Couple things I've been thinking about lately:

The San Diego Jam Knot: I had been looking for the best knot for florocarbon and read a lot of good things about the San Diego knot. I've been using it for a few months and it's a great knot. The detail item that makes this knot great for florocarbon is this ... When you cinch an improved clinch knot on florocarbon, it tends to get friction right at the end as the knot siezes up. This friction thins and weakens the line right at the knot. In 30lb floro it doesn't seem to be a problem, but in the lighter pound tests it was giving me fits trying to get my knots not to do that. When you cinch the San Diego knot, it doesn't 'twizzle' the line at all and cinches up immediately. You gotta try it if you're fishing florocarbon.

Florocarbon vs. Triple Fish: It takes a long time to gain confidence in new terminal tackle, espeically line. One thing that I dislike about floro is that despite what people say about it being 'invisible' underwater, I don't believe this to be true. I can still see florocarbon just fine under water. It does have a certain dullness to it that I like because it makes it more subtle, but when I compare that to triple fish in the green section of the line, the triple fish camoescent is much harder to see. I believe there is something to that, and it will be interesting to see how floro gets bit for me going forward.

Stocker Trout: The stocker trout is on my mind a lot lately too. It's the perfect dilemma of swimbaits. It gets bit really well. It is very versatile and it generates bites from really big fish. At the same time, it is a very difficult bait to hook and land fish on. Recently, I've had some good success on stocker trout where bigger fish have been pounding it so hard that they are getting hooked on the top hook. It's a part of my arsenal these days for sure, but I also cringe when I close my eyes and see big fish getting away from me. In any case, the stocker trout is probably one of the most underrated big baits out there.

Generic Live Trout: The live trout is basically scaring me. I've thrown it two trips now and I haven't gotten one YET. But it's only a matter of time. Watch out for this bait.

Jigs: Jigs are still on my mind big time. I have been picturing this really big 1oz jig with a 6/0 ultrapoint and a 5" mad man craw on it. I don't have this jig yet, but I'm going to start looking for one like this soon. I think I need an 8' flipping stick...

Hope everyone is getting some time on the water. It's getting cold and the crowds are leaving the lakes. It's time to FEESSHHH.

Hey Rob, lots of interesting points there. I think I can expand on the fluorocarbon line thing. It is not invisible in water(as so often advertised), it refracts light at the same intensity as water. Basically you won't have an underwater mirror of light reflecting off your line, or a transfused core of light running down your line from the waters' surface. Color has little to do with this as it is all about the refractive index. The lack of memory and lack of stretch is what has sold me on the FC for my down baits though, I think fish sensitivity to line size has more to do with the increased mobility of lures(with lighter line) than actual bass vision of line diameter. At least that's what Pat Donoho told me one day while we were on Mead, and I've decided it makes more sense to me to think about line that way. When you get down to the fractions of a Milimeter, how does 6 lb. really become less conspicous to bass than 12 lb?

Saltwater fishing seems the same, lighter line with smaller pinheads to give them the mobility to swim into the chumline on a picky bite, but when the fish come to the boat, any line gets bit.

If been thinking of line size too. Do you think the diameter of line displaces water in front of a lure and a fish can feel it? Heavy line say 20# would displace alot of water to a fish I would think. I'm thinking of downsizing my line on my crankbaits just because of this reason....BassMan

I got this off a Google search -- I presume this is the knot you're speaking of?:

http://www.calfishing.com/dc/user_files/1613.jpg

- jeff

-----------------------
Every day Congress convenes, we lose a little more of our LIBERTY!!!

(-- Mark Levin, radio-show host/KSFO 3-6pm)

yeah that's the one. A little tricky at first, but not too hard to tie after a few times.

Hey guys, I quit using fluorocarbon after doing some pull tests. Have you ever wondered why fluorocarbon is IGFA recognized? This is what the manufactures don’t want you to know.

10# Seguar .0115, Line broke at 11# 3 oz average for 5 tests.

10# Vanish .0105, Line broke at 9# 13 oz average for 6 tests.

12# Vanish .011, Line broke at 11# 1oz average for 4 tests.

17# Vanish .015, Line broke at 13# 4 oz average for 4 tests.

12# Maxima .015, Line broke at 19# 5oz average for 4 tests

10# Bass Pro Shop Excel .012, Line broke at 16# average for 5 tests.

17# Spiderline Super Mono .016, Line broke at 26# for 1 test.

I have read articles that state fluorocarbon allows you to up size your line one size over mono. Why do that when the lighter size mono is stronger than the heavier size fluorocarbon.

Personally, it's not just about break strength. Flourocarbon is more abrasion resistant and more sensitive than mono. I use it mainly for those reasons. MY PB Bass was a double digit fish that was in a down tree in the water. Hooked up on a Slammer with 65# Power pro and a 20# flouro leader. The fish ended up getting wrapped in the tree branches. I truly believe had I hooked this fish with a mono leader I would have been buying a new Slammer. The flourocarbon leader wasn't even nicked. Just that alone sold me. my .02
Mitch

Mitch --

Let me add to your important points, that *less stretch* is another 'plus' factor w/fluoro.

- jeff

-----------------------
Every day Congress convenes, we lose a little more of our LIBERTY!!!

(-- Mark Levin, radio-show host/KSFO 3-6pm)

Henry,

I said florocarbon, not Vanish :) :) :)

I did try vanish once and it was awful. Have you tried any tests with Sugoi or the Japan florocarbons? It looked like in your test that Seguar come out pretty decent.

Your tests results can be used to support mono over fluorocarbon, but maybe they can also be used to support Seguar over mono and other fluorocarbon brands.

I assume you used fresh line, but the results might be much more supportive of Seguar if the tests were conducted after numerous instances of all of the lines rubbing against logs and rocks after one or more full days of hard fishing between line changes. Did breakage take place in the line or at the knot, and was each knot the optimal one for the particular line tested?

Very interesting test results. Thanks for providing the results. This is a very important issue, and there are many variables.

Bob