Advice wanted on Transducer choice for Lowrance HDS-9 Carbon

[easydoesit]

Despite the current situation with seasons, catch limits etc. I bit the bullet and ordered a new Lowrance Carbon to replace my HDS Gen 2 - 8 which has a burnt out border on part of the screen. Its use is limited as a result. Doing my bit for the economy The backup system is a Lowrance LCX connected to an Airmar P79.

Key Points

• I have a 30 minute run down the Fraser dodging logs, and other floating debris. Risk of damage to a transom mounted transducer its high - that's how my screen got partially burned. Plus transducers canbe damaged and need replacing.
• Hull is heavy fiberglas, so there will be some signal loss for a "shoot thru" transducer as there was on my Airmar p79 vs my P66.
• Really don't want to install a through hull transducer as I trailer the boat most of the time, and the woody debris situation.
• Used mostly trolling for salmon, 50-200 feet looking mostly at bait and structure.
• I want to be able to use the Chirp capability of the Carbon unit instead of using a narrow band transducer like the P66.
• I am looking at the Lowrance TotalScan Transducer 000-12568 and the Airmar TM 150M and also have come across some protective housings for the TotalScan TD.

Questions?

• Is there a use for the Downscan in our saltwater fishing?
• Any use for Structure Scan in saltwater fishing ?
• What transducer would you recommend?
• Recommended transducer mounting?
• Any useful swing up transducer mounts?
• Anybody use protective housings?

Thanks, I appreciate your input!

Easydoesit

 

[dmurph]

I just installed carbon setup and went with the p66 as it was suggested lots as a great proven transducer for us salmon fishing. People tend to think the downscan and chirp aren’t really for deep water fishing. I hear lots who love it and to be honest I kinda feel like I ripped myself off by having this fancy carbon unit but only using it at a basic level.

 

[easydoesit]

Thanks for the information, worth thinking about the P 66 option.

 

[ericl]

Airmar makes flush mount thru-hull CHIRP ducer's. These perform better than a TM given similar ducer power/frequency, but this better performance may only make a difference in deep water (500ft+).

The only scanning fish finder I would consider for saltwater is Furuno DFF3D; all the other stuff lacks the frequency/power/image stabilization to work in rough deep water. The other stuff would probably work in some situations (calm & less than 100' deep).

If it were me i'd go the TM150 & be careful; hitting stuff is NEVER good.

 

[wildthing]

in hull chirp high wide or med
std 50/200 m260 1Kw tank mount in hull
ss175's high wide or med thru hull these sit flush

 

[easydoesit]

Thanks for the input.

Appreciate you taking the time to share your knowledge and insights.

 

[BCI]

I have owned B164, B60, P66, B175HW, Garmin GT51, and others.

For the fishing and usage your describe a performance of a P66 is useful due to the cone angles. If you look at the cone angles for the P66 (or B60 equivalent which is equivalent thru-hull with no projection - safe for trailers) you will see on page 2, beam angle of 45 degrees for 50kHz and 11 degrees for 200kHz. What this means is when you are using 50kHz in 100 feet of water, you are covering an 83' wide cone under your boat. Since for salmon and halibut fishing we are not looking for 1000ft+, we are not looking for sharp drop-offs 1000 ft below the boat for reef fishing etc, we are better served by a wider cone angle. We do not need the laser accuracy and narrow beam of other transducers. We will in fact miss information with narrow beams in our shallow (less than 500 ft) fishery.

See page 2 for beam width and ALSO for specs on BEAM DIAMETER VS DEPTH

http://www.airmar.com/uploads/Brochures/p66.pdf

Now if you look at the previous posters' recommended in-hull model, the M260, you will see the cone angles are not as beneficial for us. It is a very good transducer for sensitivity and power, but that transducer is designed for guys looking for pin point accuracy for deep dropping for swords at 2000 ft, or for trolling looking for fish in 1000 feet of water like Marlin fishing. 19 degrees at 50kHz and 6 degrees at 200kHz. Not as good a cone size for our specific needs here, even though the transducer is much more sensitive and powerful. At 50kHz and 100 ft your cone will only be 34' wide. At 30' below the boat, you are only going to cover a 10 foot wide area. You'll never lose bottom with the M260, however you will lose lots of visibility below the boat for fish swimming 10-20 feet outside of directly under your boat.

See page 2 for beam width and ALSO for specs on BEAM DIAMETER VS DEPTH;

http://www.airmar.com/uploads/Brochures/M260.pdf

So if you want to fish locally there is nothing wrong with a P66, except you don't want transom mount. So pick up a B60. It is the same elements as the P66 except housed in a low-profile thru hull.

If you want chirp element functionality then you may as well step up to the B175-HW (or SS175-HW) but be prepared to spend $2000 on the transducer.

I never used down-scan or side-scan when fishing in the salt, however it has been useful on other's boats when fishing in the river for sturgeon.

Cheap and cheerful, gets the job done, won't worry about debris in the Fraser River, and you can tow with it. Defer to Airmar on Stainless vs. Bronze for your application;

http://www.airmar.com/uploads/Brochures/b60.pdf

There's a reason the P66 and B60 are so popular here. They are cheap, they work well for our fisheries.

 

[BCI]

For further visual representation of coverage under the boat with various beam angles and depths go to this website and punch in the different variables;

http://www.airmar.com/bottom-calculator.html

 

[BCI]

For previous discussion along these lines including SS264, B175HW, SS175HW and M260 go to this discussion;

https://www.sportfishingbc.com/forum/index.php?threads/airmar-50-200-cone-angles.60266/

 

[ericl]

I agree with the praise of the P66 - but it is not CHIRP

 

[BCI]

I agree with the praise of the P66 - but it is not CHIRP

That is true. After using chirp for a few years now, I cannot say it catches more fish than conventional. We are mostly looking for bait balls, arches, and bottom. On my most recent build we put $30k in SIMRAD on it, and went with an SS60.

Let me try to post some samples of the B60, the B164, the GT51, and the B175-HW.



CV51M Chirp


CV51M Chirp


SS60 Conventional


CV51M Chirp


GT51M Chirp


B175-HW 1kW CP470 xmit power. Fixed freq on left side, chirp on right side.


B175-HW with Garmin down scan and side scan showing what you see in our local waters to decide if it's worth it for you or not.


CV51M Chirp


B164 Conventional 1000W


B164 Conventional 1000W

 

[MadJigga]

That is true. After using chirp for a few years now, I cannot say it catches more fish than conventional. We are mostly looking for bait balls, arches, and bottom. On my most recent build we put $30k in SIMRAD on it, and went with an SS60.

Let me try to post some samples of the B60, the B164, the GT51, and the B175-HW.


View attachment 45157
CV51M Chirp

View attachment 45158
CV51M Chirp

View attachment 45159
SS60 Conventional

View attachment 45160
CV51M Chirp

View attachment 45161
GT51M Chirp

View attachment 45162
B175-HW 1kW CP470 xmit power. Fixed freq on left side, chirp on right side.

View attachment 45163
B175-HW with Garmin down scan and side scan showing what you see in our local waters to decide if it's worth it for you or not.

View attachment 45164
CV51M Chirp

View attachment 45165
B164 Conventional 1000W

View attachment 45166
B164 Conventional 1000W

Thank you

 

[Chuck]

That is true. After using chirp for a few years now, I cannot say it catches more fish than conventional. We are mostly looking for bait balls, arches, and bottom. On my most recent build we put $30k in SIMRAD on it, and went with an SS60.

Let me try to post some samples of the B60, the B164, the GT51, and the B175-HW.


View attachment 45157
CV51M Chirp

View attachment 45158
CV51M Chirp

View attachment 45159
SS60 Conventional

View attachment 45160
CV51M Chirp

View attachment 45161
GT51M Chirp

View attachment 45162
B175-HW 1kW CP470 xmit power. Fixed freq on left side, chirp on right side.

View attachment 45163
B175-HW with Garmin down scan and side scan showing what you see in our local waters to decide if it's worth it for you or not.

View attachment 45164
CV51M Chirp

View attachment 45165
B164 Conventional 1000W

View attachment 45166
B164 Conventional 1000W

I see your compass and gps don’t like to be close to each other!

 

[ericl]

B175-HW 1kW CP470 xmit power. Fixed freq on left side, chirp on right side.

Great pic - from the image quality' I'll take CHIRP. I fished an area that appeared to result in marginal echo sounder performance; CHIRP showed stuff that conventional just didn't see. All available comparisons are of poor quality given the limited samples. I'll still be going CHIRP.

 

[macro]

For what its worth - I have both a total scan xducer, and an Airmar TM150M - both are capable of chirping. I believe they are the same wattage / frequency too. With that said, the TM150 gives way better returns. (Its built for it specifically) I've never been abel to get stats from lowrance to directly compare the two.

Cheers,