3 answers
I switched to fluorocarbon for fishing in clear water, where fish really do react to line visibility. There's an effect, but it's not magic - a lot depends on what you're actually catching and what conditions you're dealing with. If fish are biting actively, you barely notice any difference between fluorocarbon and regular line. But when the bite's slow or the water's really clear, the improvement is obvious.
On the practical downsides: fluorocarbon's more expensive, it's stiffer and can be annoying if you're not used to how it behaves. It also wears out faster from casting and rubbing against the guides. But here's the thing - I don't think it's worth switching everything at once. Better to try it specifically for the fishing you do most often and see if it actually improves your results in your situation.
One money-saving trick that works: I don't make a full fluorocarbon leader - just part of it. The main line stays regular, cheaper stuff, and I only use fluorocarbon for the last 30-50 centimeters before the hook. You get better visibility where it matters, and way less material gets used. I just swap out that section occasionally and keep the main line.
What fish are you going after? Fluorocarbon is great if you're dealing with shy fish - it's practically invisible in water, unlike regular line! But there are downsides: it's pricey and needs careful handling, it frays easier. If the fish aren't too picky, a regular leader works just fine and won't hurt your wallet.
The real question is whether you even need this upgrade in the first place, not just whether you should switch. Fluorocarbon really is less visible, but it has this problem where it loses its clarity pretty fast when it gets exposed to sun and sand - literally after a few fishing trips it gets cloudy and all that invisibility goes away. If you don't fish that often or you change your leaders frequently anyway, maybe it's just easier to stick with regular line in the right diameter and not overpay?
Your answer
Log into answer.