Thanks Thanks:  4
Likes Likes:  26
Dislikes Dislikes:  0
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345
Results 41 to 42 of 42
  1. Default Re: Do you believe Fluorocarbon is tougher than Mono?

    My POV salt flats and specifically when Tarpon are shy and need to drop way down on tippet 30-50(I do not fish with IGFA leaders)...same diameter or thinner fluor... Seaguar Blue...started with same diameter nylon did not get first jump parted at strike...no pigtail...my anecdotal evidence is fluor better

  2. Likes karstopo liked this post
  3. #42
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Perth, Western Australia
    Posts
    382

    Default Re: Do you believe Fluorocarbon is tougher than Mono?

    FishRat,

    Thanks for running your test with wet materials. I'm much happier with your findings than those in the original video posted.

    There's a similar thread posted on another forum. Nobody there took the effort to run the tests on wet materials as you've done. Indeed, nobody even considered testing dry to be a flaw in the experiment. I did a search to find out what's been published in scientific journals on the subject of wear resistance of wet nylon 6 and came up with the following paper.

    In 2002, the Journal of Material Science published a paper by J. John Rajesh, J. Bijwe, B. Venkataraman and U. S. Tewari on the "Effect of water absorption on erosive wear behaviour of polyamides".

    To summarise, they found the nylon used in most nylon monofilament fishing line (Nylon 6, also known as PA6) loses both tensile strength and erosion resistance as it absorbs water.

    Their abstract is as follows:
    Two polyamides (PAs) viz. PA 6 and PA 12 were selected for investigating the influence of water absorption on some physical, mechanical and tribological properties. Erosive wear studies on water treated and untreated samples were carried out at two impact angles viz. 30 and 90. Tests on tensile strength of untreated and treated polyamides revealed that the water treatment resulted in enhancement for PA12 and reduction for PA 6. Exactly similar trends were reflected in their erosive wear performance also. The water absorption deteriorated the wear performance of PA 6 at both the angles, whereas the erosion wear behaviour of PA 12 improved at both the angles due to water absorption. The improvement was more significant at the angle of 30 rather than 90. Scanning electron microscopic (SEM) investigations were done to study the topography of worn surfaces and to understand the wear mechanisms.
    Cheers,
    Graeme
    IFFF Certified Casting Instructor

    (Formerly known as Kalgrm)

  4. Likes fishrat liked this post
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345

Similar Threads

  1. Fluorocarbon vs. Mono Leaders - when to use what
    By hexhatch in forum Fly Fishing How To's
    Replies: 49
    Last Post: 10-22-2017, 10:40 AM
  2. mono backing
    By grassonfly in forum Warmwater Fly Fishing
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 10-09-2011, 07:57 AM
  3. Mono Eyes ?
    By Jimmie in forum General Fly Tying Discussions
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 07-17-2010, 07:45 AM
  4. Mono-loops
    By bekiu002 in forum General Fly Tying Discussions
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 06-28-2010, 06:08 PM
  5. Tippet vs Mono
    By boreal in forum Fly Lines
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 05-16-2010, 12:16 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •