IS THE SIDE IMAGE REALLY IMPORTANT FOR CRAPPIE FISHING ARE IS THE DOWN IMAGE THE MOST IMPORTANT. I WAS WANTIMG TOO UPGRADE MY UNIT BUT WAS WONDERING IF I NEED TOO SPEND THE EXTRA ON SIDE IMAGE. :confused:
Printable View
IS THE SIDE IMAGE REALLY IMPORTANT FOR CRAPPIE FISHING ARE IS THE DOWN IMAGE THE MOST IMPORTANT. I WAS WANTIMG TOO UPGRADE MY UNIT BUT WAS WONDERING IF I NEED TOO SPEND THE EXTRA ON SIDE IMAGE. :confused:
good question ?????????????
I don't own a Side Imaging (YET) but, I have friends that have them and I have been watching EVERYTHING and I mean everything on them that I can find on Youtube. It is hard for me to swallow spending over $1,000 for a depth finder. It would help me (I believe) with time management. I have 3 kids, work a 12 hr job and run a farm. Being that the side imaging can cover up to 240 ft of water in a single pass means that I would be locating more fish faster. Right now I pretty much have to go on prior knowledge and "gut feeling" finding fish. My depth finder is a Lowerance X15 (old 2D type) and it is JUNK. Ever since the day I got it I have only used it to find the depth of something, water temp, and the occational brush pile. I RARELY fish in water deeper than 20 ft so the "cone" area that the depth finder is looking at is small. I don't know the exact formula but, I would guess it is looking at 10-15 feet (max) of bottom at that depth.
Now, with that said will I be able to see singular crappie scattered out on a flat with one of these S.I.'s or see big walleyes laying on the bottom or tucked against the bank in the spring? I don't know but, I do believe that it will help me find structure and schooling fish faster.
I found structure and caught fish using an old flasher unit. Now I have SI/DI/2d and GPS, I have units for and aft and I still sind structre and and still catch fish.
So I guess it's not truely neccessary but it is fun to play with while fishing at times.
I think any decent electronics is all thats really needed and if you use it along with some sort of GPS you're good to go.
DI doesn't show you anything that your 2d won't show you. You just see it differently.
PS, I had a Low x-15 mt on my boat previos to the HDS units and I personally loved that unit. I found more structure and fish with that unit than anything I've ever owned. I still have it and am considering hooking it back up to use in conjunction with these other units.
My vote would be that the SI is more important than the down scan/imaging. To crappie fish you have to find STRUCTURE and the most effective tool for doing so is SI. Prior to the DI technology we would mark a way point using the SI technology. We would then pull up to the spot and fish for 10-15 minutes and move on if we didn't get a bite.
I agree with tsherman. SI has helped me find spots that i've been passing over for numerous years. Love mine.
sent you a pm
you will be amazed at what is under the water, I mean we all know there is junk in the lakes and ponds we fish, but with the side/down structure scan imiging tools we know exactly where it is I find barrells,tires,logs buckets all sorts of brush piles I never knew were anywhere arround ,,, they take some getting use to but there worth it,,,, I sometimes turn mine on and just start in a new never fished before spot and scope it out and mark the spots that look like would hold fish, and spots that are holding fish and then go back after a bit and start fishing,,,, most always catch a few
2d will show what is under the boat...
DI will show what is under the boat...and out to the sides several feet...
SI will show what is under the boat...out 100+ feet to the sides of the boat...and which side of the boat....
Crappie are "structure" oriented...
SI is invaluable for finding "new structure"...more known structure...more fish in the livewell...:)
Rickie
+1Quote:
Originally Posted by tsherman
I agree. Sidescan, once you figure out what it's showing you, is an invaluable tool in my opinion. My time on the water is limited due to my job, and this tool helps me find structure much quicker and eliminates water quicker as well. If you spot something off to the side that downscan or 2D physically can't pick up you can mark a waypoint on it, circle back around, get right over the top of it and look it over closer with downscan to decide if it's worth fishin, without sidescan you may have never known that piece of structure even existed.Quote:
Originally Posted by rnvinc
Si is the most important to me. I find brush so fast and mark them. In 4 hours I can mark about 25 brush piles easily.You can mark stumps and small laydowns on bottom. You then have a lot to try and sort out. If you like to fish brush piles then SI is a must. Also finding breaklinesand channels is so easy.
sometimes i will refer to di as (poor mans si ) because in my opinion all that di is ,is a limited view of si with no directional reference ,left or right or strait below just somewhere in the coverage area of the beam,very limmited while si on the other hand tells were the structure is ,left or right and how far away fairly accurate.close enough to mark 100ft + then go back and fish. also i think that conventional 2d sonar is needed for a lot of peoples crappie fishing techniques. please remember that this is only opinion many people disagree
I have very little time to go and just study a particular spot with regular 2D or DI. When I get a chance to go fishing a usually can make 2 passes over a spot with my SI and find all I need to know about that area and whether I should fish it or not. I have found a lot of structure and located fish off to side of the boat that I would not have seen with 2D and DI. You need to use all three 2D, DI, SI to maxiumize your time on the water when you are fishing, especially new spots. SI has shown my alot that I would have never found or fished. Just my 2 cents.
SI is by far the most important. I use SI to locate new stuff and use DI to examine it. Together they are a good team. However the DI from SI leaves a lot to be desired - JMO. As stated earlier I too use all 3 styles to increase my understanding of what is under the surface. The DI had really helped me read my 2d view.
Humminbird Side Imaging has, without a doubt in my mind, made me a far more successful angler over the past 2-3 years....particularly with respect to crappies. Check out these articles to see how I apply Humminbird Side Imaging (and Down Imaging, and Dual-Beam 2D sonar) to a variety of crappie-fishing situations:
Using Humminbird sonar to stay with roving late summer crappies
Mid-summer panfish revealed by Humminbird Down Imaging
Finding summer crappie with Humminbird Side Imaging and VMC jigs
Targeting spring panfish with Humminbird Side Imaging
Aquatic weed identification using Humminbird Side Imaging
Very nice read!
I believe that there are times that di will actually reduce the number of fish that you will catch.for instance,when you want to hover just to the side of a brush pile.with di you wont see the brush until you are already over the brush and possibly scaring the fish.this is were conventional 2d sonar would be a better choice.use si to find the structure then switch to conventional 2d sonar to keep your boat just far enough off the brush not to spook the fish.then when your done fishing you can use the di to get that pretty picture that you can show your friends
Have been running a 798c si unti at the console for a couple of years now, and just added a 798ci si at the bow. Everything mentioned so far about the use of si is right on. Very helpful tool, that's why I need one up front. If you invest in one, make sure you spend time learning how to effectively use it tho. Lots of ways to make the most of all the options.
Something no one has mentioned yet about using SI is that it's good in the flats for finding structure. I'm one of those who prefer DI over 2D because of the clarity of what I'm looking at. As for SI vs DI, a newer body of water or different area of the lake would require SI to locate structure. However, if you're fairly familiar with a particular area, and are adept enough of a Crappie fisherman to know that you should be working drop offs and submerged creek channels, etc, then I find the DI much more useful. Especially if I've heard reports of what depth the fish have been being caught in recently. I'll work the banks at around those depths until I find structure and fish. To me, both SI and DI have become an important tool in locating structure, but when fishing my favorite waters, SI is rarely used.