that flourocarbon fishing line can’t, at the same breaking strength, is provide less water resistance due to the thinner diameter. It’s a tiny advantage, though, and whether it’s worth the significant additional cost is up to the individual angler.
Buddy
The guys here are far more knowledgable than I and Buddy just explain it really well for me. So thanks Buddy. However, when we are talking Mono, I always thought that the Tippet material was stiffer than the fishing line material for a given size. Say you use Maxima Chameleon as tippet in 6 lb test, the Maxima Chameleon 6 lb test fishing line would be less stiff. I somehow assumed this as you would want a better energy transfer through the line while fly fishing.
Any thoughts?
Could it be the same for floro?
Buddy,
Can you really not see flouro after it enters the water? I can. If I can, then a fish which lives in that environs all of its life, dependent on seeing danger can as well. The fish doesn’t see it, because its brain filters it out. I use flouro because it sinks faster, and doesn’t degrade as fast as mono. As far as leader line vs. tippet…I use the cheaper line…period. I go by the diameter of the line, not the test, and if the larger spools are cheaper (and they are), I use them. I spool them onto the smaller spools, because they fit better in my vest.
I HAVE NOTICED NO, REPEAT NO, DIFFERENCE IN THE FISH CATCHING ABILITY OF COMMERCIAL LEADER LINE VS. TIPPET
Maodiver…
Yep, I can see it too…but, all the press on flouro was that whole ‘invisible’ in the water thing…we were supposed to be able to use a ‘stronger’ (thicker) tippet and still catch the same fish.
We have since discovered the it’s denser so it sinks faster, and that it doesn’t break down in ultraviolet light like mono, and that it can even be stronger for a given diameter than mono…
But, when it came out, I bought the ‘hype’ and switched to the ‘stronger’ flourocarbon tippet (typically I went up at least one, sometimes two sizes).
Funny thing happened…I had always been a ‘lighter is better’ and I payed a lot of attention to tippet diameter, trying to find the thinnest for a given test that I could…
The ‘flouro’ worked as advertised, though. I caught MORE fish using ‘thicker’ flourocarbon tippet, and not because I lost fewer due to the heavier line, I actually got more strikes.
I used to use 5x mono for almost all of my ‘regular’ still water trout fishing…6x if the water was really clear…now I’m using 8 pound flourocarbon fishing line, and taking more fish.
I was a 6x ‘nympher’ in rivers like the San Juan and the Animas…now I use 4 pound flourocarbon line, sometimes even 6 pound, which is lots thicker, and still catch more fish.
So, while I used to be ‘sure’ that I’d catch more fish with thinner mono, I was either wrong about that (could be, I’m wrong a lot), or the fish either can’t see the flourocarbon or for some reason don’t react to it like they do the same diameter mono.
In any case, I’m confident that I can use heavier test flourocarbon and still catch lots of fish. Confidence is a huge part of this addiction.
Buddy
Buddy…
After having read all that applied here, your last 8 words… say it ALL!
Trouthunter
<*)))))<>{
There are major 2 differences. The first is diameter, tippet is pound for pound thinner then fishing line, the smaller diameter will also allow for smaller knots, critical for fly fishing. The second is the major difference, suppleness. Fishing line is very stiff and will coil badly. Tippet is much “softer” and will retain little to no coiling memory.
Thanks for the intel gentlemen. Now I know.
Kevin