Posts: 643
Threads: 0
Joined: Mar 2003
Reputation:
0
I'm picking up a boat I traded a roof job for last summer.It's an older 14' fiberglass with a 35hp.I need to find a fishfinder(not to expensive)but i'm not very experience with them.Could use some advice on models,make,advantages,di  vantages ect...Oh and by the way I want the ones that garantee the biggest and best fish in the lake, ha ha. Thanks Lonnie
[signature]
Posts: 1,640
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2003
Reputation:
0
Lonnie,I just purchased my first fishfinder my self and I went with the Eagle FishMark 320,it is simple to operate,320x320 pixel and the price was only 200$$ at Sportsmans Wharehouse."BIG FISH RULE"M.H.
[signature]
Posts: 238
Threads: 0
Joined: Oct 2002
Reputation:
0
[blue][size 2]That graph definitely offers the best bang-for-the-buck of any unit.[/size][/blue]
Posts: 5,856
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2003
Reputation:
0
I am also doing some research on sonars, and I too agree that the fish mark 320 is quite the bargain. It is made by Lowrance, and as far as I can tell it it basically identical to the Lowrance X-87. And it's 100 bucks cheaper to boot. I haven't bought yet, but I think I will soon. Good luck on your purchase.
[signature]
Posts: 1,237
Threads: 1
Joined: Mar 2003
Reputation:
0
dennis i have used eagle fish finders for the past 15+ years. my first one was a eagle fish ID it only had a 120 pixels and was a $100.00 at the time it worked okay. now i have gotten an eagle ultra plus III with a 160x160 pixels with speed and temp $350.00. it works great in shallow water from 2' to 150' deep that is the deepest i have used it. my dad has the new accura 240 by eagle 240x240 pixels which reads awesome. i have caught many fish with my finder but as someone else has said the more pixels that the finder has the better it will track the bottom and read your jigs when ice fishin or out of the boat. just remember the more pixels the better it will read/work but they also cost more money. eagle fish finders are easy to use and learn how to operate. you can hook up a battery and sit in your easy chair and learn how to use it as they have a simulator mode that shows and teaches you how to use it. i would recomend the eagle fish finders to anyone. just spend what you want don't let people pressure you into the high dollar ones because you might start out with a cheaper one and love it because it works great for you. go to sportsmen warehouse and you can see them and how they work along with prices, and look in cabela's they show many models and info on each finder. hope this helps if you need more info just post that you need more help with finders and i'll help you out
[signature]
Posts: 4,139
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2002
Reputation:
0
[font "Comic Sans MS"][size 3]I think you might want to go back and look at the X-87. There is a major difference between the Eagle 320 and the Lowrance X-87. The Eagle 320 is pumping ot 1500 peak to peak wattage. The X-87 on the other hand is pounding out 3000 peak to peak power with 375 RMS. The Lowrance has twice the power. As I've said before, and I found out so well at Fish Lake, when it comes to sonar, the man with the most power wins... [/size][/font]
[signature]
Posts: 1,919
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2002
Reputation:
0
I hear that kent recomends the [size 1]Raytheon L470. Ha ha, sorry kent I just couldnt resist, the oportunity was just too good to pass up. While I am at it, hows that cardiff holding up?! Dang that BLM and his recomended gear anyways right?[/size]
[signature]
Posts: 4,139
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2002
Reputation:
0
[font "Comic Sans MS"][size 3]You are one to talk. If that is the case ,you might want to reconsider the boat you just bought! Heck, I'd hate to see you have to hire a lawyer to try and return your new boat when the welds on the outback plate break and the 150 Mariner goes to the bottom of the drink![/size][/font]
[signature]
Posts: 44
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2003
Reputation:
0
heres a link to some pretty good info...it will help you decide whats what... 
[url "http://www.lowrance.com/Tutorials/sonar/sonar_tutorial_01.asp"]http://www.lowrance.com/Tutorials/sonar/sonar_tutorial_01.asp[/url]
sorry my puter booted me...
[signature]
Posts: 5,856
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2003
Reputation:
0
The X97 is actually the fishfinder that has 3000/375, but according to the Lowrance flyer (and website) the X87 is only 1500/188. I agree that more power is mo betta, but if you can't afford the $400 price tag, taking the 320 isn't too bad of an option. I've also heard good things about the Garmin 240, only 240 vertical pixels, but a peak to peak power of 3200 watts and 400RMS, you can pick that one up for around $300.
[signature]
Posts: 4,139
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2002
Reputation:
0
[font "Comic Sans MS"][size 3]I stand corrected. I couldn't remember the power specs so I went on a search to check on it and this is the link I came up with:[/size][/font]
[url "http://www.marineelectronicshoppe.com/Lowrance/X87.htm"]http://www.marineelectronicshoppe.com/Lowrance/X87.htm[/url]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][size 3]How's that for false advertising. Must be the specs from the X-97.[/size][/font]
[signature]
Posts: 5,856
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2003
Reputation:
0
Looks like they didn't check the specs either[ ]. Oh well, the X97 and the X87 are pretty nice units. I'd be happy with either, as my current fish finder is a monofilament line and a spinner!!! No vertical pixel resolution there!
[signature]
Posts: 1,964
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2003
Reputation:
0
[cool]
I'm savin' my allowance for a new X-97. I've got an X-85 which also has 3000 watts peak to peak power. ( A must) It has 240 X 240 pixels. The X-97 has 320 X320. The X-91 is on sale at Sportsman's Warehouse for $289, and the Garmin 240 is $279. They are just about identical units, but I'd pick Lowrance anyday. The Garmin boasts 3200 watts peak to peak, but Lowrance is questioning the method of measurement. Since they are the company that brought the first sonar to fisherman, I'll give them the title of expert.
And to those who think that flashers are better for icefishing, I'll say this. Not in this lifetime.
Fishrmn
Posts: 1,237
Threads: 1
Joined: Mar 2003
Reputation:
0
i posted earlier about my eagle fish finder and i see yours about lourance finders which are great to but the eagle that i have is about 1/2 the price of yours. i don't think that you need 2000 to 3000 watts of peak to peak power on any fish finder in most cases. i have sat next to my brother which has a lourance 360a finder and i have my eagle ultra plus III finder with less pixels and peak to peak power and i could read my jig going up and down just as good as his in 100 feet of water. the thing i like with eagle finder is that i can sit 10' to 30' away with our eagle finders and not have them interfere with each other. but when my brother turns the high power on dad and i have to move a good 50 to 100 yards away from him just so we can use our finders if we are any closer to him our finders pick up so much interference that we can't use ours. when i go fishing with family and friend's i like to be able to fish fairly close to them just so we can B. S. i'm not trying to say that my finder is better that anyone else's. i am just letting everyone know what i have and have used with good success. good luck fishin
[signature]
Posts: 1,964
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2003
Reputation:
0
[shocked]
I had an X-40 (1500 watts peak to peak) and I was very disappointed with it. I took it back to the dealer that I bought it from, and traded it in for the X-50. Maybe they're better now, but I wanted more power. Then when the X-60 came along, I sold the X-50 and bought the X-60. I didn't upgrade to the X-70 or X-70 A. I bought the X-85 and had the X-60 for a spare for a while. When my brother bounced his around in a boat, I gave him mine to replace his brokedn one.
You are right about the higher powered unit having the tendency to overpower the weaker units. Since I've got the higher powered one, I'm not complaining. A friend of mine bought the X-55 which is the 1500 watt version of the X-85, and he has fished within 20 feet of me without any problems. For me the power is worth the extra bucks. But I have seen the screen on a weaker unit just go black when they are used close to mine. Kinda like having an old AM radio bleed over to the station whose antenna you're driving by.
The worst case of a fishfinder that wouldn't, was a Hummingbird unit that I watched down at Fish Lake. Three guys were catching Splake at about 35 feet. The finder wouldn't show their jig (1/2 oz) tipped with a 3 or 4 inch chub. They would put their jig by the hole, open the bail of their reel, and walk 35 feet away from the hole. Then they'd mark a spot on the ice, close the bail, walk back to the hole, and kick their jig back in the water. Then they had to get their line unhooked from all of the snow and ice around the hole. It sure looked like a pain to me. I just lower my jig to same depth as the fish echo. If my jig is in the center of the transducer cone, I can figure about how close the fish is to my jig. If I'm jigging, I can tell when a fish has taken my jig, even before I can feel him. Needless to say, I don't go icefishing without my graph.
Tight lines,
Fishrmn
Posts: 15,421
Threads: 1,297
Joined: Feb 2002
Reputation:
11
Who knows, I might be interested in making a deal with someone, just as soon as my L470 fishfinder gets back from the factory (they received it this morning). The Cardiff has been returned to Sportsman's. BTW - BLM didn't recommend the Cardiff, but he did recommend the Abu Garcia Ambas eur, C4 Winch that is on its way from Cabela's, and is replacing the Cardiff.
[signature]
|
