Guests - If You want access to member only forums on HSO. You will gain access only when you sign-in or Sign-Up on HotSpotOutdoors.

It's easy - LOOK UPPER right menu.

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
mtreno

reel bottom chip

6 posts in this topic

where do i get it? is there still a waiting list? any reports on proformance. hope i can find one fast for the big pond -

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

nevermind i just missed it when i was lookin the other night. must of had to many adult pops before i checked good old fishing minnesota.com...... still would like to know how poeple are liking the maps out on the water. cant wait to see it this weekend on mille lacs - no more running into spirit island at 1am for me!
p.s. - sure is funny how much time i spend talking to myself on this site!

[This message has been edited by mtreno (edited 07-01-2003).]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Mtreno,

I purchased the MMC chip with 1' contours of Mlacs, Leech, Gull and WhBear on opening weekend.

Overall, I think the map is terrific. The idea of having a paperless map is a big plus. I especially like the fact that I can run my cursor crosshairs to a particular spot and punch in a waypoint and go. This is extremely nice when locating tips of flats or small humps in the lake. The accuracy is pretty good, although I have found some areas to be slightly off.

The key thing to know about the chip is that it only zooms down to .33mile per screen by default. To zoom down further, you must download a packet(s), via MMC reader, from Lowrance.

The necessary packets are version 2.5 and 2.9. Check your unit to see the current version installed. If your unit idicates any version lower than 2.5, you must install 2.5 first, then 2.9. You MUST load packets in succession, or else you will experience problems with the overall settings on your lowrance!

After these packets are installed onto your lowrance, you will have the capabilities to "resize" your split screen window (sonar/gps). The smaller you make your gps screen, in comparison to the sonar, will allow you to zoom down to a .08mile/screen setting. This is the closest you can zoom in when using the Reelbottom MMC map. It does not allow you to zoom down to .05mile/screen like your lowrance unit will achieve, when not using this map.

The chip is pricey, but if you fish these lakes alot, they are highly worth the $199 pricetag.

[This message has been edited by Rick (edited 07-02-2003).]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For those who would like an answer to mtreno's question, you can get all the Reelbottom, ProMap Series and LakeMaster maps (CD-Rom, MMC Chips, & Teslin Paper maps) at:

Minnesota-Lake-Maps.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

fathead -
thanks for the info. here is the deal. i am about as good at using a computer as my dog is (by the way she turned 1 yr old today). in other words i am going to need help doing this. where do i look to see if my unit is 2.5? how do i download this new info to my x-19? is this thru the mmc chip? how do i save info on one of these chips? i have a blank chip and hopefully my reel bottom chip is sitting at home waiting for me. could you or anybody for that matter walk me thru how i get this done?

matttreno@hotmail.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

mtreno- I have the reel bottom chip as well and will say that it has been very nice to have for Mille Lacs. At 200 bucks it is well worth the money if you fish Mille Lacs much. The contours are off a little bit in many places(may be as much as a few hundred feet), but still a huge help. Also the depths are almost always 2-4 feet off somtimes more, but I don't really use it for that. It is excellent at finding sharp breaklines and points and curves. Now if those walleye would just bite!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0



  • Posts

    •     I believe you said it was "libertarian" drivel, actually, so you dismissed it out of hand...          
    •   You posted about neither.     But if you would read the article, my commentary and TJ's commentary you would know that's not really what the article is about.     You have to be kidding, right? Just about everyone who has an opinion on politics at all is this sort of person. Do you look at social media at all?
    •     Ok, now getting back to whether Trump will win the War on Drugs, do you think he will take any steps at all to decriminalize drugs, such as reclassifying marijuana, and recognizing state laws and programs designed to move towards the decriminalization of drugs?   Or do you think he will take steps to protect vested interests, such as prisons and the pharmaceutical. industry?   Just going off his rhetoric and his choice for a drug czar, I'm guessing he much prefers the latter, and will end up spending a bunch of taxpayer's money, and actually lose ground by continuing on with the brute force/criminalization approach.        
    • Because at the time, I don't have anything better to do.   I posted about the article, and you wanted to talk about the topic.  I posted about the topic and you want to discuss the article.    Which is it?     I support a particular candidate because their positions, taken as a whole, are preferable to me as compared to the other candidate(s).   In a few years I get to do it over.     I don't think there are really that many ardent "rah rah for my party" type folks out there, in spite of what we see on TV, or the occasional people we meet.     So the article is basically drivel, as I said before, based on a false premise.   
    • Borch I just signed up Ryan, Morgan, and me but I only see my name listed in the summary. Do my kids not show up because they don't have hso usernames?  Or did I not enter it right?     Please let me know how to fix it and I'll do so.  Thanks!
    •   Because I think self reflection is good for all of us from time to time.   If you don't wan't to discuss this article, why do you persist in posting here?           No one is disputing that at all. The premise of the author's article is in regards to the hypocrisy of then justifying everything your chosen candidate or party does blindly while vilifying the other candidates or party. It's the "all in" sports like mentality that is being discussed here.  
    • There is a really excellent book called "The Righteous Mind" that approaches this tribalist mindset from an evolutionary psychology standpoint. The author, Jonathan Haidt, does a remarkable job of unpacking why people persist in truly irrational defense of the indefensible - when it's their team doing the stupid stuff. I highly highly highly recommend it to anyone who is interested in lessening the hyperpartisan idiocy we have today.

      The trouble is that the closed-off mindset that lends itself to reflexive support for Obama/Hillary/Trump/whomever also tends to preclude any serious engagement in self-examination that the book is designed to provoke. Really good read, though.
    •   I get what your saying here but I think what Dave is talking about is the willingness of some to blindly follow, without question, their party or candidate. I saw this first hand during the primary with some of my own relatives, for example. I had a SIL who was a huge Bernie backer. The things she said about Hillary were worse than anything said here. As far as she was concerned, Hillary should be tarred and feathered and ran out on a rail. Then Bernie loses the nomination. She then became Hillary's biggest defender. Everything she said about her during the primary was instantly washed away. Even her own husband called her out. She wasn't simply voting for her because she found Trump worse. That's understandable. She defended or at least tried to deflect the issues with Hillary when just a few months prior, she said things that would make even Cooter or Bill say, "man you're harsh on her."   I don't think this is a new phenomenon. I also don't think it's widespread. Like everything else, access to more and diverse information just makes it possible to hear more about it than before. I think human nature causes people to internalize candidates and/.or elected officials. It's a "if you're critical of my candidate, you're critical of me," kind of thinking.   I don't fault anyone for voting for a candidate that one feels best represents their line of thinking. Or even defending their candidate from detractors. I don't think that is what Dave is talking about here. It's also the flipping of political opinions just because the candidate you voted for or support is supporting certain positions. For example, many conservatives opposed BHO's stimulus, including myself. It didn't work  as promised and we just added more on to the debt. So on the campaign trail, Trump also spoke of a stimulus plan that was even more expensive than BHO's and  those same people not only supported it but are justifying it. In summary, one can vote for a candidate without defending everything that person does        
    •  Come on.   The world, life is a bit more complicated then that.          Quit passing the blame. Your whole thesis is on choice and owning it.   Let me guess, you hate big banking also since they made it easy to refinance and purchase.   It just proves that general society is incapable of making the right decisions as a whole.   Sorry, you go down with the ship.    
  • Our Sponsors