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

Furuno NavNet TZtouch2 12 vs. Simrad NSS12 Evo2

Notices
Marine Electronics Forum

Furuno NavNet TZtouch2 12 vs. Simrad NSS12 Evo2

Old 02-21-2015, 05:30 PM
  #1  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location:
Posts: 123
Received 17 Likes on 9 Posts
Default Furuno NavNet TZtouch2 12 vs. Simrad NSS12 Evo2

Sorry if this has been discussed before, but trying to decide between the two. I Currently have a dying Northstar 958. Both units look good, but don't know about the touch screen only on the Furuno. Both have internal GPS. The Simrad has the sonic hub and chirp (external) for similar price as the Furuno's internal FF. Help.
Old 02-21-2015, 06:02 PM
  #2  
Closed Admiral's Club Member
THT sponsor
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 2,771
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Simrad has built in single band Chirp, structure scan, pinch to zoom and buttons
TZT2has Rezboost, a touch screen unit only.

The Rezboost images and videos look impressive and will allow you to run a non Chirp transducer. The TZ units are much more user friendly than what we are use to seeing from Furuno as they are typically very technically advanced and alliw grwater user input than most recreational machines.

The best recommendation anyone can give you is to go and play with both units and to see which interface you like best personally
Old 02-21-2015, 06:09 PM
  #3  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location:
Posts: 123
Received 17 Likes on 9 Posts
Default

And that means? Please explain Brian. I currently have an in hull 1kw shoot thru transducer. Will I need to get another? Can I eliminate the shoot thru transducer? Thanks in advance!!
Old 02-21-2015, 06:33 PM
  #4  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location:
Posts: 123
Received 17 Likes on 9 Posts
Default

Sorry Brian, your full message didn't com thru originally
Old 02-21-2015, 08:04 PM
  #5  
Closed Admiral's Club Member
THT sponsor
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 2,771
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

TZT2 insnt a replacement for the TZ9/14 but rather a compliment to the lineup.
Old 02-22-2015, 01:06 AM
  #6  
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 2,219
Likes: 0
Received 297 Likes on 169 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by fin-sanity View Post
And that means? Please explain Brian. I currently have an in hull 1kw shoot thru transducer. Will I need to get another? Can I eliminate the shoot thru transducer? Thanks in advance!!
Do you have an M260 transducer in the yellow tank? That should work fine with the internal sounder in the Furuno TZT2. It should probably also work okay with the Simrad internal sounder but because the M260 is not a "CHIRP" transducer, you would probably end up using the Simrad unit set to single frequency 50/200Hz "tone pulse" mode and not in CHIRP mode.

No one has seen the new Furuno TZT2 hardware in operation on the water so it is hard to know what to expect by way of performance. Personally I am very skeptical that the low-end built in single channel sounder in the Simrad Evo2 would do better than the Furuno TZT2, especially if you do not get a new CHIRP capable transducer (which would be $1000+ for a decent one).

If you have the Northstar M20/21 black box now with your 958, you are virtually guaranteed to be blown away by performance of the Furuno TZT2 internal sounder using the same transducer. But that's mostly because the Northstar is total crap! I had one years ago with a Northstar 958 and ended up junking it and installing a stand-alone Furuno sounder after a few weeks.

My opinion based on direct experience is that Simrad is great at marketing hype, not so great at designing sounders. Their so-called top of the line BSM-2 was quite a disappointment to many users (including me), only recently getting decent results with the latest software update. In fact, this winter I have sold the Simrad hardware on my boat and am replacing it with the Furuno TZT2 but will also use the black box DFF1-UHD sounder, not the internal one.

Of course, others will have different opinions.
Old 02-22-2015, 02:49 AM
  #7  
Closed Admiral's Club Member
THT sponsor
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 2,771
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I do feel that TZT2 and DFF1-UHD will be a very impressive setup
Old 02-22-2015, 03:02 AM
  #8  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Norway
Posts: 16,432
Likes: 0
Received 1,128 Likes on 918 Posts
Default

To get the improved resolution in the TZT2 sounder Furuno had to do what Lowrance and Simrad have done in the Broadband sounder (including built-in HDS and NSS sounders) use much shorter pulse lenghts. To compensate for the lower amount of energy transmitted Navico increased the receiver sensitivity significantly. This is different from how Furuno previously have designed sonars so we probably have to wait for user experiences before we know how it will compare.

With a 1kW CHIRP transducer the built-in NSS Evo2 sounder will outperform BSM-2 by far. The built-in NSS Evo2 sounder performs exceptionally well in CHIRP mode, and it will actually allow CHIRPing with M260. The CHIRP bandwidths of NSS Evo2 for this transducer is 40-60kHz and 160-240kHz. With a Q-factor of 8 in both high and low frequency M260 will have 6.25 and respectively 25kHz bandwidth. These bandwidths will give 4.7" resolution in Low CHIRP and 1.2" in High CHIRP, which is very good compared to fixed frequency sonar. By using fixed frequencies at shallow to moderate depths (100-200') and CHIRP at larger depths a NSS Evo2 with M260 should give good performance under most conditions. I have seen very positive user experiences from NSS Evo2 with TM260, M260 should not perform that different.
Old 02-22-2015, 03:28 AM
  #9  
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 2,219
Likes: 0
Received 297 Likes on 169 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by abbor View Post
To get the improved resolution in the TZT2 sounder Furuno had to do what Lowrance and Simrad have done in the Broadband sounder (including built-in HDS and NSS sounders) use much shorter pulse lenghts. To compensate for the lower amount of energy transmitted Navico increased the receiver sensitivity significantly. This is different from how Furuno previously have designed sonars so we probably have to wait for user experiences before we know how it will compare.

With a 1kW CHIRP transducer the built-in NSS Evo2 sounder will outperform BSM-2 by far. The built-in NSS Evo2 sounder performs exceptionally well in CHIRP mode, and it will actually allow CHIRPing with M260. The CHIRP bandwidths of NSS Evo2 for this transducer is 40-60kHz and 160-240kHz. With a Q-factor of 8 in both high and low frequency M260 will have 6.25 and respectively 25kHz bandwidth. These bandwidths will give 4.7" resolution in Low CHIRP and 1.2" in High CHIRP, which is very good compared to fixed frequency sonar. By using fixed frequencies at shallow to moderate depths (100-200') and CHIRP at larger depths a NSS Evo2 with M260 should give good performance under most conditions. I have seen very positive user experiences from NSS Evo2 with TM260, M260 should not perform that different.
That's quite a fascinating comment to say that the internal sounder circuit of the NSS Evo2 will "outperform the BSM-2 by far". Isn't it the same as the Sonar Hub black box? Simrad positions the BSM-2 as being a much superior, high performance sounder and prices it at nearly four times the cost.

Your technical expertise is evident from this and prior posts, just curious whether that comment is based on your experience with the units or something you know about the technology and design of these units. Maybe Simrad doesn't want to admit that the BSM-2/3 (which seem electronically identical) are underperforming products and will just make them fade away?
Old 02-22-2015, 04:05 AM
  #10  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Norway
Posts: 16,432
Likes: 0
Received 1,128 Likes on 918 Posts
Default

Note, I wrote with 1kW transducers. BSM-2 & 3 perform very well with 2 & 3kW transducers and actually with 600W as well. BSM-2 has improved significantly with 1kW transducers the last year especially in High CHIRP, but still have a way to go with 1kW Low CHIRP (I have no experience with Medium CHIRP 1kW transducers). But SonarHub is still outperforming BSM-2 & 3 with 1kW transducers.

I probably know more about the performance and technology of Navico CHIRP than anyone else outside Navico and probably except for a few guys in Navico engineering also inside Navico I have spent countless hours comparing, measuring and understanding CHIRP, I sometimes bring the oscilloscope to my boat to look at the transmitted signals and for every new software release I check the transmitted pulses for SonarHub and NSS Evo2 (I don't have BSM-2 at home, so for this all measurements are done in the boat). I've also had a look inside the units to better understand the technology.
Old 02-22-2015, 04:24 AM
  #11  
Closed Admiral's Club Member
THT sponsor
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 2,771
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Vidar is hands down the sonar / transducer god of Navico, I dub the "Depthmasterus"!
Old 02-22-2015, 04:26 AM
  #12  
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 2,219
Likes: 0
Received 297 Likes on 169 Posts
Default

Thanks for the reply. The improvement in the BSM-2 last year (in my case driving 1kW M265 CHIRP transducer) was quite apparent. I can understand how the BSM-2 might do better in low CHIRP with the bigger transducers but the high frequency elements in the larger 2kW and 3kW Airmar transducers are quite similar to the 1kW that I have in my boat. The major difference is on the low frequency side, where the 2 and 3kW units have bigger arrays of elements than the 1kW.

The one critical variable you cannot really isolate and test with your oscilliscope is the signal processing code that creates the on screen image. In the end, isn't what happens out on the water looking for fish and structure the real test? Just speaking from my own experience using 200Hz, the non-CHIRP Furuno DFF1 driving an M260 did a better job showing fish and detail in my typical 25-200 foot fishing depths than the BSM-2 with the PM265 in high CHIRP. Maybe that should not be possible in theory, but that is what I saw on the boat. I have 45+ years of saltwater fishing experience and have been using sounders back to the days of the flashers and am pretty good at tuning and reading screens.
Old 02-22-2015, 04:36 AM
  #13  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Norway
Posts: 16,432
Likes: 0
Received 1,128 Likes on 918 Posts
Default

I of course correlate what I see on the screen with my measurements. For 25-200' I get excellent performance using SonarHub with B175H-W and BSM-2 with B75H. I would not use my TM265LH for such depths because at these depths StructureScan will do the job for structure and B175H-W and B75H will outperform TM265LH for bait and fish.
Old 02-22-2015, 05:43 AM
  #14  
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 2,219
Likes: 0
Received 297 Likes on 169 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by abbor View Post
I of course correlate what I see on the screen with my measurements. For 25-200' I get excellent performance using SonarHub with B175H-W and BSM-2 with B75H. I would not use my TM265LH for such depths because at these depths StructureScan will do the job for structure and B175H-W and B75H will outperform TM265LH for bait and fish.
Not all of us have so many choices of transducer and sounder on our boats! In fact I am thinking very seriously of installing a B175H-W since after my new system is installed, I will have both a Furuno DFF1-UHD and the internal sounder on the TZT2 15. I could drive the B175H-W from the high frequency side of the internal sonar or possibly even set up a switching arrangement using one of the Airmar switch boxes.

Thanks for your comments, many of us greatly appreciate your expertise and willingness to share information.
Old 02-22-2015, 04:26 PM
  #15  
Admirals Club Admiral's Club Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 219
Received 16 Likes on 11 Posts
Default

What is the time frame on the TZT2 units coming to market?
Old 02-22-2015, 05:31 PM
  #16  
Admirals Club Admiral's Club Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 846
Received 61 Likes on 50 Posts
Default

April-May is what I was told at the MIBS Furuno booth,,,
Old 03-01-2015, 02:56 PM
  #17  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Coastal BC
Posts: 1,668
Likes: 0
Received 7 Likes on 7 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by lagarto View Post
April-May is what I was told at the MIBS Furuno booth,,,
I'm looking forward to hands-on tests with the TZT2-12. I was nearly settled on the NSS12 evo2, but this new Furuno could be better for me.

I expect I'll be able to get really good sonar performance from either the Simrad or the Furuno.

For me, the main draw of the NSS evo2 is 4G broadband radar, but Furuno has a good 24" dome (DRS4D) and the Furuno MFDs have actual ARPA built in. I think the ARPA might be more useful than any advantages the 4G might have at really close range.

Competition is great!
Old 03-01-2015, 03:54 PM
  #18  
Admirals Club Admiral's Club Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,102
Received 330 Likes on 189 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by yabbut View Post
I'm looking forward to hands-on tests with the TZT2-12. I was nearly settled on the NSS12 evo2, but this new Furuno could be better for me.

I expect I'll be able to get really good sonar performance from either the Simrad or the Furuno.

For me, the main draw of the NSS evo2 is 4G broadband radar, but Furuno has a good 24" dome (DRS4D) and the Furuno MFDs have actual ARPA built in. I think the ARPA might be more useful than any advantages the 4G might have at really close range.

Competition is great!
Just an FYI, if the TZT2 is the same as the TZT, you will need a separate power supply for the Furuno radar. It adds up to be $600-900 total more than 4G dome.... I prefer the Furuno, but it is important to note if you are on a budget. Also the TZT2 only has one Ethernet port, so you WILL need a external hub. If you stick with Furuno, it is $$$. If this is going in a center console and not a pilot house. I would recommend the Furuno hub.

I am waiting for them to hit the sheets, but I will purchase a TZT15.6" to run along side my TZT9"

Last edited by BadgerS; 03-01-2015 at 05:09 PM.
Old 03-01-2015, 05:03 PM
  #19  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Coastal BC
Posts: 1,668
Likes: 0
Received 7 Likes on 7 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by BadgerS View Post
Industry an FYI, if the TZT2 is the same as the TZT, you will need a separate power supply for the Furuno radar. It adds up to be $600-900 total more than 4G dome.... I prefer the Furuno, but it is important to note if you are on a budget. Also the TZT2 only has one Ethernet port, so you WILL need a external hub. If you stick with Furuno, it is $$$. If this is going in a center console and not a pilot house. I would recommend the Furuno hub.

I am waiting for them to hit the sheets, but I will purchase a TZT15.6" to run along side my TZT9"
Thanks for the heads up. I think the TZT2 needs the same radar power supply as the TZT. My budget is not huge, but I'll make adjustments to get the right hardware.

I have a 24' pilothouse, so I should be able to get away with a non-weatherproof hub.
Old 03-01-2015, 05:13 PM
  #20  
Admirals Club Admiral's Club Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,102
Received 330 Likes on 189 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by yabbut View Post
Thanks for the heads up. I think the TZT2 needs the same radar power supply as the TZT. My budget is not huge, but I'll make adjustments to get the right hardware.

I have a 24' pilothouse, so I should be able to get away with a non-weatherproof hub.
If you want to see a TZT install, you are welcome to come check out our boat.. Normally in Seattle, but right now in Port Townsend

TZT9
DFF1
TM260
PS-012
FA-150 AIS
PG500
Airmar GH2183
IFNM2K converter
GP32 GPS with GPS-17 Antenna
Lowrance Link-8 over NMEA2000
SH GX1200 over NMEA-0183
Yamaha Command Link Plus

All of that is tied together....

Which reminds me.. The TZT2 has NMEA 0183 built in while the TZT does not.. another added bonus!

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.