Comparison Screenshots #2 GT22, CV22, LSS1

[LWINCHESTER2]

Thanks LW, I as going to do the same with my CV52 and the GT52 once I get by boat back here.

I couldn't do the CV52. I have a buddy that just got one but he already put it on his boat and won't let me pull it off.

[Powerstroke60]

Same thing happened to me too. Bought 73sv and striker7 sv a month ago and both have cv52 transducers. Is there anything short shelling more money to get something done about this crap?

[LWINCHESTER2]

As far as I know, Garmin intends to wear this. If anyone has any information that Garmin has any intents to do anything, they've not spoken up. Looks like you're on your own.

[Bassin79]

Call and ask to do a warranty exchange on the CV transducer. I was told from CS that they CAN NOT replace the cv52 with a CV52. that I would have to be sent the gt52hw. (Which is exactly what I wanted) They do not even carry them nor are they​ for sale on there website. And I got my tracking number today so my gt52 is on the way. And I can't be the only one getting garmin to fix my problem.

[Scuirus]

When studying the screen shots it's important to notice the frequency. The GT is fine at 800kHz, but fuzzy at 455kHz. LSS-1 is good at both frequencies.

[Schins]

When studying the screen shots it's important to notice the frequency. The GT is fine at 800kHz, but fuzzy at 455kHz. LSS-1 is good at both frequencies.

I can confirm this....my gt20 800 was decent, but 455 as a mess.

And my LSS-1 is good at both, though better at 800 of course

[vik]

I couldn't do the CV52. I have a buddy that just got one but he already put it on his boat and won't let me pull it off.

CV52 Chirp is doing just fine with two elements and do not miss any single items below the boat with normal DI sensitivity setting.

Even CV40 without chirp provides more clear and detailed DI than three elements on Ti-7 in Lowrance propaganda video even with intently reduced CV40 DI view sensitivity, and hot bottom on Ti 7 view:

[Treeguyus]

So Do I have this correct 7 yr old Lowrance units technology comparing to latest greatest garmin. OK Carry On.

My thought that came to mind

[Treeguyus]

LW....the software upgrade for the Gen 3 and the sonar hub. Now I can read two transducers on the same screen.

Hate to give up the Vexilar Edge, but have the same on my Gen 3 12...

[vik]

I was amazed at how much different the screen looked with even a minor variation in the pass....

...and in sensitivity settings. There is no chance to miss the tree with two CV22 beams. If you had increased CV22 sensitivity till the bottom is hot directly under the boat like on GT22 you would see the tree the same way IMHO. Did you try this?.

[Larry3215]

Humminbird.

It doesn't take much study to see that the Lowrance-Garmin video was a hit job and nowhere close to apples to apples. Palette, discontinued model, settings, and you could see that the boat paths were different. There was two reliable facts and that was that ClearVu did not have a down element and down sonar with a down element is more detailed than down sonar without a down element. Garmin made themselves vulnerable and Lowrance jumped at the chance but got in the mud doing it.

Here is where Humminbird shines. Most everybody knows that their side imaging leads the pack and maybe their down imaging. I don't know. Now they raised the bar with MEGA. Forget about that. Consider their support model. Humminbird employees get on the forums, take and answer questions on the front line. There's Greg, Deborah and a couple more I recall right off the cuff. Garmin, Lowrance and Raymarine don't do that. You really want to know what people think. Get right in the middle of them and ask. Can you imagine being a Garmin support person right now and being assigned to answer questions on these boards? Ouch!

No, the boat paths were exactly the same - watch the end of the video again. The Garmin transducer was mounted directly in front and within a couple of inches of the Lowrance transducer on a board behind the boat so that both transducers followed the exact same path and were mounted at the exact same height. The screen shots were captured at the same exact time in the same exact place on each pass. Lowrance didnt have to cheat to show the poor performance of the CV transducers - as you have just proven.

Even if Lowrance did exaggerate the differences on the screen to some degree, that doesnt reduce or excuse what Garmin did - and is still doing to this day - in any way. Garmin has shown they are willing to lie to and cheat their customers and are willing to continue doing so even after they are caught red handed.

If Garmin is willing to lie and cheat about something as fundamental as this, and then double down on the lie and refuse to make it right for their customers instead of fix it, how can you trust them on any specs for anything they sell?

Thats the bottom line and the only detail that matters.

[vik]

The screen shots were captured at the same exact time in the same exact place on each pass.

No. Side by side comparison was done only during first 10 seconds of the video, and we see more details on Garmin screen. Then he made pause on Garmin screen and went for another pass for Lowrance - different time and path, and different sensitivity settings.

[LWINCHESTER2]

Gary. I respectfully disagree. It's not just some kind of wide and some kind of narrow cone side by side. It's which wide cone and which narrow cone. I have mounted on my boat right now, the Lowrance 200/50 with 10 degree cone and the Garmin 200/77 with 10 degree cone and the famous Airmar TM150 and a selection of Garmin chirp transducers. The Vexilar 10 degree sees closer to the bottom. Your Gen 3 cannot outperform the transducer that is attached to it. I know I'm splitting hairs but this is one that can be split.

[LWINCHESTER2]

No, the boat paths were exactly the same ............

Glad to see you posting again Larry. You've provided a lot of valuable help to a lot of people.

[LWINCHESTER2]

When I was making repeated passes using the same transducer and the same setting and also following the same pass as exactly as I could the screenshots would be quite different. Differences that were not enough to show on GPS accuracy made a big difference. That's why I made repeated passes and then cherry picked the best shot. There were two other variables that I did not vary and those were boat speed and scroll speed. Both can be used to make a better or worse picture. All of this makes a difference when splitting hairs and while the Lowrance comparison was not truly a fair one, neither was mine. All that aside, the conclusion is still accurate that down images produced by blending side sonar is certainly inferior to down images produced by a down element. That's why Humminbird and Raymarine pay Lowrance for the right to sell that technology on some of their units. I see no reason we can't agree on that.

[LWINCHESTER2]

OLATHE, Kan.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Garmin International Inc., a unit of Garmin Ltd. (NASDAQ: GRMN), announced today that an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) at the International Trade Commission (ITC) made an initial determination in the enforcement proceeding brought by Navico, Inc. against Garmin. The ALJ’s initial determination concluded that Garmin’s sale of certain DownVü sonar products violated the ITC’s December 2015 orders arising from a previous Navico-Garmin ITC investigation. The ALJ recommends a fine in the amount of $37 million.

Garmin disagrees with the initial determination and will seek review by the ITC, which is expected to issue a final determination in August 2017.

“Even if affirmed by the ITC, the ruling has no impact on Garmin’s customers or dealers,” said Andrew Etkind, Garmin’s vice president and general counsel. “Additionally, the ruling does not impact in any way Garmin products with ClearVü sonar functionality, which have been on the market since 2016.”

I never have thought that the technology Garmin used in its original DownVu violated the Lowrance patent, but I'm no kind of attorney. What I conclude from this is that Garmin is still contesting the issue in the courts and we might know the final outcome in August.

[RangerRic]

Glad to see you posting again Larry. You've provided a lot of valuable help to a lot of people.

+1.
Ditto for you, as well....

[LWINCHESTER2]

...and in sensitivity settings. There is no chance to miss the tree with two CV22 beams. If you had increased CV22 sensitivity till the bottom is hot directly under the boat like on GT22 you would see the tree the same way IMHO. Did you try this?

No. The settings were the same for all the Garmin transducers; gain, scroll speed, contrast, brightness, TVG, etc.
You have a point that I recognize as valid. That is in addition to gain, brightness, contrast; scroll speed and the speed of the boat all offer a chance at optimal settings to produce the very best image possible. Meaning that the images from the CV22 can be improved. Now apply the same logic to the other transducers. If you do all that for every transducer the blended images will still come in not being as good as transducers with the down element. Go back and search for some of MonteSS images from Dragonfly. They are quite impressive.

This is an area where Humminbird excels also. Many of their blended down images are quite good. The hardware and software both come into play. And Garmin users don't have a Jasen Halfen who makes a living teaching people how to do all the fine tuning in different situations to get the best side and down images on their Humminbird units. A user manual that details the best settings for various situations would be most helpful.

[vik]

No. The settings were the same for all the Garmin transducers; gain, scroll speed, contrast, brightness, TVG, etc.

...and the same sensitivity for down scan and side scan views? for two element scanning transducer? Fortunatly they have ability of separate sensitivity settings for side and down imaging, althow they produced by the same cristalls. For side scanning a sensitivity should be set as low as possible to keep shadows and details aside of boat. For down scanning a sensitivity should be set as high as possible to see fish dots, bushes etc above bottom line. If someone see that 2D shows some arches right under the boat then the down scan sensitivity should be increased till the images appear on the screen to see what is hidden under the arches: fish dots or bush branches, and it does not matter how hot is the bottom. CHIRP down scan gives more opportunities for 2 element DI because it is more powerful in center of beam and at the sides - just use it. Single Down element provides the same blended images by blending of two sides of its beam the same way as 2-element DI. Lowrance DI is a blend of three beams and they do not shy it

[LWINCHESTER2]

Single Down element provides the same blended images by blending of two sides of its beam the same way as 2-element DI. Lowrance DI is a blend of three beams

Pretty sure you are mistaken about the blending. Some Garmin and some Humminbird combo transducers do not have a down element for down imaging. The image is created in the software by comparing the overlap from the edges of the left and right side elements (blending). Some Humminbird combo transducers have the third down imaging element and the image is not blended from the side element. Their DI model units use the down element and don't have the side elements. Garmin GT transducers have the third down element and the image comes from that element without any blending from the side elements. Garmin's CV transducers do not have a down element and the down image is totally blended from the two side elements. Lowrance DownScan is not blended in any units and the image comes from the down element.