Budget fishfinders

[Augoose]

I'm looking at budget fish finders for around $100.00. I've read a couple of posts trying to learn about these devices and so I'm focusing on the RMS and wattage. I fish freshwater lakes under 150 feet.

Currently I'm comparing the Garmin 140 with the Humminbird PiranhaMax 170. Both seem to have equally great reputations and the price is about the same, so now its down to the specs:

Humminbird -
Display size - 4.0" diagonal
Display Colors/Grayscale: 8 Level Grayscale
* 83 kHz / 60? @ -10db
* 200 kHz / 20? @ -10db
Power Output (RMS): 200 Watts (RMS)
Power Output (Peak to Peak): 1600 Watts (Peak-to-Peak)

Garmin -
Display size - 3.2" x 3.1"
Display type: 4-level grayscale FSTN
Frequency: 80/200 kHz (dual beam)
Transmit power: 100 W (RMS), 800 W (peak to peak)
Cone angle: 45? or 15? (dual beam)

So it seems the Humminbird has twice the rms and wattage, 60 to 20 degree coverage, as well as 8 level grayscale vs 4 with the garmin, 45 to 15 degree coverage, and half the power.

According to the specs, Humminbird is the winner however I'm leaning towards the Garmin for the larger display. As for other option, alarms, water temp, etc, they seem to be the same. Anyone have any suggestions? One over the other? Other finders to consider in the $100 price range?

 

[JB]

Re: Budget fishfinders

It is good to review the specs as long as you understand how they affect on the water performance.

More important in my view is the reputation for usability and reliability. It is pretty subjective, but look at user satisfaction.

My own experience with HBs has been poor, Garmins has been good and Lowrance/Eagle has been excellent. I haven't used a Furuno, but I believe that they are treasured by those that use them.

If I had to make the choice you offer, it would be the Garmin.

 

[dingbat]

Re: Budget fishfinders

According to the specs, Humminbird is the winner however I'm leaning towards the Garmin for the larger display. As for other option, alarms, water temp, etc, they seem to be the same. Anyone have any suggestions? One over the other? Other finders to consider in the $100 price range?

You?re not comparing like measurements. When doing an apples to apples comparison, Humminbird falls short where it counts:

Hummingbird:
Display size - 4.0" diagonal
Display type: 8-level grayscale FSTN
Vertical Resolution: 240
Power Output: 200 Watts (RMS)
Cone Angle:
* 83 kHz / 30? @ -3db
* 200 kHz / 10? @ -3db

Garmin -
Display size - 4.7" diagonal
Display type: 4-level grayscale FSTN
Vertical Resolution: 240
Frequency: 80/200 kHz (dual beam)
Output power: 100 W (RMS)
Cone angle: (dual beam)
* 80 kHz / 45? @ -3db
* 200 kHz / 15? @ -3db

1. The Garmin has a 25% bigger screen. 4.0" vs. 4.7". Bigger is better. I would go with the Garmin for the larger screeen alone.

2. Display colors/ grey/ is irreverent when with such low screen resolutions

3. Vertical resolution is the same

4. The Garmin transducer is rated at -3db , Hummingbird at -10 db. When converted to like units you?ll find the Garmin has larger cone angles.

5. Both are entry-level units. Unless your fishing in deep water, the difference in output power would not be an issue.

 

[Augoose]

Re: Budget fishfinders

Excellent. Thanks for the information guys. I glad to see that specs lean towards the garmin, as that's what I was leaning towards as well. I've tried to educate myself on the details and what they mean, but I've just started to explore the fish finders and so I still don't know that much about them. I'll take your recommendations and look towards the garmin this weekend.

Thanks again

 

[John_S]

Re: Budget fishfinders

You?re not comparing like measurements. When doing an apples to apples comparison, Humminbird falls short where it counts:

Hummingbird:
Display size - 4.0" diagonal
Display type: 8-level grayscale FSTN
Vertical Resolution: 240
Power Output: 200 Watts (RMS)
Cone Angle:
* 83 kHz / 30? @ -3db
* 200 kHz / 10? @ -3db

Garmin -
Display size - 4.7" diagonal
Display type: 4-level grayscale FSTN
Vertical Resolution: 240
Frequency: 80/200 kHz (dual beam)
Output power: 100 W (RMS)
Cone angle: (dual beam)
* 80 kHz / 45? @ -3db
* 200 kHz / 15? @ -3db

1. The Garmin has a 25% bigger screen. 4.0" vs. 4.7". Bigger is better. I would go with the Garmin for the larger screeen alone.

2. Display colors/ grey/ is irreverent when with such low screen resolutions

3. Vertical resolution is the same

4. The Garmin transducer is rated at -3db , Hummingbird at -10 db. When converted to like units you?ll find the Garmin has larger cone angles.

5. Both are entry-level units. Unless your fishing in deep water, the difference in output power would not be an issue.

As usual, a very good post from Boatist.

BTW, agree that #1 would be the biggest driver for any entry unit, and looks like the OP is going that way.



If it is not dragging this thread too far off course, would like to discuss #4 and #5, and how they may impact each other. This does have to do with understanding how specs are disected and what they mean to actual performance.

To my understanding, #4 is receiving signal based spec that is based on a standard output level. #5 is an output spec. Assuming both are rated using the same test, set-up, etc (I know BIG assumption), wouldn't the HB pick-up more signal in the fringe areas of the cone angle based on the higher output signal? If so, is there a method to normalize? Ie ones transmitter is stronger than the other, but the other receiver is better, how do you combine the two?

 

[dingbat]

Re: Budget fishfinders

To my understanding, #4 is receiving signal based spec that is based on a standard output level. #5 is an output spec. Assuming both are rated using the same test, set-up, etc (I know BIG assumption), wouldn't the HB pick-up more signal in the fringe areas of the cone angle based on the higher output signal? If so, is there a method to normalize? Ie ones transmitter is stronger than the other, but the other receiver is better, how do you combine the two?

Higher power does not necessarily translate into better performance. Its how a transducer handles the power that determines performance. A 200 watt sounder with a low Figure of Merit transducer has nothing over a 100 watt unit with a high Figure of Merit transducer.

A transducers performance is determined by its Transmitting Voltage Response (TVR), Receiving Voltage Response (RVR), its Figure-of-Merit and it's "Q" value.

Transmitting Voltage Response (TVR) is a measure of the acoustic pressure of the sound wave at a distance of one meter when one volt of electricity is applied to the transducer.

Receiving Voltage Response (RVR) is a measure of the voltage produced within the transducer when a 1 mPa (micropascal) of acoustic pressure is received.

Figure of merit
The Figure-of-Merit is a measure of how well a transducer works when used for both transmitting and, then, receiving its own echoes. It is the algebraic sum of the Transmitting Voltage Response and the Receiving Voltage Response. The Figure-of-Merit is sometimes referred to as the Insertion Loss.

?Q? Value
Q? stands for quality and is a measure of the sharpness of the response of the piezoceramic element to the frequency that is supplied to it. In other words, ?Q? describes how precisely the frequency must be output to achieve the best performance from the transducer. It answers the questions: ?What is the piezoceramic element?s best or resonant frequency??,?How well does the piezoceramic element work on either side of its resonant frequency??, and ?How long will the transducer continue to ring after a transmit pulse??

For a complete explanation, charts, graphs, etc:
http://airmartechnology.com/uploads/installguide/Theory_of_ Operations.pdf

 

[John_S]

Re: Budget fishfinders

Thanks for the additional response.

Outside of airmar, I have not seen these sort of specs provided by HB, Garmin, or Eagle/Lowrance. Which then makes whatever specs they do provide, all the more vauge. Most of the consumer finders also use one piezo element for both frequences, which you would want results on each, plus when running together.

 

[robert graham]

Re: Budget fishfinders

I run a Lowrance X50ds, works great, has water temperature and battery voltage charge rate(good feature), bought from Overton's for about $120. Good Luck!

 

[dingbat]

Re: Budget fishfinders

Thanks for the additional response.

Outside of airmar, I have not seen these sort of specs provided by HB, Garmin, or Eagle/Lowrance. Which then makes whatever specs they do provide, all the more vauge.

Airmar is OEM for a good deal of the transducers for Lowrance, Garmin, Raymarine, Furuno ,Simrad and Northstar to name a few. All you need to know is which Airmar is marketed under Product X name.

Most of the consumer finders also use one piezo element for both frequences, which you would want results on each, plus when running together.

The Airmar P66 is pretty much the "stock" transducer for mid to upper level units of both Garmin and Lowrance. Here is the spec. sheet for the P66 transducer.
http://www.airmartechnology.com/uploads/CeramicDesignation/50_200A.pdf

Manufacturer Part Numbers:
Furunon? 525STID-PWD
Airmar?31-657-1-01
Garmin?010-10192-01
Raymarine?E66054
All Lowrance units with blue connector including X, LCX, HDS & Broadband units

 

[Augoose]

Re: Budget fishfinders

Wow. I think NASA is missing one of their physicists. Might need a second degree just to wrap my brain around what dingbat posted.

Thanks all for the info - I'll likely be picking up a basic Garmin this weekend.

 

[River-Runt]

Re: Budget fishfinders

Augoose,

I purchased a new boat this year and had similar requirements to yours for a budget fish finder. The dealer recommended the Garmin 140, wich I had him install, and I have been pleased with it's performance this year. As noted it has a nice size screen which has great visibility, even in bright conditions and backlighting for when it's dark out. With a glance I can see the depth, water temp and battery voltage. My only problem with it is that it shows the fish clearly, but doesn't help me get them in the boat.

While I can't really compare it to the Hummingbird you were considering, I can say I'm really happy with the purchase.

 

[Augoose]

Re: Budget fishfinders

Augoose,

I purchased a new boat this year and had similar requirements to yours for a budget fish finder. The dealer recommended the Garmin 140, wich I had him install, and I have been pleased with it's performance this year. As noted it has a nice size screen which has great visibility, even in bright conditions and backlighting for when it's dark out. With a glance I can see the depth, water temp and battery voltage. My only problem with it is that it shows the fish clearly, but doesn't help me get them in the boat.

While I can't really compare it to the Hummingbird you were considering, I can say I'm really happy with the purchase.

Hey, that's good to hear! I think I have decided on the Garmin 140 and will probably get one this weekend. Makes the decision easier to hear positive feedback- thanks!

 

[River-Runt]

Re: Budget fishfinders

"Goose", wondering if you picked up the Garmin and if you are pleased with it's performance.

 

[cannonford57]

Re: Budget fishfinders

hi,just my big o but the eagle cuda 350 is a great little unit with ff ,temp and gps built in.no plug in map cart's or anything but for around 200.00 it aint bad.hope it helps

 

[The Hammer]

Re: Budget fishfinders

I have the Piranna 215 and works great for me. The single beam is limited though especially in shallow water.