09-29-2014, 07:50 PM
|
 |
nashvillefishingguides.co
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Goodlettsville, TN
Posts: 2,588
|
|
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/
|
09-29-2014, 07:59 PM
|
 |
Junior Member
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Goodlettsville, TN
Posts: 41
|
|
Sounds pretty incredible. Too good to be true? Or simply inevitable? Wonder how much it'll cost.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
Tight lines!
Bry
|
09-29-2014, 08:14 PM
|
 |
Master Trout Magnet
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Columbia, TN
Age: 73
Posts: 5,490
|
|
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/
|
09-29-2014, 08:18 PM
|
 |
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Smyrna, Tenn
Age: 24
Posts: 884
|
|
If the stuff really is small diameter then I can't wait until it comes out!
|
09-29-2014, 08:23 PM
|
 |
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Murfreesboro
Age: 41
Posts: 3,076
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alphahawk
|
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.
|
09-29-2014, 10:42 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Lebanon
Posts: 1,796
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by XxthejuicexX
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.
|
X2 on that one! I love my braid!
|
09-30-2014, 12:04 AM
|
 |
Owner and Administrator
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Lebanon, Tennessee
Posts: 2,925
|
|
Nooooo ! <'TK><
Quote:
Originally Posted by XxthejuicexX
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.
|
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  ... 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><
Last edited by tkwalker; 09-30-2014 at 01:55 AM.
|
09-30-2014, 04:56 AM
|
 |
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 2,592
|
|
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
__________________
Keep Livin' the Dream!
Mike
Last edited by MNfisher; 09-30-2014 at 05:00 AM.
|
09-30-2014, 04:59 AM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 2,592
|
|
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.
Mike
__________________
Keep Livin' the Dream!
Mike
|
09-30-2014, 06:13 AM
|
|
Master Trout Magnet
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Columbia, TN
Age: 73
Posts: 5,490
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by MNfisher
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
|
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
|
09-30-2014, 06:22 AM
|
 |
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Murfreesboro
Age: 58
Posts: 734
|
|
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
|
09-30-2014, 11:57 AM
|
|
Owner and Administrator
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Lebanon, Tennessee
Posts: 2,925
|
|
Got it ... <'TK><
Quote:
Originally Posted by MNfisher
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.
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
.102 MM = .004 Inches.... So the 8.8/4Kg pound test @ .100 MM will be just under .004 inches in Diameter. Case solved ... <'TK><
|
|
|
