non-Chirp ping pong ball (onix)

I'm still not sold on if chirp helps much in shallow water.
I tried this today.two 40 millimeter ping pong balls tied to a my marker.the conditions were not so great today, but did give me an ideal of what to expect.ill try again when there's a a day with no wind. (I need to find a place with no fish also) anyhows, these are the pictures from today.About at the 20ft. mark in the center of these pictures is the ping pong balls.Acuallty , the string can be seen two, in one or two of the pictureshttp://i826.photobucket.com/albums/z...psfmcg3dgm.jpg

[URL=http://s826.photobucket.com/user/kosmo012/media/Mobile%20Uploads/snp1228145915_zpsinutzegf.jpg.html]http://i826.photobucket.com/albums/z...psinutzegf.jpg[/URL[URL=http://s826.photobucket.com/user/kosmo012/media/Mobile%20Uploads/snp1228140318_zps3vm7lkiv.jpg.html]http://i826.photobucket.com/albums/z...ps3vm7lkiv.jpg[/URL[URL=http://s826.photobucket.com/user/kosmo012/media/Mobile%20Uploads/snp1228140510_zps1of1wb9w.jpg.html]http://i826.photobucket.com/albums/z...ps1of1wb9w.jpg[/URL[URL=http://s826.photobucket.com/user/kosmo012/media/Mobile%20Uploads/snp1228145653_zpsua9wjwu8.jpg.html]http://i826.photobucket.com/albums/z...psua9wjwu8.jpg[/URLhttp://i826.photobucket.com/albums/z...pskfobl7ds.jpg

Nice pictures----- so the ping-pong ball is basically the same color as the fish with a red center?

Ping pong ball is used to simulate a small fish's air bladder.

Let's see DI shots of above!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by metalworx

Let's see DI shots of above!

---

ok, I can do that next time I test.i didn't try di this time but will next time.i didn't want to spend a lot of time today.it was cold and windy and I wanted to get some fishing in before I got to cold.i might try some extra ping pong balls later to.just to simulate a school of small fish.

Interesting Kosmo for sure.

When I jig in brush for Crappie I use two 1/32 oz jigs with a 1/4 split shot between them. I can easily see all three items on the 2d and on the DI (they are just specks). I would guess they are about 6-8 inches apart, maybe just a touch more sometimes. I just can't see where spending several hundred more dollars would help me any.

I found some old SI/2d images from my 997 on the computer. I honestly think the Si images are just as good when compared to the HB core units of today (8XX and 9XX). The 2d back then was exceptional.

I may be wrong but I'm thinking manufactures have about reached the limits of Si/Di that is any kind of affordable to recreational users. If this is the case I figure "chirp" will be the "next best thing" to keep sales going.

I bet you can get better images, based on your posts of old

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brettw

I bet you can get better images, based on your posts of old

---

I get better with the Onix mainly due to the dedicated Di and the screen resolution.

I was going to post the 997 images on the BBC but I can't remember where they were on the computer. I will run across them again some day and post them.

Kosmo

How much weight did it take to sink the ping pong balls? I tried the two tennis ball setup that Fishton uses to test with but didn't take enough weight with me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fishfood

If this is the case I figure "chirp" will be the "next best thing" to keep sales going.

---

I'm sure this is the consensus (or maybe the hope) of the "decision makers" at the sonar companies ...

Rickie

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fishfood

Kosmo

How much weight did it take to sink the ping pong balls? I tried the two tennis ball setup that Fishton uses to test with but didn't take enough weight with me.

---

Either it's the 8oz. or the 10oz. I'm not sure.I think l used the 10oz., I was worried that it might sink my marker, if the line got hung up.i held on to the marker until I got the weight on the bottom.seem to go down really easy

Those are some good images

The 2 main things I see with my Onix running CHIRP is the water column is much cleaner and the arches are solid. Now if I use 105khz then I get the best of both world.

I've said this before but the biggest problem with Humminbird CHIRP is the cost. And just in case you guys haven't seen them, the transducers are huge!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Diel11

I've said this before but the biggest problem with Humminbird CHIRP is the cost.

---

I surely hope HB takes a hard look at this issue...

I feel there may be a lot of SM boxes collecting dust on dealer's shelves ...

Rickie

Ok, apx. What s the cost with all that's needed for say a 10" screen

I thought I'd try 4 ping pong balls today.the di seems to separate the balls better than the 2d.also the di is showing were my bouy line is attached to the 3/16 line, above and below the balls. http://i826.photobucket.com/albums/z...psnmbpe8w8.jpg http://i826.photobucket.com/albums/z...pseomd2big.jpg http://i826.photobucket.com/albums/z...pstzm4ufvi.jpg http://i826.photobucket.com/albums/z...pssfdqd3ng.jpg

Here's some more. http://i826.photobucket.com/albums/z...psm4cf6ezi.jpg http://i826.photobucket.com/albums/z...psygkoylyu.jpg http://i826.photobucket.com/albums/z...pswoo0d6io.jpg

Looks like they are all 83/200, did you try just 200?

No, I didn't try the 200khz only, but those last two are switchfire clear.i was surprised that the clear mold produced the best results (or at least I believe it's better).I'll have to test more, but the max mold was turned all the way down, but was still to hot.on the di, I didn't fool with it.just kept it on the same setting.what I did fool with, was the surface clutter and the 83 sensitivity.

Gonna have to try this myself just to see how it looks on my FF.

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

Quote:

---

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.http://i826.photobucket.com/albums/z...psz5pnqjsr.jpg

Quote:

---

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

Quote:

---

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.

Quote:

---

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fishfood

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.

---

I think that the di and 2D compliment each other.the di definitely helps in setting the 2D correctly.im learning a lot by watching both.theres times when di alone is sufficient and also the same go's for 2d but I think that a person would be best off using both.theres times that by running both that you might see something on the 2D that might have gone unnoticed on the di.if you want to watch your jig and watch fish movement , then the 2D is much better at that.i think the biggest issue with 2d, for me was that I turn the sensitivity to high.the di helps on this.if you want to drive over a brush pile and try to see each individual fish, then I would have to say that the di has a big advantage.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kosmo

I think that the di and 2D compliment each other.the di definitely helps in setting the 2D correctly.im learning a lot by watching both.theres times when di alone is sufficient and also the same go's for 2d but I think that a person would be best off using both.theres times that by running both that you might see something on the 2D that might have gone unnoticed on the di.if you want to watch your jig and watch fish movement , then the 2D is much better at that.i think the biggest issue with 2d, for me was that I turn the sensitivity to high.the di helps on this.if you want to drive over a brush pile and try to see each individual fish, then I would have to say that the di has a big advantage.

---

I agree...... I use 200 khz 2d for marking brush piles in deeper water and 83/200 for jigging them. When idling I have a split 200 khz 2d and Di screen on one unit.

I did this test a while back comparing the Garmin (xs), Lowrance HDS Gen3 and the Humminbird ONIX.

I really like how the Garmin CHIRP works, but overall the Lowrance HDS Gen3 gave the best results not on CHIRP, but on a fixed frequency of 105kHz. As for the ONIX, I dare not even put them on the internet. What has happened to HB's sonar? It is a shocker to say the least! :dono

John Easton
Fisherman's Guide to Sonar II

https://www.facebook.com/pages/FishT...?ref=bookmarks
https://www.facebook.com/pages/FishT...d/111247072990
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Fisht...67567559978092

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fishton

As for the ONIX, I dare not even put them on the internet. What has happened to HB's sonar? It is a shocker to say the least! :dono

John Easton

---

Can you elaborate ...?? ... With example images ...??

Rickie

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fishton

I did this test a while back comparing the Garmin (xs), Lowrance HDS Gen3 and the Humminbird ONIX.

I really like how the Garmin CHIRP works, but overall the Lowrance HDS Gen3 gave the best results not on CHIRP, but on a fixed frequency of 105kHz. As for the ONIX, I dare not even put them on the internet. What has happened to HB's sonar? It is a shocker to say the least! :dono

John Easton
Fisherman's Guide to Sonar II

https://www.facebook.com/pages/FishT...?ref=bookmarks
https://www.facebook.com/pages/FishT...d/111247072990
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Fisht...67567559978092

---

sounds really bad john.do you have any ideal as to what's happened to the humminbird sonar? The onix specs, said that it has a 2.5 inch target separation, but I never did get all 4 ping pong balls to show up on the 2d.I can take a 1/16 tube jig and drop it down there and I can easily see it while I move it up and down thouhttp://i826.photobucket.com/albums/z...psj1fe1jqs.jpg:dono:dono

Hb onix sonar shocker good or shocker bad?