Thread: non-Chirp ping pong ball (onix)

Okay, this is what bothers me about 2-D/sonar. Four
ping-pong balls and lots of big arches it looks like a giant brush pile. I might spend an hour at the spot based on the 2-D image and it's not much there. Guess I better learn what is real and what's not thanks

Originally Posted by brettw

Okay, this is what bothers me about 2-D/sonar. Four
ping-pong balls and lots of big arches it looks like a giant brush pile. I might spend an hour at the spot based on the 2-D image and it's not much there. Guess I better learn what is real and what's not thanks

I'm learning also.i didn't no something this small would show up as that big of an arch.

This picture is probably the best one of all.problem is, I don't remember how the unit was set when I took this one.i should have try ed slowing the chart speed.slowing the chart speed would make the arches smaller.

Originally Posted by brettw

Okay, this is what bothers me about 2-D/sonar. Four
ping-pong balls and lots of big arches it looks like a giant brush pile. I might spend an hour at the spot based on the 2-D image and it's not much there. Guess I better learn what is real and what's not thanks

When I first started running Di I thought I knew how to interpret 2d. I quickly found out how wrong I had been all those years.

Except when vertical fishing I always run split 2d/Di on one of my console units. When I had one unit on the console it was split horizontally Si/Di when looking for structure and fish.

I'm convinced there is not as much down there as 2d indicates. Bright red, yellow, towering piles of structure that MUST hold untold numbers of trophy fish. If only I had the right color, size, hook, weight, line, movement, depth, ............
2d says WOW, DI says little or nothing is there, I trust the DI

WITH 2D HAVING A CONE SHAPE VS DI SLICE,IT IS UNDERSTANDABLE THAT 2D WOULD HAVE A MUCH BIGGER PIC, DI HITS IT AND GONE WHEREAS 2D SHOOTING FORWARD AND BACKWARD AS WELL AS SIDE TO SIDE IN THE CONE,SO OBJECTS IS UNDER DUCER FOR MUCH LONGER TIME,SO PRINTING PIC MUCH LONGER

Originally Posted by genec

WITH 2D HAVING A CONE SHAPE VS DI SLICE,IT IS UNDERSTANDABLE THAT 2D WOULD HAVE A MUCH BIGGER PIC, DI HITS IT AND GONE WHEREAS 2D SHOOTING FORWARD AND BACKWARD AS WELL AS SIDE TO SIDE IN THE CONE,SO OBJECTS IS UNDER DUCER FOR MUCH LONGER TIME,SO PRINTING PIC MUCH LONGER

Exactly .... will be interesting what it looks like with just 200...

I've never been in the boat with one of the DI units that have the 200/455 2D.....That would be interesting to compare also.

Originally Posted by brettw

I'm convinced there is not as much down there as 2d indicates. Bright red, yellow, towering piles of structure that MUST hold untold numbers of trophy fish. If only I had the right color, size, hook, weight, line, movement, depth, ............
2d says WOW, DI says little or nothing is there, I trust the DI

I think everything is there that 2d is showing. I just think our interpretation was so wrong with 2d only the comparison when running both doesn't register.

When 2d sonar came out it wasn't until the first HB si unit that I stopped running a Lowrance paper graph. I think paper did a better job separating targets, and representing them honestly, than 2d. In fact for a long time, even after Si, I ran my flasher at speed since it would show bottom composition better to me than 2d.