StripersOnline › SurfTalk › Stripers Online Forums › Fly Fishing Forum › abrasion resistance of fluorocarbon?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

abrasion resistance of fluorocarbon?

post #1 of 8
Thread Starter 
Given a choice, which has better abrasion resistance;
ordinary mono, hard mono or fluorocarbon? Assume 12 lb test, please. And if you have a favorite brand of your preferred material, which one?
post #2 of 8
Hard mono and I use Mason, is most resistant
Fluoro is the least
post #3 of 8
Hi Canyon, I'd have to respectfully disagree with you on fluro being the least. One of the reasons fluoro is used for instance in the Keys for tarpon is because it has better abrasion resistance than most mono (although not as good as hard mono like Mason).
post #4 of 8
Thread Starter 
Fluorocarbon's new enough a technology that there may be significant differences between brands in various working qualities - knot strength, shock resistance, knotability - as well as in quality control. I was tying with Seaguar, perhaps two or three years old, and was not terribly impressed. Further thoughts, anyone?
post #5 of 8
Sport fishing did a test on #20 test lines that included fluorocarbon, mono and braid a while ago. If you type "fishing line comparison 20 pound test" into google, it's the first choice but they're doing maintenance to the site and you can't access anything including the main page of They had a 4 page handout they gave away a couple of years ago that has all the information in it. I have that but they tested 85 different lines so I'm not printing everything. This is a passage about fluorocarbon:

Fluorocarbon leader has become popular for its invisibility in the water. But fluoro enthusiasts may want to take particular note and, if concerned about abrasion resistance, at least get a much heavier (thicker) leader than you'd normally use. Even the toughest fluorocarbon leaders and lines, both made by Triplefish, offered only modest abrasion resistance. Most fluorocarbon lines tested dismally, lasting only 20 to 60 or so cycles on the machine verses nearly 1,300 for Original Stren (which might be both the toughest and most economical choice for leader material).

The fluorocarbon was by far the worst, scoring lower than almost all of the monofiliment lines for abrasion resistance.
post #6 of 8
Hey Tackle, how old was that report?

I think I may have seen that report a while back, I know Stren is tough but did they consider diameter as well in the test? Not saying it would have made a big difference but it is a factor. One of the reasons I don't use Stren is I don't like it's flexibility (or lack thereof) - I think the more flexible (i.e., and consquently less stiff and "hard") a mono is, the less abrasion resistance it has. One of the reasons why Mason has great abrasion resistance is that it's a hard, stiff mono. For flyfishing, IME a stiff leader is not as good for casting - it tends to not turn over as well. I think any leader material you use that has a degree of flexibility versus "hardness" will have less abrasion resistance.
post #7 of 8
Originally posted by formula1:
Hey Tackle, how old was that report?
The testing was published in the september/october 2001 issue. I went to the site and it's back up but they didn't include any of the charts and graphs from the original article. They were more than half of the article. They pretty much took everything into consideration including:

line name that appears on the box
measured diameter
cross-x area (in square inches)
wet braking strength
tensile rating
tensile uniformity
mean cycles to break
abrasion rating
abrasion uniformity
combined rating
cost per 100 yards

The charts and graphs are nice to look at so you can see where your line falls in each category and you can pick your line accordingly. They also tested #8 line, search: "tough guys" on the same site. Once again, no charts and graphs. Old test but probably still somewhat relevant.
post #8 of 8
Thread Starter 
I'll dig that out of the local library, if need be.

On balance, I may stick to building my own tapered leaders out of mono. I do suspect that some brands of fluoro are more abrasion then others - because they're thicker. Just as in mono, if it isn't IGFA rated, it's probably underrated, and thicker then it need be for the test rating. Some are going to be thicker then others.

Frog Hair makes some significant claims for their radiation-srengthened product. Anyone fish it in salt water?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Fly Fishing Forum
StripersOnline › SurfTalk › Stripers Online Forums › Fly Fishing Forum › abrasion resistance of fluorocarbon?