Which transducer do I want?

[Anonymous]

What ducer would you pair with a Furuno FCV-295? I want the 2000watt capability. Deepdropping at 600'-1500'. It will be installed in a Contender 25T. I've been researching the R199 and the R99. I really don't want the glue in but will go that route if I have too. I have read that contender may do a glassed in ducer? Anyone ever heard of this?

Maybe a glue in will do the job just as well? Need advice...

 

[Snips]

Joey,
The R-99 is a pretty big transducer to be mounted on a 25T. While it could be glassed in, it wasn't designed to be glassed into a hull because of over heating. The R-199 is the in-hull version of the R-99 but personally I try to stay away from them due to the performance loss. If you are looking at 2 kw transducer, the PM-111 is one option but the beam width is pretty narrow. May I suggest looking at the PM411LWM.

Snips

 

[Anonymous]

Snips I actually prefer the narrow beam at those depths. Will the 111 connect directly or will I have to use a Diplexer box. I don't want to lose any performance.

Would you recommend PM111LH?
I ask because someone else recommended it. Low q being a plus.
There are way to many ducers out there. Gets confusing...

 

[Snips]

Joey,
If you are OK using a transducer that has narrow for/aft beams on both frequencies then go for it. A diplexer is not needed when using the FCV-295 with the 111.

Snips

 

[mrfisherman]

Snips,

For the R199 or R599, the high frequency shoots at 2kw. Given the depth he is asking 600-1500 and using R199/R599, how far down do you think you would be able to accurately see fish up to using 200 khz or 130 khz?

I'm in the same situation and was wondering if instead of getting a LH transducer, would it be better to get a LM instead since the medium frequency might be able to see fish better in that depth range?

thanks.

 

[Snips]

Mrfisherman,
Good question and one I can't honestly answer.
First I try to avoid using these in-hull transducers because of their performance loss. Second is that doubling the power (by itself) really doesn't equate that much gain in usable depth, maybe 15%. If you want to see deeper it is better to use a lower frequency than to use more power on a higher one. Hope this information helps.

Snips

 

[mrfisherman]

Thanks Snips. Your answer is pretty useful. Can you answer this question then?

If you had a R509LH, do you think it would be easy to see everything with clarity (bottom and fish) 1000 feet down running at 140 khz? How about 200 khz?

Thanks!

 

[Snips]

Mrfisherman,
You should probably be OK.
I rarely will rely just on the high frequency past 600ft and like to see both frequencies just to compare. I went back through my archives and found a screen shot where I was testing the R-509 against the R-309 at 200Khz. Hard to say what the fuzz was but it displayed well at a gain setting of 3.

Snips

 

[mrfisherman]

Really appreciate all the help Snips!

 

[Steve123456]

Hi Snips
Looking at putting a PM111lh in a 26 foot Ali boat paired to a 295
the cone angle is small on this which I like because if there's fish on the screen they should be under the boat At present I have a TM275LHW and it does not show structure very well at all' what is your take on the PM111LH my other option is the 200B-8B 200kh which I have had before and loved but I can't seem to find a tight cone in the LF?.

 

[Titanic II]

The low frequency beam angles are wider due to the fact they have larger diameter elements required to resonate at the low frequencies. Low frequency is also a longer wavelength and will propagate deeper into the water. Low frequency Chirp works better with a Chirp transmitter-receiver, such as the DFF3-UHD. The FCV295 is NOT a Chirp sounder as it only pings at 2 (high and low) continuous wave (CW) frequencies.

 

[Steve123456]

Thanks Titanic I have read that many people are getting good results with the 295 and pm111LH, Is this not what you are experiencing??.
What xdr would you look at I am getting in an aluminum boat?. I am getting a high-speed fairing made and cut into hull so i don't want TM. Had a fcv 1150 for 10 years and loved it I have a new boat witha TM175LH wide which has a really wide cone on it 25 degrees. It is paired to a S5100 16 inch simrad sounder which I find unfriendly to use compared to the furuno.

 

[Titanic II]

No, I was just stating to get the best performance and resolution out of a Chrip transducer is to connect it to a Chirp sounder.
I will always defer to the people that are actually using the equipment to fish the way you want to fish. If they say they are getting good results with the FCV295 and the PM111LH then I would believe them.
Just the facts...the PM111LH is compatible with the FCV295. When you set up the PM111LH on the FCV295 set the Frequency for the L and H to the center of the frequency range. Set the bandwidth to the full frequency range and you can manually adjust the frequency to get the best returns for variables such as water temp, water clarity, ect.
Once again, I always recommend going with what the other fishermen are saying as I'm a technician, not a fisherman.

 

[Steve123456]

Thanks For that
Is there any benefit/downside to installing the R109 with fairing instead of the PM111LH?.

 

[Titanic II]

The R109 with fairing will get the transducer face deeper into the water and out of the boundary-layer of air that is present at the hull surface. The R109 also only requires 3 holes in the hull. One is the cable gland through-hull fitting and the other 2 are the fore/aft mounting bolts.