Is side view/scan worth it in smaller bodies of water?

[MediumMouthBass]

Ive fished old school my whole life, but this year my dad and i decided we would further upgrade the boat and use it as much (if not more) than the kayaks, so i was going to wait for a spring sale on a Garmin Strike Vivid 5CV, but i find myself wondering if the 7SV with that side view is worth the extra cost.

 

I know most guys swear by it, but we will mainly be fishing lakes and ponds ranging from 20-120 acres.

 

Is it even worth it for how small these lakes are? I dont mind spending the extra money for it, but i would prefer to do so if it would actually benefit us.

[Craig P]

So worth it.  As anglers, we are trying to eliminate water so that we can get to catching quicker.  Being able to see out 60-100' at the console when idling tells us quickly we can skip something with confidence or find that solitary structure that doesn't get much attention from other anglers.

 

When at the bow, I stare at sidescan and mapping almost as much as people who use FFS.  I can't tell you how many fish I've caught because of it.  Sometimes I see the fish, other times, I see that isolated rock or structure that I would not have seen otherwise.

 

Since you are in Pa, you may be familiar with Leaser Lake at 117 acres.  It is a small lake with many habitat improvements.  Sure, you could aimlessly boat around to find some rock piles but sidescan will get you right on them with little effort and give you a much better understanding of how wide and high a pile is and maybe even see some fish.

[OHBuckets]

Absolutely. I run it on my canoe - I'll just wind/current drift along in small waters and fire things at structure as I see it. Dial it in and you see fish, schools, musky, cats. 

 

If I'm not as familiar with the water I'm on, I'm bringing it.

[12poundbass]

Keep in mind, the shallower the water the less you’ll see to the side, the same goes for 2d and down imaging. Keep that in mind when making your decision. I’d say if you can swing the $ get it. It’s better to have it than not have it. 

[Born 2 fish]

Absolutely it’s worth it.

[Scott F]

I had side scan and almost never used it. I found fish are difficult to see unless you are staring at the screen. When l did use it, I was sitting at the console and looking for a rock pile or downed logs, but not for locating fish. 

[Craig P]

12 minutes ago, Scott F said:

I had side scan and almost never used it. I found fish are difficult to see unless you are staring at the screen. I did if I was sitting at the console and looking for a rock pile or downed logs, but not for locating fish. 

 

Fish mostly just look like dots so you can't get a good idea of their size but if you also look for shadows, you'll see it from a different perspective.  Those dots and shadows will also give you an idea of the species you may be seeing with how they are set up.  It's not magic or anything but once you start hooking up your brain will recognize the nuances and then you'll be cruising along and say "oh, fish!", cast and hopefully catch.

[MIbassyaker]

Depends on the kind of water you're fishing. I really like side scan for seeing the deep weedline in natural lakes, and most places I'm fishing are in that size range.

 

 

[DogBone_384]

12 hours ago, MediumMouthBass said:

Is it even worth it for how small these lakes are?

 

For me it is.  I have side scan on my boat and kayak.  I pedal along and mark structure/weed lines/etc.

[MediumMouthBass]

5 hours ago, 12poundbass said:

Keep in mind, the shallower the water the less you’ll see to the side, the same goes for 2d and down imaging.

Most places id be fishing are in that 8-12' range with lots of grass in the summer.

The lakes vary for deepest spots from 12-15-25'.

4 hours ago, Scott F said:

had side scan and almost never used it. I found fish are difficult to see unless you are staring at the screen. When l did use it, I was sitting at the console and looking for a rock pile or downed logs, but not for locating fish. 

Honestly im not going to use the fish finder regardless of if its down/side scan to find bass, (however it will be used to find schools of crappie on days im hungry) its going to be more for what you mentioned. The lakes i fish i only fish certain areas because i know them well, the rest of the lake im always guessing depth, and unsure what cover lies below.

 

I really just want to find some rocks, boulders, downed trees, brushpiles, and mark them on the fish finder to have reference points for future trips. Plus being able to know the depth is amazing.

And back to that reference point saved to the fish finder, id be fishing out of a simple job boat, that gets blown around by wind and wakes. Being able to troll back to the spot i need to be is a huge plus.

 

Im thinking ill go with the side view because i really like being able to see on each side of the boat in the deeper places ill be fishing, because even though i will primary be only using 2d/down view the side view will come in handy mapping these lakes.

 

 

[gim]

5 hours ago, Scott F said:

When l did use it, I was sitting at the console and looking for a rock pile or downed logs, but not for locating fish. 

 

Same.  I rarely spot actual, confirmed fish on it.  I'm looking for an established weed edge, underwater brush pile, isolated boulders, etc.

[GreenPig]

SI is how I find all my structure the first time. I'm gonna have on all my boats but my throw in the truck bed jon.