Looking for fish???

[Avid Angler]

I always hear the big shots talking about driving around looking for fish with their depth finders. My current depth finder does not let me drive more than 3 mph and still see fish. I am hoping to get a new depth finder by next spring. I am looking at spending the cash for a quality unit. I am leaning towards the Hummingbird units, but might go the Lowrance way. With the new units out there, how fast can a guy drive and still see fish and which products work well?

Avid

[Esox_Magnum]

My HDS still reads bottom and will mark schools of fish at 42.

[CAMAN]

I always hear the big shots talking about driving around looking for fish with their depth finders. My current depth finder does not let me drive more than 3 mph and still see fish. I am hoping to get a new depth finder by next spring. I am looking at spending the cash for a quality unit. I am leaning towards the Hummingbird units, but might go the Lowrance way. With the new units out there, how fast can a guy drive and still see fish and which products work well?

Avid

Your transducer is too high.

[jtroop]

I happen to have a Humminbird 898. I keep it under 5mph if I want to see any detail. Any faster and the "fish" get so narrow that I can't see what I'm looking for. I can't really see 3 or 4 stacked/grouped fish (for instance).

[Avid Angler]

I will try lowering it, but I still question accuracy when going so fast. I would like to be able to see stuff well at least 10mph.

[BobT]

I've had a hard time believing you can actually see fish on a graph at most any speed in excess of about 5mph. Think about it. Unless it is a whale that can remain under the sonar for more than a couple ms, all you'll see from an average freshwater fish is a dot on the screen. At higher speeds, the time the fish spends in the cone of the sonar is so small that it isn't even likely to appear on screen other than a small dot or smudge at best. It just doesn't seem feasible to me.