Now that you know how I got the screenshots, here are examples of Lowrance’s new networkable Broadband Sonar as seen on the HD (hard drive) version of a GlobalMap 9200C. (The 9300c HD, oddly, doesn’t seem to be listed as a current product?) The full 800x600 screen above gives you some sense of the scene as we exited Miami looking for deep water and fish. (Yes, the Lowrance radar was running, but possibly wasn’t tuned, and certainly looked a lot better in the harbor at slower speeds.) What you can’t see is the dinky transducer (this one, I think) that was hung on the stern of the 330 World Cat demo boat (with, yeeha, twin 300 hp Suzukis). Remember that the LBS premise is amazing performance with only 250W of peak-to-peak power, “a whisper instead of a shout” as Navico likes to say.
Lowrance’s Broadband Sonar was announced back in July, but—judging from the chatter on forums like BassBoat Central, BassPro Shops, and the Hull Truth—it’s just now getting to market. So there aren’t yet many consumer reports about its performance yet, but, man-o-man, the folks at Lowrance and mother company Navico are some excited about it. At METS CEO Jens-Thomas Pietralla called it “a fine piece of disruptive technology,” by which I think he meant that it has the combined performance and value to upset the whole world of fishfinding. His claim echoed (so to speak) an excited Lowrance rep I spoken with at the Fort Lauderdale Show.
Now online along with my PMY column about George Wallner, owner of Electra, is a write up of Interphase’s neat black box SE-200B FLS (forward looking sonar). The two related as Wallner, like me, is a fan of FLS, despite its limitations, and had a series of Interphase models on his former yacht Tumblehome. An SE-200 could have integrated nicely into Electra’s two helm system, but Wallner chose a Color Twinscope instead, feeling that a stand-alone unit would be less distracting to use, which usually happens to be when he’s maneuvering in thin waters. Click here for pictures and details of Electra’s systems that couldn’t fit in the PMY article. Today, it was announced that the SE-200 made the DAME awards short list, one of 34 products selected from 138 entered. I don’t even know what some of the electronics category entries are! But I’ll be at METS to find out, assuming I get through the FLIBS mad house, which starts for me in one hour. As you can see from the press schedule and show list, I’m going to be a busy boy.
If you check the bigger image, you’ll see the FM band button, a welcome first for a fixed VHF radio. But maybe better yet, I think, is the Lowrance style NMEA 2000 plug on the back.
I had a long phone interview with Garmin this morning and was mucho pleased to learn that the limited NMEA 2000 support in the 4 and 5000 series is only temporary. Garmin’s Marine Sales Manager Greg DeVries explained that the reason they took the approach they did—i.e. N2K engines only, as seen in the (simulated) screen above and its alternate—is that they’d “still be in development” if they hadn’t. He promised that “Going forward, we're absolutely going to embrace full NMEA 2000. It will just be a software upgrade for existing customers.” That makes what I first heard sit a whole lot better!
I got the test Garmin 545s and a new Raymarine A60 installed on Gizmo and took a test run around my local Lake Megunticook. I don’t think Navionics, Garmin, or any one else has electronic charts for this particular lake—or many lakes in Maine for that matter—so the plotter functions were pretty pointless. But I did get a taste of both their dual-frequency fishfinders. For starters I was rather shocked that neither seemed to interfere with the other, even when both were set to the same frequency, and even though the transducers are about 6” apart on the transom. They simultaneously held onto the bottom even at 20 knots too. Is this an aspect of the digital signal processing both claim to use?
Garmin wouldn’t let me photograph this in Miami—something about a patent application—but fishermen must be discovering it around the country right now. This screen shows the 3D underwater view, available only when you have a g2 Vision chart card in the slot. Plus, if you turn it on, every few seconds the active sonar image is overlaid on the 3D, as shown above. I did this in simulation mode but will try it on the water next week. Right now I’m in New York City to see my sweet daughter graduate Columbia Journalism School this afternoon. Proud papa! Oh yeah, Vision cards also let you see a more ‘traditional’ 2D bathy fishing chart, another thing Garmin hasn’t had time to advertise much:
It seems a bit unusual that the folks at Raymarine just announced a new A60 plotter/fishfinder that they didn’t mention at the Miami Boat Show, but I imagine they’re hustling to meet the Garmin juggernaut. After checking out the A60’s specs, and manuals (where I snipped the diagram below), I’d say it’s a worthy competitor to, say, the Garmin 545s. You get a slightly bigger display, 5.7” over 5”, a killer digital fishfinder, and Ray’s C/E-series soft key interface made even simpler as it’s stripped of radar, AIS, wind, and other elements the hardware doesn’t support. The A60 comes with a Navionics Silver card covering all U.S. waters in almost complete detail, plus you can use Gold or HotMaps fresh water cards. The Garmin, of course, has BlueCharts built in, plus you can get g2 Vision cards with hi res photos and 3D, even add XM weather, but is a 5” screen big enough for that sort of use? (Though note that the 545 sports high pixel density, 480 x 640 versus the A60’s 320 x 240.) At any rate, there’s already a discussion going at The Hull Truth comparing the Garmin with Raymarine’s A65, the similar 6.5” model that preceded this new one (at a significantly higher price). But, watch out, I think FlipFlop425’s post is wrong about the 545s having a digital fishfinder. (And, by the way, are any of the new Garmins shipping yet?)
PS 4/18: Yipe, I made mistakes above! It turns out that the internal fishfinder in the Garmin 545s does use digital signal processing, plus you can use its CANet port to connect to an up-to-2kW GSD 22 module. Also, it and the other smaller new Garmins are now shipping (with the 4000 and 5000 series soon to follow). Apologies to FlipFlop425 and also to Garmin’s media guy (whose Blackberry jukeboxed when it started working again early this morning!).
If you make wireless sensors so tough they can be dragged around attached to trawler nets, a good way to market that quality is to have brawny fishermen chuck them as far as possible. That’s just what Simrad does every year in Norway, and apparently it’s so much fun that they’ve introduced the competition to the U.S. (above). It’s pretty amazing what the whole Catch Monitoring system can do—showing a skipper how his gear is setting, what temp water it’s in and when it touches bottom, and how many fish are in it. Makes you wonder what this technology could do on the yachting side? But mind you that this is Simrad the commercial fishing company, not the spun-off Simrad Yachting, which is now under the Navico corporate umbrella.
I’m guessing that title got your attention? You see I’m trying to compare a Furuno FCV-620 fishfinder with the Raymarine DS500X which is already installed on Gizmo (and which the idiot thieves failed to strip off). Airmar kindly made me a patch cord so that the same transducer works with both machines (and the Navman 8120 I’m also testing). I can’t run them simultaneously (the DS500X is locked up in above photo), but can switch the transducer quickly. You can see in the bigger picture how noise-free both units are, apparently thanks to Digital Signal Processing, and note that both are in full auto mode. What I’m having a hard time determining is if one or the other is actually better at finding fish. So far the Raymarine IDs more fish on screen, but I suspect that it is being ‘optimistic’. It’s hard to get trained fish for this purpose, which is why someone suggested that a few ping pong balls held underwater with panty hose and a rock could simulate fish bladders. I’m not sure I’ll find time to try that, but would appreciate other suggestions on how to compare the units.
In the meantime, the difference in interfaces is much more obvious and quantifiable. I quite like the 620’s knobs for controlling manual gain and screen mode (below, bigger here), a much more tedious process on the DS500X. Knobs, as noted yesterday, are old fashioned, but they sure can be useful.
