Tippet material substitution...

Big-Bass

Big-Bass

Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2013
Messages
496
So as I browsed my local Gander Mountain today looking for deals on ice fishing gear, I saw sales on berkley trilene xl mono in I think 150yd. spools for like $4. Could I use say the 2 or 4 lb. test as tippet material and to what X would this relate to? Also, could I do the same with flouro for hopper dropper rigs in similar pound test? Thanks and I know it's against the grain but let's face it...it's economical.
 
I agree, its very tempting to want to spend the 4-5 bucks on a huge spool vs 14-18 on a 30m spool of the name brand tippet. I used berkley vanish for about 3 years straight. The 2 Lb vanish. My buddy also used it as well. Him and I fished together for the first time in a while a few weeks ago and i had finally picked up some Rio FlouroFlex. Both used the same flies for the majority of the day, water was rather low and clear and it was mine 6x Rio vs his 2lb Berkley. Winner? Him. So is it worth it? Not to me. But everybody has preferences on what they use and why so I am curious to see the reasoning some people have as to why they use actual tippet over flouro line.
 
I'd say 4lb test would be about 6x-ish. I find myself buying "regular fishing line" more and more instead of tippet from fly fishing specific companies. Definitely cheaper, and you're getting just about the same stuff.

I think I've used Trilene xl before(spinning or fly, can't remember) but I know there's one Berkley line I didn't like. I think it was one of there lower end fluorocarbon lines(Vanish?). Poor knot strength was the main issue..

edit: kelso posted while I was tying. I guess I must have gotten a bad batch of Vanish or something. I currently use Seagar fluoro for most of my tippet when nymphing, usually in 6lb test, and 8-10 when steelheading.
 
Vanish if by no means anything great. But for 5 bucks you can get a nice little spool that will last well over a season. If anybody else is using just regular flouro fishing line i would like to hear what they are using so I can give it a try. Not trying to jack the thread OP but I think it would benefit your post as well.
 
I only use fluoro for my tippet, while the rest of the leader is mono since mono floats better(and is cheaper). Like I said I'm pretty happy with that Seagar(not sure on the spelling..) stuff, but a few months ago I picked up a spool of Blackbird fluoro at Gander and I haven't had any issues. I've used Rio fluorocarbon as well and like it, but it's more expensive(hence the reason for the thread) than the "regular line."

When dry fly fishing, my entire leader+tippet is mono. I tend to use Rio tippet, but I'm sure I've used some "conventional line" before also.
 
Just a question......if 500 yard spool of Berkley line for $10 was a valid substitution for tippet, you would see dozens, maybe hundreds of articles suggesting it. Typically, the only place you see it mentioned is on forums when someone is trying to save a few bucks. Nymphing all day from the boat in the wind with a 3 fly rig can eat up some fluoro. Buddy that guides used Berkley, P-Line and others. He's back to using Rio fluoro-flex. Others didn't perform as well. If you compare the diameters of regular line to fluoro tippet, I'm 90% sure that the tippet is higher strength and smaller diameter. Keep an eye on reguler lines too...some are fluoro coated mono vs fluoro tippet.

I think there was a question about seeing who uses fluoro vs mono or something like that.

For dries, mono tapered leader and mono tippet. Softer, floats better and stretches. You are usually fishing lighter when fishing on top and the elasticity acts as a shock absorber imo.

Nymphing, mono butt section and then tapered fluoro. Tougher, less visible in water column, sinks. Con would be that it's a little stiff so the fly may move a little less natural but I'll take the trade off. If I have to skip lunch to upgrade to fluoro, I will. Benn VERY impressed with Rio fluoro-flex plus...good stuff.

For a dropper, you may want to consider a tag of fluoro. Stiffer = less tangles....less visable and stronger.
 
Flourocarbon has less stretch, which is sometimes a good and bad thing. I have had hooks break on 6lb flouro fighting steelhead rather than mono just because the initial run was too much to handle.


I've used Rio, vanish, seagaur, frog hair, orvis, and varivas as tippet, and it will come down to presentation more than one line vs the other.
I like flouro bc I mainly nymph and it gets down faster. Vanish did impress me with it's strength though.

 
I read a thread on another forum (North Georgia maybe?) about viable substitutes for tippet. I recall that actual diameter vs advertised diameter was a big deal and it was seldom what it read on the spool. Also, sometimes I don't get through a regular spool of 5x before it gets too old and brittle to fish let alone a 150 yard spool.

Do you guys ever have trouble with the knot between mono and fluoro? Slipping or consistently breaking?
 
Berkely Vanish is garbage. I made the mistake of thinking the same thing. I bought a spool of 8 lb. test for steelhead. It broke very easily in the cold water and didn't hold up to a single fish I hooked. I never used it again. Lesson Learned.
 
I used 4lb ice fishing line last weekend when I went out for my dropper. I use it all the time when running a tandem.. saves some money. my personal choice though
 
I came a across a dry fly leader formula that is tied mostly with stren lo vis mono - but finished off with a final tippet section of orvis super strong. And have been fishing these for about 10 years or so now. Really like how they perform - the stren is very limp.

As for cost savings, I kinda doubt that there is any advantage in that regard. The stuff came in 300 yard spools, and I've used very little of it in 10 years time now. I'll probably end up tossing most of it out, and buying fresh spools soon.
 
I used to only use white river 5 x period. This year I picked up some regular mono. So far in two days of fishing with it I have caught 2 fish in the 20s no problem.
 
Yes, just match the weight of the line to the weight of the tippet you would be using.
 
X is diameter, so you can go by that. Not lb test.

By the way, MEASURE the diameter, don't take the box's word for it. Most k-mart type manufacturers routinely understate the diameter, sometimes considerably, and Berkeley TriLene is among the worst at doing this. I guess it's just loose tolerances and they state the minimum diameter and lb test. But frankly, if you buy 4 lb TriLene I'll bet you dollar to donuts that if you tested it, the diameter will be around 50% higher than advertised, and breaking strength will be more like 8 lbs. It's like they took honest 8 lb test and just stuck it in a box that says 4 lb test on it.

Honestly, I don't think there's any problem with using these lines for leader material. But personally, I'd stick with a FF brand for the tippet on the end. It's just much higher quality, to higher tolerances. More expensive, yes, but get 4 spools in 3x-6x and for still
 
Stroft is the way to go for nylon/copolymer line. The only real advantage of flouro is being more abrasion resistant. Nylon has higher breaking strength and much better knot strength.

rio flouroflex plus is way overrated at smaller diameters like 6x. It doesn't hold knots very well, so I find myself retying my knot every couple fish just to make sure it won't come out. It's knot strength is poor when you get it at smaller diameters.

I like the regular rio flouro carbon, but I have gotten some bad spools of it so it just has put a bad taste in my mouth with all their tippet material.

I use flouro as tippet probably 75 percent of the time at 5x but switch to stroft or frog hair when I drop to 6x. I just have a lot more confidence in nylons/copolymers.

For knots for flouro to fly, I now use the 16/20 knot, orvis tippet or improved clinch. I think the 16/20 knot really works well with flouro.
 
The only real advantage of flouro is being more abrasion resistant. Nylon has higher breaking strength and much better knot strength.

Agreed. Copolymers also are the most supple of the materials, which is the most important consideration for me MOST of the time on tippet.

Abrasion resistance has it's place, though. For me that place tends to be on toothier fish, but where you don't want to go all out on a wire leader. Steelhead is a good example.
 
I mainly use a sighter leader with tippet ring as I nymph a lot. Normally, I tie on several feet of Cabelas 4 lb. test 100%fluorocarbon fishing line to the tippet rings and surgeons knot several feet of 2lb. test P-Line 100% fluorocarbon fishing line as final tippet. Been doing this for several years and haven't seen any issues vs. using fluorocarbon tippet to build the leader. And, the fishing line costs much less than fluorocarbon tippet
 
I just read on another forum (it was pulled from a book, ill look it up and see what book) but the author tested this and found that trout see all the lines and that 7x is as visible as 3x, but the difference is their suppleness. and thats why they sometimes (well most of the time) outfish the 3x. But with that said, i switched to rio/orvis mono tippet, and cant say my catch rate went down. im on the side that thinks the marketing theory for mono has brainwashed us into thinking we are inferior if we do not use the $15+ fluro from whatever FF brand. just my .02 cents

Edit: this is from the troutlegend forum and is posted by devin olsen.

Though the book didn't have nearly as much underwater observation as I was hoping for, you may want to check out What a Trout Sees by Geoff Mueller. He specifically looked into fluoro vs nylon and 7x vs 3x underwater. He concluded that fluoro is not much different than nylon underwater and 7x is just as visible as 3x. He believes that the reason fine tippets often outfish thick tippets is because of differences in drift, sink rate, etc. and not because of visibility. I would tend to agree. I've also fished a lot of fluoro vs. nylon the last few years. I fish a lot of fairly technical hard fished Colorado tailwaters. I honestly can't say fluoro has caught more fish than nylon for me. Where I believe it excels is in abrasion resistance. Fluoro doesn't seem to get as banged up by rocks etc. as nylon. It's your choice whether that makes it worth the extra dough.

Devin
 
Here is a great post by a real accomplished FFer. Also, great links with even more info on the subject of tippets and fluoro.

Fluorocarbon has four main advantages over nylon monofilament.

The one that everyone mentions is visibility and refractive index. Fluorocarbon does have a refractive index closer to water and if that were the only factor in visibility, it would be less visible. There is also color and sheen. A line that is the same color as the water is less visible because of the camouflage effect. Sheen is reflectivity due to the oily lubricant that is on the line surface due to the extrusion process of manufacturing. In very clear and thin water, this sheen can spook fish and that is why fly fishers will use Snake River Mud to remove the sheen and oily coating from both nylon and fluorocarbon tippets. All things equal and in clear still water, fluorocarbon is less visible than nylon.

Seeing is believing.

Here is a visual test of 0.16 mm nylon monofilament on the right and 0.18 mm fluorocarbon on the left. The fluorocarbon is THICKER than the mono.

You decide which on is more or less visible. You decide whether the visibility is due to the difference in reflection or refraction. Are you seeing the mono because of sheen from the surface or because it bends the light from behind it differently that pure water, and are you are seeing a difference in DENSITY of the mono vs the fluorocarbon?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YpgGfm6Q0rY

Fluorocarbon's second advantage is that it does not absorb water and nylon does. Nylon monofilament can absorb 10% of its weight in water and loses 25% of its breaking strength.

Fluorocarbon's third advantage is that it is solid and nylon monofilament is porous so for a given volume, there is more material in fluoro line. Therefore, for a given X size, flouro has the potential for being stronger than mono. Check out the line strength ratings of Rio mono vs fluoro tippets and you will see that the fluoro is stronger than the mono. The "rio" difference though is in wet strength. Mono will get weaker and fluoro will maintain its strength. The absorption of water by mono also weakens the mono knot including the tippet to fly knot.

Fluorocarbon's fourth advantage is that it is more abrasion resistant. It is harder than nylon. So for nymphing; the wet strength, low visibility, and wet strength makes it better than nylon.

Fluorocarbon's fifth difference is both an advantage and a disadvantage. Fluorocarbon is resistant to UV light breakdown so you can keep a spool of fluorocarbon for years and it will not degrade. Nylon mono gradually weakens. For salt water fishers, that means you don't need to replace the line on the casting reels every year. For fly fishers, you can buy large spools of fluorocarbon and use it over many, many years.

The slow breakdown also means that it stays in the environment for thousands of years. But nylon is not that great either. Nylon mono takes 500 years to completely break down so you shouldn't toss either along the stream or lake.

Although fluorocarbon is a bit denser than water and has a higher specific gravity than nylon mono, nylon is also heavier than water. It turns out that the slight difference in specific gravity has little effect on the sink rate of fluorocarbon vs nylon of the same diameter. Although both are heavier than water, the surface tension of water allows both nylon and fluorocarbon to float and be used for dry fly leaders.

Once under water, fluorocarbon will sink a bit faster than nylon but that does not mean it can break through the surface tension. Tests have shown that fluorocarbon is not dense enough to sink on its own.

We have seen the experiment that demonstrates that surface tension can float a sewing needle on water. But once you push the needle under to break the surface tension, the needle sinks.

The Floating Needle. - YouTube

Surface tension will float also fluorocarbon. But once pulled under water by the fly or split shot, it sinks. If you want to keep it floating longer, coat it with silicone floatant.

The truth is that fluorocarbon will not make dry flies sink NOR is it measurably better than nylon in getting nymphs to sink. Both statements are wrong. Surface tension is what floats both flies and leaders that are heavier than water and lead or tungsten is what makes nymphs sink. Over the average cast and drift, whether the tippet is nylon or fluorocarbon has no effect on making a dry fly float or making a nymph sink.

"The actual blend of polymers used to produce ?nylon? varies somewhat, but the nylon formulations used to make monofilament leaders and tippets generally have a specific gravity in the range of 1.05 to 1.10, making them just slightly heavier than water. To put those numbers in perspective, tungsten?used in high-density sink tips?has a specific gravity of 19.25."

"Fluorocarbon has a specific gravity in the range of 1.75 to 1.90. Tungsten it ain?t, but it is significantly more dense than nylon. But is it sufficiently dense to quickly and reliable break surface tension and sink all by itself, even at zero contact angles, and even in the smallest diameters? No, it?s not. Our testing reveals that most brands of fluorocarbon tippet material in 0X to 8X diameters are no better than nylon at breaking surface tension and sinking on their own."

It used to be that fluorocarbon was stiffer than mono for identical diameters and so it hindered a drag free drift. Now there are limp fluorocarbons so there is less difference between the two. When I buy fluorocarbon tippet material, I buy the limpest one on the shelf. I will give up some breaking strength for a longer drag free drift.

Here's the best article on fluorocarbon vs nylon that I have been able to find:

http://www.flyfishamerica.com/conten...arbon-vs-nylon

Regards,

Silver


Link to source: http://www.flyanglersonline.com/bb/showthread.php?51912-fluoro-tippet-sizes/page2
 
That visibility test should not be taken seriously. Never in FF would you have a white background, and the fluro is on the darker wall and not the brighter side (mono side). But besides that i agree that the abrasion resistance is a big plus. but with that said, i check my tippet after every fish regardless of what tippet i use, and rarely find that its banged up (besides steelhead or a bigger trout). With that said i use both fluro and mono, but lately ive been using more mono just for moneys sake, but i dont think its as big as a difference as some people think, and i certainly dont think its worth the extra money most of the time. only exception would be places like big spring creek where the water is all glass and the fish are always super spooky... but as i said before i do use both, but mostly due to wanting to cover my bases (and for fluro i use alot of the sequar abrasX or red label in 4 lb, as i cant find it in 2 lb)
 
Back
Top