LINES: Are we being conned? Part 1: Diameter

I’ve been looking at lots of test data of lines, covering claimed diameter (dry), claimed dry unknotted Breaking Strength (BS), actual diameter and BS after wet-conditioning, and elongation (stretch) at the Break-point when testing the BS of wet-conditioned lines.

It’s too much to cover in one thread, so I’d like of kick-off with Part 1 : DIAMETER, and ask the questions about line diameter claims 1. “Are we being conned?” and 2. Do you care?

Coupled with these questions is perhaps a more important one i.e. the reasons why anglers select a particular diameter of line and how this relates to practical angling.

[I’ll post a couple of follow-up threads re: BS and elongation (stretch) in due course]

It’s impossible to fish without wetting your line, so to me, it seems a nonsense to test dry lines and to make sales & marketing claims based on those results. OK, it is more time-consuming and expensive, but not more difficult, to test lines after wet-conditioning i.e. closer to their in-use condition.

What I’d like to know is the basis on which you anglers choose your lines as relating to diameter, and do you think you’re being conned, or do you care, if the diameter claimed on the box or spool is say, 10 – 30 % less than its in-use diameter when tested after wet-conditioning? I’m talking about nylon and copolymer monos here; braids are a different kettle of fish.

I realise that the cost of lines is a combination of R&D costs, polymer costs and extrusion costs, among many other things, but I think weight of the line on the spool is more meaningful than length, and as weight is a function of diameter and length, I am sure I’ve been conned; what about you?

DG :confused:

[ 16. February 2004, 11:17 AM: Message edited by: The Diamond Geezer ]

Guests - this sponsored link will vanish when you log-in. Click here to register for free.

... but I think weight of the line on the spool is more meaningful than length ...

Not sure I understand your reasoning here DG. It is interesting to know I'm buying a 1 lb spool but if I need 500 yards of a particular line, that's more important to me than the weight.

If you are saying that they mis-state the length and that weight gives a more accurate picture of how much (by length) line you are getting, then the statement makes sense but still doesn't seem to help very much unless I've used a particular b/s of a line to know how much I get when buying a certain weight spool.

For instance, World Wide Sportsman™ Camo Fishing Line - 1/4-lb. They note that yardage is approximate (and one does have to wonder how [i]approximate ) but hopefully they are somewhat close.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Newt:

Originally posted by The Diamond Geezer:

... but I think weight of the line on the spool is more meaningful than length ...

Not sure I understand your reasoning here DG. It is interesting to know I'm buying a 1 lb spool but if I need 500 yards of a particular line, that's more important to me than the weight.

If you are saying that they mis-state the length and that weight gives a more accurate picture of how much (by length) line you are getting, then the statement makes sense but still doesn't seem to help very much unless I've used a particular b/s of a line to know how much I get when buying a certain weight spool.

---

Newt, what I'm saying is that the suppliers pay for their line by weight (not length) and then they charge us by length. Length is not weight; weight is a function of diameter & length. If a spool declares both, then that's fine, but it's best to compare brands on a weight-to-weight basis and not metre for metre or yard for yard.

That way, I/you/we can see whether or not I'm/you're/we're being conned. Some companies such as Sufix have always declared the weight of their spools of line (as well as the length and diameter), and what I am saying is that this is much more open, honest and helpful

Oh, and BTW, Newt, and talking about monos, not braids, you missed the main points of my posting!

1) do you buy your line according to diameter (as well as other parameters i.e. BS, stretch, cost etc?)
2) If so, why? .... and
3) Do you care if the supplier says it's 0.20 mm diameter (dry) when in fact the minute you get it wet, and check the diameter, it's 0.25 mm?

DG

[ 14. February 2004, 05:42 PM: Message edited by: The Diamond Geezer ]

When I buy a line I expect it to break when it says that it should, irrespective of diameter. If its a two pound line that is what it should break at! Because it breaks at three pounds does not make it a better line. I expect a line to have a low memory. I expect a line to be reasonably abrasion resistant. I expect a line to retain most of its strength with a well tied and loaded knot. I couldn't give a hoot what the diameter is! I expect a line to last for years!!

I buy 'normal' monofilament line by breaking strain and expect it to be of the correct diameter for standard nylon.

I have some 25 year old bulk spools of BRENT mono in 2, 3, and 5 lbs b/s and have been very satisfied with it. It still works absolutely fine. I bought it from Veals, who seem to do only do sea tackle now.

Last year I needed some new line and bought Mukllarkey's bulk spools in 2, 4, 6, 8 lbs b/s. I immediately noticed inconsistencies in diameter, and have been planning for months to borrow a micrometer to check it out. The 2 lbs in particular the 6 lbs are too thick and I am not at all happy with this line.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lid:
I buy 'normal' monofilament line by breaking strain and expect it to be of the correct diameter for standard nylon.

I have some 25 year old bulk spools of BRENT mono in 2, 3, and 5 lbs b/s and have been very satisfied with it. It still works absolutely fine. I bought it from Veals, who seem to do only do sea tackle now.

Last year I needed some new line and bought Mukllarkey's bulk spools in 2, 4, 6, 8 lbs b/s. I immediately noticed inconsistencies in diameter, and have been planning for months to borrow a micrometer to check it out. The 2 lbs in particular the 6 lbs are too thick and I am not at all happy with this line.

---

Lid

Well, I bet you'd get quite a shock if you put your 25yr-old lines on to a tensile tensiometer to check their true wet-conditioned Breaking Strength .... but as I said in my initial posting, I'm hoping to discuss the shedload of data on the BS and Stretch of these monos later ! ... for now I was hoping to concentrate on diameter .. even though you may intuitively think that it's inextricably linked to BS (thus giving-rise to a more important parameter, tenacity )

So, .. what do you expect the normal standard diameter to be, for your 2, 3 ,4 , 5 , 6 lb lines? :confused: What are the claims on the spools? And what are their actual diameters once they've been in the water for a couple of hours? What do you mean by too thick ... compared with what? As I'm talking about monos here, I hesitate to suggest that you try braids if your monos are too thick

DG

[ 14. February 2004, 08:58 PM: Message edited by: The Diamond Geezer ]

when i buy line i get 200yds of 10lb line which costs around £3 but my mate got 1000yds of 20lb line for £3! i think we are getting ripped off quite a bit.

quote:

---

So, .. what do you expect the normal standard diameter to be, for your 2, 3 ,4 , 5 , 6 lb lines? What are the claims on the spools? And what are their actual diameters once they've been in the water for a couple of hours? What do you mean by too thick ... compared with what? As I'm talking about monos here, I hesitate to suggest that you try braids if your monos are too thick

---

I don't actually know what measurement I expect the diameters to be. However I can see that some of these new spools of line are thicker than other makes for the stated b/s. I've also got some 12 lbs in that Mukllarkey stuff and it's more like 20lbs b/s. I suspect that the line is simply mis-labelled and I don't think it has diameters stated!

Years ago I used to know the diameters and likely associated breaking strain, but I've forgotten it all now.

Your 1.5p/yard sounds about right, but your mate's 1000yds for £3 sound more than a tad dodgy..... interesting to test it? ... but anyway, I was hoping to concentrate on diameter for this thread

For sure, you're not getting ripped off if it's a decent brand like Sensor.

DG

[ 14. February 2004, 09:08 PM: Message edited by: The Diamond Geezer ]

C'mon you guys...

Line is incredibly important, much more so than rods and reels, for example, yet it is dirty cheap.

Like everything else today, it is much cheaper comparitively to what it was 10, 20, 30 and 40 years ago. And incredibly superior.

Buy the cheapest line available and of course it won't be as good as stuff costing two, three or five times the price. But it will still be much better than something of the same price a few years ago.

We've never had it so good. ANd no, Nathan, we are not being ripped off... far from it. Think yourself lucky you're starting out fishing at a time when excellent fishing tackle has never been so affordable.