FishingTN.com Tennessee's Fishing and Boating Community - Gliss...fishing line of the future

- Local Fishing (http://www.fishingtn.com/forumdisplay.php?f=4)

- - Gliss...fishing line of the future (http://www.fishingtn.com/showthread.php?t=9504)

Gliss...fishing line of the future

It looks like the expensive braids of today are about to become history if this article's claim is true.

http://www.inthebite.com/2014/09/line-to-replace-braid/

Sounds pretty incredible. Too good to be true? Or simply inevitable? Wonder how much it'll cost.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Either they have the diameter wrong in the article or it is quite a bit larger diameter than most braid at same # test. Be interesting to see.

Regards
http://www.basspro.com/Spiderwire-Ul...1409030641472/

If the stuff really is small diameter then I can't wait until it comes out!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alphahawk (Post 57291)

Just a quick search and I found a report that said the diameter was listed wrong in the article. should be .100 not.010. I am game for something that will be clear line mono or fluoro but strength and sensitivity of braid.

Quote:

Originally Posted by XxthejuicexX (Post 57298)

X2 on that one! I love my braid!

Quote:

Originally Posted by XxthejuicexX (Post 57298)

As usual most folks have problems when it comes to decimals and especially Metric's ... (I am talking about the Quick Search article not the messenger) First off .100 thousands is a tenth of an inch ... My weed eater uses .090 mono and it is bigger than a BIC ball point ink cartridge .. Go look at your weed eater cord ... it is in Decimals (Thousands ) I have two, a smaller cheap one that takes .065 and a larger one that takes .090 ... Right off you know who ever wrote the Quick Search Report didn't have a clue .... Especially for 8.8 pound test ...

So what is 4Kg ?? It is equal to 8.8 pounds ... Formula is 4Kg X 2.2 =8.8 pounds test ... To me .010 would be high for 8.8... There's a lot of mono out there that is in this Diameter but a higher test range ....Just look on the spool, it gives diameter in Thousands) Now as far as Braid?? I only tried it when it first came out 30 years ago ... I didn't like it for a number of reasons ... One I like the stretch ... So I really don't know the braid equivalents as far as Diameter ( I did read the Spiderwire chart) .... Now I am sure as the Kg's/Pounds increase the Diameter will also like everything else ...

Maybe I missed something ... Let me read it again ... You do no I have had Brain surgery resonantly and I may be slipping :eek:... I really don't think any one is going to be using fishing line the size of a small straw (.100, 1/10 of an inch for 10 pound test ).

Now if the diameter went the other way .. .001 that would be super small which I think would be a real eye opener ... Especially my eyes I couldn't see it to tie a Knot in it !!

To Me the article is very confusing it is boasting a larger than average diameter than the braid standard for that pound test ? ... Need more info on this one ... <'TK><:)

Gliss...fishing line of the future

First thing that came to my mind. Is that this is a European company. It's all metric, since they label the strength in kg. I highly doubt they would label the diameter in inches. So maybe the decimal is in mm which would make it a much thinner diameter line. Just a thought.

Mike

For an example, here is a pic of European suffix, shows in kg and mm. In this case .100 would be correct like Juice said.
http://tapatalk.imageshack.com/v2/14...c105dda3f4.jpg

Mike

Quote:

Originally Posted by MNfisher (Post 57309)

My thoughts too. There was a bass fishing forum that was talking about this and they were saying same.

Regards

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Here is what I think, if I use any smaller line than I use now I won't be able to see it to tie a knot. I am thinking about getting some of TK's weed eater line. That's sounds like what I need.

Roy

Got it ... <'TK><

Quote:

Originally Posted by MNfisher (Post 57310)

For an example, here is a pic of European suffix, shows in kg and mm. In this case .100 would be correct like Juice said.
http://tapatalk.imageshack.com/v2/14...c105dda3f4.jpg

Mike

Yep, Mike, Juice you are on top of it .... I went to my shop and got my metric equivalent chart ... Now that we know we are comparing Oranges to Oranges :eek:

.102 MM = .004 Inches.... So the 8.8/4Kg pound test @ .100 MM will be just under .004 inches in Diameter. Case solved ... <'TK>< :)