XL side scan and transducer options

[Seahaul]

Looking to get some info on sidescan quality on the xl. Been running garmin for years now very comfortable with the sidescan and deal breaker if not up to snuff in comparison to garmin. Currently runny a GT 56 transom mount ducer quality out to about 70ft of water would like to get quality side scan deeper but that’s about where the falls off at the gt 56. I’m thinking about replacing the garmins in boat with getting a xl 13 and 10 for second station and pairing with dual 455 ducers for side scan. Anybody made switch from garmin and been happy with side scan? Another question would be how many transducer can you run off the two Xl mfds. Can you run side scan and split between say b265 on same mfd at same time or need another screen to do so. The would 10 go up in second station so won’t be next to the 13. Been very happy runny side scan or chirp on garmin next to 585 on 200 or 50.

 

[FishTech]

"iFishMD.com" on Facebook has some good shots of his Side-Scan in the Chesapeake Bay. That would be a start if nobody else add anything here.

 

[LordoftheTides]

Looking to get some info on sidescan quality on the xl. Been running garmin for years now very comfortable with the sidescan and deal breaker if not up to snuff in comparison to garmin. Currently runny a GT 56 transom mount ducer quality out to about 70ft of water would like to get quality side scan deeper but that’s about where the falls off at the gt 56. I’m thinking about replacing the garmins in boat with getting a xl 13 and 10 for second station and pairing with dual 455 ducers for side scan. Anybody made switch from garmin and been happy with side scan? Another question would be how many transducer can you run off the two Xl mfds. Can you run side scan and split between say b265 on same mfd at same time or need another screen to do so. The would 10 go up in second station so won’t be next to the 13. Been very happy runny side scan or chirp on garmin next to 585 on 200 or 50.

Sounds like you need a 44st for all them units!!

 

[Don Sol]

Ive got a new installation of the XL 13 and 220 sidescan with a P66 50/200. Ive come from Raymarine sidescan which is very good as well as very user friendly, across its range of products. I went for the 220 sidescan on my new boat as my plan is to be able to sidescan to about 60m water depth, the lower frequency will allow this, i havnt tested that yet. But i used it for the 1st time yesterday to a depth of 45m and the quality of the image is just incredible. As well as the range easily looking port and starboard to 100m either side. If you going to focus on sidescan in the shallows only then 455 would improve the image again. i run a high level of clutter reduction and gain high.

 

[FishHunter]

If you going to focus on sidescan in the shallows only then 455 would improve the image again.

At what depth where you would go choose 220 over 455khz? Is there a depth where the benefits of the 455khz higher resolution start tapering off?

Is there a max effective depth for the 220khz and the 455khz?

 

[Don Sol]

At what depth where you would go choose 220 over 455khz? Is there a depth where the benefits of the 455khz higher resolution start tapering off?

Is there a max effective depth for the 220khz and the 455khz?

Im not 100% sure on specifics of how and when the 455 would become less effective. if i had to estimate id suggest maxing out at about 40m. I think it would be exceptional from shallow to 25m. The 220 is fantastic to 50m, and that is why i went with the lower frequency. The 220 ive used to 75m, the reality is although i get an image there is no value in trying to cram a ton of data into a small portion of display, then zooming out to max because then the scale or ratio of size is lost. basically a reef structure the size of a house would look like a match head and you would miss it.

 

[FishHunter]

if i had to estimate id suggest maxing out at about 40m. I think it would be exceptional from shallow to 25m. The 220 is fantastic to 50m, and that is why i went with the lower frequency.

Thank you @Don Sol, the 220 looks fantastic in general. I just haven't been able to find any example imagery or a good idea of it's useful range for the 455. Appreciate the thoughts.