Getting a new boat, looking for advice about electronics.

[Fishing Rhino]

It looks like there will be an addition to my fleet, currently consisting of two canoes.

My priority is the electronics.  I want to get a GPS mapping, bottom reading sounder, and a side scanning unit.

The electronics are more important in my overall scheme of things.  An adequate boat with good electronics should result in better fishing than a better boat with lesser electronics.

I have a color sounder from my lobstering days, but it is a CRT Furuno.  It's a good unit, with surface temp and over the water speed capability.  It produces an excellent image.

The downside is that it is heavy, and takes a lot more electricity to operate.  Not a problem on a lobster boat with a 150 amp alternator, and a standard automotive type alternator, and three 8D Rolls Surrette batteries that weigh nearly 200 pounds each.

So, I'm looking for input from those with experience using the current units that are available, and the pros and cons of each.

I've done well finding bottom with my 99 dollar Eagle Cuda, powered by 8 AA batteries.  I'm setting my sights higher, and want to be able to fish unknown waters without fishing blind.

The wise council of experienced hands will be greatly appreciated.

[Wayne P.]

Lowrance has Stucture Scan as an ad-on to their HDS units.

Humminbird has Side Imaging that is in some of their units.

Your choice is how much you are willing to spend for that technology.

[fishfordollars]

I ran Humminbird for years. They are quality units that are easy to run.

I switched over to Lowrance about five years ago. they require a little more knowledge and fine tuning than the birds, but I found that I could fine tune them to get the results I wanted.

Just a personal preference. You cannot go wrong with either. As stated above the birds will come with the SI built in and it must be purchased seperately with the Lowrance.

Good luck,

Jack

[Fishing Rhino]

I'm willing to spend two to three thousand on the electronics.

I'll sacrifice on the boat, type, size, horsepower, and speed. From past experience as a commercial lobsterman, electronics, particularly for reading the bottom as to type, structure, etc., is of the utmost importance.

Good electronics, and using them properly makes for a more successful fisherman.

The boat, not so much of a factor.  It's just a platform to get you to where the fish are.

[Wayne P.]

Fishing Rhino, the larger screen models of each brand are in that price range.

If you choose a Lowrance HDS unit, you need to allow for an extra $600 for the Structure Scan add-on. That feature was just marketed in the Fall.

Most users of either brand prefer the larger screens to view multiple features at the same time (side views/2D sonar/GPS) or a combination of two of them.

To help you decide, visit a dealer like BPS that has them on an operating display to see which you may prefer.

I have the HB 798ci SI and decided on that unit because of it's physical size (the space I have to mount it) and higher screen resolution than any LEI HDS units and the larger screen HB units. After you get familiar with what you can find and where it is on waters you fish often, the side views will become less used and the 2D sonar quality will be the most importance function.

[K_Mac]

Fishing Rhino with that budget you are going to be amazed at how good the new stuff is. I am not one of the experienced hands, I just moved up to the smaller Lowrance (HDS5 and 5x with no side imaging) this past year. Good luck.

[Fishing Rhino]

The Furuno I have, but do not plan to use, had a zoom feature which displayed the bottom as a straight line regardless of contours.

That makes it possible to greatly "expand" the bottom echo, greatly magnifying even subtle differences in bottom composition.

Definition is definitely important, and I do want the larger display, for the reasons stated by others.

I really appreciate the input.  Keep it coming.

I have no brand loyalty, and an open mind. 

Plan to go to BPS later this week to scope out the electronics.

[Wayne P.]

All the sonar units I have used and observed displayed the same bottom features whether in zoom or not.

Some zoom setting on some units will allow for where in the water column that the zoom range is set (like you can zoom to a depth range of 20'-40' and be in 100' so you would not see the bottom.) Most fresh water users use the zoom to always include the bottom.

Most of the better quality fresh water units have a dual frequency for 2D of 20 degrees and 60 degrees expressed as 200 mhz and 83 mhz. For very deep water use, a 200mhz and 50 mhz transducer is used.

[Fishing Rhino]

I think we are talking about two different types of zoom. 

If I speak in fathoms, please understand that's the terminology commonly used among commercial fishermen, at least in this neck of the woods.

There were several ways of setting the bottom display.  You could have twenty fathoms on the screen, and the sounder would automatically adjust  so the bottom was displayed.  It stayed at a twenty fathom range on the screen

If you went from fifteen to a thirty fathom depth, it would automatically change from 0 to 20 fathoms, from 20 to 40 fathoms.

My el cheapo Eagle Cuda will automatically "zoom" and change the settings for the display.  It starts at a ten foot range.  When the depth approaches ten feet, the setting changes so the display shows from 0 to 20 feet.  As you go over deeper water, the display increases in ten foot increments, so in 52 feet of water, the display will give readings from 0 to 60 feet.

This is necessary for finding fish suspended in the water column.

If it only read from 50 - 60 feet on the display, it would not show fish that are suspended above the 50 foot depth.

But the zoom I mentioned is different from either of the above.

The bottom always shows as a straight line regardless of contours.  So, if that type of zoom is employed, you could have the display set at ten feet.  The bottom would be displayed on the screen in a greatly expanded visual, maybe a couple of inches wide. 

When the bottom composition changes, say from a pure mud bottom, to a mud/gravel, or mud/shell or a mud/short vegetation bottom, the change stands out starkly.

Set in the standard display, showing bottom contours the bottom line would be relatively small, a quarter inch or so.  Those changes would be hardly noticable.

When fishing offshore bottom, with very slight contour changes, being able to expand the bottom display to a wider line made all the difference.

There were places where I had several trawls in thirty fathom of water.  Some caught five to six pounds of lobsters per trap, while others caught only a pound or two per trap.

The bottom was perfectly flat, and looked the same on the normal display.  When I zoomed to expand the bottom image, you could plainly see the differences in the type of bottom that produced more lobsters than that which produced fewer.

My eyes were always fixed on the display as we fished.  Whenever we passed over the "good" bottom, I'd record the loran bearings, and when we had a trawl that wasn't catching lobsters as well as others, I'd move it to that piece of bottom.

Even slight color changes in the bottom echo reflected subtle changes that made a big difference in the catch.

My years of studying the bottom as revealed in the image on a sounder, cause me to be more interested in bottom changes, and I tend to get more excited over bottom changes, than marked fish.

I'm a green rookie regarding fish marking on a sounder, but, I plan on learning how to read that.

[Kenny418]

I can not speak about the Lowrance because I have never used one. I have the Humminbird 997 and it is great and easy to read and use. Either in 2D or Side scan it is an awesome tool. Now I think both companies come out with down-scan also. I know it is loaded on the newer HB's,but I have to upgrade my software for this feature this month when its available.

Go to this link and do all the research your brain can handle. Then compare it to the Lowrance.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sideimaging/

[Fishing Rhino]

I clicked on that link, and got this.

"Document Not Found

Sorry, the document you requested is not available.

Please click here to visit the Yahoo! Groups home page."

Are some characters missing in that link?

[Wayne P.]

Fishing Rhino, PM sent

[Kenny418]

Sorry Rhino I added an extra key. I fixed it

[Brine]

If I could afford the HDS-10 with downscan, that would be my choice. I piddled around with that thing for almost an hour at BPS the other day. Alot of that time was looking at screen shots from a local guide on a local lake who had detailed the images with text. I could see myself spending all of my time looking at the screen vs fishing if I owned one.

[coopie84]

If my budget is $1,000 would you guys suggest looking around for a HB917 or would you suggest looking for HDS 5 with structure scan or have any of you guys found that screen is too small???

[Fishing Rhino]

Sorry Rhino I added an extra key. I fixed it

Found it.  Thanks.

[Fishing Rhino]

If I could afford the HDS-10 with downscan, that would be my choice. I piddled around with that thing for almost an hour at BPS the other day. Alot of that time was looking at screen shots from a local guide on a local lake who had detailed the images with text. I could see myself spending all of my time looking at the screen vs fishing if I owned one.

Eventually, the trade off would be worth it.  When I replace the paper recorders with the color sounder, it was hypnotic.

It was amazing how much it improved lobstering for me.

But, like anything else, you have to apply yourself to understand what you are seeing, and to look for differences in the bottom be it contours or composition.

There is a pond I fish near Cape Cod that has smallmouth and largemouth bass.

Last summer, I found them in grassy patches of bottom.  The grass was found in six foot depths plus or minus a couple of feet.

Some grassy patches consistently produced fish, while other areas did not.  Try as I might, I could not distinguish any different bottom characteristics on my 99 dollar Eagle Cuda, or is it Cuda Eagle?

I'm hoping that with a better unit I can detect the difference, even if it's only some variation in the bottom echo.

The grass provides cover, and also holds forage.  That some places produce while others don't tells me that those areas which don't lack something that attracts the forage on which the bass feed.

If the latest and greatest can show me some difference in the bottom, then I will know which vegetation areas are more likely to hold fish.