Another day out on my Garmin 840XS, Depth Range Shading, NMEA2000, down view/Sonar

[deepanchor]

Getting more acclimated with my Garmin's.

1..I now have NMEA2000 up and running. I don't have all the gauges dialed in.
2. I set depth range shading from 10-16'. The pink/rose color coding represents the range I was targeting with my A-Rig today.
3. Took a good pic of a brush pile/tree with Down Vu and 2D Sonar (Airmar P79 shoot through hull transducer)
4. Fishe eye view below the boat. Orientation comment. Blue is the water surface.

[Defiant]

Great looking pics Deep did you catch any of those fish ?

[deepanchor]

Not like last weekend. Water temps dropped 5° and was hard to control boat with wind blowing 20mph (open water). Very sluggish. Plus I spent more time with my electronics. I had to switch to different presentation, carolina rig.

[bloodman]

I sure would like to see some more down imaging pics. Mapping looks good but I am more interested in the sonar. Thanks

[hawgripper]

Great pics Deep, i have about 2 feet of ice to get rid of before i can ad some...

[deepanchor]

I sure would like to see some more down imaging pics. Mapping looks good but I am more interested in the sonar. Thanks

Bloodman, when time is right I'll take some more pics. These were just initial pics I took idling out of an area I've never been before. I don't fish Lay that much but have a friend down that way. Mapping is the most critical part how I use my electronics. The Sonar is close second but and what I've seen so far at a minimum is equal to better then my time spent on both Hummingbirds 1197 days and HDS8 and HDS7 ownership. I'm sure going forward this becomes subjective. My 2D sonar is traditional sonar on my Garmin. It's a shoot through hull like most bass boat setups. The SideVu and DownVu is good too. I don't go wow it's better except that I've seen and yet to do myself can shoot out with exceptional clarity at 400' on each side of the boat. I don't work for Garmin so if I think of it and figure out the mechanics I'll try setup my unit to shoot as far out on each side and snap a pic. I'm quite happy with what I have now and is what I've been looking for that meets my expectations.

[bloodman]

Bloodman, when time is right I'll take some more pics. These were just initial pics I took idling out of an area I've never been before. I don't fish Lay that much but have a friend down that way. Mapping is the most critical part of to what I use my electronics for. The Sonar is close second but and what I've seen so far at a minimum is equal to better then my time spent on both Hummingbirds 1197 days and HDS8 and HDS7 ownership. I'm sure going forward this becomes subjective. My 2D sonar is traditional sonar on my Garmin. It's a shoot through hull like most bass boat setups. The SideVu and DownVu is good too. I don't go wow it's better except that I've seen and yet to do myself can shoot out with exceptional clarity at 400' on each side of the boat. I don't work for Garmin so if I think of it and figure out the mechanics I'll try setup my unit to shoot as far out on each side and snap a pic. I'm quite happy with what I have now and is what I've been looking for that meets my expectations.

Thanks deep. Always interested in this stuff and like to see whats out there. I have no need to change my setup from what I have but like to see where the electronics world is heading.

[Scuirus]

For Garmin to compete when it comes to 2D sounder performance a CHIRP transducer is needed. TM150M is the entry level CHIRP transducer. I have a Garmin 527xs which has the same sounder module as 840xs. I'm using it with TM150M and it has good resolution. I've tried it with B60 and I wasn't impressed, HDS is much better both when it comes to sensitivity and resolution with a fixed frequency conventional transducer.

[deepanchor]

Bloodman, you betcha.

[deepanchor]

For Garmin to compete when it comes to 2D sounder performance a CHIRP transducer is needed. TM150M is the entry level CHIRP transducer. I have a Garmin 527xs which has the same sounder module as 840xs. I'm using it with TM150M and it has good resolution. I've tried it with B60 and I wasn't impressed, HDS is much better both when it comes to sensitivity and resolution with a fixed frequency conventional transducer.

I've had HDS5, HDS7 and HDS8 and I saw no advantage with Lowrance transducers at all with for shoot through or transom transducers. What I'm seeing on my Garmins both at the bow or through the hull is just as good. Won't say better and for certain not worse! This can become subjective art determining the quality of arche separation I'm seeing in freshwater. Are you fishing freshwater? Trust me if one was noticeably better I'd say it. Example. Do I think Garmin's DI or SideVu detail is better with their Chirp transducer. No... Garmin, Hummingbird and Lowrance are all great. However, if I can duplicate what Fishton has posted with his Garmin GVC-10 black box by extending the detail outs as far as he's posted then obviously it's an advantage for Garmin for covering water more accurately. 800' with clarity left to right is outstanding. I'll try and duplicate that at some point in time but is not priority to me.

[Diel11]

I've had my 1040xs for about a year now and you can see 400' each side no problem. Of course you won't be able to tell much when it comes to actual fish but for mapping, recording and structure marking it works very well. I run the 1040 head to head with my Onix and Simrad units and I haven't had any problems with it so far. One thing I don't like is the buttons, but that will be remedied when my 7612 comes in.

In my opinion shallow water SideVu is on par with the Onix. DownVu very good also, on par with Lowrance/Simrad.

[deepanchor]

Deil11,

Great info and thanks for sharing. To be able to shoot 800' left to right is way beyond anything I've seen. Obviously you do loose some detail (fish). However, I'm not looking for fish per-say but rather structure breaks and cover. Isn't that the most critical? To me it is. I can idle easily at 5mp with exceptional clarity with my Garmins. I could only do 3.5mph with my past HB and Lowrance HDS SS-1 setups. Add that I can move a bit faster and cover much wider areas with Garmin's SideVu offers greater efficiency for my fishing needs.

[Diel11]

It really is insane. Raymarine has good range also but it darkens a lot toward the edges. I've shot my Onix out to 230' on each side and it looks good also. Hoping they release the 7612 soon.

[Scuirus]

I've had HDS5, HDS7 and HDS8 and I saw no advantage with Lowrance transducers at all with for both shoot through or transom transducers. What I'm seeing on my Garmins both at the bow or through the hull is just as good. Won't say better and for certain not worse! This can become subjective art determining the quality of arche separation I'm seeing in freshwater. Are you fishing freshwater? Trust me if one was noticeably better I'd say it. Example. Do I think Garmin's DI or SideVu detail is better with their Chirp transducer. No... Garmin, Hummingbird and Lowrance are all great. However, if I can duplicate what Fishton has posted with his Garmin GVC-10 black box by extending the detail outs as far as he's posted then obviously it's an advantage for Garmin for covering water more accurately. 800' with clarity left to right is outstanding. I'll try and duplicate that at some point in time but is not priority to me.

My statements are not subjective I've measured the pulse lenghts using an oscilloscope and calculated the resolution for a large number of sounder and transducer combinations (it's all documented in the pinned CHIRP thread at THT). Lowrance has much better resolution than Garmin in fixed frequency mode, in CHIRP mode with an Airmar transducer the resolution is similar. I was not commenting scanning sonar resolution, I stated 2D. I fish both in fresh and saltwater. A Garmin sounder in fixed frequency mode combined with P79 is in my opinion a really lousy combination, none of them are good. The acoustic window of a transducer should be in contact with the water, give the same sounder a B75H or better a B175H-W you will see excellent results. The best resolution I've seen is from SonarHub with B175H-W displayed on a 12" Simrad.

[deepanchor]

Let's use Bass Fishing and fishing no deeper then 60' of water as the benchmark. Do you fish specifically within these parameters since this website is called Bass Boat Central?

Respectfully, I can't appreciate your measurements and I have no way to counter nor do I want to. All I can say using my eyes and how I use my equipment for bass fishing I can't tell the difference. I offshore no deeper then 40' 99% of the time. Also, I fit the profile for most that opens the box and uses the graph for 2D use. Anecdotally I use my 10 plus years bass fishing/sonar use as my reference. I could be wrong and won't be the first. I'm sure not going to get into mine is prettier then your pics. To me it's a moot point and a bit strong to say transducers "none of them are good". In general your expectations is a bit high for the bass fisherman. No disrespect to bass fisherman. Me, I look for good clarity, traditional arches and solid bottom reading to determine bottom hardness (2D). So for the real world test using my eyes I don't see advantages or disadvantages personally in the 2D sonar world. I just don't. I own and like my P79 and it sure isn't lousy to me. I like my TM transducer for my echoMap 70DV and it sure isn't lousy to me. Again my test is what my aging eyes see on the graph with glasses on. Same can be said for Lowrance and Hummingbird. I've owned them both for years. The differences are negligible for me and I'm no rookie using sonar technology. Not saying I'm a guru. Actually, I've been quite happy with all of them for 2D use. I can't comment on HB's models above their 1100 series units.

Garmin owners you will be quite impressed with 2D sonar functionality. If one is better by the numbers I'll say you won't be able to tell that much or any difference. Heck part of the current Chirp 2D sonar debate right now is not seeing a difference with Chirp sonar transducers vs non chirp transducers (2D) for fresh water use. I've been told to really appreciate the difference you'll have to spend close to $1,200 for Chirp transducer. I don't think that fits most of the Bass Fisherman today for 2D sonar use. I'll end by saying I'm quite happy with what I've used and what I'm using now for 2D sonar in 40 plus ft. of water.

[hawgripper]

Let's use Bass Fishing and fishing no deeper then 60' of water as the benchmark. Do you fish specifically within these parameters since this website is called Bass Boat Central?

Respectfully, I can't appreciate your measurements and I have no way to counter nor do I want to. All I can say using my eyes and how I use my equipment for bass fishing I can't tell the difference. I offshore no deeper then 40' 99% of the time. Also, I fit the profile for most that opens the box and uses the graph for 2D use. Anecdotally I use my 10 plus years bass fishing/sonar use as my reference. I could be wrong and won't be the first. I'm sure not going to get into mine is prettier then your pics. To me it's a moot point and a bit strong to say transducers "none of them are good". In general your expectations is a bit high for the bass fisherman. No disrespect to bass fisherman. Me, I look for good clarity, traditional arches and solid bottom reading to determine bottom hardness (2D). So for the real world test using my eyes I don't see advantages or disadvantages personally in the 2D sonar world. I just don't. I own and like my P79 and it sure isn't lousy to me. I like my TM transducer for my echoMap 70DV and it sure isn't lousy to me. Again my test is what my aging eyes see on the graph with glasses on. Same can be said for Lowrance and Hummingbird. I've owned them both for years. The differences are negligible for me and I'm no rookie using sonar technology. Not saying I'm a guru. Actually, I've been quite happy with all of them for 2D use. I can't comment on HB's models above their 1100 series units.

Garmin owners you will be quite impressed with 2D sonar functionality. If one is better by the numbers I'll say you won't be able to tell that much or any difference. Heck part of the current Chirp 2D sonar debate right now is not seeing a difference with Chirp sonar transducers vs non chirp transducers (2D) for fresh water use. I've been told to really appreciate the difference you'll have to spend close to $1,200 for Chirp transducer. I don't think that fits most of the Bass Fisherman today for 2D sonar use. I'll end by saying I'm quite happy with what I've used and what I'm using now for 2D sonar in 40 plus ft. of water.

Ditto!!!!!

[TroyBoy30]

guess its a good thing i dont have an oscilloscope on my boat then

its got to be better than the botched 83 khz on my humminbird 1198's

[deepanchor]

guess its a good thing i dont have an oscilloscope on my boat then

its got to be better than the botched 83 khz on my humminbird 1198's

[Defiant]

guess its a good thing i dont have an oscilloscope on my boat then

its got to be better than the botched 83 khz on my humminbird 1198's

[Diel11]

Hey guys, I understand what you guys are talking about but I also see Scuirus' point. With the way all these manufacturers spew out all kinds of marketing junk it's good to see if their specs really match what they advertise. Here's where Scuirus comes in, he has a serious background on electronics and sonar, and more tools and resources than any of us have. I know, sometimes we don't really care about the bolts and nuts of the units, but having someone like him going into these units in depth helps a lot. From personal experience, using the Lowrance HDI transducer to run CHIRP seems to be ok with most people, even Lowrance themselves. But if you take Scuirus' information that he has posted in other forums, and try the TM150, you realize how much better that combination is. The funny thing is this, if you're fishing in a lake, where algae and dirt content in the water changes, you can really see what he's talking about. Sometimes the HDI transducer will work very well, then other days it's a mess. But the TM150 is very balanced when it comes to those conditions. Ask him about "Q" factors, just very good information.

In my opinion the only way to truly know if a combination of transducer and head unit work as designed is to use an oscilloscope and measure pulse length. I can tell you that once I turned 40 my eyesight started to go south, and what looks good sometimes doesn't look the same the next. I thought the HDI chirp was great, until I installed the TM150.

Again, I'm not saying that one way is better than the other, I'm just saying that using all the information out there usually ends up working better for all of us. Sorry about the long post.