LINES: Are we being conned? Part 1: DIAMETER

[phil hackett]

DG

You say you worked for ICI polymers at one time?

Shouldn’t there be a more fundamental question asked here; Are we being conned by line manufactures in regards to who (middlemen) they are selling their product on to?

 

How many companies actually produce line? Globally I would think there’s no more than 7-10.

 

Back in the 70s, someone who like you, who then worked in the polymers industry stated in the Chevin Magazine (I think it was), there was only 3 companies involved in line production globally - Dupont, ICI and Bayer. All other branded names were made by one or other of these Cos and just labelled up with their client’s name on it.

 

I suspect, but don’t know, that this practice is still the norm.

Granted that Bloggs line goes to the line manufacturer with a spec and says produce me this quantity of line and I’ll pay you this price.

 

Surly what the line manufacturers can’t do is produce a line that is not yet in existence, whether that line is tested by wet, dry, weight of spool, diameter, or whatever. The claims made on the spool sold on by the middle vendor, probably don’t equate to what the line manufacturers state to them at the point of sale in the technical data.

That said, it would not be in the best interests of the line manufacturer to publicly contradict such claims, unless they were so outrageous that they were farcical.

 

Therefore don’t we need to know who all the line manufacturers are first?

Then out of them, who makes the best line?

And finally, which line manufacturer Bloggs line is buying his/her line off as the middleman?

 

Only then can we as the gullible, make an informed choice about what line we require.

[The Diamond Geezer]

quote:

---

Originally posted by phil hackett:

Shouldn't there be a more fundamental question asked here; Are we being conned by line manufactures in regards to who (middlemen) they are selling their product on to? .

---

Good point, Phil, about the middleman, and one I hadn't forgotten .. they all take their cut and contribute to a higher end-user price..... but some fishing tackle marketing companies have line from Factory A, spooled-up for them and sell it for say £4 a spool, while another company will buy the very same line from the very same factory, have it spooled-up on fancy spools, put it in a fancy box, make some fancy but unsubstantiated (and unsubstantiatable) claims for it, and sell it for £9/spool for the very same length of line.

 

Is this a rip-off?

 

DG

 

[ 16. February 2004, 09:17 AM: Message edited by: The Diamond Geezer ]

[The Diamond Geezer]

quote:

---

Originally posted by phil hackett:

 

Surly what the line manufacturers can’t do is produce a line that is not yet in existence, whether that line is tested by wet, dry, weight of spool, diameter, or whatever. The claims made on the spool sold on by the middle vendor, probably don’t equate to what the line manufacturers state to them at the point of sale in the technical data.

That said, it would not be in the best interests of the line manufacturer to publicly contradict such claims, unless they were so outrageous that they were farcical.

 

---

Phil, in law it is the retailer's responsibility to the buyer to ensure that the product sold complies with its claims, although in turn where claims are shown to be false, the retailer can then claim 3rd-party warranty against the supplier who sold the line to them.

 

DG

[The Diamond Geezer]

quote:

---

Originally posted by BUDGIE:

I dont think that mainline diameter really affects presentation etc as much as the hook length (within reason of course!)I will wait to discuss this when you start the relevant thread.

---

Yup, Budgie, you're quite right .... obviously the knot and the hooklength line (if it's different from the mainline) are as important as the main line, and yup, good idea to cover Hooklengths separately later ... hoping to post Part 2: STRETCH next (what does it really mean?)don't answer that now !

 

quote:

---

Originally posted by BUDGIE:

Although I agree with what you are saying I seriously doubt if most anglers care that they are being mislead. After all look how long they have swallowed it for?

---

Well, you're probably right and if anglers don't care that they are being mislead, they are mugs and are ripe for being ripped-off .. and that means we all get ripped-off

 

quote:

---

Originally posted by BUDGIE:

I would have thought that a Weights and Measures inspector would have a field day with a lot of fishing tackle,wouldnt you?

---

Yup, Trading Standards are on the case and some companies have already been fined and told to adjust their claims , including one company making false claims about its rods' test curves

 

DG

[The Diamond Geezer]

quote:

---

Originally posted by kleinboet:

O.K. DG let me explain, I use Maxima brown 6lb B/S line for my main or reel line which has a stated diameter of .22mm. For my hook length I will use Trabbuco Diamond which, for the same B/S, has a stated diameter of 1.6mm and fluorocarbon which means that I have a finer, more 'invisible' line at the 'business end'.

The Maxima line costs me £11.25 for 600m and the trabucco line costs £6.99 for 50m.

 

Even allowing for inaccuracies in diameters, I am still using a finer hooklength than the mainline. As I have been using this combination successfuly for some time now, and found that the knot strength (usually the weakest link in any set up) to be very high. I feel that using a mainline that is inexpensive but 'bulky' and offsetting that with the finer line, I don't think I am being ripped off at all.

---

Thanks, kleinboet, for that extra info which I hope others as well as me wil find useful .... looking at it in detail .....

 

YOUR MAINLINE ....

you're paying 1.88p/metre for your mainline. I have the data for Maxima compared with many other lines. I think you are being ripped-off because there are many other demonstrably better lines costing much less .. the cheapest being about 0.6p/metre and the most expensive costing 1.5p/metre

 

YOUR HOOKLENGTH LINE

Firstly I have to say that I don't have or have access to pukka lab test data for Trabucco's Diamond fluorocarbon line, but you're paying nearly 14p/metre for it.

 

BTW, fish of course can feel (sense) lines as well as see them, so the fact that fluoros have a refractive index close to that of water and thus theoretically making them less visible to fish, isn't quite what it seems.... fish can of course swim-about and feed quite happily in the dark without bumping into reeds, other fish etc and even some lines .... Also, knots with fluoros are much more critical than with nylon monos.

 

Also, the subject of lines and their many parameters is such a vast one that, in order try to compare like-with-like, I was trying to restrict comments etc to nylon 66 and nylon co-polymers, rather than including lines based on other polymers such as fluorocarbons which are a very different kettle of fish

 

Your lines certainly appear to do what you want diameter-wise (which is what I'm on about in this thread) but have you checked them to see if the diameter meets the claim .. when the line is wet?

 

Though fluorocarbon polymer is a lot more expensive to produce and extrude than nylon 66, and fluoros monos allegedly work well in heavily pressured waters, I still have that sneaking feeling that at 13.9p/metre, you may be being ripped-off ... same BS , smaller diameter = lower weight of polymer metre-for metre .. and the supplier wil be paying for the polymer by weight, plus extrusion and spooling costs etc

 

And who makes and sppols-up that fluoro-mono for Trabucco I wonder

 

 

DG

 

[ 16. February 2004, 11:43 AM: Message edited by: The Diamond Geezer ]

[bubbles]

I use berkley big game myself..... always found it to be strong and reliable...and its resonably priced

[The Diamond Geezer]

quote:

---

Originally posted by bubbles:

I use Berkley Big-Game myself..... always found it to be strong and reliable...and it's resonably priced

---

Bubbles

 

....... and the good news is that Lab Test data mainly confirms your on-the-bank findings .. with the exception that the measured wet diameters are 5-10% higher than the claim.

 

Wet abrasion-resistance is well-above average, and the actual measured wet-knot (Palomar) Breaking Strengths are between 80 - 100 of the claimed dry, unknotted BS. So, good choice, but treble the price of some other lines of comparable performance ... but you're not being ripped-off as much as you would be by buying some other monos IMHO

 

DG

[kleinboet]

DG. I think you will find that I, like many of my fellow anglers, have tried the various brands with their claims of 'higher knot strength' etc.

I personally have bought lines that will cut into your fingers when pulled to check BS but will snap like cotton in use because knot strength is about 25% of claimed BS.

I think that most serious anglers thesedays have 'shopped around'and found line that suits their application well.

[The Diamond Geezer]

quote:

---

Originally posted by kleinboet:

I personally have bought lines that will cut into your fingers when pulled to check BS but will snap like cotton in use because knot strength is about 25% of claimed BS.

---

e.g. ??????? name of these lines ?

 

Of course, with a thin, high-tenacity line, such as you describe, you have to be ultra-careful with the knots you use, otherwise self-strangling will occur giving an apparently low knot-strength.

 

 

 

BTW, how do you even semi-accurately check the BS by pulling with your fingers? :confused:

 

DG

 

[ 16. February 2004, 02:54 PM: Message edited by: The Diamond Geezer ]

[kleinboet]

DG - Not testing knot strength but line BS with my fingers. Unfortunately, the only way you learn that knot strength is down is when you lose a fish, due to knot break at the hook length, that you should have landed.