Choosing a Fish Finder

[Dan in Alaska]

Hey folks,

I'm in the process of getting the new boat up and running for the season, and we've decided that we're going to upgrade the fish finder sooner than later. Initially, we were just thinking of going with an inexpensive unit (Garmin 400c), but now we're thinking of maybe getting something better (Furuno FCV620).

Can someone give me few good reasons to spend twice the money on a fish finder? I've never used a high-end FF, so please help me see the light and clue me in on what I've been missing.

Thanks.

[north coast]

If it's worth spending the dough on an expensive finder or not really depends on what you plan to do with it and how often you'll use it. If your going to spend alot of time fishing in deep water you can hardly do without one. If your a weekend or three a season kinda guy, fishing mainly shallower water, I wouldn't waste the money. Some species make a finder more necessary than others also. For instance, when I'm codfishing in 60-300 ft. of water I'd probably go home if my finder broke down, you need it that badly, On the other hand when I'm bass fishing in 5-30 ft of water, there are days I don't even bring it with me. don't really need it.

I love my Furuno 582L by the way.

[Dan in Alaska]

Thanks, North Coast. I should have given you guys some more info to work with. Sorry about that.

We usually bottom fish in 100 - 400 feet of water, and we drop our shrimp pots in 400 - 500 feet of water. From what I understand, halibut are very difficult (if not impossible) to see on a fish finder, but knowing what kind of bottom you're dealing with (muddy, sandy, rocky, etc) can be extremely helpful. We typically troll for salmon, suspended in 30 - 80 feet of water, and rockfish schools are typically suspended in 80 - 200+ feet of water. Ling cod are usually associated with big rock piles and schools of rockfish. Sometimes they are right on the bottom, and sometimes they are suspended.

I typically spend 50+ days on the water, each season, and last year I had just over 70 days on the water. My Garmin 160 Blue has been doing a decent job, but I'm curious to see what I can gain by upgrading to a higher-end fish finder.

[onejacker]

Hey Dan,

We having a saying in Georgia. "If it an't broke, don't fix it". We have lots of sayings, but that one seeems to fit here. Another Georgia saying is "Hold my beer while I get you my license, Officer", but it really does not apply here. Sorry.

If you spend the money to get a FF that has a good grayline feature, and maybe even a color display, AND you practice,paying lots of attention to the display, you will be able to better identify fish,structure, bottom contour, and bottom density/composition. I personally don't have time for all that crap while I fish and drink beer. Too much like work to me. I don't like to have all that fancy equipment on board. People expect you to know what you are doing then, and they expect you to catch fish ALL the time. Just too much pressure for me.

(Any chance you could post some pictures of your shrimp trap gear, and maybe some shots from on the water doing that? That sounds very, very neat and intersesting to me. Never set a trap for shrimp before. )

Good luck with the fish finder.

[Pastorbob]

I also fish Alaska, mostly out of Seward so I don't do as much shrimping anymore. My boat has three fishfinders on it but they are dated and I want to replace one of them with a Furuno 585 which is about as good as you can get without geting into really high priced units.

[pmagrady]

Since you are a bottom fishing guy you will appreciate the awesome detail that the new digital fish finders give you. I had a Furuno 585 on my previous boat. I now have a Raymarine E-series DSM300. They are both excellent machines. I can recommend both of them. You mentioned the Furuno 620. That's the same machine as the 585, with a smaller screen. You get the same detail in a smaller package.

Upgrading the transducer would be the next step up in performance. The 1000 watt transducers have the advantage of having multiple elements. That gives you many many times the detail of the "normal" transom mounted tri-ducer. Visit Airmar's site for lots of information.

http://www.airmartechnology.com/airmar2005...ID=0&NewID=

[2ndCurse]

Furuno, you won't regret it for a second.

[Pastorbob]

I would go with the 585. The 620 is really good and would probably be fine but you can use a 1000 watt transducer with the 585. The 620 is rated at 600 watts which is probably plenty but when I'm trying to get a good look at the bottom at 400 or more feet I feel like the 1000 watt would be best. I read somewhere that fishfinders only work with fish that have air bladders. I don't know if that is true or not but would explain why you have so much trouble seeing dogfish.

[Dan in Alaska]

Mr. Pat, thanks for the link. The new Airmar transducers sound pretty sweet. I called BOE Marine, and they're not released yet, but Jim did offer me some "ballpark" prices. Now the decision comes down to money. It'll be a FCV620 w/ a P66-style transducer ($840) or a FCV585 w/ a fancy transducer ($1910).

I don't know that I've got the interest for a $2000 fish finder in this particular boat, so the smaller 620 will probably get the nod.

[Pastorbob]

Hey Dan, Let me know how well the 620 works, maybe for the price difference I will go for the 620.