Help me choose 2 ducers

[Indyspecracer]

I’m having my next boat built and am looking for confirmation on ducer selection. I’m looking to solve for bottom fishing up to about 600 ft, maybe 700ft occasionally. Reading tails is my first priority. For this type of fishing, I’m leaning towards the CA50/200. Still the best for bottom truthing in 100-700 ft?

My second type of fishing is mid water column pelagics. I’m leaning towards a B275LHW. Thoughts on this ducer?
Thank you

 

[FishTech]

I think you have a good plan.
@Deep Blue might have more to add of this.

 

[Quitsa]

Another option would be a B175H and a B265LM. You can run the B175H as a 200Hz fixed frequency instead of in CHIRP using the custom frequency presets or in CHIRP mode. My experience is that the B175H provides better results for bottom fishing especially at the deeper end of your range than you might see with the CA50/200. The B265LM would be a nice complement for pelagic fishing with the medium band showing a broader section than the B175H and you would have the low frequency element for very deep water.

I am assuming you must have two MFDs based on your original post since I don't think the pair you proposed can be used on a single unit.

 

[Indyspecracer]

Another option would be a B175H and a B265LM. You can run the B175H as a 200Hz fixed frequency instead of in CHIRP using the custom frequency presets or in CHIRP mode. My experience is that the B175H provides better results for bottom fishing especially at the deeper end of your range than you might see with the CA50/200. The B265LM would be a nice complement for pelagic fishing with the medium band showing a broader section than the B175H and you would have the low frequency element for very deep water.

I am assuming you must have two MFDs based on your original post since I don't think the pair you proposed can be used on a single unit.

Thanks for your post, I will take a look at the b175h. I had a B75H on a prior boat and it did well.

 

[Indyspecracer]

Another option would be a B175H and a B265LM. You can run the B175H as a 200Hz fixed frequency instead of in CHIRP using the custom frequency presets or in CHIRP mode. My experience is that the B175H provides better results for bottom fishing especially at the deeper end of your range than you might see with the CA50/200. The B265LM would be a nice complement for pelagic fishing with the medium band showing a broader section than the B175H and you would have the low frequency element for very deep water.

I am assuming you must have two MFDs based on your original post since I don't think the pair you proposed can be used on a single unit.

I am currently running a B260 and prefer to look at the second echo to discern bottom hardness. Apparently the higher the Q factor, the better the “tails” that indicate hard bottom. The B260 has. Q of 9, the B175H has a Q of 2.5. I prefer 200hz for 99% of my fishing thus far.

Do you like the bottom echo that you are getting for reading hardness with the B175H running in fixed 200hz?

 

[Quitsa]

I am currently running a B260 and prefer to look at the second echo to discern bottom hardness. Apparently the higher the Q factor, the better the “tails” that indicate hard bottom. The B260 has. Q of 9, the B175H has a Q of 2.5. I prefer 200hz for 99% of my fishing thus far.

Do you like the bottom echo that you are getting for reading hardness with the B175H running in fixed 200hz?

Fortunately the Furuno techs will read this and offer a more expert view than mine. I don't think you are correct that higher Q provides a better indication of bottom composition. Basically Q is a measure of the ringing in the element when generating the signal. Lower is always better as a general rule. Low Q transducers are more expensive because the elements cost more to fabricate. I think with CHIRP low Q is more significant because of the multiple frequency transmissions across the CHIRP band are more affected by the ringing.

But applying my own experience, the B175H returns as displayed on the sounder very distinctly shade redder from hard bottom with more precision than the B64 high Q transducer on my skiff and distinguish rocks from sand, etc, with greater definition.

 

[Deep Blue]

Indyspecracer,

Quita is correct. The transducer's "Q-rating" is the ringing of the transducer that equals to more energy being transmitted into the water. If the transducer has a low "Q-rating" then better is the transducer's performance. Typically, lower frequency transducers that have with higher "Q-rating have wider beamwidths and are better for seabed hardness and bottom truthing/bottom tails.

The B175LH has a Q-rating of: "2.5", the B265LM has a Q-rating of: "2", and the B275LHW has a Q-rating of: "2". The B260 has a Q-rating of: "9".

Out on the West Coast, the B275LHW is very popular for the pelagic fisheries and utilizing the frequencies of: 42-65 kHz for Low, and the 150-250 kHz for High Wide. (25° Constant Beamwidth).

It all comes down to how you really want to fish. I know Quitsa, and he really does know how to get the best performance out of his fish finder for any specific fishery.

- Deep Blue

 

[Sekasonthewater]

I’m having my next boat built and am looking for confirmation on ducer selection. I’m looking to solve for bottom fishing up to about 600 ft, maybe 700ft occasionally. Reading tails is my first priority. For this type of fishing, I’m leaning towards the CA50/200. Still the best for bottom truthing in 100-700 ft?

My second type of fishing is mid water column pelagics. I’m leaning towards a B275LHW. Thoughts on this ducer?
Thank you

That’s a great transducer which a lot of good operators run.

 

[Indyspecracer]

Thanks for everyone’s comments. After some more research as well as talking to my Furuno dealer, I think that I’m going with the ca50/200 for bottom fishing and the b175hw for mid water. The b275lhw has redundancy in the low frequency that I would probably never need, the 175hw is also a thru hull which would be much easier to replace if it ever failed. The 275lhw would be in a pocket and would be a big deal to replace. The CA50/200 has a reputation for being bulletproof and it seems like it does do a great job of showing hard bottom. Here is a link to a previous thread on the topic, it shows the returns of the B260 and the ca50/200 on the same spot.

B

Thread 'Best combo for hard bottom'

Dec 8, 2016

I am interested in a bottom machine and transducer that will show the bottom hardness (tails)I have had two chirp systems from other manufacturers.I have read that the low Q transducers will not show the tails.I a have owned the 582L,585 with a 526hdd.Also a 295 with a B265HL.I want to be able to determine hard bottom.Was thinking a 588 or TZT2?? What transducer?Was Looking at your tank mount.Will that allow me to mount it in hull?We fish the Gulf of Mexico bottom fishing in 50-175ft.What would be my best option,regardless of transducer styles. Boat is a 33 power cat..30 mph.Thanks Capt.Mike

• Blaster1
• Replies: 39
• Forum: Fish Finders & Sonars