• 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...

Soft flurocarbon????

Terry Simner

Terry Simner

Senior Member & Supporter
Hi..has anyone out there come across anything that could be described as a 'soft fluoro'? I've been using 12lb bs Gamma Edge (which is supposed to be "supple") but I've had great problems with 'line-twist' i.e. kink in the line. Yeah its ok with casting more than 1oz or so, but on delicate presentations, or 'loose line work' its awful. Anything new about????
PS..I most use fluoro coated now i.e. Krystonite due to probs with 'Edge'.
 
Terry Christopher said:
Hi..has anyone out there come across anything that could be described as a 'soft fluoro'? I've been using 12lb bs Gamma Edge (which is supposed to be "supple") but I've had great problems with 'line-twist' i.e. kink in the line. Yeah its ok with casting more than 1oz or so, but on delicate presentations, or 'loose line work' its awful. Anything new about????
PS..I most use fluoro coated now i.e. Krystonite due to probs with 'Edge'.
Click to expand...

Sadly, as far as I am aware Terry, a truly 'supple' genuine fluoro does not exist...stiffness seems to inherent in the make up of the stuff. As you know, various manufacturers bombard us with adds claiming ridiculous levels of suppleness, softness and 'castability', but despite having a good look at everything I could find, these claimss all turn out to be rather dishonest exaggerations. Yes, there are slight variations, some are vaguely softer than others....but the difference is marginal, and not really worth seeking out.

When fluoro first came out, the carp guys took a long, hard look at it. The general consensus was this....
Fluoro certainly is less visible in water to us, when viewed from above, but less so when viewed underwater. Whether it is actually less visible to a fish , who have different vision to us, is arguable....who knows? Added to that, there other questions which are very relevent, such as 'Does that actually matter?' and 'Would a line which is more difficult to see REALLY have any advantages from an angling viewpoint?'

Once fluoro was scrutinised more closely in action, it was noticed that it almost immediately started to gain a coating of microscopic detritus, which transformed it completely. It quickly became just as visible as any other line, which is a bit sad :p Whether this was just a natural settlement of suspended solids, or whether the stuff (or any line?) gains a static charge in use which attracts muck to it, I have no idea. Neither do I know whether this would occur as quickly, or at all, in running water. However, more damning to me is the fact that it seems that the smooth surface of fluoro very quickly becomes abbraided in use, and that again makes it as visible (certainly to us) as any other line. Even worse (?) it soon takes on colour with use, which instantly puts paid to any arguments, because it absolutely no longer has the properties then, the makers were claiming were so benificial :D

I don't know the answer for certain fella....those findings (if true) certainly make it look like a bit of a waste of time and money, and makes the pain of putting up with its stiff nature more difficult. I guess used as a hook link (or even a leader) which you renew regularly, those faults (if true) would not have time to develop. But for me, using it as a mainline is no longer an option. But that's just me :)

Cheers, Dave.
 
Dependant on the breaking strain you were lookin to use often
the stuff used by fluff chuckers is quite supple and considerably
cheaper - a fiver for 50 metres compared to a tenner for 20.
To be fair its most probably exactly the same stuff used
by other coarse brands just re packaged. Another benefit bein that
they do it down to 2lb b.s. or similar - obviously not ideal for barbel
but the 8-9lb could be pushed into use.
 
Fox illusion xs seems the best I've come across was the best at taking on the contours of a lake. Will admit thats from carping as I'm just getting back into barbel and will be sticking to good old maxima that I used last time I fished for barbel.
 
I have used Xline and Tiger Line - the latter is more supple. But to avoid many of the issues Dave G discuses, I regularly reel in through a damp towel. It pulls the detrius off and keeps the line smooth.
I hated Krystonite as the coating came off and led to severe problems in weed. The Ultima Power **** ( Ultima Power Carp Line ) is far better for a coated line - I am using on some carp setups and is quite good. Still clean the line as with the Tiger and Xline.
 
Thanks for that lads..esp Dave. Great contribution mate..I tend to agree with your thoughts.
I did do an experiment with three fluoros in a larger measuring cylinder. The first thing I noticed was 'micro-bubbles' of air adhering to all 3 brands.. making them all highly visible.
Re. static charge, I'd have thought running water would only increase it.
Got a load of P-Line Fluoroclear (fluoro coated)..may give that a go.
Re. the "coating coming off" Krystonite. Really surprised to hear that Darryl. I've been using it for 8yrs now without a problem.
ATBA
Terry
 
p line you'll not go wrong with that,i've used it in 8 and 12lb.

sorry terry i misread your post ,you should of gone for the pure flurocarbon in p line,not the fluroclear!
 
Last edited:
David Gauntlett said:
Sadly, as far as I am aware Terry, a truly 'supple' genuine fluoro does not exist...stiffness seems to inherent in the make up of the stuff. As you know, various manufacturers bombard us with adds claiming ridiculous levels of suppleness, softness and 'castability', but despite having a good look at everything I could find, these claimss all turn out to be rather dishonest exaggerations. Yes, there are slight variations, some are vaguely softer than others....but the difference is marginal, and not really worth seeking out.

When fluoro first came out, the carp guys took a long, hard look at it. The general consensus was this....
Fluoro certainly is less visible in water to us, when viewed from above, but less so when viewed underwater. Whether it is actually less visible to a fish , who have different vision to us, is arguable....who knows? Added to that, there other questions which are very relevent, such as 'Does that actually matter?' and 'Would a line which is more difficult to see REALLY have any advantages from an angling viewpoint?'

Once fluoro was scrutinised more closely in action, it was noticed that it almost immediately started to gain a coating of microscopic detritus, which transformed it completely. It quickly became just as visible as any other line, which is a bit sad :p Whether this was just a natural settlement of suspended solids, or whether the stuff (or any line?) gains a static charge in use which attracts muck to it, I have no idea. Neither do I know whether this would occur as quickly, or at all, in running water. However, more damning to me is the fact that it seems that the smooth surface of fluoro very quickly becomes abbraided in use, and that again makes it as visible (certainly to us) as any other line. Even worse (?) it soon takes on colour with use, which instantly puts paid to any arguments, because it absolutely no longer has the properties then, the makers were claiming were so benificial :D

I don't know the answer for certain fella....those findings (if true) certainly make it look like a bit of a waste of time and money, and makes the pain of putting up with its stiff nature more difficult. I guess used as a hook link (or even a leader) which you renew regularly, those faults (if true) would not have time to develop. But for me, using it as a mainline is no longer an option. But that's just me :)

Cheers, Dave.
Click to expand...

Cracking post, Dave. I seem to becoming a bit of a fan of yours. The only thing I would add is that the density of fluoro might be an advantage in certain circumstances.
As for Robert's Vann's post, the lower breaking strain fluoros appear to be less springy simply because of their lower diameters. Because of fluoro's relative springyness, compared to mono, it is useful in making the droppers on a fly cast stick out that little bit more reducing the tendency to tangle.
 
Jim Foxall said:
Cracking post, Dave. I seem to becoming a bit of a fan of yours. The only thing I would add is that the density of fluoro might be an advantage in certain circumstances.
As for Robert's Vann's post, the lower breaking strain fluoros appear to be less springy simply because of their lower diameters. Because of fluoro's relative springyness, compared to mono, it is useful in making the droppers on a fly cast stick out that little bit more reducing the tendency to tangle.
Click to expand...

Thanks Jim, I have often found myself nodding in approval on reading your posts as well, so no surprise to me that we are broadly in agreement on many topics. However, we mustn't keep meeting like this, otherwise people will begin to talk :eek: :p

Seriously though fella, the density of fluoro is pretty well the only value it has for me. When X-line (which I think was the first fluoro in the UK) first came out a good few years ago, I contacted the seller, because I found the properties he was claiming for the stuff very attractive, and I was soon the proud owner of a very expensive 1000 yards or so of it in (I don't recall exactly) either 10 or 12lb BS. I loaded my reels and headed for the lake, decided on a margin swim, and walked a rod out wearing my chesties, placing the baited rig and a handful of freebies in a likely spot, then retreated to the bank, laying the line carefully behind me as I went. I placed my second rig in a similar manner, in a different spot, then settled down. Sadly, no takes during the night....but it was when I tried to wind in that the real disappointment came. The first line seemed slightly snagged on the bottom, a common occurrence in that lake as the bed can have odd larger stones amongst the gravel, so I twitched the rod as usual to release the line....and the stuff parted instantly, with virtually no resistance. I was speechless! I had several similar incidents during that session, so I decided to strip the reels and keep the stuff for hook links only. A week or two later, after several hook link breakages, I found another home for the line. I doubt the crows down the tip minded, probably used it for nesting material...they certainly weren't in any danger from it :p

I know the stuff has improved since that first batch, and it is now recognised that you need to substantially up your usual BS when using it, because the slightest nick from anything vaguely sharp on the lake/river bed results in the line parting unacceptably easily when using the finer diameters. Most of the lads were going to breaking strains of upwards of 20lbs when using it for it's fast sinking properties, i.e, where hiding your line mattered (clear water margins, with VERY large, crafty old 'seen it all' Leney warriors to try and fool)

I have not used that particular brand since then, nor ever intend to. I know it has improved over time, and no doubt someone will now relate how they towed the Queen Mary with it....but its not for me :D Some fluoros are, in my opinion, much better than that, but they ARE all rather brittle, and vulnerable to sudden failure due to damage that ordinary mono shrugs off. 'Treat with caution' I think best describes fluoro, certainly as a main line.

Cheers, Dave.
 
The softest I've found was Grand Max Soft Plus. Felt great and used it as hook link in 13.7lb bs variety (0.235mm). Had the barbs going on the first day of using it,,though I'd cracked it. Well I had..had 3 crack off from 3 fish in 3 sepparate swims. In disgust I reverted to braid...1st cast, barbel 11-11. Nuff said.
Not touched the stuff since. If you aint got the confidnce in your tackle....
 
David Gauntlett said:
Thanks Jim, I have often found myself nodding in approval on reading your posts as well, so no surprise to me that we are broadly in agreement on many topics. However, we mustn't keep meeting like this, otherwise people will begin to talk :eek: :p

Seriously though fella, the density of fluoro is pretty well the only value it has for me. When X-line (which I think was the first fluoro in the UK) first came out a good few years ago, I contacted the seller, because I found the properties he was claiming for the stuff very attractive, and I was soon the proud owner of a very expensive 1000 yards or so of it in (I don't recall exactly) either 10 or 12lb BS. I loaded my reels and headed for the lake, decided on a margin swim, and walked a rod out wearing my chesties, placing the baited rig and a handful of freebies in a likely spot, then retreated to the bank, laying the line carefully behind me as I went. I placed my second rig in a similar manner, in a different spot, then settled down. Sadly, no takes during the night....but it was when I tried to wind in that the real disappointment came. The first line seemed slightly snagged on the bottom, a common occurrence in that lake as the bed can have odd larger stones amongst the gravel, so I twitched the rod as usual to release the line....and the stuff parted instantly, with virtually no resistance. I was speechless! I had several similar incidents during that session, so I decided to strip the reels and keep the stuff for hook links only. A week or two later, after several hook link breakages, I found another home for the line. I doubt the crows down the tip minded, probably used it for nesting material...they certainly weren't in any danger from it :p

I know the stuff has improved since that first batch, and it is now recognised that you need to substantially up your usual BS when using it, because the slightest nick from anything vaguely sharp on the lake/river bed results in the line parting unacceptably easily when using the finer diameters. Most of the lads were going to breaking strains of upwards of 20lbs when using it for it's fast sinking properties, i.e, where hiding your line mattered (clear water margins, with VERY large, crafty old 'seen it all' Leney warriors to try and fool)

I have not used that particular brand since then, nor ever intend to. I know it has improved over time, and no doubt someone will now relate how they towed the Queen Mary with it....but its not for me :D Some fluoros are, in my opinion, much better than that, but they ARE all rather brittle, and vulnerable to sudden failure due to damage that ordinary mono shrugs off. 'Treat with caution' I think best describes fluoro, certainly as a main line.

Cheers, Dave.
Click to expand...

Yet more back slapping, Dave. Enjoyed your post immensely. I first used fluoro when trout fishing many years ago when the stuff first hit the shelves. I think that it was Grand Riverge 8lb and had the strength of cotton. No doubt fluoro has come on a lot since then and I now have confidence in using it when trout fishing. But, there is nothing in a reservoir to abrade the line and the line is changed fairly frequently. Incidentally, a top fly fisherman that I know never uses fluoro and would have nothing to do with it.

I have used fluoro when barbel fishing and a good friend of mine recommended a particular brand, not one of the mainstream makes, which does seem to be very good. Clearly, I'm not at liberty to divulge the brand but spools can be obtained from him with the manufacturer's details removed, and of course quality comes at a price. But in all seriousness, it does seem to be very good and I would only use that particular brand. In response to Terry's post, I agree, I'm far happier with braid, at least you can easily spot where there is fraying.
 
Very interesting posts chaps...I have experimented with Fluro as main line for some years and my conclusion in the end was not to ever bother again..!!..:eek:

Terry,

If youve not done so already i would recommend braid as main line especially for a small clear river like the Teme, it works wonders for me on my local stretch of the Stour which just like the Teme is small and pretty much clear, in fact my catch rates greatly improved when i used braid as main line..;)
 
Interesting points Dave, i have also read about what youve just said..It does mention it on the stu morgan and guy rob dvd and they show you underwater shots of fluro and amazingly it stuck out like a sore thumb due to attracting small debris matter on it..
 
Have never considered using braid as mainline Craig...seems counterintuitive (esp on small clear rivers)! The Dorset Stour was my 'first love':)
ATVB
T
 
I think this is a great thread, especially for someone like me who is fairly new to barbel fishing. I particularly valued Dave G's post. I have only thought of fluro as having value because of its sinking ability but can only see that of general benefit on rivers when used as a leader. This links me to a related dilemma that perhaps folk could help with. If using a running rig and looking to create a safe zone with a good hook length (up to 3ft) and a leader, both pinned to the river bed, how concerned should I be about barbel feeling the weight of the leader material (not thinking leaded here but a good alternative) when they pick up the bait? For running rigs I feel drawn to rig tubing where the mainline is threaded through in order to reduce the potential resistance. The only problem I have with this is that there seems to be more sophistication in leader material products compared to tubing (colour/camoflage options for example). There are other aspects to consider I know in terms of the material for that 3 ft section above the lead, but I would welcome thoughts on whether or not I should be concerned by fishing being sensitive to the weight of the leader material. Many thanks.
 
Howard..my only advice to you would be "keep it simple"...
Backlead (whatever mainline you're using) and try to keep your backlead, running ledger, and hookbait in as straight a line as possible. Then the first resistance the barbel will feel is the rod tip which, IMHO, should offer substantial resistance i.e. NOT a quiver tip.
Whether or not the hooklink should be all soft, or part soft (i.e. whether to use uncoated braid, or coated braid with coating stripped off the last few inches) is a moot question. IMHO the only good thing about coated braid is its more resistant to fraying. Yes it may reduce tangles, but casting correctly should cut out tangles anyway.
 
Craig Wood said:
Interesting points Dave, i have also read about what youve just said..It does mention it on the stu morgan and guy rob dvd and they show you underwater shots of fluro and amazingly it stuck out like a sore thumb due to attracting small debris matter on it..
Click to expand...

Sorry Craig I think you have your facts wrong about the Stu Morgan and Guy Rob dvd . Up close & personal Part 1 Summer & Autumn .

They are using fluro for their hook links and recommend its use .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top