# Braided Line Leader Material Question



## lukejhoward (Jul 1, 2013)

Hey everyone,

So I just decided to invest in braided line and I am wondering if the whole fluorocarbon 'leader material" is all that it's cracked up to be. Does anyone think that using plain old fluorocarbons line would work as a leader material for braid? I am a college student and I honestly don't feel that paying 15.99 for 25 yds. of leader material is justified (especially since i retie and experiment with a lot of baits/lures). Does anyone use plain old fluorocarbons line as a braid leader? I need some opinions.


----------



## lukejhoward (Jul 1, 2013)

I guess I could also add this...does anyone use monofilament as a braid leader?


----------



## Wishiniwasfishing (Apr 1, 2012)

I just buy fluorocarbon line and cut out 1.5 feet and tie it on i forget the name I'll have to check out my bag tomorrow but it's blue black and red box you can get it anywhere it's 10$ for 125 yards and lasts for a long time if you are just tying leaders 


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire


----------



## Bassbme (Mar 11, 2012)

I personally don't use leaders, but to answer your question ..... yes, you can use standard fluorocarbon line for leaders. I can't say for sure, but I seriously doubt there is a difference between the line for a spool marked as leader material, and one that isn't marked at leader material. If there is, I can't imagine it being much of a difference?

As far as mono filament for leaders..... when I used to use leaders I used regular nylon mono filament the majority of the time. While nylon mono is more visible than fluorocarbon mono, nylon mono has more stretch than fluorocarbon so it acts as a shock absorber when you're fishing for big hard fighting fish, or if you're fishing with heavy tackle and thick cover in close quarters. If you want the highest sensitivity, you're going to want to use a fluorocarbon instead of a nylon mono for your leaders. 

If you're curious as to why I don't use leaders, it's because I don't use braided line very often. When I do I'm using it in heavy cover where there is something in the water to help disguise the line, so I'm not worried about line visibility. Also, when I use braid I'm fishing short line techniques and strong hook sets. I don't like the idea of an extra knot between me and the hook. Then there's the whole thing of having to retie a new leader a few times a day because your leader gets progressively shorter when you have to retie because of line abrasion, or when changing baits. 

You could use a longer leader to help alleviate that problem, but then you run the risk of having the knot connecting your main line and leader together, passing through your rod guides. That will eventually weaken the connecting knot, and it can also affect your casting accuracy. Especially if you are using lighter baits. 

I'm not saying I wouldn't use a leader, because if you use braided line for the majority of your fishing, and you're not always fishing in heavy cover, a leader is probably a good idea. I'm just giving some reasons why I don't use them.


----------



## davef (Aug 7, 2007)

I've been using Vanish line as a flourocarbon leader material for a couple of years now. It has worked fine for me in all conditions except for in freezing weather. It does fray pretty quickly and you need to keep an eye on it. 

I mostly fish for pan fish and if the leader does fail it doesn't bother me. When I fish for steel head I do use Seagur flouro though.


----------



## sherman51 (Apr 12, 2011)

I've used both 15 and 20 lb braid without a leader for bass and done just fine. I believe with the smaller diameter line a leader is not needed. but for walleye fishing I do use a leader and when I do use a leader I use seaguar in 20 lb and im a firm believer in using a good fluro or not using a leader at all. but there is a lot of people that swear by mono leaders.

I use to use vanish for my leader up on erie but I had to many broken leaders. I switched to seaguar and problem solved.
sherman


----------



## Big Joshy (Apr 26, 2004)

Leader fluorocarbon is harder and stiffer so probably more abrasion resistant than castable fluorocarbon which needs to be a softer blend to me more manageable.

I like to use the leader material if im fishing real clear water for something that will hang the bait in the fishes face, like ice fishing for perch, casting spinners for trout, Even fishing for bluegill. where you want the braid to help you to feel the bite but you need to keep it as invisible as possible. The harder material would also help if the line will be repeatedly coming into contact with the fishes teeth. 

All that being said for all other situations where you need a leader I like to just use red label Segaur Fluorocarbon. Their abrazx is more abrasion resistant and might be even better. For me if im fishing moving baits where there is not alot of time for a fish to inspect it I will use a heavier leader than my mainline braid. Tying a knot in fluorocarbon weakens it significantly so going heavier ensures that I will have the power to straighten hooks and pop baits out of rocks. For me its 10lb braid gets 12-14lb florocarbon.
Up on Lake Erie throwing heavy jigs around all those sharp zebra mussels I use
15lb braid and 17lb Flurocarbon.


----------



## Intimidator (Nov 25, 2008)

No one wants to believe this because of the "invisible" hype, but testing and studies have been done that proves Fluorocarbon is as visible and opaque as braid underwater.....there's Another good article in In- Fisherman called the Clear Connection For Panfish. Fish that eat translucent critters can easily "see" Fluoro. ..it comes down to making your lure irresistible to them.


----------



## Bassbme (Mar 11, 2012)

Intimidator said:


> No one wants to believe this because of the "invisible" hype, but testing and studies have been done that proves Fluorocarbon is as visible and opaque as braid underwater..... can easily "see" Fluoro. ..it comes down to making your lure irresistible to them.


Nobody wants to believe it, because it's not true. And no I don't say that because I believe the hype. I say it because I believe my eyes. 

If you want to say that with comparable pound test lines, that braid is as hard to see as fluorocarbon then I will agree with that to a point. But if you're trying to say that with lines of comparable diameters, that braided line isn't anymore visible than fluorocarbon, or even a nylon mono filament......... sorry, you're just plain wrong.


----------



## Intimidator (Nov 25, 2008)

Heck, who would have figured!!

There's several articles on this but I'll excerpt a couple quotes...
"When you examine fluorocarbon under water with a camera or dive mask, you might be surprised to see it's as visible and opaque as braid"
Fishing line expert..."since fluorocarbon line is round, it acts as a lens, gathering and reflecting light rather than allowing it to pass straight through....if fluorocarbon were flatter and made with square edges, there would be less of a lens effect, and it would be much more transparent under water"!




Bassbme said:


> Nobody wants to believe it, because it's not true. And no I don't say that because I believe the hype. I say it because I believe my eyes.
> 
> If you want to say that with comparable pound test lines, that braid is as hard to see as fluorocarbon then I will agree with that to a point. But if you're trying to say that with lines of comparable diameters, that braided line isn't anymore visible than fluorocarbon, or even a nylon mono filament......... sorry, you're just plain wrong.


----------



## Bassbme (Mar 11, 2012)

Intimidator said:


> Heck, who would have figured!!
> 
> There's several articles on this but I'll excerpt a couple quotes...
> "When you examine fluorocarbon under water with a camera or dive mask, you might be surprised to see it's as visible and opaque as braid"
> Fishing line expert..."since fluorocarbon line is round, it acts as a lens, gathering and reflecting light rather than allowing it to pass straight through....if fluorocarbon were flatter and made with square edges, there would be less of a lens effect, and it would be much more transparent under water"!


Don't you find it odd that the excerpts from the two quotes you posted contradict themselves? One quote states that fluorocarbon is as opaque as braid, yet the other quote states that fluorocarbon would be much more transparent if it were made with square edges? So which is it? Is fluorocarbon line opaque, or is it transparent?

The fact is that fluorocarbon line is transparent, or at the very least, translucent. The same cannot be said of braided line. If you lay fluorocarbon line, or even a nylon mono filament line against an object, you can see the color of the object show through the line. That helps the line blend into its surroundings. The same cannot be said about braided line. If you lay braided line against an object, you're going to see the line, unless the line and the object are the same color. 

Is fluorocarbon line invisible, or invisible under all conditions? No. And to believe so is foolish. But to imply that in most, if not all instances, that a fluorocarbon line is just as easy to see as a braided line of comparable diameter, is even more foolish. I don't care if you're looking down into the water, from underwater, or from outer space. It's just not true.

If you want to change the debate to the visibility of braid and fluorocarbon in comparable test weights, that's one thing. And even then there comes a point where fluorocarbon will be less visible. Of course there's always the debate of whether or not line visibility plays a roll in how many bites you get in a day to fall back on.


----------



## Intimidator (Nov 25, 2008)

The 2 quotes don't contradict themselves, fluorocarbon is opaque (which just means it's not transparent) because it reflects light...it is not laying on anything, showing that color, it gives off the colors of its surroundings and the colors that reach the depth of water that you are fishing.
If it was not round, it would not be a lens, thus opaque....if it was square it would allow light to pass through, thus transparent. 
The point is that Most think Fluorocarbon is invisible and it's not....it is marketed as invisible and it's not.
So, if you're buying it, or using it, because you think it is invisible....it is not!
It is opaque....just like braid! To what degree wasn't being argued at this time!

And you looking at something on land is gonna be totally different, than how a fish would see it under water, especially with all the various factors, like rods/cones, light absorption, visible light, etc....even underwater we would see things differently than fish.
Most people in their right mind, won't be using same diameters of Fluorocarbon or braid...heavy braid is for junk fishing, topwater, or Big game fishing, where stealth is not as needed.
The debate that rages is if braid as small as a human hair can be distinguished over comparable fluoro....now that we know fluorocarbon is opaque....IT MAKES MY CHOICE EVEN EASIER.

My other point is that the artifical lure fisherman's technique is more important than any piece of equipment....the fish will concentrate on eating the lure no matter what, if the fisherman presents it properly.




Bassbme said:


> Don't you find it odd that the excerpts from the two quotes you posted contradict themselves? One quote states that fluorocarbon is as opaque as braid, yet the other quote states that fluorocarbon would be much more transparent if it were made with square edges? So which is it? Is fluorocarbon line opaque, or is it transparent?
> 
> The fact is that fluorocarbon line is transparent, or at the very least, translucent. The same cannot be said of braided line. If you lay fluorocarbon line, or even a nylon mono filament line against an object, you can see the color of the object show through the line. That helps the line blend into its surroundings. The same cannot be said about braided line. If you lay braided line against an object, you're going to see the line, unless the line and the object are the same color.
> 
> ...


----------



## lordofthepunks (Feb 24, 2009)

I agree that this is a dumb comparison...


First off... The term opaque is getting thrown around all of the sudden... Obviously braid would be considered an opaque object because you cannot see through it in any way, shape or form...

But in the same paragraph you are saying (or the study is saying) that floro is not less opaque because it works as a lens.. In what world is there such a lens that cannot be seen through? The very definition of a lens is a transparent object

A lens BENDS light... It does not reflect light


----------



## lordofthepunks (Feb 24, 2009)

So if floro is now being called a lens, that does not mean you can't see through it... It simply means that the object behind it is distorted.... That does not make it opaque...


----------



## grub_man (Feb 28, 2005)

bassbme,

They hype about the invisibility of fluorocarbon has to deal with its index of refraction, and a poor application of physics. Yes the index of refraction of fluorocarbon is close to that of water, but the geometry of the surfaces as light is going from one medium to another are equally (perhaps more important) in this case.

Suppose you have two slabs of material (slab meaning a boundary shaped like a plane) placed next to one another. When you have a light beam traveling through one of the materials, it encounters the boundary where the index of refraction (or the speed that the wave propagates through the material) suddenly changes, some light gets reflected and some gets transmitted. When the indices of refraction are close, then a greater percentage of the light is transmitted. This is what the marketing team wants you to recall from Physics 101!

Now, the monkey wrench gets thrown in, we don't live in the ideal world of Physics 101, where fishing rods are massless rigid rods, lines are massless, and all materials are in large isotropic slabs. We live in the real world. Enter graduate level electrodynamics. Boundary conditions are not always simple, and the same laws of physics apply, but the solutions become much more complex. Line is more closely approximated by a cylinder than a slab, you need to pull out Hankel Functions and work much harder to solve the problem of what happens at the boundary. What it boils down to is that the result doesn't behave like a slab.

Mono and Fluoro lines of similar diameter have very much the same visibility underwater due to their geometry. Under certain light conditions, particularly when you have calm water and direct sunlight (a high density of parallel light rays), I can buy the argument that braid will be less visible, because the braid will reflect a small amount of light due to its color (inability to absorb certain wavelengths), while the mono/fluoro will gather, transmit, and reflect light similar to a lens and could create a bright streak under specific circumstances. Under cloudy or most other conditions the lens effects are greatly diminished where the light is mostly scattered and you have fewer parallel rays, and doesn't result in something significantly easier to see. 

Now for my two cents on line and fishing. The bottom line is that there is no such thing as an invisible line. Under certain conditions, one line may be more visible than another, but frankly I don't think the optical properties of the line matters one bit. Even in the case of 'line shy' fish, I think it is more what is done with the line (where and how it lands), or how the diameter of the line and its mechanical properties affect our ability to control presentation. After all, there are very few ways of presenting a lure or bait to the fish that do not have hook that is clearly visible, at least partially, to the fish. If a 'line shy' fish can overcome a much thicker opaque material sticking out of its meal, it certainly doesn't have the mental faculties to know that much thinner often translucent object emanating from its meal means bad news.

Joe


----------



## katfish (Apr 7, 2004)

> After all, there are very few ways of presenting a lure or bait to the fish that do not have hook that is clearly visible, at least partially, to the fish. If a 'line shy' fish can overcome a much thicker opaque material sticking out of its meal, it certainly doesn't have the mental faculties to know that much thinner often translucent object emanating from its meal means bad news


I will add that fish that can be fooled with shiny plastic or metal are not as intelligent as the fish that eat them


----------



## lordofthepunks (Feb 24, 2009)

katfish said:


> I will add that fish that can be fooled with shiny plastic or metal are not as intelligent as the fish that eat them


or it could be their just not as large...


and anyone who has ever fished for bass have caught shovelheads as well, often with shiny plastic or metal...


----------



## lordofthepunks (Feb 24, 2009)

katfish said:


> I will add that fish that can be fooled with shiny plastic or metal are not as intelligent as the fish that eat them


however... I will give you props on that shovelhead... that's extremely impressive and I have the utmost respect for true trophy shovelhead hunters...


hunting for trophy shovelheads is easily, by miles, my second favorite type of fishing...


----------



## Bad Bub (Jan 17, 2006)

I liked it better when we argue about the a-rig....

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Ohub Campfire mobile app


----------



## Intimidator (Nov 25, 2008)

DANG JOE....I was just gonna say to Steve, "lens effect", and it wasn't my quote....but your explanation will do...I guess!




grub_man said:


> bassbme,
> 
> They hype about the invisibility of fluorocarbon has to deal with its index of refraction, and a poor application of physics. Yes the index of refraction of fluorocarbon is close to that of water, but the geometry of the surfaces as light is going from one medium to another are equally (perhaps more important) in this case.
> 
> ...


----------



## Bassbme (Mar 11, 2012)

Joe, I understand what you're saying in your post. As far as how the geometry of fishing line, or I should say, transparent or translucent fishing line applies to this discussion. It's the concave or inner wall of the line that concentrates, and reflects the light, more so than the convex outer wall. The bright streak that nylon or fluorocarbon lines can sometimes display is just as much a product of its transparency, as it is its shape. IF braided line is less visible than fluorocarbon line under certain conditions, it isn't simply because its color reflects less light .... it's also because its opacity doesn't allow it to gather light.

As far as the rest of this debate goes ... We all know that marketing people are going to make claims about their products that are misleading or completely false, just to generate sales. Hype sells. But I'm not much of a "buy the hype" kind of person when it comes to fishing equipment these days. I've been at it long enough to know better than to buy the hype. 

I did my own little line visibility test by filling up my kitchen sink with water, and putting two equal lengths of line in it. One of the lines is braid, the other line is fluorocarbon. The braided line is 50# moss green Power Pro, with an advertised diameter of .014. The fluorocarbon line is 17# clear Vicious Pro Elite, with an advertised diameter of .0162. One picture was taken looking down into the water. The other was taken through the bottom of a Pyrex baking dish placed against the surface of the water.

I colored two areas on the fluorocarbon line so you'd be able to see it clearly. Those two areas are at the bottom of the pictures, below the drain. I put the glass beads on the braided line to help keep it on the bottom of the sink.

Can you see the fluorocarbon line in places other than the sections I colored? Sure. I never said fluorocarbon line was invisible. But if ANYONE can truthfully say that they can see the fluorocarbon line just as easily as the braid........ well..... As a matter of fact, you can even see the shadow created by the braided line. Where's the shadow from the fluorocarbon line? 

Has this been a stupid debate? It sure has. But when you read something that is blatantly wrong...... sometimes you just gotta call BS


----------



## lordofthepunks (Feb 24, 2009)

Bassbme said:


> Joe, I understand what you're saying in your post. As far as the geometry of fishing line, or I should say, transparent or translucent fishing line applies to this discussion. It's the concave or inner wall of the line that concentrates, and reflects the light, more so than the convex outer wall. The bright streak that nylon or fluorocarbon lines can sometimes display is just as much a product of its transparency, as it is its shape. IF braided line is less visible than fluorocarbon line under certain conditions, it isn't simply because its color reflects less light .... it's also because its opacity doesn't allow it to gather light.
> 
> As far as the rest of this debate goes ... We all know that marketing people are going to make claims about their products that are misleading or completely false, just to generate sales. Hype sells. But I'm not much of a "buy the hype" kind of person when it comes to fishing equipment these days. I've been at it long enough to know better than to buy the hype.
> 
> ...




im not sure how this is possible... seeing as how fluorocarbon is actually opaque and all... don't your camera or your eyes know this? I mean, some unknown source told us that the braid is just as invisible as the floro so clearly your test is flawed... after all, your test shows that you cannot see the floro, but you can see the braid...

I cant wrap my brain around this...


----------



## lordofthepunks (Feb 24, 2009)

someone needs to tell all these dopes running around wearing glasses that they cant actually see through them because they are lenses and lenses are opaque...


----------



## fishslim (Apr 28, 2005)

I am confused to. Lol is this a fair test might need some more testing maybe your bathtub it is deeper might change things.hmmm


----------



## Shortdrift (Apr 5, 2004)

Bring your waders or hip boots and hop into my patio pond. The pond is 30" deep with a river stone bottom. This should allow for a very realistic and conclusive test. The test could be conducted during sunshine conditions and then I can erect a tarp to simulate overcast conditions. Maybe somebody with a Go Pro camera could be present to take some underwater pictures.
I will not partake or view the test as I already know that Fluro is less visible than Braid.


----------



## Intimidator (Nov 25, 2008)

Read the attachment....the point is that fluorocarbon is not invisible....maybe in some circumstances braid may be less visible??



Shortdrift said:


> Bring your waders or hip boots and hop into my patio pond. The pond is 30" deep with a river stone bottom. This should allow for a very realistic and conclusive test. The test could be conducted during sunshine conditions and then I can erect a tarp to simulate overcast conditions. Maybe somebody with a Go Pro camera could be present to take some underwater pictures.
> I will not partake or view the test as I already know that Fluro is less visible than Braid.


----------



## Bad Bub (Jan 17, 2006)

Nobody was arguing that fluorocarbon is "invisible"... the argument is that fluorocarbon is very much "less visible" than braid. Flouro is in no way opaque. It allows some light to pass through, regardless if it's bent through its "lens like properties". Braid does not allow any light to pass through, thereby making it opaque. It's like a wall versus a window. I can still see the glass in the window, but not as well as a wall painted black or "low vis green".... I don't understand how this debate continues to rage on year after year... 

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Ohub Campfire mobile app


----------



## Bassbme (Mar 11, 2012)

LOTP .... I was having trouble wrapping my brain around it too. I even went so far as starting to wonder how fish can see under water.

Fishslim .... I had thought about doing the test in my bath tub, because as you pointed out ....the tub is deeper, and the results may be different in deeper water. I just didn't want anyone to see my non slip Scooby Doo bath tub stickers. One of them is Daphne in a bikini, and with this being a family site ..... I decided against it. 

Shortdrift .... the offer of the use of your patio pond in the name of science is commendable to say the least. But like you..... I'll pass because I really see no reason in performing a test, to prove something that I already know. Plus ...... I'm not sure if I could live with myself if my tramping around in waders messed up what I am sure, is a beautiful river stone bottom.


----------



## Shortdrift (Apr 5, 2004)

Intimidator said:


> Read the attachment....the point is that fluorocarbon is not invisible....maybe in some circumstances braid may be less visible??


Did I say it was invisible?

"I will not partake or view the test as I already know that Fluro is less visible than Braid."


----------



## Intimidator (Nov 25, 2008)

Some more quotes...
"Line profile" is more than just the "actual" visibility of the line. It is also the amount of water disturbance created as the line moves through he water. Remember, the bass has a "lateral line" that helps it "see" objects. without really seeing them. This leads me to believe that line diameter is just as important as actual line visibility. If you use larger diameter, higher pound line, this will offset the benefit of reduced visibility"!

"Fluorocarbon line is supposedly rendered virtually invisible due to it having the same light refractive index as water. But what about "background" against which the line is imposed? A dark background will present significant contrast to the "clear" line making it extremely visible"!

"Studies have shown that fluorocarbon lines, those touted to be invisible, are of negligible benefit in dark or low light conditions. The detection of "invisible lines" by bass compared to those that were not was little different". 
"Ask yourself. How often do you fish in bright light and extremely clear water conditions? Not often I bet".

"A line doesn't disappear when its color fades. It becomes brown, black or a shade of grey. In the final analysis the best fishing line color, if reduced visibility is your goal, is that which contrasts the least with the background. In other words, the best fishing line color is the one that, given the conditions at hand, blends with the background."

"In optimum clear water conditions, which those of us who fish lakes and rivers rarely see, the color red, as we see it out of water, is practically gone at 10' and has assumed a color of grey or black. Orange and yellow are quick to follow fading out completely at 25' to 35'. Green hangs in a bit deeper with the family of blues continuing to show in water 60' and deeper. In stained water the effect on all colors fading is worse. 
Interestingly, notice that in muddy water the blue family of colors is the first to go. 
But, under normal, ever changing conditions including such things as water clarity, time of day, season, angle of light hitting the water and amount of particulate in water impacts the amount of light penetrating the water. This in turn affects the degree to which colors will fade as water deepens. So, what might be the best fishing line color one day or in one circumstance may not be the next day or on a different body of water."

"Contrast to background is what makes line visible to bass, not the actual color. For example, red fishing line and lures appear black as they sink into deeper water. In fact, red is one of the first colors to fade away. So it isn't the color red as it appears above water. It's how much it contrasts against the background environment or water surface.
Furthermore,the degree of contrast depends on several factors other than and in addition to a fishing line's actual color such as water clarity, bottom type, time of day, clear or overcast skies or even season. Because of this an in depth discussion about the intricacies of bass vision and the many affects environmental influences have on it is discussed elsewhere."

"For example, with 20lb test Fireline Braid you have line that has the same diameter as 6lb mono. This also means you will be able to cast further. Additionally, there will be less water displacement with smaller diameter line so not only will the bass be less able to see the line with its eyes but with its lateral line as well."

"There are many benefits to using the thinnest line braid with the highest strength other than just landing your bass. 

Increased Strikes
Less visibility to bass can mean more hook ups when using slow moving soft plastic lures. 
Better Lure Action Crankbaits dive deeper, Jerkbaits retain manufacturer intended action. Live bait will be able to behave naturally on thin line and small hooks. Bass notice, don't think they don't. 
Increased Sensitivity
Enables the angler to better detect bass picking up plastic lures and finesse jigs. 
Transmits stronger signals to anglers of bottom structure and types of cover. 
Enhances Casting Less wind resistance makes for longer casts. Better on spinning reels."


----------



## lordofthepunks (Feb 24, 2009)

Intimidator... We all know what your doing.. Grasping at anything that will help you justify in your mind that using braid all the time is the right thing... Just because it's what you do doesn't make it the right way...


I feel like we are arguing about what's easier to see... A rope strung through the jungle or the Predator in his hologram like camo...


One other point... You scoffed at the notion of someone using comparable diameters in braid/floro... Guess what? That's what you are supposed to do... If you normally flip laydowns with 20lb floro and you want to use braid, you are SUPPOSED to use a comparable diameter braid...

Flipping with 20lb braid is like taking a spatula to a gun fight...


----------



## lordofthepunks (Feb 24, 2009)

If you have a green colored rope in the jungle, maybe it's slightly harder to see than the predator

If you have a black rope in the pitch black night... Maybe it's just as hard to see as the predator

If you have a white rope in a white room... Maybe it would be hard to see like the predator...


Common link? The predator is hard to see in all those scenarios but you have to change the color of the rope to fit its surroundings in order for it to even compete...




Let's not forget this "water displaced by bigger diameter line" hurdle that fluorocarbon creates with a fishes lateral line...

Least we forget that most bass are around some sort of cover... If you've used braid than you are well aware if the deafening sound that braid makes when dragged over wood/grass/rocks/your rod guides...

But I'm sure that doesn't matter


----------



## Intimidator (Nov 25, 2008)

That's actually not what I'm doing! 




lordofthepunks said:


> Intimidator... We all know what your doing.. Grasping at anything that will help you justify in your mind that using braid all the time is the right thing... Just because it's what you do doesn't make it the right way...


----------



## Bad Bub (Jan 17, 2006)

lordofthepunks said:


> If you have a green colored rope in the jungle, maybe it's slightly harder to see than the predator
> 
> If you have a black rope in the pitch black night... Maybe it's just as hard to see as the predator
> 
> ...


That's pretty good Punk!

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Ohub Campfire mobile app


----------



## Bassbme (Mar 11, 2012)

As to the additional quotes provided. Who is the fool that you quoted for that first quote?

In the first place, you're talking about a round object that is .020 of an inch in diameter for 30# test fluorocarbon line. How much water does this fool think something that thin displaces? Secondly, water displacement is what helps a bass find a silent bait. Especially in off colored water. That's why lure manufactures put ridges on baits, that's why crank baits wobble, that's why swim baits have paddle tails, and so on. If anything, the added water displacement of a larger diameter line is going to HELP a fish find your bait ...... LOTP has already touched on the sound factor associated with braid. But what about the added water displacement that braided line has? Braid is not a smooth line. Even the slick braids have a texture to them. That texture increases surface area which increases water displacement. You may be like me, and think it's negligible at best. But I'm not the one posting quotes about the water displacement of line. Lastly concerning this first quote. A bass may use feel to help them find a bait, but we've been debating line visibility. 

On the second quote ....I cracked up when I read this one. First off, I cracked up because in an earlier post I said that if you lay fluorocarbon line against a colored background that the color behind the line shows through and helps camouflage the line. You poo pooed my post with something about the line not laying on anything. Now you're posting a quote that says that a dark background will present significant contrast to the clear line and make the line extremely visible. That is total BS. The line is clear. It will present no contrast at all. An opaque line will either present an extreme contrast, or it will blend in if the color of the line is the same or close to the same as the back ground..... How do I know what I say is true? I took more pictures. 

LOTP covered the third quote beautifully with his Predator, and colored rope in the jungle post. The only time you could see the Predator when he was in stealth mode was when he flashed his eyes. But he did that very rarely. Just like when fluorocarbon line can sometimes flash. It happens very rarely. I've only seen it a happen a handful of times in at least 10 years of fishing with fluorocarbon line. I've never seen fluorocarbon line flash underwater. It's always been with line just above the surface. And like the Predator's eyes. It does it once, and then its gone.

I really don't understand how any of the quotes about a lines color applies to fluorocarbon line? Fluorocarbon line is clear. It has no color that will morph into a different color. The only color fluorocarbon line is going to display, is the color on the other side of it. 

As to the quote that mentions 20 lb Fireline braid having the same diameter as 6# mono. First off..... Fireline is not a braid. It's a fused line. It starts off as a braid but is put under heat so the lines fuse together. The end product is a mono filament line. It has no bearing on this debate, but I just thought I'd correct the quote. Secondly..... what the heck is even said in that quote. It makes no sense at all. It mentions longer casting distance. Ok, I've never used Fireline, but I guess I'll buy that. Then it goes on to mention that water displacement with smaller lines thing again. But he is comparing lines of equal diameter? That quote sounds made up to me..... or at best it's a quote from a very confused person.

As far as the last part of the post. The first part deals with a lines visibility having an affect on the number of hook ups you can get. It implies (and I wholeheartedly agree) that a less visible line can help increase the number of bites, and thereby the number of hook ups you can get in a day. A less visible line is the whole idea of fluorocarbon line. The remainder of the last quote touts the advantages of braid and smaller diameter lines. I'm not going to disagree with any of it. It's all true. It doesn't cover any of the disadvantages of braid. But that's ok with me.

Now for the pictures I took that I mentioned earlier. I used the same two types and weights of lines I used in my prior line visibility test. 50# moss green Power Pro, and 17# clear Vicious Pro Elite fluorocarbon. I didn't color the ends of the fluorocarbon line this time, because the quote said "A dark background will present significant contrast to the "clear" line making it extremely visible"! So why color the line if I was going to be able to see it clearly. The only problem is........... I couldn't see it at all. LOL I also couldn't see the braid against the black background (enter LOTP's outstanding colored rope in the jungle post) So ....... I decided to turn on the flash, and see if the fluorocarbon line would show up. Sure enough, it did. But guess what? So did the braid. In the picture I took with the flash, you'll notice the fluorocarbon line being extremely visible in the lower right hand corner of the photo. That is what I would term as "flashing" This the first time I have ever seen fluorocarbon line flash under water. I don't know if it's the result of the line gathering and reflecting light as was talked about in an earlier post. Or if it's the camera's flash, reflecting off the stainless steel sink bottom and showing through the line. That section of line was off the bottom. Either way, it's extremely visible in that area of the line. Other than that, you can see the fluorocarbon line easier under the flash, but......... you can see the braid even more clearly. LOL Anyhow....... the pictures pretty much prove that the person responsible for the second quote is wrong. Without the flash you couldn't see the fluorocarbon line at all. With the flash you could see it, but other than in one area, it wasn't extremely visible, and it was less visible than the braid.

Intimidator ...... I guess I should give you props for continuing to try and fight the good fight .... But sometimes you just gotta say uncle, and tap out.


----------



## lordofthepunks (Feb 24, 2009)

Braid is fantastic...

I use it for finesse stuff, flipping heavy vegetation, frogging and some other stuff...

Use a leader when it's necessary, understand and accept its limitations and you will be fine... It's not ideal for all tactics but it can be an extremely helpful tool...



If people would remember that, and stop trying to use a pair of vice grips (so to speak) to twist off every bolt on the motor (and then advocate it as acceptable) a lot of people would catch more fish


----------



## Intimidator (Nov 25, 2008)

Intimidator ...... I guess I should give you props for continuing to try and fight the good fight .... But sometimes you just gotta say uncle, and tap out.[/QUOTE]


You know...never once did I voice my OPINION! I even brought scientific facts...I know how PUNK thinks....so I provided quotes from those he likes to Quote!
Every quote was from a Pro...dang bunch of morons! 

It did take ALOT of research to find these Jewels but they're out there!
He also knows why! 

The OP is a college student trying to catch fish...he has to know that there are options...you can fish on a budget and catch just as many fish as the next guy...or you can load up on anything you can afford, so you can have all the specialized equipment and suitcase tackle boxes needed to hit the local Pond!

Dude, use the braid, it will serve you well without a leader, especially in the stained or colored water that is in MOST reserviors and Ponds in Ohio...learn the strengths and weaknesses of braid, then you can learn to overcome the weaknesses or add to your arsenal. 
Like Punk said, for some, it's not ideal for all situations, but if you don't want alot of expense or vise grips (so to speak) to carry or lug around....then you can learn to adapt it, so you don't round off the heads!


----------



## lordofthepunks (Feb 24, 2009)

Intimidator said:


> Intimidator ...... I guess I should give you props for continuing to try and fight the good fight .... But sometimes you just gotta say uncle, and tap out.



You know...never once did I voice my OPINION! I even brought scientific facts...I know how PUNK thinks....so I provided quotes from those he likes to Quote!
Every quote was from a Pro...dang bunch of morons! 

It did take ALOT of research to find these Jewels but they're out there!
He also knows why! [/QUOTE]

Na... I don't know why... Enlighten me...

And how do I think? 

I'm just trying to help people choose the right line for their particular job... There is no 1 size fits all... And that's the important thing to take from this discussion...


----------



## buckzye11 (Jul 16, 2009)

I think we give fish WAY too much credit on their IQ test.

scenerio#1- Bass.. "hey look somthing moving in the water!, let me investigate this... oh no... the light is refracting off his line... i think ill pass on that belly filling offer today."

scenerio#2- Bass.. "hey look something moving in the water!, lets see if there is any line attached... don't see any... just a hook and a bristly weed guard... sure dosen't look like any of the indiginous crawfish species around here..., aw hell, he used invisible line... since he tried so hard to fool me, i'll eat".

scenerio#3- Bass.."hey look something moving in the water!, there's a green string attached to it... but, i sure am hungry today... no, no, no. Can't eat when i can blatently see i am being fooled."

scenerio#4- Bass.."hey look something moving in the water! I see some kind off line attached, but it sure does blend well with the background colors. Man, my mouth hurts.... DANGIT, fooled again!"

scenerio#5- Bass-.."hey look something moving really fast in the water! i better get it before it gets away.... wait, do i see treble hooks?... and i hear a lound rattling like bb's... those arn't in the Gizzard Shad around here.... well yeah, but i don't see the line... CHOMP!"

scenerio#6- Bass-.."hey look something moving in the water... aw screw it, ill eat another day... this 5 inch Shad in my belly has me satisfied right now, I dont care what kind of line is on it."

scenerio#7- Bass-"hey look something moving in the water, i need something in my belly!, I don't care what kind of line is on it."

scenerio#8- Bass-"me hungry, me eat"

scenerio#9- Bass-"belly full, me no eat"

scenerio#10- Bass-"belly full... me no pass food though"


----------



## lordofthepunks (Feb 24, 2009)

It isn't always about line visibility... But if you want to make things as simple as that then I doubt you'll care about those silly factors like stretch, flexibility, breaking strength, nick resistance, buoyancy, memory or anything else that them there bass don't care about when dey be eatin and such...

The difference between catching fish and not catching fish are in the details... You do enough things the right way, and you will see a difference... Maybe paying attention to one small detail won't make a noticeable difference but if you sweat all the details all the time, it might make the difference between catching 4 keepers and getting a limit... And who knows, that 5th bite might be the fish of a lifetime


----------



## Mr. A (Apr 23, 2012)

buckzye11 said:


> I think we give fish WAY too much credit on their IQ test.
> 
> scenerio#1- Bass.. "hey look somthing moving in the water!, let me investigate this... oh no... the light is refracting off his line... i think ill pass on that belly filling offer today."
> 
> ...


Bwahaha! That's funny right there! I think your right in a lot more ways than you may have intended though. Bass cannot make rational decisions, utilize free will, or think like a human can. Nearly all of their behavior is dictated by instinct, just like everything else in the wild. When the area has no fishing pressure on it the bass are far more likely to bite on whatever you throw out there whereas in places that are pressured they can be much more finicky in their de missions to bite (excluding reaction bites).

As far as braid v mono v Flouro goes; it's situational IMO. While having "x"# mono throwing a top water lure may be the ideal consensus, if there is little or no pressure you can probably do just as well with Flouro or braid. We all do this every time we go fishing with one rod and one reel. While the equipment may not be 100% ideal we choose something that works the best in the most situations. Your choice of line normally doesn't make or break a trip IMO.

However, I do agree that in highly pressured areas, unusually clear water (for Ohio), or under harsher conditions where the fish just aren't biting that using the ideal line for the situation will increase your chances of success. I attribute that more to getting past a fish's heightened instincts in those situations; not fooling their rational thought process.

As a review no to low pressure areas #7 - #10 applies. For high pressure areas, very clear water areas, and under harsh conditions #1 - #5 applies. And when you get skunked #6 applies. 

Mr. A


----------



## buckzye11 (Jul 16, 2009)

lordofthepunks said:


> It isn't always about line visibility... But if you want to make things as simple as that then I doubt you'll care about those silly factors like stretch, flexibility, breaking strength, nick resistance, buoyancy, memory or anything else that them there bass don't care about when dey be eatin and such...
> 
> The difference between catching fish and not catching fish are in the details... You do enough things the right way, and you will see a difference... Maybe paying attention to one small detail won't make a noticeable difference but if you sweat all the details all the time, it might make the difference between catching 4 keepers and getting a limit... And who knows, that 5th bite might be the fish of a lifetime


Trolling success! What im saying is line visibility/invisibility is not much compared to location, timing, and forage.
I understand the importance of the line factors that you just mentioned... visibility falls at the bottom of that list. What them there Bass be eatin and when dey be eatin is factor #1.
I could be totally wrong, but since you didn't say so, i guess i'm not.


----------



## lordofthepunks (Feb 24, 2009)

Always predictable who will be on which side of the fence


----------



## lordofthepunks (Feb 24, 2009)

buckzye11 said:


> Trolling success! What im saying is line visibility/invisibility is not much compared to location, timing, and forage.
> I understand the importance of the line factors that you just mentioned... visibility falls at the bottom of that list. What them there Bass be eatin and when dey be eatin is factor #1.
> I could be totally wrong, but since you didn't say so, i guess i'm not.


I don't think it falls at the bottom of the list... It might not be as important as what and where te fish are eating but its a controllable factor that can make a diffèrence... To ignore it is just being lazy just like ignoring any other factor... Ignore enough of those factors and...


----------



## lordofthepunks (Feb 24, 2009)

Serious question...

What is it with this "good enough" attitude that makes people go balls out to defend something that's just "good enough"?

"Good enough" should be a last resort, not something you fight for..


----------



## buckzye11 (Jul 16, 2009)

Point taken, but i can't help being stubborn on the line visibility issue when half the lures used don't look much like what they are supposed to imitate, but still will catch fish.... given the other key factors.
I'm a minimalist by nature... on your side of the fence you have the monumentalist(yeah i had to google that word)... once again, any disaggrement can be sumed up with one phrase "to each their own". I'm not just spewing for arguments sake... ive tried the all factors approch... for me, i catch more fish by keeping things simple. For you, it's a different approach... mabye better, but i'll keep my simple.


----------



## buckzye11 (Jul 16, 2009)

lordofthepunks said:


> Serious question...
> 
> What is it with this "good enough" attitude that makes people go balls out to defend something that's just "good enough"?
> 
> "Good enough" should be a last resort, not something you fight for..


Must be the Buddhist in me. I fix things with duct tape.


----------



## Intimidator (Nov 25, 2008)

You know....if the guy is going to try his hand at Tourney Fishing and needs to get 5 money fish, then I'm gonna tell him to use all the tools needed for every possibility. 
But, if he's going out to have fun, fish on a budget, fish light, etc....then he needs to know he can learn the strengths and weaknesses of any line and then, he can learn to pick the one he likes, and develope a system around it.

I used swimbaits all year, 100% at CJ and in creeks....with superline....caught fish all year long , Bass, Walleye, Crappie, etc...totally went against everything being preached....just wanted to see if it was possible to do....fished shallow, deep, topwater, in cover, etc....still catching fish this winter...will be doing it again next year! Probably had the most fun also....I really learned how to work swimbaits in many different ways.....and I really don't know if I could have caught any more fish by "fishing properly"!

We all have our own reasons to fish....and many different ways to do it....You and I dont fish the same. ..as far as I'm concerned, neither is wrong...we both have our reasons for fishing how we do....you are working on a career, you mainly fish from a boat....Most of the time, I'm walking on rocks or through the woods, needing to be as light as possible, and carrying a basket full of Crappie or Gators for supper....I can't get a 1 piece rod in the trunk of a Camaro, or a suitcase full of tackle...be flexible and adapt!





lordofthepunks said:


> You know...never once did I voice my OPINION! I even brought scientific facts...I know how PUNK thinks....so I provided quotes from those he likes to Quote!
> Every quote was from a Pro...dang bunch of morons!
> 
> It did take ALOT of research to find these Jewels but they're out there!
> He also knows why!


Na... I don't know why... Enlighten me...

And how do I think? 

I'm just trying to help people choose the right line for their particular job... There is no 1 size fits all... And that's the important thing to take from this discussion...[/QUOTE]


----------



## lordofthepunks (Feb 24, 2009)

I like your answers... Fair and honest buczeye


----------



## Bassbme (Mar 11, 2012)

Finally the discussion turns to what it was actually all about in the first place. Line visibilities effect on the number of bites you get. Buckzye, that was some pretty funny stuff. Even the part about the bass eating it just because the person went to the trouble of using a low visibility line. You're right ..... bass eat a lot of things that fisherman throw that either don't resemble anything in nature, or things that have shiny things like hooks and wires and weed guards sticking out of them. Heck, look at some of the A rig's out there. There are visible wires sticking out all over the place. Your logic is sound when you say that if a bass will eat something that doesn't look natural, does a lines visibility really make a difference? In that scenario..... No..... it doesn't make a difference at all. There are times when you can throw practically anything, and a bass it going to bite it. Bass aren't always hitting a bait to eat it, but that's something for later. 

Let me ask a question of those that don't think a lines visibility ever makes a difference? Do any of you buy any baits that look natural? Do you ever buy a soft plastic bait because it looks real? Do you choose a crank bait because it has a natural looking finish? Do you pick colors that look natural? Do you have a color in a bait that you swear by? If you do, and you scoff at the idea that a lines visibility can make a difference .... why do you buy natural looking baits? Evidently you buy a natural looking bait or a natural looking color, or you have a color you turn to most often because you think color makes a difference? 

You do realize that in buying natural looking baits, and having favorite colors, that you're doing the exact same thing that a person that believes line visibility can make a difference, right? Before you try and tell me it's not the same .... Think about it first. And if you still try and tell me it's not the same, you know what I'm going to do right? I'm going to laugh my butt off. Because it is exactly the same. 

It's pretty clear that I am one of the people that believe line visibility makes a difference. Does it make a difference all the time? No, and I'd be a fool to say it does. IMO I'd also be fool to say that it doesn't. I know for a fact that at times it does make a difference. I've experienced it on the water. There are times when line visibility makes a difference, and it doesn't always have to be in crystal clear water. I've seen line visibility make a difference in water with a 1 1/2' visibility, which is far from crystal clear water. And it's also the norm for most of the lakes I fish here in northeast Ohio. 

As I said earlier, I know a lines visibility doesn't always make a difference.... but since I'm not a psychic or a fish whisperer, I have no idea when those times that line visibility is going to make a difference, so I'm going to do ALL of my fishing as if it does. 

That's about it from me. My apologies to the thread originator for being a part of turning your thread into an argument. If you could read the fine print between the lines, you'll see that some useful information surfaced in the midst of all the crap. I hope I was able to help and give you a few things to think about.

BTW..... Dan? Tackle Warehouse had their Tatsu on sale at $29.99 for the 8# and $35.99 for their 20#. That was almost a $35 dollar savings over what LBF had listed on their web site, so I just ordered the line from Tackle Warehouse yesterday. Sorry about that. I do appreciate that you had those two spools set back for me though, And if you still do, please put them back in stock and accept my heartfelt apology. I hope it doesn't cause a problem for you with the higher ups. If it does, just tell them I'll be coming in some time this off season and spending some big cash on restocking baits. 

Anyhow..... It's been kind of fun. Catch you peoples in the threads


----------



## spectrum (Feb 12, 2013)

You guys really welcomed the original poster to the forum.....jeeezzz....
I think all you guys need to team up and go scuba diving with different line's and tell us the results


----------



## lordofthepunks (Feb 24, 2009)

spectrum said:


> You guys really welcomed the original poster to the forum.....jeeezzz....


He wanted answers.. He got them... Hopefully he chooses to follow the good advice instead of the convenient advice


----------



## Intimidator (Nov 25, 2008)

lordofthepunks said:


> He wanted answers.. He got them... Hopefully he chooses to follow the good advice instead of the convenient advice


It's all good advice, it's just according to what he wants to do and how much he wants to spend...we gave the guy OPTIONS to catch fish!


----------



## spectrum (Feb 12, 2013)

There was advice??? OH that was back on page 1  .....Sorry I'm done, I was bored too and just wanted to chime in


----------



## Intimidator (Nov 25, 2008)

Bassbme...I find Tatsu on EBay for about the same and free shipping...if you need more, normally after Christmas prices plunge into the 20$...I normally buy mine from Scissortail Sports in OKlahoma.
www.pttackle.com has some good prices all the time on Samurai braid and of FC I haven't tried yet??

I know also that in very rare circumstances line visibility may be an issue, I also think sometimes you can even overcome that.
The more I research colors in water, what fish can see, how colors react with all the elements, I start to realize how little I knew...I bought alot of colors cause I LIKE THEM...now I buy colors knowing how they react with sunlight, clouds, stained or muddy water, food sources, etc.

I love Chartreuse with silver flake...in stained water, Chartreuse turns/looks Gold, add other colors which mute or turn and you have various baitfish.
When you really get to the nitty gritty, we ARE choosing colors to look like some food, by accident! Others we choose because it does look like food they are eating!
Some of the other baits we use are just to piss off bass or make them react...sometimes we'll hit on something that does it all...we won't talk about those!

This is why I think our choices in lures and presentation (how we make that lure react/act) overshadows other smaller details...most of the time!

I fished with Punk, love to watch him fish, and he's VERY GOOD! We fish different, he mainly fishes from a boat...half the time I don't. He doesn't catch fish to eat...I do (Not Bass)! His way is right for how he fishes and I have developed a system for how I fish...we have 2 "Right" ways of doing things differently. I fully understand everything he says because I was there once! I understand what you're saying, we just have 2 ways to accomplish the same thing.
People that I help when they are starting to fish, must learn about the species, they must learn about the body of water and the interaction, then food sources...then you get into actual tackle etc.
I feel you cannot make good tackle or lure choices until you understand what you are trying to mimic and where, you have to understand how colors react, patterns, etc, to benefit the most!
The guys I help understand the process and in turn they can give me feedback to continue my learning, they understand what is going on at the lake or river, see the little details that are important, and that most overlook...are the crawdads out, what larva, fry, insects, water conditions, temp, O2 levels....to me this is fishing...the challenge is understanding Mother Nature...and then TRICKING a fish to bite a Man-made lure or bait!


----------



## buckzye11 (Jul 16, 2009)

Spectrum, you brought up a good point... sorry OP.
Bassbme, yeah i put those back, i did the advertising on this site for LBF because i was asked too. I'm done. Enough people know about LBF to make their own choices. I know TW and other places have better prices sometimes. LBF is just a good place to go if you want to physically see everything first hand, like those natual looking baits i use You are right, when it comes down to it i'm just as picky as anyone when it comes to that perfect lure pattern so i'll stop scrutinizing line choice.
I go as far as to custom color with spike it/perm markers on every plastic that hits the water. I catch crawfish weekly to stay up to date on their color patterns, i catch the smaller baitfish species and look at the patterns and sizes for the time of year. i'm VERY picky... just not about line visibility... now if i add that to the equation, and i catch more fish, i can only blame my own stubborness. It's hard being hard headed. Even though we have kind of went off topic, ive enjoyed the thread.


----------



## NewbreedFishing (Apr 15, 2004)

Hey Guys while on the topic of braids I wanted to see if anyone has experience with the Power pro slick (MARINE BLUE). I ordered 2 spools of 4/15 from Overstockbait for 2 new LEWS 100a Speed Spools i just purchased.

any feedback? it said it was designed for clear water. will be good for me because my stupid eyes are going bad(insert jokes)and it looks like it will be pretty visable above water at least.


----------



## Big Joshy (Apr 26, 2004)

The slick powerpro that I tried was nice at first but did not last as long as regular braids. Seemed to fray quicker and I had some wind knots.


----------



## buckeyebowman (Feb 24, 2012)

Intimidator said:


> No one wants to believe this because of the "invisible" hype, but testing and studies have been done that proves Fluorocarbon is as visible and opaque as braid underwater.....there's Another good article in In- Fisherman called the Clear Connection For Panfish. Fish that eat translucent critters can easily "see" Fluoro. ..it comes down to making your lure irresistible to them.


I tried fluorocarbon line right after it came out. I and my buddy are basically walleye drift fishermen. We knew our spots and would set up for drifts over them. In this kind of fishing it's very important to be a "line watcher", since the slightest twitch in the line could signal a take. Whether or not fluoro is "invisible" underwater, I can tell you it's damn near invisible above it! I strained my eyes that whole spring and early summer and finally got rid of the fluoro! 



grub_man said:


> bassbme,
> 
> They hype about the invisibility of fluorocarbon has to deal with its index of refraction, and a poor application of physics. Yes the index of refraction of fluorocarbon is close to that of water, but the geometry of the surfaces as light is going from one medium to another are equally (perhaps more important) in this case.
> 
> ...


Reminds me of the physics joke, "Why did the chicken cross the road?" "To get to the other side, provided it's a spherical chicken in a ten dimensional universe!"

I'm getting ready to try braid. I have a couple of spools downstairs that are the brand my BIL uses. As far as I've been able to determine, he uses no leader whatsoever on his braid, and he catches the crap out of fish! He attributes this to the line's sensitivity, not it's lack of visibility. 

I'd remind people that our fathers, and, or, grandfathers, depending on your age, caught fish with black, braided nylon fishing line! I know, that's what I started out with!


----------



## lordofthepunks (Feb 24, 2009)

buckeyebowman said:


> I tried fluorocarbon line right after it came out. I and my buddy are basically walleye drift fishermen. We knew our spots and would set up for drifts over them. In this kind of fishing it's very important to be a "line watcher", since the slightest twitch in the line could signal a take. Whether or not fluoro is "invisible" underwater, I can tell you it's damn near invisible above it! I strained my eyes that whole spring and early summer and finally got rid of the fluoro!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I would also remind you that our grandfathers fathers went to work on horses and wooden wheels...


----------



## Intimidator (Nov 25, 2008)

lordofthepunks said:


> I would also remind you that our grandfathers fathers went to work on horses and wooden wheels...


Some, still go to work on horses today! 
Some are going back to traditional medicine, traditional housing, traditional farming, etc! ALOT of older stuff is better than new!
Some advancements are better...I like the best of both!


----------



## lordofthepunks (Feb 24, 2009)

Intimidator said:


> Some, still go to work on horses today!
> Some are going back to traditional medicine, traditional housing, traditional farming, etc! ALOT of older stuff is better than new!
> Some advancements are better...I like the best of both!


Stop it dude... Christ... It's just getting old at this point...

You spent 3 pages trying to tell everyone how braid is better, more invisible and so on... Then, finally after the dust settles, you admit that braid works for you because you fish out of a Camaro and from the banks and if money were on the line you would recommend doing things differently...

Now your gonna advocate horses and wooden wheels? I don't think a horse is gonna drag my bass boat to Florida next month... Furthermore, I can't imagine how awful my new tundra would ride with wooden tires...


Ill pay the 3 dollars a gallon for gas, let the horses live a life of leisure


----------



## Shortdrift (Apr 5, 2004)

lordofthepunks said:


> Stop it dude... Christ... It's just getting old at this point...
> 
> You spent 3 pages trying to tell everyone how braid is better, more invisible and so on... Then, finally after the dust settles, you admit that braid works for you because you fish out of a Camaro and from the banks and if money were on the line you would recommend doing things differently...
> 
> ...


**************************************************************

Amen, and in addition I'll second and third that. Hard to believe that an individual could say so much, about so little, and in so many different ways. Trying to change a mindset like that is futile.


----------



## Intimidator (Nov 25, 2008)

lordofthepunks said:


> Stop it dude... Christ... It's just getting old at this point...
> 
> You spent 3 pages trying to tell everyone how braid is better, more invisible and so on... Then, finally after the dust settles, you admit that braid works for you because you fish out of a Camaro and from the banks and if money were on the line you would recommend doing things differently...
> 
> ...


No one said a word about you hitching up a freakin horse to your boat, your post to buckeyebowman reminded him that our ancestors used horses...just reminding you that Cowboys, Farmers, Amish, etc still use them TODAY! Didn't even post anything about wooden wheels, so your just being silly!

My other point is that I fish for fun and food as efficiently as possible, I dump money into other things...you are a "Pro", trying to make money, you have a truck, boat, electronics, loads of gear and tackle, etc. We both catch fish, in different ways...sorry if I overstated things! 

Merry Christmas to you!


----------



## Intimidator (Nov 25, 2008)

Shortdrift said:


> **************************************************************
> 
> Amen, and in addition I'll second and third that. Hard to believe that an individual could say so much, about so little, and in so many different ways. Trying to change a mindset like that is futile.


 
Merry Christmas to you!


----------



## lordofthepunks (Feb 24, 2009)

This conversation has turned into a "but but but..." Argument...


In my personal opinion I don't think have to be a pro to want to get as many edges as possible...

I also don't think being a novice is an excuse to take shortcuts when you know there are better options...

Everything is relative... It's not about doing something that someone else does to catch as many fish as they do... It's about improving your game...

I frankly don't care if you or Joe Schmo of bob bassmaster want to live in the archaic times by using kids closed face spin cast reels with purple braid and eagle claw hooks that are pre snelled... This isn't about that.... Go for it...

But don't try to brainwash people into thinking that those ways are somehow better and for the love of god, stop saying braid is more invisible then florocarbon...

I'm so out of this conversation... Braid is more visible than flouro... End of story


----------



## SConner (Mar 3, 2007)

I believe everyone with an opinion has expressed it an the OP can choose based on the information already given. This thread has run it's coarse.


----------

