Looking for a mid-range fishfinder

[teslaman]

I'm considering buying a mid-range fishfinder. I'm looking a tthese units:

1) Lowrance 334 C--has internal gps antenna. Fishfinder is OK as it has single freq 200 kHz with 60 degree cone. 2400 Wp-p & 5" color screen (480X480)
cost:~$550

2) Lowrance LCX-17M--7" screen! (B&W 480X640). Is GPS capable with external antenna. 8000Wp-p dual beam
cost:~$550

3)Eagle 480 DF -- 4000Wp-p 5" B&W (480X480) 90 degree angle. No GPS capability
cost:~215

I'm not sure that spending the money on GPS capability is important now that small handhelp GPS units are available that I can use for anything, is there a good reson to have it on the fishfinder?

I fish a local lake with depths up to 400ft. However, I usually fish in depths <50 ft (freshwater). I like to walleye fish, but I do bass fish to. Is the dual mode necessary? How deep can I get with 200kHz? Can it pick up walley just off of the floor?

Does anyone have any preference among the units that I have listed? Are there better units in the same price range out there?

3)

 

[Barnacle_Bill]

Re: Looking for a mid-range fishfinder

Lowrance is the way to go. Eagle is made by lowrance, just lower end units I guess but still very reliable. Go with color. They are much easier to see in bright sunlight. You don't need dual cone unless you always fish very deep water like the ocean. Check out the Lowrance 332C.

 

[teslaman]

Re: Looking for a mid-range fishfinder

I'm going with the LMS-334c. I went to Gander Mtn to get one this past Saturday, but all they had was the demo unit. They were going to sell me the demo for $500 but they couldn't find the box or tranducers.

They are going to get me one from another store for $550, if I register for a Gander Mtn account they will give me 10% off, so the unit will cost ~$500.

I think that this unit gives me a little of everything at a descent cost. I've been told that for freshwater lakes in Tennessee that I do not need dual frequency. With the 334c I get internal GPS, 200kHz sonar, and a color screen with 480x480 resolution. Hopefully I'll get the new one installed before next weekend.

 

[rickdb1boat]

Re: Looking for a mid-range fishfinder

Good to hear. Let us know how youl like it and how it performs.....

 

[bruceb58]

Re: Looking for a mid-range fishfinder

One more option is the Lowrance 337c DF. The advantage it has, if you want it, is that you can add a fuel flow meter for $50 to the NMEA bus and you can have instantaneous MPG and fuel flow measurements. It does use an external antenna though.

I have one of these and I am extremely happy with it.

You may want to wait awhile. Both of these units are being replaced in a few months with the 500 series. The one that replaces the 334c will have the NMEA bus.

 

[Boatist]

Re: Looking for a mid-range fishfinder

One thing you should know is the up to 60 degree cone angle is a standard 20 degree transducer with very misleading marketing. Look for a transducer for the unit and you will not find anything over 20 degrees as that is what they use.

300 watts RMS power is very low power to fish anywhere over 100 feet. You may see bottom but not fish built like a stealth fighter.

If you fish the same areas over and over then I think a GPS will help you catch more fish than a fish finder. Both will help you find the fish faster.

 

[teslaman]

Re: Looking for a mid-range fishfinder

The 334c to my knowledge does have a NMEA bus. Lowrance doesn't specify this well at their website, but it is in the 334c manual.

Your right about the 300 W RMS. However, I only fish local lakes in Eastern Tennessee. The lake I normally fish, Norris, does have some deep places I hear (~300-400' deep). However, I usually fish no deeper than 30' or so. If this unit can give me a good view at 100', it will do me well.

The 20 degree beam sucks though. The literature is tricky, "Up to 60 degrees" it says. Does this mean that this fishfinder will only read directly under the boat? That is, the cone will not spred very far at the depths I'll be fishing.

 

[bruceb58]

Re: Looking for a mid-range fishfinder

I should have said the NMEA 2000 bus. The 334C has the older bus.

If it did have the 2000 bus, it still wouldn't be able to display MPG...only fuel flow. This is because the GPS antenna is internal. Not sure if that is important to you at all anyway.

You should give Lowrance a call and ask them what improvements are in the newere series that will be out in a month.

 

[teslaman]

Re: Looking for a mid-range fishfinder

I called Lowrance about the 500 series. They said that the 500 series is still in the testing phase and haven't reached the assembly line yet. It will probably be sometime next year before they are available.

Lowrance couldn't give out any info except to say that it would offer a NMEA 2000 bus. They also said that the cost would be comparable to the 334/332 units.

Since I do not need the fuel level reading, I'm not really concerned about the NMEA bus. They wouldn't say if the GPS would be any different or improved, but this would be the only reason for me to hold out.

Like all electronics, the technology gets better, more compact, and cheaper with time. I could wait forever for the perfect one, but then all of those tastey walleye wouldn't make it to my dinner plate.

 

[bruceb58]

Re: Looking for a mid-range fishfinder

I agree...you can wait forever. On the Tigerdirect website, they claim one or more of the models are available in December but who knows...might be self serving for them to say that.

They had pictures of the new models but they looked suspiciously like the old models.

 

[Boatist]

Re: Looking for a mid-range fishfinder

If your fishing 30 to 50 feet then the unit has enough power.

On the "up to 60 transducer". The insdustary standard is to messure the cone angle at the half Power point. If you messure the cone angle at the 1/10 power point then most transducer are near a 60 degree cone angle. Lowrance and Eagle are useing this to market the up to 60 degree cone angle. They claim this is because they have advanced signal processing. If you turn the sensitivity up on any unit you will see more fish, but to use it at 60 degrees 1/10 power point the sensitivy has to be so high that the center of the cone return will black out the whole screen. Dont get me wrong I think Lowrance and Eagel make the best fresh water units.

Another thing if your fishing a rough uneven bottom a narrow cone angle will show more fish than a wide cone angle. If your fishing a flat bottom where it hard to find any change in depth then the wide cone angle will see more fish. This is hard to explain without a picture.

To start with what is under the boat when you ping is the right most row of pixels on your LCD screen. What it see to the right or the left is all displayed in the right most row of pixels on your LCD screen. Next it moves that row of pixels one row to the left and sends out another ping. When the echo returns it again put all the returns in the right most row of pixels. When you first turn your unit on you can see this as it fills the right row moves it left and fills in the right row again.

So Your fishing and area that has a very uneven bottom. Right under your boat in the cone of your transducer there is a rock that sticks up 10 feet, close to the rock about 5 feet off the bottom are 5 big bass. Problem is you can not see the bass at all. What happeneds is the ping is sent out and when the solid echo from the rock comes back is is marked as bottom and everything below it is black out for the bottom. If you have gray line on them they will be in the gray area. As you move away from the rock and it is no longer in the cone angle of the transducer you will be able to see the fish but you will not get a full arch at all.

I found a web site with a picture that explains it better than I can.

http://www.vexilar.com/help/tips/tip006.html

http://www.find-fish.com/index.pmg/page-builder/pageid-4

 

[teslaman]

Re: Looking for a mid-range fishfinder

Boatist,
Thanks for the information, it was very helpful to me. Taking into account the dead zone, the 20 degree transducer is probably best for me since I'll be fishing for walleye.

So at 30' you only cover a 10' diameter circle with a 19 degree transducer, I figured that you could see more than that.

It sounds like interpreting data from the display is somewhat of an art. Eveything is backwards from how humans usually percieve things.

 

[Boatist]

Re: Looking for a mid-range fishfinder

Yes you got it right. With a 20 degree transducer take the deepth and devide by 3 and that will be the size of the circle you will see. If you want to get a real wider transducer get a dual frequency. Many units the 50 KHZ is a 45 degree transducer. Many units the 200 KHZ unit is 20 degrees and the 50 KHZ is 45 degree.

Today Lowrance and Eagle dual frequency units I think the standard is 200KHZ at 12 degrees and 50 KHZ at 37 degrees. You can still add another transducer by just unpluging one and pluging in the other.

I fish the Ocean quite a lot and my fish finder is 3000 watts PeP or 375 watts RMS on a 192 khz 20 degree transducer. I could see fish fine out to atout 200 feet of salt water but deeper than that no fish. I could see bottom but no bottom fish at all. So I bought a 8 degree transducet. This puts all the power in a smaller cone area. Now I can see fish out to 450 feet. Even thou the 8 degree cone is much smaller at 400 feet it is still a big area. From the way Lowrance reported the depth capibillties I now use what they say and devide by 8 for the depth you can see fish at. Same with the other brands. They all report water up to 1000 feet. If your in a real clear lake like Lake Tahoe and it has a bunch of hard flat rocks that return a very strong Echo that would be true. However put a pearch, rock fish, Striper, or Salmon that are buits like a stealth fighter and it not true. Add some mud from the river, some algee, air or turbulance and the depth is much less to see fish. Salt water even harder so I devide what they claim by 8 and find it to be pretty close to how deep you can actually see fish. This is just something to think about when trying to figure if the unit your are buying is the right unit for you.

Enjoy your new fish finder.

 

[Tacklewasher]

Re: Looking for a mid-range fishfinder

I'm not sure that spending the money on GPS capability is important now that small handhelp GPS units are available that I can use for anything, is there a good reson to have it on the fishfinder?

While I realize you've picked up a unit, I thought I'd comment on this.

I've got an Eagle Fishmark 240 and a handheld iFinder Expedition. While the GPS sitting on the dash and me at the back of the boat adjusting the trolling motor, I can't see how fast I'm going on the GPS screen.

I'm going to pick up a LMS-334 in the spring to get rid of this issue. Buddy has the LCX-25 and it works a lot better than my combination.

 

[Boatist]

Re: Looking for a mid-range fishfinder

Tacklewasher I agree your not going to be able to see a less than 3 inch screen from the back of the boat but if your up close out in the daylite how hard is it to read. I Have the Garmin GPSMAP 76 and it works perfect but almost impossible to see the display in most light conditions. I have seen the Lowrance H20 C and Expedition C indoors and they are great but wonder how they do Outdoors. Lowrance LCX- 25 C HD is great outdoors and you can see it from the back of the boat even in direct sun but before I buy the Lowrance IFinder H20 C want to see it outdoors. I think it has the exact display as your Expedition.

 

[TheChad]

Re: Looking for a mid-range fishfinder

I don't know if this is true or not, But when I bought my LCX-26C HD Fish Finder/GPS Combo unit from Bass Pro Shops, I went to 2 different Bass Pro Shops and was told the same thing about Internal vs. External Antennas.

Both Said Lowrance had some difficulty with the internal antennas, and both sales associates said they knew of a few people which Lowrance had ended up swapping out the Internal units for Externals.

Both also said that If you were lucky enough to get one of the Internal units that didn't have connection problems, that the unit has to be 100% straight up, and can't be tilted or the internal antenna would experience connection problems.

After hearing all this, I made the choice to get the Extrenal Antenna, it only took about 5 minutes to install, and I will never have any connections problems with GPS. Why risk having GPS problems when your spending that kind of money?

Just some input. Hope this helps.


-TheChad

 

[teslaman]

Re: Looking for a mid-range fishfinder

I've heard these same complaints. I think the connection problems were mainly with the older units though. Your right the unit having to keep the unit staight up though. I 've heard that you can tilt them only about 10 or 15 degrees.

I have a small boat, not much room to install an external GPS antenna.

 

[Boatist]

Re: Looking for a mid-range fishfinder

If you can find the room for the small external antenna it works much better.
Normal GPS birds in low earth orbits it will have very little effect on.

The 2 WAAS bird at 23800 miles up in Geostationary orbits over the Equator is a different story. AOR-W (alantic Ocean Region) over the equator at 54 degree west and POR (Pacific Ocean Region) over the equator at 178 degrees east are low on the horizon for most. POR can only be seen from the western 1/3 of the US. If you live in the Northern US then they will be low on the horizon. With and internal antenna in the fish finder on the dash then thing like window frames people can block the signal. Also antenna angle can make a big difference. If your is Southern Florida or Southern California then probably will work good.

If you can not see the WAAS error correction birds then GPS accuracy goes from about 10 feet to over 90 feet. That makes it much harder to find that small rock pile in the middle of the lake that always holds fish.

 

[Tacklewasher]

Re: Looking for a mid-range fishfinder

Boatist:

I have no issue reading my Expedition in full sunlight but I usually run it with the backlight on (and plugged into a power source). It may be harder to see with the backlight off.

This goes for using it in the boat and in the truck.

The screen is just to small to be readable. Mainly what I'm trying to do is set my speed on my kicker by the gps, so having the speed in big numbers on the screen will help me.

As to the internal vs. external GPS, I have a soft top so that is why I was thinking internal. Also, I may try to use it as a portable (like I have done with my Fishmark 240) for smaller lakes in my 12 foot boat. Or I may keep the Fishmark for that. Haven't decided yet.

As to WAAS, the number of times I see the WAAS satellites in a year clear enough to get the improved accuracy can be counted on one hand. I live too far north to get a clear view of them unless I am pretty much on a mountain top. This also goes for my friend with the LCX-25 and the external gps. Just don't have line of sight to the satellites very often. Be different if I was hitting the chuck more.

I may still opt for the bigger unit and the external GPS. Depends on what my other costs are in the Spring. Basically decided my tax refund is going into my boat.

 

[whiteman]

Re: Looking for a mid-range fishfinder

I reckon a quality chartplotter is essential for successful fishing, particularly if you troll a lot (I do) or drift fish. When I troll I set up a number of marks based upon bait fish, large arches and structure and this creates a pattern for my trolling. It's hard to be modest but my boat is by far the best trolling fisher in our local fleet. This all happened since I installed the chart plotter and combined it with the Lowrance x135 and then set about learning how this works and setting up correct lures, etc.

Have a look at this site for some good stuff on real world use of fishfinders: http://www.ausfish.com.au/forum/YaBB.cgi?num=1087980909