Dedicated bottom unit and transducer

[Shooter 1]

I’ve got the 1022xsv and ps22 and am loving it. Now I want a dedicated bottom rig to help pick out the bottom huggers in 50’and less water. Unit and transducer.

Im thinking the lack of screen resolution will hinder the 1022 but if I’m wrong please correct me.

I have read the chirp is not that good at bottom separation but I have no ideal.

Alos I know this is a Garmin forum but I’m open to what ever is best.

thanks

[LWINCHESTER2]

This whole post is strictly regarding seeing fish close to the bottom. The circumstances, topography comes into play. On an absolutely flat bottom, cone width is not a factor. Over the width of the cone, the area closest to the transducer is directly under it and all perform pretty much the same depending upon "target separation". Target separation is a hardware+software+transducer combined result. Near an incline though, both target separation and cone angle come into play. There's much more blocking of bottom visibility from a wide cone than a narrow cone. The same applies to an irregular bottom. If it's within the cone the nearest return of the bottom, a bank, or rock or boulder within the cone would cause the unit to display that as the actual bottom. Don't forget you can't have target separation if the targets are not separated. There's a big difference between a fish that is belly down touching the bottom and one 3 inches off the bottom. I have been able to see fish that were on the bottom in experiments, but unable to discriminate between the fish I put there and a rock I put there.

Chirp is good at bottom separation, but everything is relative to what you are comparing. For example, take a standard 200 kHz 20 degree cone 2d transducer. Now compare the performance of that with another Low Q chirp transducer with center frequency of 200 kHz - 20 degree. Chirp wins every time. That's why so many say chirp is better, and it is. You can't just say something is better. It's better than what? In this example chirp would be expected to have better target separation than the non-chirp.

Now take the best low Q chirp transducer on the market with a center frequency of 200 kHz - 20 degree. Now compare that to a good 10 degree non-chirp transducer. The 10 degree non-chirp will win every time. For this comparison I am talking about an irregular bottom or near an inclined bank. And of course a 5 degree would beat a 10 degree, etc.

[Shooter 1]

Ok Leonard I’m tying to wrap my head around that. I had read other post by you and a couple others relating to this. So if I understand it correctly. I’m just going to use numbers here that’s easy to relate to so bare with me.

20deg transducer running parallel to a fairly steep sloping bank.
At 20’ depth and 20deg cone =10’ cone the depth showing would actually be 5’ toward the high side of the slope not directly under the boat and the only returns would be from that same 5’ distance.

Hope that’s close to right because it makes sense to me.lol
Does di work the same way. I assume it would but don’t know.

thanks

[Shooter 1]

So if I was moving drictly over a ditch in an otherwise flat bottom using a 20deg and the cone was wider than the ditch I would never know it was there much less any fish holding in it.

How would Panoptix handle it if using the ps22 with its 20deg cane.
Or the PS30 on the transom

[LWINCHESTER2]

Ok Shooter. You sure know how to formulate some tough questions

20deg transducer running parallel to a fairly steep sloping bank.
At 20’ depth and 20deg cone =10’ cone the depth showing would actually be 5’ toward the high side of the slope not directly under the boat and the only returns would be from that same 5’ distance.

Your numbers may be off a bit but the concept is correct. I've attached a couple of illustrations of what you are talking about.

Does di work the same way. I assume it would but don’t know.

No. DI is both better and worse depending upon which way the fan is turned. DI is very narrow front to back but quite wide left to right. I don't have a graphic for that. For example, If you had the wide part of the fan parallel to a concrete bridge pier you could get very close to it and see well. But turned the other way, the 2d would show fish that were deeper while the DI would be blocked.

How would Panoptix handle it if using the ps22 with its 20deg cone. Or the PS30 on the transom.

That's tough to answer. Theoretically you would think that it would be similar to a 20 degree cone pointing down but it's not. For example if you had a 45 degree inclined bank that had no irregularities and the PS22 was mounted 45 degrees, there would be no dead space. Also with the multibeam phased array technology you have multiple elements operating that serve to minimize those blocked or dead areas. And the PS30 on the transom can be set to 10 degrees allowing it to scan irregular areas without the same kind of blocking that happens with 2d or DI.


About the only way to test this is with a setup where you place object in specific areas and then scan to see if you can see them. That's tough for me to do right now, giving up fishing time. I use the PS30 for my #1 search tool and it seems operate flawlessly in open water and in tight against inclines without the blocking that 2d and DI are subject to. Right now if they are inactive they may be 100-130 ft deep and if active as shallow as 50-60. Just last week I saw some fish at 50-60 and figured they were bass. Some were, but the walleye were in with them too. I just idle along a bank and when I see them stop and fish. It couldn't get any easier. There's no brain work to it. Then I use the PS22 and LVS32 to pinpoint them and try to stay on them. Often they are on the move. But if you're quick and get in them and catch one, the whole school will stall right there and then you can work on them big time.

[Shooter 1]

Amazing stuff. Did not know I knew so little about sonar until I joined this forum.

Now I know since I have started fishing a near by river and I see fish and structure at times and I turn around to take another look and its gone. The river is like a wash board as far as varied depths. It is fairly narrow in spots and like fishing in a long trough and I can see now that I may actually never see bottom a large percentage of the time.

Thanks Leonard

[LWINCHESTER2]

One last thing about the PS30. Imagine what you would see on 2d, DI, or SI.

[Chief Brody]

in those PS30 shots, does the left right cone line get narrow if you narrow the beam?

[LWINCHESTER2]

in those PS30 shots, does the left right cone line get narrow if you narrow the beam?

No. The setting is for the front to back part of the cone. 10,20 or 40. In really steep and rocky areas I'll use 10. In areas with more gradual terrain I may use 40. 40 allows me to scan faster than at idle. When searching I may also turn trails on. You can see that in the first pic. All that; trails and degrees depend on the terrain and boat speed I want to use. The wider setting is less pinpoint but the image stays on screen longer so I can be more casual about it.

[Shooter 1]

So those shots actually represent the 100deg angle and are perpendicular to the boat.

Is the first shot on a different unit?

Are the first three shots of the same thing with shot one and thre going one way and shot two the opposite way.

If that is right shot 3 really confuses me as to depth and what looks to be bottom at
around 80’

One more. The right shot I assume your are running parallel to a sloping bank.
The solid returns under the boat look to be fish to me. Now above them I see faint images that I think are maybe fish. Are they either signals that have already past under the boat or are about to
Not asking if you know which just if I’m interpreting things right.
The faint signals to the right could be either plus they are too far to get a good signal or combination of all.

I am probably interpting everything wrong so don’t be bashful about telling me so.
thanks

[LWINCHESTER2]

So those shots actually represent the 100deg angle and are perpendicular to the boat.

Yes

Is the first shot on a different unit?

Could be, don't remember. Also a lot of my "screenshots" of Panoptix are not screenshots. Some come from a phone app called telecine in combination with the older HELM app. Than later with ActiveCaptain. Kind of a second hand screen shot.

Are the first three shots of the same thing with shot one and three going one way and shot two the opposite way.

No. They are all different areas

If that is right shot 3 really confuses me as to depth and what looks to be bottom at around 80

That is the bottom on the left edge at 75 ft. It is a rocky river channel being the deepest just where the steep bank on the right rises. I can't explain the imagery behind the bank on the right. That bank is solid rock.

One more. The right shot I assume your are running parallel to a sloping bank.
The solid returns under the boat look to be fish to me. Now above them I see faint images that I think are maybe fish. Are they either signals that have already past under the boat or are about to. The faint signals to the right could be either plus they are too far to get a good signal or combination of all.

I think you are referring to #4. On my lake the interpretation of faint returns is both a situational thing and a geographic thing. Situational as you described. Is it about to turn red as I go over it or has it been red and now weakening due to boat travel? Geographic in that one arm of the lake I fish always has more clutter than the rest of the lake. Clutter in this case meaning a lot of these faint, pale returns that never turn red. In that case I ignore them. That's something I had to learn with use. Also there are good adjustments that can be used. Gain and Color Gain are real handy although they might not be well tuned in these shots.

[Shooter 1]

Man I thank you. I’m learning every time you answer.

Now the un ask question.
What the heck is that in the first two shots Is that bank also? If so it must be rock like in no.3

[LWINCHESTER2]

I have lots of rock outcroppings. It's the rule on my lake rather than the exception.


Pic 1. Rugged irregular rock formation on right side. Shouldn't have been much more than 60 ft deep or I would have had the depth set differently. The point of the shot is that you can see the irregularities. The depth directly under the boat was about 45 but you can still see down the incline on the left and up the incline on the right. What else can you do that with so clearly? Surprised that there weren't some bass there.


Pic 2. Sharp steep dropoff to 200 FOW. Directly under the boat the depth is about 120.


Pic 3. Fairly sharp incline on the right, but not a sheer dropoff. A fish at the bottom at about 78 ft. Most likely a walleye. Below 80 ft is less defined, but could be more fish. I stop and fish this situation. Quite often one fish will give away the location of others that are bottom hugging and less defined. The point where the incline meets the bottom is a prime area for me.


Pic 4. Three definite fish about 17 ft to the right, 80 to 100 ft deep. On my lake this has walleye written all over it. At 22 ft to the right just under 80 ft, likely a couple more that are on the edge of the front to back cone. 55 ft to the left under 80 ft and 65 ft to the left below 100 ft could be more. I don't know and don't remember but that dot to the right at 40 ft deep could well be a one ounce Mann-O-Lure on it's way to those three red areas. In this case, if I didn't catch fish, I would move to 80 ft depth and fish the incline all the way down to 120. No way I would pass this up.