Doonbuggy Posted March 25, 2004 Share Posted March 25, 2004 When you're looking at fishfinders do you want to look at the pixels, say 480 x 480 or is peak to peak power more important.As examples, the Eagle 480 is 480x480 for pixels with 1,500 watts of power while the Garmin 240 is 240x240 with 4,000 watts.Also, can someone confirm that Lowrance bought Eagle?Thanks for the input.DB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 irvingdog Posted March 25, 2004 Share Posted March 25, 2004 Pixels make the monitor pretty, and have so very little to do with the locators quality that eventually, the manufacturers quest for 1000x1000 screens will create an educated consumer like you. This consumer will do their homework and realize that peak to peak power and frequency is what seperates hype from function. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 can it be luck? Posted March 25, 2004 Share Posted March 25, 2004 I'm no expert on fishing electronics, but I love my Garmin 240. It has fine resolution, sensitivity, and cheap! I never owned any of the more expensive fish finders that are out there, I'm sure they're great. But I'll stick with the 240. When I'm out in the boat fishing, I'll tell my buddys, "Get ready we're comeing over fish." Then BANG! Fish on! Then I usually say, "See, I told you the Garmin doesn't lie!" I made "believers" out of more than one of them. So the Garmin is actually "better" than the Eagle? ------------------http://groups.msn.com/canitbeluck [This message has been edited by can it be luck? (edited 03-24-2004).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 PerchJerker Posted March 25, 2004 Share Posted March 25, 2004 I think the rule of thumb is the more pixels the better, so you can see more detail on the screen, and that the power ratings are basically worthless because what really matters is the sensitivity of the receiver (transducer).The only time a high power rating is needed is with a narrow beam transducer in very deep water, like well over 100 feet deep.Hope this helps. Good luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 Surface Tension Posted March 25, 2004 Share Posted March 25, 2004 Actually the Garmin 240 is 3200 watts. High pixel count gives you better resolution and higher detail. In general higher watts will penetrate deeper water. Either unit would do just fine for the walleye guys. If you fish the Great lakes consider the Eagle Seafinder 480 DF with 4000 watts and dual frequency 200/50 kHz. Other considerations are the sounders features. Gray scale levels, screen size, cone angle degrees, zoom levels, fish track, bottom lock, grayline and like Arnold would say these types of things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0 Seabass77 Posted March 25, 2004 Share Posted March 25, 2004 If you are a walleye fisherman, get something with lots of power. For most other applications, you just need something sufficient to pick up structure and baitfish. I have a Garmin 240 and I like it alot. There cheap now too at $199 new. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Question
Doonbuggy
When you're looking at fishfinders do you want to look at the pixels, say 480 x 480 or is peak to peak power more important.
As examples, the Eagle 480 is 480x480 for pixels with 1,500 watts of power while the Garmin 240 is 240x240 with 4,000 watts.
Also, can someone confirm that Lowrance bought Eagle?
Thanks for the input.
DB
Link to comment
Share on other sites
5 answers to this question
Recommended Posts