Go Back  The Hull Truth - Boating and Fishing Forum > BOATING FORUMS > Marine Electronics Forum
Reload this Page >

3Kw In Hull Transducer Versus 2KW Thru Hull Transducer For 28 Foot Boat - Help Please

Notices
Marine Electronics Forum

3Kw In Hull Transducer Versus 2KW Thru Hull Transducer For 28 Foot Boat - Help Please

Old 10-13-2014, 08:53 PM
  #1  
Admirals Club Admiral's Club Member
THT sponsor
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 914
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default 3Kw In Hull Transducer Versus 2KW Thru Hull Transducer For 28 Foot Boat - Help Please

Looking at the R599 3KW 25 element Airmar in hull chirp transducer versus the 109C-LHW
fairing block 16 element transducer on a 28 foot Albemarle. The 109 will be cutting it close as
there is about 6 3/4" from the bottom of the hull to the top of the cross members and axles on the trailer. Should clear as the transducer will hang down about 5"

The 599 would be a whole lot easier to install but concerned about the performance through
the hull and the 109 has the wide band in high. Like to be able to read bottom at 30mph and look for structure running to the stream.

Will be running with the GSD26 and would appreciate any feedback you could offer.

Thanks
Old 10-14-2014, 01:26 AM
  #2  
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 2,221
Likes: 0
Received 300 Likes on 171 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by gsrsol84mm View Post
Looking at the R599 3KW 25 element Airmar in hull chirp transducer versus the 109C-LHW
fairing block 16 element transducer on a 28 foot Albemarle. The 109 will be cutting it close as
there is about 6 3/4" from the bottom of the hull to the top of the cross members and axles on the trailer. Should clear as the transducer will hang down about 5"

The 599 would be a whole lot easier to install but concerned about the performance through
the hull and the 109 has the wide band in high. Like to be able to read bottom at 30mph and look for structure running to the stream.

Will be running with the GSD26 and would appreciate any feedback you could offer.

Thanks
Probably you know that either one is seriously overkill unless you are looking for the best bottom picture in water deeper than 800-1000 feet. I would not worry about the signal attenuation shooting through the hull. I would worry a lot more about a big mother transducer on a fairing block on a boat that small.

I believe that the bottom is solid glass on the Albemarle, which is key to an in-hull. If you can mount the box for the in-hull on the keel just forward of the stuffing boxes, you should have the cleanest flow of water and the best picture at cruising speed. I had an M260 in that location on my old Carolina Classic 28 and it read bottom in 1500 feet with no problems.

I think a better and much cheaper option would be to glass in a PM265 on the keel just aft of the engines and in front of the stuffing box assuming you have no through hulls just forward of that spot.

Maybe Gil or one of the professionals can comment on other transducer options.
Old 10-14-2014, 07:57 AM
  #3  
Senior Member
THT sponsor
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Beaufort NC
Posts: 6,662
Received 3,420 Likes on 1,536 Posts
Default

I usually prefer a fairing block style ducer but that 109 will act like a water ski on your 28 and cause a very noticeable list at speed on that deep vee bottom. Going with the in-hull would be my recommendation and 2KW should be more than enough power to mark bottom well offshore here anywhere within your fuel range.
Old 10-14-2014, 09:49 AM
  #4  
Admirals Club Admiral's Club Member
THT sponsor
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 914
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by bills106 View Post
I usually prefer a fairing block style ducer but that 109 will act like a water ski on your 28 and cause a very noticeable list at speed on that deep vee bottom. Going with the in-hull would be my recommendation and 2KW should be more than enough power to mark bottom well offshore here anywhere within your fuel range.
Thanks for the reply. Was really concerned about that monster fairing block on the 109.
Another consideration was building a pocket for the 109 and have it protrude a couple of inches. A Friend of mine built a pocket for his 29 strike with a 265LH airmar

It is a jackshaft diesel model, so quite a bit of room inside to work with and great gas mileage for some serious range to run to the other side of the stream.
Thought about the 2KW in hull but was concerened about signal loss through the hull.

The current transducer is mounted to the side of the water pickup. No pickups in front of the transducer.

Here is a picture showing the current transducer. The deadrise is 19 degrees where the transducer is mounted
Name:  IMG_2231_zps5ed11c50.jpg
Views: 662
Size:  2.22 MB
Old 10-14-2014, 10:34 AM
  #5  
Senior Member
THT sponsor
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Beaufort NC
Posts: 6,662
Received 3,420 Likes on 1,536 Posts
Default

Ok, eastern wall of the stream trips make sense now why you were looking at the higher power ducers. We built a 61 years ago for that reason and recessed a pair of 2KW into the hull, you will definitely be surprised at what you will find if you keep your eye on the screen running out!

On your 28 (and IF the bottom is kept clean) you won't experience too much boundary layer turbulence using a shoot through hull. Building a pocket for the 109 will work well too but a lot more work!
Old 10-14-2014, 11:29 AM
  #6  
Admirals Club Admiral's Club Member
THT sponsor
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 914
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by bills106 View Post
Ok, eastern wall of the stream trips make sense now why you were looking at the higher power ducers. We built a 61 years ago for that reason and recessed a pair of 2KW into the hull, you will definitely be surprised at what you will find if you keep your eye on the screen running out!

On your 28 (and IF the bottom is kept clean) you won't experience too much boundary layer turbulence using a shoot through hull. Building a pocket for the 109 will work well too but a lot more work!
Thanks again for the info. The bottom is very clean as there is no bottom paint and boat is kept on a trailer. The in hull would be a lot easier. The main attraction to the 109 was the
wide beam on the high and concern over the thru hull perfermance.
Not a huge price difference between the in hull 2kw and 3kw so might as well go with the 3kw for the in hull.

Very excited to see what's out there.

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


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.