CV52 vs Totalscan

[Schins]

more...

[Schins]

fish
theres some interference on the Garmin, but the fish are still hard to spot. But....is that a fish that the Lowrance didnt see?

[DonnieG]

Derek, which Photo Hosting Website are you using?

[Schins]

This forum's

[grout-scout]

My lss2 actually gives better returns on 455, you might try it.

[Larry3215]

ah ok, you had both units on at the same time? the sideview pics, particularly the bottom set of pics. at 15ft where the bottom meets the black part. looks like a pipeline running on each side from the top to bottom on the left hand pic. there looks to be some horizontal interference streaks as well.

the 7" screen appears to make a big difference over a 5" screen for side imaging as well. a lot of people ask that question it seems.

See my post #9. They are called ghost lines or null lines.

[Larry3215]

fish
theres some interference on the Garmin, but the fish are still hard to spot. But....is that a fish that the Lowrance didnt see?

Just guessing here, but the things sticking up that you are calling a fish shows up on the Garmin too. Might be fish or might be brush, etc.

The thing below the bottom line looks more like a stick or branch or similar something off to the side to me, but it could be fish. It probably didnt show up because you have the Brightness higher on the Garmin. That will "light up" targets better. Try turning up the equivalent setting on the Lowrance.

[Schins]

Lowrance brightness at max, only adjustment left was contrast. If I raised it, the centerline/bottomline got too bright to see anything.

I messed with most settings......the Garmin's screen is better. Detail shown, however, not as good.

[Schins]

Advantage Garmin? The Lowrance shot here was a bit blurry, but still useable

[Schins]

and the last shots im posting....again Lowrance was a bit blurry
if it matters, the Garmin was installed port side transom, Lowrance starboard transom. Lowrance may have been a couple inches deeper.

[Larry3215]

If the transducers are that far apart, then it could just be a matter of where the target is in relation to the two transducers. Note that it looks slightly closer to the top edge of the bottom return in the Garmin shots and slightly shallower. That means it was closer to the Garmin transducer.

Its hard to judge comparisons like that unless the transducers are very close together - especially in shallow water.

Thats why the Lowrance guys did their comparison shots with the Garmin transducer mounted directly in front of the Lowrance transducer and at the exact same depth. The two were within a couple of inches of each other.

[Schins]

About 3ft apart, in this case

[msn26753]

wow... All the Down Image on the Garmin I give thumbs up Especially since this is the CV Transducer istead of the GT Transducer... Im thinking I perfer the Lowrance on the Side Images... at least of some of the Tire Pics.. I can Clearly see them better.. But thats do to the Grainy look of the Garmin, and if you back up off the pics, then you see them fine.. So Based off these pics, Im happy with my Garmin... There should be no difference in GT52 and CV52 on SideVU should there be?

[MTW]

mine doesnt show fish very well on 800Khz either. i leave mine on 455 most of the time.

[vik]

Thats why the Lowrance guys did their comparison shots with the Garmin transducer mounted directly in front of the Lowrance transducer and at the exact same depth. The two were within a couple of inches of each other.

A couple of inches....LOL It could be no gap at all, or 3-5 feet between the transducers it would not change anything in their comparison because they did not use them simultaneously. This is just a Lowrance trick - they claimed that they are doing side by side comparision in the beginning of video and in the end of video showing the transducers mount, but they did not do this "because of interference". They made several separate passes for each transducer, when the difference in transducer point of view could be several feet, then could choose any pass they want to compare. Everybody who did experiments knows that it is required tens of passes to do by the "same" path to get more or less close images, not just two passes.
They did simultaneous side by side comparison during the first five seconds only from 1:32 till 1:37, then they stopped it and did everything they want, but during those 5 seconds of real side by side they showed better CV working than Ti. Thanks them for that, this is a real side by side with excellent CV imaging :

[Larry3215]

Im really getting tired of you vik. It doesnt matter what Lowrance did or did not do in that video.

You are trying to defend the thief because the cop who busted him had no search warrant. Doesnt change the fact that he is still a thief who stole your wallet and then got caught with the stolen goods in his possession.

The bottom line is - he still stole your wallet.

Garmin took the down element out of the CV transducers and lied about that to every one of their customers so they could take their money.

How can you possibly defend that?

Yes, sometimes, when the moon is in the correct phase AND you are shallow AND you have the settings just exactly correct AND its your lucky day, a CV transducer will make some decent down images. Sometimes they are even almost as good as a GT transducer - not often, but sometimes.

Also, sometimes, (see above) they make images almost as good as Lowrances OLDER generation transducers. They never match Lowrances new stuff even though they are supposed to be Garmins newest, best stuff.

Remember, this was supposedly "just a name change" from the GT transducers - which are Garmins newest and best.

They even - sometimes, under some conditions - make images almost as good as Humminbirds 5 year old transducers - rarely. Again, dont even think about trying to compare them to Humminbirds current transducers.

So what?

Garmin lied to every one of their customers about taking the down element out. They took their customers money, laughed at them when they complained about it, and told those same customers to F-off when they were caught.

How can you defend that?

Why are you even trying?

[vik]

It doesnt matter what Lowrance did or did not do in that video.

It matters because we are discussing technical part of image comparison, but not a wrong Garmin or Lowrance marketing. You are telling that Lowrance made more precise side by side comparison than Schins (two inch instead of two feet), but Lowrance did not do side by side comparison at all and difference in images is several minutes and several feet in different passes.

Why are you always trying to say that this was fair comparison?

[TroyBoy30]

[DonnieG]

It matters because we are discussing technical part of image comparison, but not a wrong Garmin or Lowrance marketing. You are telling that Lowrance made more precise side by side comparison than Schins (two inch instead of two feet), but Lowrance did not do side by side comparison at all and difference in images is several minutes and several feet in different passes.

Why are you always trying to say that this was fair comparison?

[TroyBoy30]

you shoulda quoted both of them. works for either one