Transducers/Garmin

pescador

Well-Known Member
My P66 transom mount transducer got knocked off by a piece of drift wood over the weekend while I was en route through Race Rocks to Beechy Head. I've been able to re-install it for the time being, but, the bracket is damaged. I've been thinking for some time about getting a higher quality transducer. While I'm not keen on drilling a hole in the bottom of my boat, I've got an open mind as I want the best quality transducer I can get to ensure my sonar images are as good as can be. I understand that costs could be as high as $ 1500 and am willing to spend it if I get value. I fish typically in water less than 300 feet and spend 95% of the time fishing for Springs. I use Garmin 740 GPS/Sonar systems in the boat. I would likely have someone install it for me in either Vancouver or Victoria who knows their Sh*t. I want it done correctly. Would appreciate anyone who's moved up in terms of quality in their transducers, experience, would you do it again, how much better are the images......etc etc. I remember my old Humminbird Sonar would show my downrigger balls going up and down. That’s the sort of detail I need and obviously where the fish are.
 
my p66 works really well and replacement was 89 bucks at nikka... i can see my balls with it. lol i run the garmin 720s model and have ripped it off twice,, now changed location and fabbed much better bracket. i also keep a spare now.
 
I have 2 transducers and I think my situation is a good example of what you are asking;

on a HDS 10 I have an Aimar TM260, then on a HDS 8 I have the original P66 that I ran w a LCX25 before the HDS's. So I can view both units at the same time. The two displays are networked so I can even switch which head is displaying which transducer.

There is a definite difference in the detail between the 260 and the 66 - But not so much that it actually changes my fishing tactics. To me, it is under the heading of 'nice to have' but not a huge advantage. I would say the images are 20 -25% more defined. But a tight bait ball is a blob on both units. Both units 'mark' fish - the 260 shows 3 individual fish arches, the 66 shows 3 connected arches.
90% of my fishing is WCVI offshore ... so if you fish shallower structure, it would make more of a difference and the extra definition could be helpful.

Whether or not the DR weights show on the screen, have more to do with the angle you mount the transducer at - some boats need more angle for clean water flow so the trans points 'ahead' under the hull too much to see DR weights. The flatter you can mount the trans face, and the more shallow the weights, the more likely the DR balls are inside the cone of 'pings' the transducer emits.

Blair just bends at the waist I believe...lol
 
I was in the same dilemma a year ago, since the new CHIRP sonar was quickly becoming mainstream I didnt want to be left with holes to fill in the bottom of my boat when I took that leap so I went with the tank mounted shoot thru versions.
4 bolts and I can change out ducers in minutes.

I have run many stock ducers, Airmars P66, M270W and the M260 and can tell you from experience the 260 was my least favourite for our application.
Its a great narrow beam deep water ducer, but thats not what we need for downrigging.
On 200khz @ 30' deep the 260 only shows a 3' cone, at 100' deep it only shows an 11' cone where as the 270w shows 13/45' respectively.
Another nice feature (besides the much wider cone angle) the 270 has is the same cone angle on both the 50/200khz frequencies so when you split screen 50/200 (the way I run my sounder 99% of the time) it shows mirror images not one narrow cone and one wide.
The 270 also has twice the sensitivity on 200khz that the 260 has.

I can hold a good lock on bottom @ 35mph 5-600' and can see my rigger balls and flashers the majority of the time with the exception of very shallow fishing.
So in a nut shell, yes I would absolutely do again or recommend the 270w for downrigging.

Airmars website has a wealth of info and is worth the visit
 
Back
Top