Hmmmm, just read through.
Seems we do have a long way to go. I'm not surprised by a lot of the results (i.e. the ones with less stretch had less knot strength but were generally more abrasion resistant, and the lines with more stretch were more supple had better knot strength).
One thing that did stick out to me though was the "strain or deformity". While it shows that some fluorocarbons are easily deformed under loading, I'm really not surprised and I think that this is 100% where fluorocarbon SHOULD be going, or at least where it could be developing in to an allround line to surpass mono (in some conditions). You find a lot of pre-stretched monos these days. When I stopped coarse fishing a couple of years ago, they had started to overtake normal mono's in a real way - as a reel line. Previous to that they were reserved for hooklengths and pole rigs, but as abrasion resistance improved on them in recent years, they became a viable, thinner, stronger alternative to old, thick, stretchy classics like Maxima as a reel line. They made the word a much brighter place. We perhaps have a pre-conceived idea that fluorocarbon should be stiff, hard and have little stretch (perhaps just because this is what the original versions were like). My question is, why are fluorocarbon mainlines NOT pre-stretched?????????????????????????? We don't 'expect' them to stretch much anyway, so they might as well rid themselves of their own 'lie'. For those not sure what I'm on about, this would reduce stretch, decrease diameter (or at least allow a larger, therefore stronger diameter to be used), but still be more abrasion resistant than mono - if done right. AND have the more more normal fluoro advantages (less water absorbtion etc.).