Amnesia vs Flurocarbon

[John Marshall]

For years I've used Amnesia as trace line, local tackle shops retail at around £5
per 100 yards, but my mate Lenny has just paid £9 for flurocarbon, same size reel.

Question is, when boat fishing in 60 to 250 foot does it make any difference?

[Lewis 77]

Originally Posted by John Marshall

For years I've used Amnesia as trace line, local tackle shops retail at around £5
per 100 yards, but my mate Lenny has just paid £9 for flurocarbon, same size reel.

Question is, when boat fishing in 60 to 250 foot does it make any difference?

Probably not in that depth. I use line like vanish (flurocarbon) when fishing in really clear water during the daytime for fish like mullet etc and when float fishing. If the water is coloured or the sea is rough i stick with clear Amnesia as vanish can tend to tangle easy in any swell. Wouldnt use line such as vanish on rocky area's as the line can kink easily and snap without much effort.

[Gremlin]

Fluorocarbon was developed for optimum presentation to shy-taking trout where the main thing is that the fish does not detect the tippet. (Refractive index of the material)

'Amnesia' was marketed as a snood-length which is memory-free.

You'd be surprised how many sea anglers have no idea that you should pre-stretch Amnesia before using your trace (ie out of the trace wallet) and after a 'pout spin' and it straightens out.

[NICK R]

Amnesia every time Florocarben aint as invisibe as it says it is, I have had and seen fish,Ie mullet spook off from seeing it in the water , never had this with Amnesia

[Fishing Forum Admin]

Question is, when boat fishing in 60 to 250 foot does it make any difference

At that depth think you might as well save your money

[Catfish Virgin (Still!)]

Originally Posted by Gremlin

Fluorocarbon was developed for optimum presentation to shy-taking trout....

I believe it was first developed for Long Line Commercial Fishing by the Japanese where visibility is an issue. It was then further refined in much smaller diameters and immediately siezed upon by Game Anglers, particularly in the USA.

It therefore seems to make sense that it's worth using at depth for sea fishing.

In the freshwater world I sometimes use Fluoro as a hooklength but mainly to achieve a certain style of presentation rather than for any claim of invisibility. For me, it's also a lot to do with confidence in the rigs, tackle and methods you use.

[John Marshall]

I did try Fluro last Saturday, I wasn't impressed and went back to Amnesia after
a few drifts, but we were fishing in 200 foot.

[Greenheart]

I use Flourocarbon for fly fishing. It definately increases the number of bites from shy Trout in clear water. However I have had problems with losing fish through knots slipping. Bear in mind too that most trout take the bait from below when the line is silouetted against the sky & not with it lying on the bottom or in very deep water.

[lazy hooker]

I use flouro-carbon for all my bass fishing

I use the seagar brand which is highly aclaimed by salmon fishermen, It is a bit tricky to tie (make sure you really moisten the knots as your tightening).

After long periods in the water mono, including amnesia absorb the water and make it slightly weaker (possibly upto a 3rd of it breaking strain), flourocarbon doesn't.

i find flouro more abrasive resistant which off the rocks is a definate benefit, quite stiff so doesn't tangle and no memory whatso ever.

bearing in mind my fishing is the rock gullies on the gower which are rougher than a badgers arse, i wouldn't use mono or amnesia with much confidence now that i'm used to flouro. oh and yes i've completely mullered my mate on spots quite regularly (he can't get on with flouro carbon) fishing next to him with the same tactics.

john

[John Marshall]

Should say, I was fishing a flying collar trace 15 foot long and twisted up on the drop, breaking strain 40lb.