TZT2 transducer slelction

[buckshot]

I will be upgrading my transducers this winter. I have 2 TZT2 displays and I have been looking at the Airmar B260. I am also considering the DFF1 uhd with a B265LH transducer. I will be trolling in 65 to 400 ft and bottom fishing up to 2000 ft for swordfish. We also do a fair amount of bottom fishing in 100 to 250 ft for triggers grouper etc.Which setup would you recommend of the 2?
I currently have a B45 and a B256 transducer already in the boat. They work but the temp senders are shot on both. Which one of those would you leave installed for now?
Thanks
Lee

 

[Flatline]

Buckshot,
thank you for your inquiry. While the internal 600/1kw sounder found in the TZT2 and the external DFF1-UHD black box are both excellent echo sounders, of the two choices the increase resolution of the CHIRP technology may be helpful in your particular application. The "finer" target resolution of the DFF1-UHD may help you discriminate bottom target species from that of the bottom itself. The choice then becomes do you select the B265LH transducer or the B275LHW transducer. The later 275 transducer gives you a constant 25 degree "wide" beam angle while sweeping the higher frequency band versus the 265 that is a much tighter beam angle of 10 degrees to 6 degrees while it sweeps the high frequency. The wider beam transducer can mark more targets suspended in the water column (like pelagic fish) b/c of the wider beam, by converse the narrower beam can do better at marking shallow bottom structure & bottom species because of the focused energy of the tighter beam width. Both the B265 & B275 have the exact same beam width on the low frequency end, and it must be noted that if you select the B275 the "bottom discrimination" functionality of the DFF1-UHD will not be able to be utilized.

In regards to your second question about the B45 versus the B256. Again both are fine transducers, but there are certainly some differences in these two 50/200 CW transducers. The B45 is rated at 600w and has a much wider beam angle on both the low and high frequencies (45 degrees and 12 degrees respectively) versus the B256 rated at 1000w and narrower oblong beam angle of 14x23 degrees on low and 3x5 on high. Again the same physics apply; the wider the beam the more probability the transducer will mark targets suspended in the water column but the less precise they are for bottom fishing as the sound is spread over a wider area on the seafloor.

 

[C-Bass]

Good morning Buckshot,

Thank you for your inquiry.

Wow, this is a big question to tackle with so many different styles and kinds of fishing that you plan to do.

I will do what I can to help guide you in your search for the perfect setup.

As Flatline mentioned below it all comes down to where and how you plan to fish the most if you are talking about just 1 fish finder and 1 transducer to do it all. Typically for pelagic fishing the objective is to cover the most water as possible so a wider beam angle is preferred. You must also take into consideration the style of pelagic fishing that you are looking for. Will you be trolling for the pelagic species, I ask that question because the transducer and mounting location used will play a large role in the performance of this style of fishing and the other styles you plan to do. Rule of thumb is the high frequency does better with trying to work in unfavorable water conditions such as turbulence. So if the vessel is prone to turbulence then for pelagic fishing by means of trolling at higher speeds I would lean towards the 275LHW transducer because it gives you the widest beam possible on the high frequency, so if it is does get a little turbulence it will be more likely to fight through it. With all that said the B45 transducer may be all you need for this type of fishing because of the wide low frequency beam it can cover alot of water.

So I must ask a question, how did the B45 transducer perform when connected to the TZT2 system using the internal sounder?

Bottom fishing in the shallower depths, the Chirp box should be the trick because of the excellent vertical resolution. With wreck fishing it is all about being as close to the wreck as possible so typically a higher frequency is used because higher frequency transducer's tend to have a narrow beam angle. For this type of fishing I would lean towards the b265LH transducer. Which will give you excellent vertical separation and be able to get you right on top of the wreck.

Swordfishing and going deep is a completely different ball game. The internal sounder using a good 1kw transducer on the low frequency will work ok, just like the low frequency for the DFF1-UHD will work ok but they really are not what you need to go deep. Going deep and finding fish deep is all about high power and low frequency. Typically we would recommed the DFF3 with a single 2kw or 3kw 28kHz transducer.

So what all this means is one fish finder and transducer combination will work for all types of fishing, but depending on what you choose it may work better for certain styles of fishing. So it will help to make your choice based on the style of fishing you plan to do most. If you fish all 3 styles of fishing equally then I might lean towards the B265 with the DFF1-UHD and keep the b45 transducer for the internal sounder in the TZT2 to use for pelagic fishing.

 

[buckshot]

I think the B45 gives me a better picture than the B256 for most situations until I hit deeper water. I have been leaning towards leaving it installed.
Will the DFF1uhd with the B265LH out perform the B260 for bottom fishing in 100 to 250 feet? How about 600 to 800 ft? I know it can be subjective but will it be a big difference? Are there any screenshots that may help me decide?
My boat is a 40' inboard diesel with the ducers thru hull mounted . I have not had any turbulence problems with them.
As always I really appreciate the help.
Lee
:furuno