Hey RT and others,

It's great to see the enthusiasm for the line tests. I hope that if we are going to do this, we do it right. All of us recognize that there are personal preferences for various types of fishing situations. Any test, however, can only measure so many variables. And, the data will only be as valuable as the test. As much as possible, it's important to remove all bias. Following are a few ideas I have for the test, others may have additional ideas to reduce error.

1. A qualified scale would likely be the most consistent method of measure; a "pull test" with a swivel between lines would be an alternative;

2. Each line and or pull test between lines should be conducted three or more times to reduce error as a result of poor knot or line construction.

3. Line diameter in addition to line poundage will be part of data, some lines are far larger in diameter but have same poundage rating, maxima being a good example;

3. Tests should be conducted on both new and used lines. Used lines should in some way best approximate "real-life" wear but also be consistent from one line to another. The point being that each "used" line must be "used" the same amount to provide a fair comparison. Control for this test will be difficult due to the variation in fishing approach (bobber, plug, bottom), weather conditions, gear type, substrate type, etc., all of which effect the amount of line wear.

4. Several tests with each line could be done. For example: new mono vs new mono, new super vs new super, used mono vs used super.

5. Consistency regarding "knot" type should be used for each line type and test. For example, improved clinch for mono, palomar for super lines.

A qualified and accurate scale would be most helpful, perhaps someone has an idea for this. If not, perhaps several of us could test the popular brands using the pull test and provide them to the group in table form. Any ideas?

RM