Blackout at ~75 feet with side imaging

[Dirtyeggroll]

My side imaging really only produces an intelligible image out to about 75 feet as seen in the picture.


I have a thru-hull SI+ transducer and a Helix 12 G3N.


Any suggestions?
74F41A2E-25B0-4BC0-8763-5FCF568ACCF5.jpeg

[Wayne P.]

Nothing unusual about that at that depth. 800 and 1200 kHz do not have 180 degree coverage, 455 zkHz does.

[Dirtyeggroll]

Good to know! I personally thought the images were coming out great but maybe a little short. My first unit with side imaging.

Any setting suggestions otherwise based on the provided image?

[exx1976]

Your map tells the tale. Looks like off the starboard side of your boat is a pretty big drop. Can't bend the sonar beam to get returns from that, so it all shows up as a shadow.

[DonnieG]

Your map tells the tale. Looks like off the starboard side of your boat is a pretty big drop. Can't bend the sonar beam to get returns from that, so it all shows up as a shadow.

GOOD INFO

[fishon396]

Looks like the shore might not be to far away also.

[Dirtyeggroll]

Your map tells the tale. Looks like off the starboard side of your boat is a pretty big drop. Can't bend the sonar beam to get returns from that, so it all shows up as a shadow.

You know, I think I would have told someone else the same thing. Haha. Funny how that works.

What about the top left? It only looks like it is generating an image about 30 feet out or so and then it becomes grainy. Is it just the angle of the surface?

[exx1976]

You know, I think I would have told someone else the same thing. Haha. Funny how that works.

What about the top left? It only looks like it is generating an image about 30 feet out or so and then it becomes grainy. Is it just the angle of the surface?

Hard to say. Looks like there are some returns there, but I can't be sure. It's much easier to tell from a screenshot than a pic from a phone. Could be the way the shoreline curves (as noted by someone else, the map makes it look like you're not too far off shore). I'd maybe bump the sensitivity up another click or two and see if anything more shows up.

[ezfishn]

I think I would want to try it in some other conditions (depth, level bottom, etc.) before deciding. Appears you have it dialed in for what is showing in the image but agree with exx1976 that photos don't quite give you a fair comparison to an actual screenshot when trying to evaluate settings or performance.

[Dirtyeggroll]

I will try to take some more screen shots from multiple bottom types next time I go out. Thanks.

[Wayne P.]

I will try to take some more screen shots from multiple bottom types next time I go out. Thanks.

I took a few shallow water MEGA SI screen shots as an example for a topic and this screen shot is close to that depth and the shoreline was a few hundred yards away with no rapid depth changes in the area:

[Wayne P.]

This one is in that same area 1/2 that depth and less range:

[exx1976]

Looks like some nice weeds in those images. Catch anything?

[Dirtyeggroll]

Thanks for sharing Wayne. That’s very similar to the image I am getting. I would say the image you provided also gets grainy at about 75 feet.

I guess I was expecting something more since Humminbird states “coverage up to 200 feet” with Mega+. I am new to this so I don’t know how it compares to other or previous versions of side imaging.

[Wayne P.]

Thanks for sharing Wayne. That’s very similar to the image I am getting. I would say the image you provided also gets grainy at about 75 feet.

I guess I was expecting something more since Humminbird states “coverage up to 200 feet” with Mega+. I am new to this so I don’t know how it compares to other or previous versions of side imaging.

Read post #2 again. That explains shallow water coverage.

[Dirtyeggroll]

Read post #2 again. That explains shallow water coverage.

Ok. Now I understand a little better. Thanks!