Side scan or not

[tinkertoy]

Looking to buy a new Gps- fishfinder is the side scan worth the extra $$. looking at a H bird helix 5 for $289.00. anything with sidescan is over 300 bucks more. I have never used side scan, seems to make sence, any info would be great. thanks

[BtweenShots]

My only opinion on the subject is no, that is unless your fishing near shore or shallows. I have a Helix with down imaging and use that perchin' . Trolling seems a not needed item in the long run. I have never used the gps/ff combo either I have to keep them separate, but that's just me. If it is a must to have gps/ff and going with the DI I would go with the 7 it has as nicer screen size when splitting screens.

Gene

[Hoytman86]

My understanding of the sidescan is that it doesn't work well in the shallow water on the western end of the lake. We had it on the old boat but rarely ever used it. I'd imagine it'd be great for finding perch schools in the deeper water but it's not a necessity by any means.

[Ltrain]

I find sidescan to be a very valuable tool when locating structure on inland lakes. If you are primarily fishing lake Erie then you probably won't be using it much, I do use downscan on Erie though.

[freddie]

My understanding of the sidescan is that it doesn't work well in the shallow water on the western end of the lake. We had it on the old boat but rarely ever used it. I'd imagine it'd be great for finding perch schools in the deeper water but it's not a necessity by any means.

I've always heard the opposite. Side scan is helpful, but not when you're typically in 25+ foot of water. Shallow water, areas with structure or reefs is where it's helpful. It's hard to see fish marks on side scan in 30 some feet of water IMO. Downscan is a different story though.

Have side scan on my personal boat (got a great deal at the time) but don't use it on Erie.

[Hoytman86]

The argument that I heard was that the sidescan can only do out to the side of the boat as far as it can go down. It makes sense to me. I've also seen a lot of the opposite after searching for reviews. Some people love it for shallow water. I guess the best way of saying it is that it may be just as effective, just not as efficient in shallow water because you're convering a narrower path than you are in deep water.

I'm no expert on the technology and am about 3 years removed from researching for my own install. I'm just relaying the advice I got from members of this forum at the time. The consensus at that time was that it wasn't a necessity for fishing Erie.

[Eriegardless]

I've contemplated this same question. I already have my new units just haven't installed them yet. I do have the side scan transom mount transducer but thinking of scrapping it for a chirp thru hull. Definitely want the thru hull for performance while running. If I go that route it eliminates the need to drill holes and clutter up the transom.

Interested in this conversation...

[wakina]

here is a Google search. I found this one from Humminbird very interesting ( http://www.humminbird.com/Category/T.../Side-Imaging/). Looks like it is supposed to be effective up to 240 ft on either side of the transducer.

https://www.google.com/search?source...MZw&gws_rd=ssl

[dunn782]

I have a Lowrance HDS with side scan and I find it only marginally useful on Erie. Part of it is I'm not confident in interpreting what I see. I'm completely confident in the regular sonar. In theory I should be able to identify fish off to the sides while trolling but since I seldom use it I'm not too good with it. The second reason is I don't spend a lot of time structure fishing in Erie. Maybe in the spring around the reefs. Maybe a little while smallmouth fishing. I do use it more on inland lakes. However giving it to do over I would still buy the side scan feature.