Who is running just down imaging? I am coming from a rig that had both SI and DI. I am debating if the DI is worth the extra $100 for the unit that will be used in the canoe and up in the bow of the bigger boat.
I wasn’t as impressed with the DI as I was with the SI but that doesn’t mean it isn’t a valuable tool.
Wade, I found the down imaging works the best in places where traditional 2D doesn’t work well. Turbulence behind wingdams, extremely stirred up water,… When I don’t get a clear image in 2D, the down imaging normally comes through. Also, if I’m looking close at structure, it is a great tool to compare images and see what is really there. As for in the canoe…maybe a slight over kill on your needs. But as for your unit on the bow of your main rig, I would!
I run an 858 DI on the bow and and 898 on the console. Love them both. I feel the clarity of DI over 2D is amazing. Also have compared the DI view from the 858 with the DI view from the 898 on the console and the 858 gives a better DI image. This could be due to the transducer being a dedicated DI transducer on the 858 and the 898 using the SI transducer to get the DI view.
Quote:
Wade, I found the down imaging works the best in places where traditional 2D doesn’t work well. Turbulence behind wingdams, extremely stirred up water,… When I don’t get a clear image in 2D, the down imaging normally comes through.
X2
x3, love di 
I use DI more than I do 2d sonar or SI..
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
