Thread: Garmin with chirp and SI and DI

What's not showing fish SI DI 2d? Take some screenshots of what's going on, maybe someone can help.

you have to remember that 2d or paper graph will show object at lease 4 times bigger than di or si but these units fine tune in on fish from structure,like any unit it take time to learn your unit no matter which unit one choose and will have to adjust for different places

You sure are going to be giving up a LOT.

Thanks guys for trying to be helpful. But I think you have misunderstood what I meant to say. My units do show fish. But the info is not all that reliable. Meaning that I know from experience where fish should be. I run boat over spot several times nothing exciting shows up. Decide to try anyway. Spank the snot out of them.

Guess what I am trying to explain that I can't eliminate wasted time by relying 100% on these modern HB's like I could depend on the ole CH30. If that graph did not pick up any fish you did not catch much . I do see fish on DI and SI. But I am believing that for some reason they miss a lot.

I don't use fish ID and all my settings are close to or exactly as I have studied about. That is why I am considering the Garmin route. Not ready to give up all of my HB setup. But if the Garmin does prove to be more reliable. I am going to be having a huge sale.

hays ,let us know how it goes,and good luck

I feel the same way about the 2d sonar on my 899. I am very happy with the si and di but I am getting tired of playing around with the 2d. Being very familiar with CHIRP technology in the missile business I too am looking closely at the new Garmins.


Regards

My bro has brand new CHIRP technology on his saltwater boat ..... and it is AWESOME!

Maybe you have something "screwed" up, why not let a tech look at it?

Been using SI since HB introduced it with the 997 years ago. Currently running two HB 998s. FWIW, I see more fish on my 2D than I ever do on DI or SI. The SI is great for locating structure that hold fish during seasonal periods and for locating bait balls, especially in the water column, but not so good at finding fish. This is mostly due to the fact that the fish are very small relative to the amount of area being scanned and crammed into a 7" SI screen (for example) . Same with DI.

A professional guide once told me that bass and walleye will often hug the bottom so tightly they won't show up on SI or DI graphs. They may or may not show up on 2D in this situation. It is only when fish are up off the bottom a little that the graphs will separate them from the bottom and show them on the graph in 2D, DI or SI.

I typically don't use SI to find fish. From experience and from my notes for the lake I'm about to fish (and I have 11 years of notes), I go to locations with structure and cover where I've caught fish in the past during the time of year I'm fishing. Then I use SI to scan those ledges, points, flats, humps, standing timber, brushpiles or whatever that have held fish previously. I usually have the SI range set to around 100' - 120' to each side when starting off. If I see anything that looks interesting, I cut the range by 50% (50' - 60') and go back over it. If I see fish, I switch from SI to 83/200 on the 2D and start fishing. If not, I'll move to another location.

I've seen images from Garmin, Lowrance and, of course, HB. I see no significant difference between any of them sufficient to make me move to another company's units. The difference between a good image on one unit and a bad image on another usually equates to a very good transducer install and very good settings on the unit producing the great images and not so good on the other. Many will claim that Lowrance has the better DI images due to the dedicated element. I agree. Many will say HB had the better SI for any number of reasons. I also agree. It's a toss up between all three when it comes to 2D but I prefer HBs version of 2D simply because of the ability to run both 83 kHz and 200 kHz simultaneously for the larger coverage area and also the two color Fish ID which shows which fish falls under which cone.

For the most part, it's a Ford vs Chevy vs Dodge thing.