Це відео не доступне.
Перепрошуємо.
Tested | 20lb Braided Lines, 24 Types Available in Australia
Вставка
- Опубліковано 19 вер 2020
- We’ve been planning to do this test for a pretty long time. Finally, we assembled all of the sample lines just before COVID hit. So it all got shelved during lockdown and only reappeared on the radar in the middle of 2020.
At that point I hit up Gareth Williams from Brisbane’s Tackle Tactics to borrow some of his testing machines. Gareth recently acquired Platypus lines and as far as I know if the biggest braid manufacturer in Australia.
Gareth agreed, and after a few hiccups (which involved us taking out power to the entire TT operations while they were ultra-busy) we got the work done.
What are the results? Well, you’ll need to read on to find out, but I learned a lot about braid and braid testing along the way. And I’m happy to take y’all along on the journey.
Gareth summed it up pretty well on day one.
“Although braid has plenty of amazing properties, it’s all pretty poor when it comes to abrasion resistance - monofilament line will win that battle every day of the week. It’s why we tie leaders to the end of most braid setups. Abrasion resistance and to reduce visibility,” he said.
At the end of the day, there’s plenty of ways to test a braided line. We tested with the machinery that we had available. Other companies test different ways and other industries test different ways as well.
And we know that different anglers look for different properties in a line. Some want thinness, others abrasion resistance and others just want to spend as little money as possible to get the job done. We get all of that, which is why we’re aiming to rank the lines in plenty of different ways based on these preferences.
The first thing that stood out to me was that there’s no, one line that’s the best at everything. If there was a braid that was the cheapest, thinnest, most abrasion resistant, most supple and had amazing knot strength, then we’d all just buy that.
Guess what - it doesn’t exist - at least not yet.
There’s 24 lines in our test, which we think represent most of the braids on the market today. There were a few companies who declined to participate in the testing and we didn’t force the point.
Full article in October 2020 Fishing Monthly Magazine
issuu.com/fish...
As someone who professionally works with data and reporting, I really appreciate the approach. After watching and reading the article I am dissappointed not to have a solid conclusion of the "best line", but I completely understand why you chose not to crown winners. Would it be possible to upload your data to a google sheet or something so we can look at the data and chose a line that best fits what we each are looking for? The measured results for each line for abrasion, diameter, and straight strength would be enough. Thanks.
I agree but also disagree... it comes down to PRICE and to "let the consumer decide which is important for them" so if someone is fishing rocks, Abrasion is important but price is still a factor and if Strength is important because they are shore fishing, PRICE is still important. Diameter means ZERO in this because they can create a huge diameter with crap material, or thin with amazing material, but it still comes down to Price, Abrasion, Strength... everything else is Marketing Fluff! I do appreciate they are protecting the larger brands and sadly on to other channels.
No post of the abrasive resistance results. Literally one of the two reasons I watched
Great vid and approach to the testing. If you do publish line diameter and abrasion resistance results we would be able to divide the breaking strain by the diameter and also the diameter by the abrasion rotations to to get scores that would allow us to compare the different braids.
Impressive job! That's how you make a useful comparison! Super informative!
Looks like the most comprehensive and accurate testing i have seen so far. I always felt like the breaking strains were all over the shop. We need to all use one method of gauging them. Personally I have gone to PE as the standard. Nice to see Aussie testing on Aussie brands too.
Except that PE ratings also seem to have diameters all over the place. And not all publish a PE rating.
PE is even worse now 3 years later. A generalised PE (which just stands for Polyethylene) number can incorporate about 5 different line diameters.
An excellent and informative vid guys. I’m going to show all staff at the Bass Angler tomorrow. Thanks
I'm glad he actually changed the sandpaper instead of running the same piece.
thanks for taking the time to do the testing. given it mostly seems to come down to diameter it would be great if brands could be consistent around that
Publish it you dawg!
Yes!
Expand the description section of the video the link is in there.
I’m glad my suffix 832 performed great 😊
Yeah but it's way too expensive for certain type of fishing like bottom sea fishing.
*sufix
Look forward to reading the full review when my magazine hits my letterbox. In the meantime, I tend to only look at the diameter (and only in Daiwa lines) and buy the one suitable for the style of fishing. For example, in a deep drop slow jigging reel, I like a very fine diameter (so Saltiga EX in a nominal 20lb), whereas for say a shallow plastics outfit where diameter is not so important, I'll go to a less expensive and larger diameter (J-Braid or Grand in a nominal 20lb).
Interestingly, EX breaks at nearly 1/2 of Daiwa’s other 20lb braids.
@@FishingMonthly Interesting. As long as they all break above 20lb...
Not one broke under!
@@FishingMonthly And daiwas other 20lb braids are much thicker.....
Nice work Fishing Monthly, it is certainly a confusing segment of the industry. We were told the Japanese purchase braid on PE size, maybe we should do the same.
The only problem with that is most people don't know what pe size is and the question of what pe size to use with their rod.
We are likely reworking this for the industry mag. Some consistency would be nice for the end users.
did you guys publish any of the diameter tests?
Nothing worse than sitting through a 10 min video for a non conclusive result
Maybe a 5 minute video with incorrect results would make you feel better!
Fishing Monthly Magazines just choose a winner based on durability and price. Can’t be that difficult!
Can’t wait to see the results of Johns tests.
Sorry we couldn’t make it any simpler.
The true breaking strength are not the same. Just because they marketed the same rating doesn’t mean they actually are and Steve clearly said that
Wish I knew you were doing this, cause I did the same thing about 3 months ago. Cost me a fortune in lines and now I have so many spools i wont use lol
I did my testing slightly different though, I ignored the rated breaking strain and just compared all the lines by diameter.
I did my testing with 0.28mm (around 30lb) lines and 0.13mm (around 6lb) lines. The results weren't consistent across a brand. A brand may have scored well in 1 size and scored poorly in the other. Its frustrating
As far as we could measure, stated diameters were not consistent either - it’s a difficult equation!
Care to share your results. I liked the video but really hoped to see the real diameters of each line at least. Could have shared all the results with a disclaimer about test conditions.
Obviously sandpaper gets blunt, even I know that and I'm only a floor sander.
Let see those charts
Awesome to see that strength to diameter correlation is so tight, takes a lot of the need to obsessively research away. Seems that the only real factor with strength is how thick the company makes it and not what company makes it.
yup thats just how physics works 😂
Not when you’re comparing braid. A thin 16 strand braid is stronger than a thick 4 strand braid.
Not when you’re comparing braid. A thin 16 strand braid is stronger than a thick 4 strand braid.
Good job bro
ilike champion team design tropy
Cheers Mate.
Nice I reckon you should test out best reviewed Amazon braids see what holds up!
I don't understand how the tensile rating could be off so far. There must be a standard. I feel the title may be to bring attention to Platypus more than about testing. The testing that you supposedly did is pointless without sharing the results.
There is no standard. Sorry about the butthurt.
1:11 you forgot to mention the line diameter, .17 mm is a lie but the Chinese diameter is actually .25 (not the indicated 2.5) which is realistic for a 17kg line. Apart from Platypus lines, Tasline braid is made in Melbourne.
Would have been interesting to test several batch of the same braid. One of my suffix 832 is breaking way below the labeled value...
*sufix. All the lines tested by more advanced methods than seen here show breaking strains below what’s published. The Line Laboratory is the best channel for line testing and it’s Australian.
Despite all the negative comments this was an interesting watch and a good linked article, from which one can deduct some obvious conclusions. Thanks for the testing and all the informative responses through the comments.
Thanks …. Most would prefer and answer - even if it is incorrect.
Is there any merit in publishing strength or abrasion per mm? Kind of like how you did price per m? Obviously the mm is based on your measurement as you stated they all differ in terms of accuracy on published thickness? Or will that be in the article?
I thought that the call out about changing the sand paper was great!
Either way great video
I think as we build on our proficiency doing this then we will get the detail that granular.
Nice contents very informative....any thoughts on daiwa UVF PE durasensor + si2 2020?
Any reason TASLINE braid wasn’t tested? Curious as a few UA-camrs I watch use it
May not have supplied or may not have been asked by the FM staff.
This should have been done my using same diameter brads ( not declared diameter but measured diameter ) and then have those tested on abrasion and strenght. I can see that for example saltiga has nearly same strenght as it is written on the box. This is because they are true to the diameter value while others are not. And this is the characteristic of expensive and quality braid. As close to the numbers written on a box as possible. Thats what everybody wants.
What everybody wants is some standardisation - not a free-for-all in labelling.
@@FishingMonthly exactly. I can understand those that had to lie about diameter in order to have strength thats written on the box. But those that are much thicker and have over 40lb are beyond me. Why not declare those as 40lb braid instead of 20. This is why if I want 0.2 jbraid I buy 0.14... ridiculous.
PE rating is a much better determination for expected strength.
How did 8 carrier braids compare to 4 carrier in strength and abrasion?
Enjoyed the review but would have loved to see knot breaking strength. Ultimately the knots are the weakest link. Be interesting to see if it follows the the same trend on your graphs.
How did J braid grand do on abrasion testing?
Any reason you left of the list a brand known by everyone Javis Walker that is available from every Big W and Kmart store?
They chose to not supply any samples
why didnt u show the test for the abrasion part I wanted to see that part the most tbh
this is stupiggggggggggggggg,...............no show the result on abrasion test.......waste my time watching n reading !
i want to know if my rod breaks will the braid company refund me and buy me a new rod for mis information of a product .
I wonder how many people have broke rods because of this also ? 🤔
Why not publish diameter data?
I think Yanks state knot breaking strain. Confusing.
Why didn't you publish measured diameter of each brand?
We did. It’s in the magazine article.
@@FishingMonthly I checked magazine from description and I can't see thicness for specific brand that you measured. It only states how you did it.
D Average Braid
0.35 Strike Pro Armour Braid
0.27 Berkley X5
0.27 Daiwa J-Braid x4
0.19 Siglon PEx4
0.31 Nomad Pandora braid
0.32 Strike Pro CFS Fish Floss
0.29 Daiwa J-Braid x8
0.31 Berkley X9
0.21 Sign PEx8
0.27 Platypus Platinum Braid
0.27 Toray Super Strong PE
0.31 Sufix x8
0.24 Shimano Kairiki braid
0.31 Daiwa J-Braid Grand
0.35 Platypus Bionic Braid
0.28 Sufix 832
0.28 Platypus P8
0.32 Power Pro
0.24 Toray Jigging PE Power Game
0.33 Schneider Super 8
0.25 Sufix 131
0.27 Power Pro V2
0.21 Daiwa Saltiga EX
0.23 Toray Sea Bass PE
@@FishingMonthly Thank you very much! This is gold!
What’s happen to Fins?
Declined to participate
Time saver: buy the magazine to see results. Not in this video.
What was the big outlier on the abrasion resistance test?
Strike Pro Armour Braid - but it’s was noticeable how much the coating clogged the sandpaper. That bit is in the article.
@@FishingMonthly Cheers, I'll check it out.
@@FishingMonthly if you were planning on doing this sort of thing again you can get graduated microscope slides with a scale etched onto them which might make it easier to measure the diameter.
Dude! I watched the whole thing and you did not even share results. Grr
Well that sucks. All that effort and you do not publish the abrasion results. What a waste of time.
We do it for your own protection. If we publish them, some people who can only hold one concept in their brain at once squawk it everywhere out of context. Saves y’all from looking stupid.
@@FishingMonthly those guys who click on and watch your video want to see a clue for the results... they will be so dissapointed.
I tried braid and I'll never buy another spool.
Good for you.
Many talk. Where the result test??
At least publish the diameters. You simply waste your time and reader's as well.
Waste of time
Thanks for nothing steve😂 its 2023 and I want results.
You can get results with modern testing equipment, on youtube the Aussie channel ‘The Line Laboratory’ is much more scientific and the results will shock you. No line manufacturer is honest, I’ll just say that.
I just gave you a dislike because you did not publish the results. Not even the measurement of the thickness, which is an objective fact helping to choose accordingly on how honest the brand labels theirs products.
After pointing out that thicker line has a higher breaking point everyone would have sufficient insights to chose wisely.
My guess is that you guys feared some repercussions from some brands and therefore omitted the results
We gave you a dislike because you didn’t read the description where there’s a link to the article where all of that is published.
@@FishingMonthly nope, even in the article are no single results of each tested line, of diameter measurement or abrasion resistance...triple dislike 😂
@@dante7228 they didnt publish any diameter tests for some reason
@@danielwutfisho I know! It is completely pointless to make some test and not publishing the results.