• You need to be a registered member of Barbel Fishing World to post on these forums. Some of the forums are hidden from non-members. Please refer to the instructions on the ‘Register’ page for details of how to join the new incarnation of BFW...

How to describe fishing line?

L

Lars Snipen

Active Member
I have always been puzzeled by this: Why do british and american anglers always describe their fishing line by the breaking strain?

In scandinavia, and I think the rest of Europe, we always focus on the diameter of the line, not its breaking strain. As you know there is a huge variation in the breaking strain per diameter for various line brands, hence neither of these two pieces of information tells you the whole story. But, I would much rather know the lines diameter than its breaking strain when I by line, say on the web.

The line diameter tells me how much it will fil the spool, it says a lot about its suppleness and I believe also in most cases how abrasion resistant it will be. A 12lb line for barbel fishing could be anything between 0.20mm and 0.30mm (most likely around 0.25mm?) and there is a HUGE difference in abrasion resistance between 0.20mm and 0.30mm...
 
Yes, I agree both are needed, but most online shops only give you one of them, this site included. And if I could only have one piece of information, I would rather have the diameter than the breaking strain. I feel the diameter tells me a little bit more.
 
It's got to be a question of culture/background then because if only one or the other was given, I'd rather know the breaking strain.
 
You can usually find out somewhere on the web the diameter of branded lines, just have to do a bit of searching, or zoom in on the spool picture if there is one.
 
Having been brought up with breaking strain the diameter thing confuses me, although on my barbel reels I do have one spool with a decent low diameter low stretch line on one spool and a spare with cheap thick line in the same breaking strain on it for fishing rocky areas where I need the abrasion resistance.
If you think of it logically though I should be using the same brand in different diameters which would provide better abrasion resistance in as much as reducing the breaking strain is concerned.................Oh God, I'm confusing myself now.
 
its a old imperial hang up ,we british have mixing our measurements ,as not only do we refer to our lines in B/s we also refer to it in lbs rather than Kg but we conversly refer to the dia in mm's and buy by length in metre's.

its because if we start quoting diametres and technical information we start too look like geeks and loooked at like we're trainspotters or something ,and its more macho to describe it by b/s as its a bigger more manly number like 12lbs as compared to the more whimpy 0.26mm ,things just sound more impressive in imperial (inches) measurement than metric (centimetres) ,9 inches is a lot more impressive than 22.86cm ,thats why 12lbs sounds more impressive than 0.26 mm
 
Steven Devereux said:
its a old imperial hang up ,we british have mixing our measurements ,as not only do we refer to our lines in B/s we also refer to it in lbs rather than Kg but we conversly refer to the dia in mm's and buy by length in metre's.

its because if we start quoting diametres and technical information we start too look like geeks and loooked at like we're trainspotters or something ,and its more macho to describe it by b/s as its a bigger more manly number like 12lbs as compared to the more whimpy 0.26mm ,things just sound more impressive in imperial (inches) measurement than metric (centimetres) ,9 inches is a lot more impressive than 22.86cm ,thats why 12lbs sounds more impressive than 0.26 mm
Click to expand...

Yes 9 inches is certainly impressive, but 6 (or thereabouts) is good too isn't it? I think it is. Isn't it? Also, yes, I would rather say I caught a 12lb barbel than one of 0.26mm diammeter. That sounds tiny. God, it is confusing.
 
I suppose the one you are used to is the one you feel is the most informative. I don't think its about lb vs kg or mm vs inch, at least not in my eyes.

Anyhow, I think that if you stick to one brand, and learn to know it properly, you always know which breaking strain corresponds to which diameter, and it doesn't matter which one is listed.

I ordered some 2lb line from America once, and expected a line around 0.12mm in diameter. I was shocked when I got the spools and found it was more like 0.18mm (50% thicker)! The breaking strain was also MUCH higher than 2lb, even if that was what the spools said. Incorrect marking of line is something we experience wether it is in breaking strain or diameter, unfortunately.

The imperial hang-up: Well, if listing a diameter of 0.26mm as 0.01023622047224409...inches, I would certainly prefer the lb breaking strain...;)
 
Last edited:
If you have a line of 0.12 mm diameter and it breaks at a quarter pound what good is knowing the diameter. Similarly if you have a line that breaks at 2lb and it is an inch thick that is no good either! To make a comparison you need BOTH breaking strain and diameter. Even with that though you don't know if it is going to be stiff or supple, be abrasion resistant or not, or even if the knots will hold or slip.

The only thing to do is try to get a good recommendation from a friend, magazine or on line and once you have a line you like always buy the same make.
 
Failing that, you can always look most lines up on the 'Tackle Box' line comparison charts. They are accurate and tell you the TRUE braking strain and diameter of a line, whatever rubbish the manufacturers claim, and print on the box.

Cheers, Dave.
 
big problem with line diameters is the importance of knowing 1, prestretched or not ( lars in uk lines are much thinner if prestretched but break much
easier than non stretched ones)
2, knowing what type of line
me personally i prefer to be able to see the diameter and breaking strain, this way if it constantly breaks below printed b/s then at least it gives your complaints credence:)
 
David Gauntlett said:
Failing that, you can always look most lines up on the 'Tackle Box' line comparison charts. They are accurate and tell you the TRUE braking strain and diameter of a line, whatever rubbish the manufacturers claim, and print on the box.

Cheers, Dave.
Click to expand...

I had a spool of 15lb gr60 ( not for Barbel fishing i hasten to add ) that when tested broke at around 27lb ! good reliable line though, and nice thick as well so abrasion resistance was very good :D

Totally meaningless buying line by breaking strains quoted on the spool IMO.
 
Last edited:
There used to be a bloke on here who loved this discussion. He would tell you there are only about four line manufactures world wide and give you a link to a website to prove it.
 
I think once you know what brand of line you're going to buy (and I think most of us are loyal to a couple of brands that we like) then the b/s is more useful than knowing the diameter (and easier to remember as it's constant). The diameter is only really useful I think when comparing different brands of line and even then you also need to know how supple a line is, it's abrasion resistance, how well it knots and whether it is prestrecthed or not (to name just a few things).
 
Paul Garner said:
I think once you know what brand of line you're going to buy (and I think most of us are loyal to a couple of brands that we like) then the b/s is more useful than knowing the diameter (and easier to remember as it's constant). The diameter is only really useful I think when comparing different brands of line and even then you also need to know how supple a line is, it's abrasion resistance, how well it knots and whether it is prestrecthed or not (to name just a few things).
Click to expand...

I like the american Berkley lines, and when I buy line I never even look at the breaking strain, only the diameter. What do you mean by breaking strain being constant? This is purely down to what you choose to hold as constant, right?
- If you compare the breaking strain of a Trilene line of 0.25mm from 30 years ago to todays Trilene 0.25mm, it has changed a lot.
- If you compare the diameter of a Trilene 12lb line from 30 years ago to todays Trilene 12lb, it has changed a lot.

If you used a 12lb line 30 years ago, and still use a 12lb line, it is much thinner today, right? Do you think it still has the same abrasion resistance?

The abrasion resistance is, in my eyes, more important than breaking strain. If the line snaps during fishing, it is almost always due to abrasion, not the fish pulling. But I guess it is difficult to measure and mark the spools sensibly.

Prestretched or not is of course also important, I know.
 
What on earth are you talking about ?
When i buy line it depends on what species i am fishing for, also what type of venue i will be using it on, such as very open water or a snaggy piece of water, if i am fishing for a heavy species then i want a line that is capable of withstanding the heavy fight, that means that the breaking stain is the most important factor, if i purchase a line that is the right breaking strain for the job but it is extremley thick, then i would spool it up on a spool that is suitable for the job.
Lots of anglers use braid, which means that a high breaking strain line can be of a very low diameter, and that means it would fit almost any small spool,
for instance, 30lb Whiplash would fit very easy on a 2500 Shimano Baitrunner,

It is possible to buy some very cheap line that has a very thick diameter but has a low breaking strain, so i just cant see how it is possible to know what you are buying without the knowledge of having both the breaking strain and diameter.
You should always buy the best that is available and for purpose.
Brian.
 
Last edited:
Hi Lars, yes I guess it depends on what you hold as a constant. For me the most important thing is knowing the b/s as that's what's important for balancing my tackle and gives me an idea of how much presure I can use. So what B/S to use will be my first decision, then what brand of line to use with be my second. I don't even look at the diameter, I just know by brand which is the finest, or which has the best abrasion resistance, or which has some stretch, or which is likely to kink, or which floats, or which sinks. To my mind it's even more important to know the B/S if you're using different brands for mainline and hooklength or if you use different brands for different methods.

I used to do a lot of match fishing with hooklengths quite often down as low as 12oz which leave little margin for error, so my thought process would be something along the lines of:
What fish am I expecting to catch and how big are they likely to be.
What's the lowest b/s line I think I can get away with.
Then I'll choose the brand depending on the properties that I need in the line which will depend on the method that I'll be fishing; pole, whip, stick float, waggler, feeder, all place different requirements on a line. I might even be targeting the same fish with several different methods, the constant thing though will be that I need to be sure of the b/s.

Does that make sense?
 
I know a couple of lads who are pretty big into match fishing.

Listening to them talking is a very different experience to listening to specimen anglers.

Very rarely do I ever hear the match men mention B.S, its always diameter.

The opposite holds true for specimen anglers who usually talk in terms of BS.

The only time I'll mither myself about diameter is if I want to know how much line a spool will hold other wise its BS all the way.
 
Lars, the main breaking strain i target is a constant breaking strain at knots ect, try it with a decent spring balance, the same spool can produce very varying results, not entirely due to the line but a good line should give
a decent b/s at the knot, the more prestretched is usually the stuff thats
inconsistant but theres a fair bit of inconsistancy on some non stretched lines too, try the knot/scale test and after a dozen tests you may see things to consider that you didnt before:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top