On A Tight Budget

I'm looking to acquire a fish finder but I need to adhere to a pretty tight budget so it seems my choices are limited. Here is what I am looking for in a fish finder and I'd like to hear what people think is the best value for features, durability and customer service.

I need to stay under $100.
I want it to be able to be easily moved between a canoe and a kayak assuming I can make the appropriate mounting system.
I want a nice readable display that doesn't disappear in bright conditions. I am not crazy about pictures of little fishies on the screen.
It does not need to be able to handle water deeper than about 200 feet usually much less.

So far I have found the Garmin Echo 100, Hummingbird Pirhanamax 153 and Lowrance X4. There may be others and I am still looking and open to suggestions.

Any help would be appreciated.

You can turn off the Fish ID+ Symbols in the PiranhaMax 153 unit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Humminbird_Greg

You can turn off the Fish ID+ Symbols in the PiranhaMax 153 unit.

---

I was hoping that was the case but did not know for sure. So which of these budget minded finders do people think does the best job? In particular which is the most reliable?

Let me try one more time to bring this to the top. It seems that maybe no one on here has any use for the lower end depth finders. I've tried searching but so far it seems that what few questions I've seen posted on these models don't draw much if any response. Can anyone give me any feedback? If not then I'll just have to take my chances with whatever info I can get on line.

Sorry that i have no experience with the units you mention. But here is my.02 Have you considered a used unit. Possibly get some feedback or even offers on this site. I myself have several older units in that price range that could be put into service again. Distance is prohibitive in my case but you never know who may have something local. Good luck with whatever you do.

Don't let the lack of responses discourage you....

There are a multitude of different models in the market...(maybe just no one with this exact unit that has seen your inquiry yet)...

Even in these less expensive models..you can expect good results showing fish and brush...

Extra dollars spent are generally for "bells and whistles"....

The PiranhaMax 153 has dual beams which is good...
Dual Beam
83 kHz / 60° @ -10db
200 kHz / 20° @ -10db

The Lowrance 4x is a single beam..
Single beam 200kHz (they don't openly advertise their beam angles that I can find)...

I don't think you could wrong with either...

I think this suction cup mount would work with the 153 for your canoe/kayak application...(Check with HB to be sure)
http://store.humminbird.com/products...32258638ff54be

Rickie

The more I dig into these depth finders the more confused I get trying to understand the whys and wherefores of their design specs. It seems that the frequency is somehow related to the the cone angle of the beam but maybe not. I am looking at the Piranhamax 153 and comparing it to the Garmin Echo 150 (yeah I know, I originally asked about the Echo 100). They both seem to operate on similar dual frequencies. But the Piranhamax has cone angles of 60 and 20 degrees. The Garmin reports cone angles of 120 and 60 degrees. The wider cone angles would seem to be better for shallower waters and slow moving canoes but is there a trade off? If I look at the Piranhamax 175, which is priced like the Echo 150, I find even narrower cone angles of 28 and 16 degrees.

I am also finding a number of models in my under $100 budget with some significant differences with just a $10 or $20 price point difference. Since I am not in a position to be buying a different model every year to correct a buying mistake I'd sure like to make the right decision on this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JD1

Have you considered a used unit.

---

That was my first thought, too. Older units don't "wear out"--they are replaced by newer units with the latest & greatest bells & whistles. Most of the time when someone buys a used boat, the old electronics will not be used (or will be used very little.) In most cases, these surplus units are perfectly serviceable and the new owners would probably be willing to sell them. Post something on the SC board, and see if someone wants to sell one--or even give one away.

I have the Hummingbird on my Jon Boat. I fish predominantly shallow water and this unit works well. I get water temp and images of bottom and depth. I can see fish bait and bottom irregularities along with bottom structure. If you checkout some kayak forums you can get a wealth of knowledge to solve your need to move from yah to canoe. PVC pipe can be used to work miracles. Check this site out: Bayou Coast Kayak Fishing Club
go to the rigging section and enjoy...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BobberStopper

I have the Hummingbird on my Jon Boat.

---

Which Humminbird do you have? The 153? That one has a wider cone than the 175.

I have seen some of the ways people have mounted their units on kayaks and canoes. I have a lot of surplus PVC around the house so I figure I should be able to rig up something pretty decent without spending any more money.

And for those suggesting the used market I will definitely try and see what is out there. So far I haven't found much on Craig's List for my area but I will keep looking.

If you're interested in used, check out the lowrance mark 5 pro (dual beam) and see if it would meet your needs. PM me if interested.

PM sent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bill_in_SC

The more I dig into these depth finders the more confused I get trying to understand the whys and wherefores of their design specs. It seems that the frequency is somehow related to the the cone angle of the beam but maybe not. I am looking at the Piranhamax 153 and comparing it to the Garmin Echo 150 (yeah I know, I originally asked about the Echo 100). They both seem to operate on similar dual frequencies. But the Piranhamax has cone angles of 60 and 20 degrees. The Garmin reports cone angles of 120 and 60 degrees. The wider cone angles would seem to be better for shallower waters and slow moving canoes but is there a trade off? If I look at the Piranhamax 175, which is priced like the Echo 150, I find even narrower cone angles of 28 and 16 degrees.

I am also finding a number of models in my under $100 budget with some significant differences with just a $10 or $20 price point difference. Since I am not in a position to be buying a different model every year to correct a buying mistake I'd sure like to make the right decision on this.

---

Bill,
Narrow or wide sonar beam angles both have their advantages and disadvantages. The narrower the sonar beam the better the more accurate the bottom detail can be but at the cost of not showing a lot of the water/bottom that is under your boat. With a wide angle sonar beam you can cover a wider area of the water and bottom but at the cost of not being able to display the detail that a narrow sonar beam can. Narrower beam units can also work to greater water depths but this is usually hundreds of feet deep and does not affect most freshwater fishermen. Example: if you are on a flat area and there is a small depression in the bottom; the narrow beam unit might be able to show this to you but the wider beam unit would not. With a narrower beam unit you are mostly just showing what is directly under the transducer but with a wider beam unit you would be able to see those fish that were off to the right of the boat… So Dual Beam units were developed that have the best of both worlds.

Frequency is related to the width of a transducer beam. Inside the transducer are what some call “elements”. These are what change the electrical signal from the sonar unit to the acoustical (sound) pulse that is required for sonar to operate. They also take the returned sonar signal and convert it back into an electrical signal for the sonar unit to process and display for the user. If you had a sonar element that could be used at more than one frequency; you would find that typically the higher the frequency; the more narrow the sonar beam it produces is. The lower the frequency the wider the sonar beam it produces is.

Frequency will also play a part in the possible resolution of the sonar and how deep it will work in the water. The higher the frequency the better the sonar resolution but the less deep it will work. Lower frequencies work to a lot deep water depth but at the cost of sonar resolution.

What you should probably look at more is the area covered by a particular unit’s sonar beam at the water depths you will be using it at. Oh, and get a dual beam sonar unit so you will have the best of both the narrow and wide sonar beams.

Thanks for the insights. There seems to be some differences from manufacturer to manufacturer as far as the relationship between frequency and beam width. Different manufacturers seem to produce slightly different beam widths for the same frequency. But generally speaking the relationship you describe seems to hold up. For use on a canoe or kayak in relatively shallow water it seems as though I am going to be happier with the wider beam units. Something with a 120/60 dual beam capability should be nice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bill_in_SC

Thanks for the insights. There seems to be some differences from manufacturer to manufacturer as far as the relationship between frequency and beam width. Different manufacturers seem to produce slightly different beam widths for the same frequency. But generally speaking the relationship you describe seems to hold up. For use on a canoe or kayak in relatively shallow water it seems as though I am going to be happier with the wider beam units. Something with a 120/60 dual beam capability should be nice.

---

The difference in sonar beam widths in different brands is usually attributed to the fact that the different brands "measure" their respective beam angles differently...

HB measures (and advertises) their beam angles measured at the -10db value...

I think Lowrance measures their beam angles at the -3db value...

Rickie

OK. That somewhat explains it although my understanding of the electronics behind it is minimal.