Fish finder... Garmin or Hummingbird?

[jdawg183]

I am just looking for a cheap, but reliable finder. Which of these brands is best? I am contemplating between the two linked below. Thoughts?
http://www.amazon.com/Humminbird-Piranha...305&sr=8-8

http://www.amazon.com/Garmin-Fishfinder-...305&sr=8-3
[signature]

[The_Red_Leaker]

lowrance....imho
[signature]

[Fishassassin]

I say lowrance as well. Lowrance allows you to customize settings that the others dont. I've played around with humminbird as well and they are a great unit. I just like the customization features of the lowrance better. Just my opinion.
[signature]

[jdawg183]

What kind of additional features do you get with the Lowrance? I dont really need anything too fancy, just looking for something cheap to throw on my boat, but if it makes a huge difference in finding fish, I might spend the little extra money.
[signature]

[OldTroller]

At that price point you can't go wrong with either unit.

You really don't need to worry until you get well over $400. Then you start looking at GPS and a clock and everything else that comes on one that pricey.

BTW there are a ton of videos on youtube about fish finders.

One more thing that you didn't ask: all of them lie to you. Every time they say there is fish they are not always right. Use it as a depth finder because the depth you're fishing at is as important as anything else.
[signature]

[jdawg183]

So they don't really do a good job of showing when fish are nearby? Well crap, that was the whole reason I wanted one! Are they just false positives occasionally or all the time?
[signature]

[Fishassassin]

I've got a lowrance x96 as a backup unit and its a great fishfinder for the price. The fish finder wont lie to you if you know how to tune it. Definitely turn off the fish I.D. and this gets rid of 90 percent of those fake fish which are actually stucture or algae. Also adjust you're sensitivity. I usually go to about 80 percent. I've used this unit ice fishing too and I can see my lure and when a fish is nearby. I don't think you can go wrong with a lowrance or humminbird.
[signature]

[jdawg183]

Good deal. As long as it tells the truth at least 50% of the time, and I can usually tell when its lying,I am good. I am leaning towards the hummingbird unless there is a specific feature they makes the lowrance worth the extra $25. Is there Abigail enough difference in the low end models to justify the money for a newbie weekend warrior?
[signature]

[TubeDude]

[cool][#0000ff]Go to the manufacturers' websites and look for their sonar tutorials. They explain the different buzzwords and features and how they work.[/#0000ff]
[#0000ff][/#0000ff]
[#0000ff]In a nutshell, the higher the wattage/power the greater the sensitivity and the more accurate the display (when properly tuned).[/#0000ff]
[#0000ff][/#0000ff]
[#0000ff]Anybody who buys a sonar strictly as a fishfinder is delusional...at least in the lower price ranges. Some of the better quality units DO display fish in real time and also your lure if you are vertical jigging. That can be extremely helpful for seeing how the fish react to different lures and different presentations. [/#0000ff]

[#0000ff]Unfortunately, many of the lower priced models are guilty of "false readings" when it comes to marking fish...especially if you have your display set on "Fish ID'...and it displays little pixelated fish swimming across the screen. The signal from the transducer interprets anything it hits between top and bottom as a fish and displays it as a fish. That includes bubbles, algae globs, aquatic insects, tree limbs, etc. That's why unless you have a special need you should not use the Fish ID display.[/#0000ff]

[#0000ff]Also, unless you are making vertical presentations to bottom hugging fish...like perch, walleye, bass, etc. you will seldom catch the fish you are seeing on sonar. You might see signals from fish going through at 20 feet deep in 30 feet of water. What that should tell you is that there are fish in the area and they should be fished at or above the 20 foot mark. [/#0000ff]

[#0000ff]If you are fishing fairly shallow water...like Utah Lake...you will seldom see any fish marks on your screen in less than 6 or 7 feet of water. Even in a quiet float tube the fish will generally move out from beneath your tube. And the "cone angle" of the transducer is very small...about 1/3 the depth on a 20 degree transducer. That means that at 6' the "footprint" of your sonar is less than 2' across. You literally have to run over a fish for it to show on your screen.[/#0000ff]
[#0000ff][/#0000ff]
[#0000ff]In most cases the major value of a sonar is to help keep you fishing in the right depth. This is especially important when targeting bottom hugging species that generally have a preference as to depth and bottom contours. Being able to fish in the right "zone" is more important than just seeing a little fishy icon on the screen. There will be times when the fish are laying right on the bottom and even a pretty good sonar will not separate the fish from the bottom and you will never know it's there.[/#0000ff]
[#0000ff][/#0000ff]
[#0000ff]That being said, I have been a Humminbird fan for several years and am very happy with the quality and accuracy I get in float tube sonars for under $200. There are times I lust after super side scan systems...with GPS, mapping and all the goodies. But I still manage to muddle through somehow.[/#0000ff]
[#0000ff][/#0000ff]
[#0000ff][url "http://www.lowrance.com/en/Support/Tips-and-Tutorials/Sonar-Tutorial/"]LOWRANCE TUTORIAL[/url][/#0000ff]
[#0000ff][/#0000ff]
[signature]

[Fishassassin]

First off I would compare peak to peak power of the two. Also, the width of the cone of the transducer. Lastly, how many pixels the screen has for quality of picture. Water temp may be an important feature as well. Just food for thought.
[signature]

[jdawg183]

So, are you saying that for a guy who only has a little 12' boat and uses it in places like mantua, newton, and the bear river and is just wanting to know where the fish are, it may not be worth it?
[signature]