Which Brand Tippet?

Walter1023

Well-known member
Messages
668
Reaction score
17
I used to be a Trouthunter fan......still like it but have replaced it with Cortland Ultra Premium for my go to 6X fluoro dry fly tippet.... I am also conducting my own field testing of fluoro v mono for tippet on dry fly leaders and am also using Stroft GTM mono....in their equivalent of 5.5x
 

okaloosa

Well-known member
Messages
764
Reaction score
83
Location
CO
I take issue with some of that article. I get everything mentioned about mono versus fluoro. He may be correct and makes some interesting points. i wonder how the light green tint of SA’s new stealth tippet would play into the RI comparison he uses. It makes sense to me that the tint could be a closer match to the color of the water and reduce reflections caused by the sun with clear material.. Maxima makes different color tippet and leader material for this very reason - matching the color of the water. This leads me to believe that SA ‘might‘ be on to something. I Just can’t claim this to be true without more information.

His comments about wire leaders are what I have a problem with. How can he make his assertions without knowing how many of those salt water fish would take the bait if the tippet were clear, And whether that number was higher, lower or the same. Wire leaders are used in salt water to prevent fish from biting the line in two. If there was a clear tippet that would stand up to the pressure of teeth, I would ‘assume’ catch rates may go up. The comparison doesn’t seem appropriate in a mono versus fluoro conversation IMO. I’m no expert though.
I fished the salt for 30 years and clear mono or fluorocarbon out fished wire every time for me........
 

losthwy

Well-known member
Messages
601
Reaction score
46
Location
Currently Westminster, Co. Headed to "West Slope"
Another timely link I found. Mono and Fluorocarbon

It would be interesting to personally compare the different fluorocarbons in water to see their relative visibility. An expensive undertaking for an individual test no doubt. Certainly visibility is an very important factor though not the only one. For me fluorocarbon's hardness, which makes it more resistance to abrasion, makes it also a key consideration for nymph fishing.
 
Last edited:

ts47

Well-known member
Messages
2,983
Reaction score
45
Location
MD Suburbs of DC
Another timely link I found. Mono and Fluorocarbon

It would be interesting to personally compare the different fluorocarbons in water to see their relative visibility. An expensive undertaking for an individual test no doubt. Certainly visibility is an very important factor though not the only one. For me fluorocarbon's hardness, which makes it more resistance to abrasion, makes it also a key consideration for nymph fishing.
As your article suggests, put two pieces in a glass of water and check for yourself.

Here is an interesting video put on by a younger Bill Murray lookalike. The interesting part starts about 4 minutes in. Flourocarbon vs monofilament Test - Comparing Mono to Fluoro

The one thing I noticed is the reflection from both types of materials. If this is to be believed, what might be a better conversation would be the value of mudding (knocking the shine off) your tippet material. Again if this video is accurate, the reflective index seems to hold little value as compared to the actual reflection or flash BOTH have under water.

I again wonder how the green tint in the new SA Stealth tippet would look if it were tied to the stick in that video?
 

osseous

Well-known member
Messages
1,393
Reaction score
100
I used to be a Trouthunter fan......still like it but have replaced it with Cortland Ultra Premium for my go to 6X fluoro dry fly tippet.... I am also conducting my own field testing of fluoro v mono for tippet on dry fly leaders and am also using Stroft GTM mono....in their equivalent of 5.5x
You have actually replaced 6X Trout Hunter (which measures bang on) with 5X diameter Cortland~ if you measure it, rather than trust their label

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
 

redietz

Well-known member
Messages
383
Reaction score
47
Location
Central Maryland
I've used Orvis SuperStrong (now SuperStrong Plus) and for decades and have regretted it on the few occasions I've tried anything else.
 

trev

Well-known member
Messages
845
Reaction score
133
Location
south of Joplin
wonder how the green tint
Personally I think any tint would carry less light than clear, either greater opaqueness or more reflective above water should translate to less of a light conduit below water, but I'm not a physicist.
I once saw a guy using a magic marker to take the shine off his tippet, wish now that I had asked questions or stayed to watch his results.
I know the Ultragreen has a following among lure fishermen because they believe it less visible.
 

trev

Well-known member
Messages
845
Reaction score
133
Location
south of Joplin
I've used Orvis SuperStrong (now SuperStrong Plus) and for decades and have regretted it on the few occasions I've tried anything else.
Not the same, from Orivs webstie- "SuperStrong + is an entirely new material, from a different manufacturer than SuperStrong. "
 

osseous

Well-known member
Messages
1,393
Reaction score
100
^^That's an interesting point- Could be.....

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
 

trev

Well-known member
Messages
845
Reaction score
133
Location
south of Joplin
Does Orvis still own SA? Their new tippet could be the same as SA's.
AFAIK, yes. The Orvis tippet is imported from Japan so could be the same as Trout Hunter or Umpqua or could be an entirely new material, from a different manufacturer
The SA tippet doesn't claim to be imported and isn't marked made in Japan, but doesn't mean a lot, so maybe they are all the same with better wrappers?
Is there a monofilament factory in the USA? I've never seen one, but there are other things I've never seen.
 

ts47

Well-known member
Messages
2,983
Reaction score
45
Location
MD Suburbs of DC
If you believe the marketing, SA may have just surpassed the Orvis Super Strong Plus. According to their websites, Orvis 5x is 4.9lb, 4x is 6lb. SA says their 5x is 5.9lb, 4x is 7.4lb. Diameters are reported as the same.

I personally think I may give the new SA tippet a try and see how I like it. There is very little information about it online aside from marketing. So... I can't really offer any practical reason why other than the Stealth version really interests me. I guess time will tell if my results are the same as Mtboiler.
 
Last edited:

osseous

Well-known member
Messages
1,393
Reaction score
100
Their big claim is were strength is higher than anybody else- handling is pretty good...though occasionally I get a weird twist. Pretty minor, but it doesn't have quite the handling characteristics of the green label TH

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
 

ts47

Well-known member
Messages
2,983
Reaction score
45
Location
MD Suburbs of DC
Their big claim is were strength is higher than anybody else- handling is pretty good...though occasionally I get a weird twist. Pretty minor, but it doesn't have quite the handling characteristics of the green label TH

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
Are you saying that you find the handling characteristics of TH to be better than SA?
 

osseous

Well-known member
Messages
1,393
Reaction score
100
Are you saying that you find the handling characteristics of TH to be better than SA?
Slightly- not enough to be a deal breaker. By handling I mean ease of knot tying and seating. Ever had trouble with that last little tug to fully seat the knot? Or it flat spots when you snug it down, and you know that knot is doomed? SA is not that bad an issue, it's just not quite as....friendly in your hands when you're working with it. Small distinction- again, not a deal breaker, but I notice that occasionally compared to years of using TH

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
 

ts47

Well-known member
Messages
2,983
Reaction score
45
Location
MD Suburbs of DC
Slightly- not enough to be a deal breaker. By handling I mean ease of knot tying and seating. Ever had trouble with that last little tug to fully seat the knot? Or it flat spots when you snug it down, and you know that knot is doomed? SA is not that bad an issue, it's just not quite as....friendly in your hands when you're working with it. Small distinction- again, not a deal breaker, but I notice that occasionally compared to years of using TH

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
Thanks for the clarification. Your comments make sense.
 

planettrout

Well-known member
Messages
2,522
Reaction score
46
Location
Los Angeles, CA / Pullman, WA
I have to assume that anyone who responds to a tread question with a photo of a mic knows a thing or two. ;)

I'm familiar with the other two tippets and have not been a fan of Cortland 'tippet'. Why did you start using Trouthunter nylon?
Because it was there...I picked up several spools of the nylon Trouthunter when I was in the Trouthunter fly shop in the Fall of 2017:





PT/TB
 

dynaflow

Well-known member
Messages
657
Reaction score
21
Location
Byron Bay...easternmost point of Australia
The principal reasons why I don't use Nylon in the tropics where I fish are 1) it absorbs water over time,2) it deteriorates due to UV light, 3) it's not tough enough anywhere around coral,rubble and structure, 4) it stretches, 5)it floats rather than sinks.Fluorocarbon doesn't exhibit any of these qualities.No-one I know and fish with uses Nylon monofilament.Fresh water fishing is a different ball game.I'll concede that knots need to be tied properly,but isn't that the case with every line?
 
Top