Thanks Roo… I have tried out the “Double San Diego Jam” knot as a bend, but have never seen any discussion about this knot anywhere. I figured there may have been a good reason. I mostly see the Uni Knot and Blood Knot (or Double Improved Clinch) being discussed for multiple usages, but I see no reason why other similar knots don’t receive similar attention. By the way, my favorite fishing knot right now is the San Diego Jam.
First of all I have to agree with you about my previous remark regarding “obvious security” by just looking at a knot. That was a silly thing to do. I just felt so for the dbl sheet and the uni, but I tested them first and then thought, yes, its actually obvious when you look at them. But it can be misleading and the examples you gave are proof enough.
The site you mentioned lists the following:
Retained Breaking Strength: 90% to 95% for the (dbl) sheet bend
Retained Breaking Strength: 75% to 80% for the uni to uni
Ah ok. The dbl sheet bend goes easy on the rope, (because the rope is not so heavily bend and pinched?), but that is to no use, if the line slips, which it did in my tests.
I have yet to see the zeppelin or the uni to uni fail (line slipping) but I could imagine that the breaking strength of the rope is reduced more with the zeppelin, as the rope has several sharp turns to endure in the zeppelin bend.
Fishing line e.g. seemed to break more easily when bend with the zeppelin then with a double fisherman or uni to uni, but I still did not see it slip. For fishing line it is important though, that the line retains a good bit of breaking strength, therefore the zeppelin is out.
The knot wars tests were very convincing though, as it took a while before the uni to uni was beaten, which means first of all: it does not slip, but the breaking strenght remains considerably high.
For fishing the dbl. sheet bend is out of the question, because it slips to easily and falls apart if there is no load on it (which is one of the advantages of it in other circumstances. The sheet bend (and dbl sheet bend) remain one of the standard knots in the German navy e.g. but I would not use it for abseiling.
I picked the uni (and the palomar) for fishing, as they are simple and very strong but I will have a look at the “new champion” the modified albright and your favorite the San Diego Jam, because I am a knot-nut and like to learn new knots.
OK, I change my mind about possibly using the Double Sheet Bend or the Zeppelin Bend for joining fishing lines. However, it’s not “ridiculous” or “silly” to pose the question and have the discussion. That’s why this is a discussion forum, and not a website for one-way information. So, shame on you, Dan. 
The Zeppelin Bend first looked ridiculous and silly to me because sun shines through it. But then I tested it out, and the Zeppelin Bend instantly changed my whole mindset about knots. Recall that Ashley didn’t put the Zeppelin Bend in his book. Perhaps Ashley came across the Zeppelin Bend (before it was the Zeppelin Bend), but summarily dismissed the knot as a “ridiculous” and “silly” mistake.
Just to check: You are firmly setting/working all bends in rope before using them, right? I would hope that you could eliminate daylight shining through gaps in the bend in most cases.
Bah! It should be the case that such observations can be made
with confidence in at least some occasions. In the one at hand,
you are right in re the Sheet bend vs. many other knots.
The site you mentioned lists the following: Retained Breaking Strength: 90% to 95% for the (dbl) sheet bend Retained Breaking Strength: 75% to 80% for the uni to uniAh ok. …
??? Did you not read my post, in which the claim of supposed
strength of the Sheet bend was examined?! --nothing “ok”
about it at all: it is QUITE contrary ALL other evidence! AND
contradicted by other information presented (by echo) on the site.
Moreover, for anyone familiar with knots it should be strikingly dubious
(along with your correct thinking about security).
The knot wars tests were very convincing though, as it took a while before the uni to uni was beaten, ...
Do you have a URLink for these tests?
Do they show the actual tied & tested knots, so one can
see what they’re testing (as opposed to some other source’s take
on what the knot should be). In the case of the Uni knot, I’ve
found quite clear images of the before-setting form, but that of
the set tight form is shown in only crude appearance, which
seems generally to be a sort of Multi-Strangle form,
but that implies a significant transformation from the clear form shown.
The sheet bend (and dbl sheet bend) remain one of the standard knots in the German navy e.g. but I would not use it for abseiling.
Those who might use such end-2-end knots in that case would do so
with Strangle knots tying off the ends; the main knot would be
chosen for ease of untying (and possibly for different-diameter ropes).
I picked the uni (and the palomar) for fishing, as they are simple and very strong but I will have a look at the "new champion" the modified albright and your favorite the San Diego Jam, because I am a knot-nut and like to learn new knots.
Except that in the “gel-spun” (HMPE) line, the Palomar isn’t so strong;
many older knots come up short and are replaced with ones with
more turns or length or used with "double"s – i.e., long eyes of
a (still strong) Bimini Twist. Btw, the Palomar is presented variously
in >>three<< dressings: that end bight left around the hook shaft,
or moved up to surround the body of the knot (specifically stated
e.g. by Lefty Kreh, noted fishing author), or pushed farther up to
surround the SPart (e.g. by Geoffrey Budworth), making the the
knot a sort of eye-secured Half-Hitch, Pile Hitch noose.
–dl*
Have any of you actually tied a Uni-knot? Do you have a good
idea of what that tiny squiggle shown in the cited (and every other
I’ve found) presentation is supposed to be – you know, the actual
knot geometry that meets the Real World!?
For I have, and have had failure so far to achieve the form of
a (multiple-)Strangle in monofilament of moderate strength
(I’ll guess 30-50#? --maybe less; I don’t have a good feel for it).
I found some thinner line and in it got the transformation I’d
expected. Given one author’s assertion that the knot can be
set tightly enough to be a fairly effective fixed eyeknot,
it must be the case that the Strangle-knot form is intended,
for simply hauling bunch of turns tight with a to-be-loaded
SPart pulling through them to the end turn couldn’t be expected
to grip & hold. Some presentations show a mid-transformation
state that is that of going to Strangle form.
But I have seen some commentary that suggests that the above
transformation isn’t so readily achieved. In my efforts (a few
attempts, though --come to think of it, dry line), I got
an Overhand twist of end & SPart at the away end and
this didn’t work into and become surrounded by the multiple
wraps.
One might suspect that some different opinions/results on the
knot could arise from this difference in formation – and the
vague imagery provided in the knot’s presentation sadly does
nothing to resolve it.
2. Can I safely use two San Diego Jam knots, or two Improved Clinch knots, etc., for joining lines like I do with a Double Uni knot? ...
- Yes.
??? I’m looking at this: www.marlinnut.com/knots/sandiego.shtml
Please show me how to ring hitches can be used reasonably
qua end-2-end joints?! The Uni knot is well suited to abut something
under load, but I don’t see the ring hitches above as being so.
(And I can see one dressing the knot so that it was only the
ring-proximate parts of these hitches that involved the other
hitch, the away parts being beyond such overlap.)
3. Do you use different knots to join monofilament, braided, fluorocarbon, etc.? Or do you use the same knot for joining all types of fishing line?
- You can use the same set of knots. If you’re unsure of a knot, why not test it in the fishing line you use?
The sources I’ve seen present fishing knots as often particular
to circumstances, such as line type; this is especially true for the
newer, “gel-spun” lines of HMPE, which is very slippery and
strong. And there are special knots for joining dissimilar lines
(typically of different diameters).
–dl*
In big thick rope, I have found that light comes through the Zeppelin Bend no matter how hard I pull. The knot, nevertheless, still works great.
Dan, that’s a little too verbose for me. Did you answer the original three questions somewhere in there? I’m not saying you must. I’m saying I DO value your opinion, even you’re kind of a dick, and I mean that in the nicest possible way. 
??? Yes.
Do you have a good idea of what that tiny squiggle shown in the cited (and every other I've found) presentation is supposed to be -- you know, the actual knot geometry that meets the Real World!?I don't know what you're referring to. It's been clear enough for me. I'm sorry you're having problems.
Please show me how to [u]ring hitches[/u] can be used reasonably qua end-2-end joints?!The same way any hitch can be hitched to the belly of another hitch. I'm not a regular user of the knot in question, but it certainly can be done. It's not like the San Diego Jam Knot is tied on the bight.
The sources I've seen present fishing knots as often particular to circumstances, such as line type; this is especially true for the newer, "gel-spun" lines of HMPE, which is very slippery and strong.Some people may have opinions on what is best suited for a particular line, but the question was one of possibility. And it is possible to use common angling knots among a wide spectrum of fishing line. Some line may require more or less coils of the basic knot structure to suit friction requirements.
Do you also try to smash the collars tighter as you pull on the various ends of the bend?
I just tried on some nylon rope that’s stiff and not even that thick. Daylight still comes through a little, but I like that. For this particular application, I will be untying the knot, and a tight bend is neither necessary nor desired.
Actually, if you fail to set it and leave the Zeppelin Bend too loose, there is a small but real chance that the bend may change forms into a jammable distortion with certain types of rope.
I don’t know what kind of rope and/or strength with which you’re working. No matter how tight I get the Zeppelin Bend, after the knot is dressed completely tight, when I then put a strong load on the standing ends, daylight ALWAYS comes through at least a tiny bit. I have no problem with this. Other bends, such as the Overhand Bend and many other bends, will not have daylight coming through when a strong load is placed on the standing ends. It’s just the nature of the various knots and doesn’t seem to affect performance either way from what I can tell.
As long as you are setting it as you would other bends, you’ll be fine. It’s the effort that counts. I was just making sure you weren’t being too lax. 
I recommend also the adequate tightening of all knots on almost all occasions. My Zeppelin Bends are generally gap-free.
If I were to use big, twisted, polypropylene rope, then there might necessarily be gaps through which daylight can shine . . . but the knot will still be tight.
"Actually, if you fail to set it and leave the Zeppelin Bend too loose, there is a small but real chance that the bend may change forms into a jammable distortion with certain types of rope."
I recommend the adequate tightening of all knots on almost all occasions. Quite frankly, when folks talk about problems with the Bowline, all I can think is, “They probably didn’t tighten it properly.” If you don’t tighten it properly, then you didn’t make it properly, and you cannot expect it to work “as advertised.”
JCS
If the cryptic images of the Uni knot are clear to you,
how can my question not be? I even explained it: that some
of the text implies that a (multi-)Strangle is expected, but it’s
not something I’ve been able to coax out of one fishing line,
though did achieve it in a thinner one. The commonly seen
images of the Uni Knot show as the last clear image (the final
being a mere “squiggle”, in my words) is what one might
call a Reverse (multi-) Anchor Bend.
Please show me how to [u]ring hitches[/u] can be used [b]reasonably[/b] qua end-2-end joints?!The same way any hitch can be hitched to the belly of another hitch. I'm not a regular user of the knot in question, but it certainly can be done.
I did say “reasonably”; theoretically I understand, and in this
case quickly dismiss as A Bad Thing.
–dl*
True, but I think we both agree that the proof of the pudding is in the eating.
I did read your post.
Whether the alleged percentages for breaking strength are correct or incorrect,
I can’t tell and also have my doubts about them.
I was trying to point out though that retained breaking strength of one
knot may be high, it does not necessarily mean higher overall security of that knot.
In particular the sheet bend seems to slip before it breaks, but the zeppelin rather
breaks before it slips, at least in my experience.
Have a look here.
http://www.versus.com/fishing/videos/#browser (type: “knot wars” in the search bar)
They did not show a close up of the tied knot, but they showed how each knot is properly tied,
they tried it with 3 common types of fishing line and repeated each test several times.
They also seem to know what they are doing and you expect them to tie the knots they present correctly.
Do I have ultimate proof of that? No.
Does not make sense to me. 1. why not use a better knot in the first place (that has the quality of being secure AND ease of untying) like the zeppelin e.g. ?
2. If you use a sheet bend for ease of untying and then back it up with strangle knots (which jam so hard that a marlins pike runs home crying) the ease of untying is gone.
Then I would use the uni instead of the Palomar, which is also good for that purpose.
It’s so unreasonable and bad because…? Please be specific.
It’s not going to be the strongest option (which is why I encourage common angling options), but it’s tyable. If he has another method of implementation that’s stronger, all the better.
In this case, I disagree: we can tell – the knots at issue are ancient,
and if they had anywhere near this alleged breaking strength we
wouldn’t be learning about it all of a sudden only in the 21st century!
Moreover, one can’t posit the knot as insecure and accept a high
breaking strength – it has to hold in order to break. And fishing
line does not make for greater, rather lesser, security.
Have a look here. http://www.versus.com/fishing/videos/#browser (type: "knot wars" in the search bar)They did not show a close up of the tied knot, but they showed how each knot is properly tied,
they tried it with 3 common types of fishing line and repeated each test several times.
They also seem to know what they are doing and you expect them to tie the knots they present correctly.
Do I have ultimate proof of that? No.
Thanks. As for knowing what they’re doing, well, hmmm,
that impression is given at times by some hilariously botched
presentations, but I’ll hope that they do.
[quote="Dan_Lehman post:25, topic:3648"] Those who might use such end-2-end knots in that case would do so with [i]Strangle[/i] knots tying off the ends; the main knot would be chosen for ease of untying (and possibly for different-diameter ropes). [/quote] Does not make sense to me. 1. why not use a better knot in the first place (that has the quality of being secure AND ease of untying) like the zeppelin e.g. ? 2. If you use a sheet bend for ease of untying and then back it up with strangle knots (which jam so hard that a marlins pike runs home crying) the ease of untying is gone.
Your supposed “better” knot isn’t proven to be all so secure
in the case of contact w/rock and wouldn’t be trusted.
(Here is a good cue for Agent_Smith to re-surface and tell
of his further adventures at promoting that e2e joint to the
SAR/climbing world!). And the Strangles would hardly be
so tight as you fear (!! --indeed, I’ve heard of folks having
them come loose, even (!?)), as they are only loaded by hand
in setting, and secure the Sheet bend’s tails, that’s all; ease
of untying is present.
[quote="Dan_Lehman post:25, topic:3648"] Except that in the "gel-spun" (HMPE) line, the [i]Palomar[/i] isn't so strong; [/quote] Then I would use the [i]Uni[/i] instead of the [i]Palomar[/i], which is also good for that purpose.
Hmmm, I don’t see the Uni in Geoff Wilson’s small pamphlet on
tying Gel-spun lines; but I do see his note that the Blood knot broke
as such low loads (40%) that he stopped further testing/listing of it
in an appendix of various results: the Uni seems rather like the
Blood in geometry. And the bump in strength from the Palomar
to Triple P. of about 12%-pt.s came from the triple-turns on
the ring; he uses a similar thing with the Uni --although names
the structure “Collar & Capstan”, and makes no comment about
it being tantamount to a Uni, and ties it directly into Strangle
form using a helper eye to pull tail up through wraps–
and boasts about an 85% or better strength.
It really is irritating to have authors present knots that are
–though not clearly stated, but by apparent presentation–
the same as others, but the similarity isn’t remarked/confirmed!?
(Were it confirmed, the image from one knot could help in
guiding the tying of the other; it could further inform the reader.)
As I think Knot4U remarked, he’d never guess that the Palomar
would be so strong; I’ve had the same puzzlement, if not for
absolute strength, then, for relative strengths --i.e., I cannot
figure why one knot is stronger than this other, and so on,
given appearances. Partly this must be due to the failure of
the presentation to show even the final image, or what the
geometry becomes on loading --though we can note that
with angling knots, one is often setting them to a fairly
high percentage of tensile strength (I think Barnes, who got
to test the new-fangled at that time nylon monofilament,
opined that about 60% tensile loading was needed for
optimal results): which means that the set geometry
should be pretty near the at-rupture geometry.
(In contrast, we meager humans setting even skinny climbing
ropes come nowhere near to full-load force, let alone breaking
forces.)
Here’s such a mystery: an end-2-end joint recommended as
very strong, for gel-spun line, is joining two Bimini Twists
in a “Cat’s Paw Splice” --which is just the repeated making
of a sort of “Girth hitch” around-&-through-& weaving
of eye-&-eye. With ten such interweavings, who would think
that the eyes would be where the break would occur? --after all,
those eye strands individually need share only 50% of the force,
whereas the eyeknots have 100% on a single strand! But, as
per Wilson, increasing from ten can gain strength, so it must be
in the wraps that the break occurs. And this is at about 90%
of listed break strength (which is typically understated).
–dl*
Yes, as the SParts press against the collars. But I’ve just gotten
the knot to jam in 1/4" shock cord, and there’s very little light
coming though. Which I regard as a good thing; I’m not
sure how far I’d trust this jammed knot to stay tied, but it’s looking
pretty good at the moment; I have no concerns about being able
to loosen & untie it --that will be simple enough. I can get this
result by deliberate dressing of Ashley’s Bend #1452, but that
knot is nowhere near so neatly compact is Rosendahl’s.