hummingbird 999 si or garmin 93 sv? I need help deciding what unit to purchase.
Printable View
hummingbird 999 si or garmin 93 sv? I need help deciding what unit to purchase.
Don't know a lot about the Garmin models, but make sure you check out their mapping, it may or may not meet your needs.
The latest software release only allows Garmin's own mapping on the unit ..... If the maps you need are the Ultra mapping you will be good .... They no longer allow Navionics mapping........This may change at some time in the future since there is quite a bit of flak about it right now.
Garmins shoot a beautiful picture for sure. But are priced pretty much the same as the tried and true Humminbirds and Lowrance. So unless u got alot of money for experimenting, Better go with what ya know (In my opinion), becuase there is not much of a price difference. Im not dissing garmin for sure. I like the images I have seen from them. I also get great images from my birds. So 6 in one and half dozen for the other. If garmins were ALOT cheaper, we would have a different argument. I hope I helped.
The other benefit of the Garmin's are that they have really great range on the SI...... even better than Humminbird. Some have said that the tradeoff for that is that it is harder to see the fish on SI and DI with them......just another factor to consider.
I like to set my Humminbird to max range when trying to figure out the features of a new body of water.....On a body of water you are familiar with, the ability to see fish better would be a greater advantage.
Where's that documented? I'd be interested in reading that or seeing some screenshots. ThnksQuote:
Originally Posted by BobB
I think I read that the Garmin SI will go out to 600' ...... You can probably check out the specs on Garmin's website, or read some of the threads or ask the question over here Garmin Sonar/GPS
The Garmin web site says 750 feet to the left or right. Now that sounds great but with a 9 inch screen....with 480X800 pixels.....I don't know what you could see with the range set out that far that would be any use to someone.....IMHO.
Regards
The extra range is good to learn the overall bottom features of an unfamiliar body of water ..... but I think the 250 each way (500 total) on the birds is plenty.
500' is almost a football field wide per pass.
Even though the unit is capable of that distance. No way u could see what us needed to unless maybe if u were fishing in 500 feet of water. And then even with 800khz that's not enough power to get much detail in ur image.
There are some wide range images over on the forum I posted that are pretty impressive.....If you want to mark creek channel junctions, drops, weed edges, rockpiles etc.....The wide range is VERY useful. If you are looking for fish or small structure, the narrower range is better.
Out of curiosity I've been reading some other forums about the new Garmin. The part that would worry me is not being able to see fish in side vu on the non chirp unit. If someone here has these units I would be interested in reading your opinion.
From what I have been reading that and the lack of mapping options with the new software seems to be their 2 weak points.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greenwing
I have had both units. Well sorta... I currently have a 93sv and it is a great, functional, user friendly device. The side imaging shows decent images of structure. I cannot attest to it showing fish on SI as I have no interest in using SI for locating fish. I think the bigger problem is the mapping. If Garmin's built in maps or their LakeVu HD add-on card have the lakes you primarily fish then you're alright. However, they do not offer any custom mapping options (SonarCharts/AutoCharts) so they pretty much sucks. Especially if a built-in lake they provide has inaccuracies that you would want to enhance.
I've previously had an HB 1199 and 898. I am currently pending a trade for my 93sv to go to a 998 HD. Decision is based on mapping, networking options, and my overall confidence with HBs. Oh and I just picked up a Helix for my Kayak and its pretty sweet. Just my opinion on the matter.
I am just curious as to why you would not be interested in locating fish using si.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tundah
Regards
Simple, I use it to locate structure...weed lines, grass, etc off shore. Lakes I fish around here are usually less than 10-12 feet deep. So depending on crappie season I am either interested in accurate depth contour lines or some type of structure out in the middle of the salad bowl.
So with the shallow depths, I would have to set the range very low to expand the water column on the screen to look for fish and that would defeat the purpose of si for me.