The Hull Truth - Boating and Fishing Forum

Sponsored by:
Go Back   >
Search


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 01-13-2010, 09:13 AM   #1
Admirals Club
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Westville, KZN, South Africa
Posts: 551
Default DownScan v.s DownImaging



Date: 13 January 2010

Time: 11h00

Venue: Inanda Dam Kwa-Zulu Natal South Africa

Test: Lowrance HDS8 with LSS-1 v.s Humminbird 1197cxSI with Hi-Def Side Imaging with software 4.750 (Down Imaging)

Setup: Both transducers are mounted side by side on the starboard side of the transom

Conclusion: The Humminbird definitely performs better in the 455kHz range than the 800kHz, but still lacks somewhat when compared to the Lowrance LSS-1.

HB DI 800kHz


Lowrance DS 800kHz


HB DI 800kHz


Lowrance DS 800kHz


HB DI 455kHz


Lowrance DS 455kHz
Fishton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2010, 10:11 AM   #2
Admirals Club
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 409
Default

I suspect the guy running that Bird also has the fish symbols and fish alarm on.
Rolngthun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2010, 11:01 AM   #3
Admirals Club
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Westville, KZN, South Africa
Posts: 551
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rolngthun View Post
I suspect the guy running that Bird also has the fish symbols and fish alarm on.
Fish Alarm - No! ... Fish 'symbols' - 100%. Humminbirds TrueArch technology combined with FishID+ is extremely effective. The Humminbird FishID+ is the only one that actually works out of all the sonars available today. Keeping in mind that the HB represents fish in the 83kHz cone as blue and fish in the 200kHz cone as orange. This is extremely helpful when determining the fish's actual position, especially when using QuadraBeam PLUS!



I love my Humminbird, and have been using SI for several years. Read some of my articles at www.fishtec.co.za and www.bassing.co.za over the past few years.

This thread is not to stir, it is an honest "apples with apples" comparison.
Fishton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2010, 11:34 AM   #4
Admirals Club
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 409
Default

"This thread is not to stir, it is an honest "apples with apples" comparison."

It could be an honest apples to apples comparison. But it would be hard for me to hold stock in, no matter who the winner appeared to be. Just because I know just how easy it is to affect the outcome with the settings.
Now if I had to pick who I felt would win a side by side comparison. Which I have as much chance as picking this years Super Bowl winner. I would expect Lowrance to win. Just based on price and the size of the transducers. But as time goes on, I expect to see many comparisons, with the outcome being different many times.
Rolngthun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2010, 05:37 PM   #5
Admirals Club
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Westville, KZN, South Africa
Posts: 551
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rolngthun View Post
But as time goes on, I expect to see many comparisons, with the outcome being different many times.
I am a huge supporter of Lowrance AND Humminbird. I have had both on my boats for many years. I am currently using a Lowrance HDS8 and HB 1197cxSI.

I agree, there will be many comparisons to come, and that is the beauty of forums such as The Hull Truth.
Fishton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2010, 06:42 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Rhode Island
Posts: 534
Default

To get returns for the same target imaging they'd have to be sending at the same time (modulo different proprietary pulse patterns), correct?

If they're both blasting away in the same frequency domain, isn't it possible that one or the other could be affected adversely by its competitor's signal?

Maybe not so much like apples but more like two coloratura sopranos auditioning side-by-side.
kidshelleen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2010, 07:06 PM   #7
Admirals Club
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Westville, KZN, South Africa
Posts: 551
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kidshelleen View Post
To get returns for the same target imaging they'd have to be sending at the same time (modulo different proprietary pulse patterns), correct?

If they're both blasting away in the same frequency domain, isn't it possible that one or the other could be affected adversely by its competitor's signal?

Maybe not so much like apples but more like two coloratura sopranos auditioning side-by-side.
I tried both, top 2 images are running at the same time and the last 4 with the other unit's sonar stopped.

The interference was surprisingly minimal with the Hi-Def SI Humminbird and Lowrance StructureScan transducers running side by side (3 inches apart).

***Notice***

I am trying to keep this thread light and fun - hence the banner I created. Lets use this thread as a learning tool, and not mud slinging. Thanks guys.



Many of you have probably seen one of my boats with HDS Lowrance down the side (see signature image), and feel that I am a bit biased. But have you seen the starboard side of this boat? Depending on the class I am running it will either be networked with a selection of 4 lowrances or 4 Humminbirds.


Last edited by Fishton; 01-13-2010 at 07:16 PM.
Fishton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2010, 07:15 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Rhode Island
Posts: 534
Default

No mudslinging intended - that was just my odd humour trying to keep it light.

The quality of the LSS-1 is quite striking. I've been shopping for new electronics (radar, FF, chartplotter - the works) and will now be going back to square one (and maybe saving a lot of money) after drifting toward a Garmin/Humminbird hybrid setup.

Thanks for posting the comparison.
kidshelleen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2010, 07:19 PM   #9
Admirals Club
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Westville, KZN, South Africa
Posts: 551
Default

100% kidshelleen
Fishton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2010, 07:54 PM   #10
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Saigon, Vietnam
Posts: 2,199
Default

Pictures to compare would be great
XV2PS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2010, 08:04 PM   #11
Admirals Club
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Westville, KZN, South Africa
Posts: 551
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by XV2PS View Post
Pictures to compare would be great
They are at the top of the page XV2PS, just wait for them to load.
Fishton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2010, 02:39 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Virginia
Posts: 128
Default

As I stated a while back:


Quote:
Originally Posted by JayDee View Post
I do have a question for some of you who are more technically oriented. I thought about posting this in the HB section but I'm sure it would end up like the proverbial Ford/Chevy debate and I'm not here to stir up a stink.

How can HB use the same side scan transducer which I think was also used in legacy units and get true down scan? According to illustrations and specifications, their transducer has two side scanning crystals that operate at either 455 or 800 kHz and a conventional down looking crystal that operates @ either 83 or 200 kHz. Used in combination they advertise 180 degrees of coverage.

Apparently HB and Lowrance agree that 455 and 800 kHz are the best frequencies for optimum range, coverage and screen display. Breaking it down, HB advertises 86 degrees of coverage to each side. You can see from their illustration that the peak power point (strongest impulse) is close to/at the center which is indicated by the heavier, thicker portion of the arc and weakens as it approaches either vertical or horizontal. Although weaker, still 86 degrees coverage. 86 and 86 = 172 degrees. In order to get down scan coverage, where do the (required) 8 degrees come from?

Think about this. The unit determines frequency, not the transducer. Transducers are designed to operate optimally at certain frequencies. If the side scan crystals/elements will be used to create down scan and complete the 180 degree arc of coverage, wouldn't they have to alter the operating frequency? A frequency which they weren't designed for? On the other hand, if a conventional 2-D transducer crystal could emulate down scan paralleling side scan performance, it would have been introduced long ago. Something is missing.
JayDee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2010, 03:27 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Norway
Posts: 10,914
Default

Lowrance are using a dedicated Downscan element in their transducer while Humminbird according to what I've heard are operating their standard 83/200kHz 2D sensor element at a higher frequency to get Downimaging.
abbor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2010, 02:36 PM   #14
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: North NJ & Barnegat Bay
Posts: 6,316
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tcm View Post
Humminbird "Down Imaging" is not true down scan in an sense of the concept. It is just an attempt to stop some of the fall out that they
have experienced sense the introduction of Lowrance Structure Scan.
It's just a software change, something Humminbird could have offered
years ago but never saw the need until now. It's a none issue we me
anyway, don't really see the need to make all the comparsions.
Humminbird users should be pleased with what thay have now, it's good enough, just not the best.
I think thats a very fair statement. I am pleased with the free update and what i have now. They could have offered it years ago. When they heard lowrance was coming out with DS they actually could have release their DI first but instead announced the upgrade would be available in 2010 only a week after the DS was available i guess in an attempt to piss in their cornflakes a little and stop HB users from jumping ship.

They didnt release it years ago because they mostly cater to fresh water. If you are fishing in 5' of water for bass what are you really going to see?? The cone at that deptth is probably only a foot wide. At that depth good to see weeds and bottom hardness but not fish.

Its actually a good thing that is all in one ducer. The HB crowd mostly uses trolling motors and to have a all in one ducer is a plus. I am sure someone will make some kind of after market bracket soon but I cant see how you can install a 2d ducer and a side/down scan ducer on the same lower unit of a trolling motor. Maybe with built in universal 2d sonar but the Lss-1 looks too big for even that on a lower unit.

Last edited by pastaman1234; 01-15-2010 at 02:48 PM.
pastaman1234 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2010, 02:41 PM   #15
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: North NJ & Barnegat Bay
Posts: 6,316
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rolngthun View Post
"This thread is not to stir, it is an honest "apples with apples" comparison."

It could be an honest apples to apples comparison. But it would be hard for me to hold stock in, no matter who the winner appeared to be. Just because I know just how easy it is to affect the outcome with the settings.
Now if I had to pick who I felt would win a side by side comparison. Which I have as much chance as picking this years Super Bowl winner. I would expect Lowrance to win. Just based on price and the size of the transducers. But as time goes on, I expect to see many comparisons, with the outcome being different many times.
I agree. I think the lowrance is bettter so far but Id like to see the HB setttings too. Posting pics on the same day that the download was available......to me..........wouldnt allow enough time to learn the product to tweak for the best posssible images.
pastaman1234 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2010, 04:27 PM   #16
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: OZtralia
Posts: 92
Default

fishton
could you shoot out to sodwana quickly and get us some pictures at 9mile reef to see what it looks like in salt water?
was looking at a hummie for a long time, living in the arse end of the world i never got to see 1 in real life
ms went and bought me a hds 10 with structure scan for xmas-spending her bathroom reno money on it(still waiting to fingd out what she wants ;p ;p)

thanx for the post seldom 1 sees real comparison photos
DvrDve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2010, 07:32 PM   #17
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: North NJ & Barnegat Bay
Posts: 6,316
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tcm View Post
As far as the LSS-1, I got excellent results first time out which was good
because it's the only time I got to use it. It was simple to use and
didn't require any adjustments. In fact there are only a few.
Humminbird SI/downImage has a "first generation" look about it,
where Lowrance LSS-1 looks like the next generation (which it is).
I suppose (and hope) the Humminbird version will improve with time.
It's just not a contest to me. What ever Humminbird has out there is
OK with me.
Lowrance i guess might be a little easier to use then. The Hb takes some practice. Boat speed, scroll speed and sensitivity are all very important to one another. The unit works best in 455 in most situations. Once its dialed in the detail is quite good though.
pastaman1234 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2010, 09:34 AM   #18
Admirals Club
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Westville, KZN, South Africa
Posts: 551
Default

I tried some different settings today:- (Day 2 with DownImaging by Humminbird)

Settings:

Unit: 1197cxSI
Frequency: 455kHz
Chart speed: 4
DI view: wide
DI Sensitivity: 17
Pallette: Brown
Speed: 2.1kph

Comment:
The higher sensitivity certainly makes a massive difference to the cover (trees). The ground however becomes a bit washed out.



This is still my favorite DI shot so far. This was a lower sensitivity (12) and on amber1.


Last edited by Fishton; 01-16-2010 at 09:49 AM.
Fishton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2010, 11:50 AM   #19
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: North NJ & Barnegat Bay
Posts: 6,316
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fishton View Post
I tried some different settings today:- (Day 2 with DownImaging by Humminbird)

Settings:

Unit: 1197cxSI
Frequency: 455kHz
Chart speed: 4
DI view: wide
DI Sensitivity: 17
Pallette: Brown
Speed: 2.1kph

Comment:
The higher sensitivity certainly makes a massive difference to the cover (trees). The ground however becomes a bit washed out.



This is still my favorite DI shot so far. This was a lower sensitivity (12) and on amber1.

Very nice pics. I know you know who Doug is. His Side imaging pics are extrordinary and the best i have ever seen . He claims as far as sensitivity on the scale of 0-20 he is always between 8-12 and says that thats all he uses. Do you think the same will be for Down imaging?
pastaman1234 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2010, 11:59 AM   #20
Admirals Club
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Westville, KZN, South Africa
Posts: 551
Default

Yes, I do.

HB's SideImaging is fantastic in 455kHz. And yes, 11 is about the best for SI, but for deep trees it seems to be about 16-18 on DI.
Fishton is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:51 AM.


©2009 TheHullTruth.com

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.9.3.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.