Topic: quadra beam transducer

[hoselrocket]

Is upgrading to the quad beam transducer worth it for the non SI models (788ci)?  I have a 997 on the bow with side imaging.  I am purchasing a 788 for the helm.  I normally fish shallow water (less than 20ft) Does anyone have some experience with this. 
Thanks

[sonar2000]

 Humminbird says:   Please note the transom mount quad beam transducer can be used for high speed readings in a 2D down looking sonar.  The quad beam transducer does not provide Side Imaging on the unit. The quad beam sonar coverage is not as much coverage as Side Imaging sonar, and the side imaging would thus be used in trolling applications over the quad beam for high speeds .  HMMMMMMMMM    At what speeds are you looking for in the helm mounted.    And then again the cost of the quad is not expensive so  it might be a good investment.  I guess it would depend a lot on what you want from the transducer.  chuck

[hoselrocket]

I will run from 10 to 50 mph, when i use the helm unit.  Maybe my question should be what is the benefit of quad beam?  Is it a wider coverage area?  And is it worth it in shallow water 5 to 10ft.

Thanks for any insight on this

[sonar2000]

You will probably see benefits in the above trolling speeds as it pertains to depth and bottom directly below.  since you dont have SI the shallow water will not be much coverage other than directly below the boat and maybe a little to each side.  It is a circle beam. It will work good at speed though for depth and bottom. hopefully George, or Harry or Greg (just to name several) will jump in and add to this.   chuck

[George]

hoselrocket

I have a QuadraBeam mounted on my Port side transom and a SideImaging on the Starboard side transom.  I like the QuadraBeam over 2D because it covers a wider area.  Before DownImaging I had a QuadraBeam on my trolling motor, I have switched it back to the SI transducer.

Is the QuadraBeam worth it, I thought so since it covers a wider area then 2D.  But it is something that you will need to determine on whether 2D is enough for you.  You might want to do a search for
"Jason Halfen Outdoors 2010 Humminbird-MinnKota Seminar Video" on this site.  It is a free video seminar, which has some information on the are covered beneath the boat.  It might give you the information you need to make a decision.

I like the QuadraBeam and would buy it again.  I have mine on a switch to go between SI and QuadraBeam.



George

[reddog]

I just ordered a quadra beam yesterday for my bow mount 787.  I figured it was cheap enough that I should try it.

[George]

Reddog

I think you will like it.  We will wait to see what you think.

George

[soretoe]

I have a quad beam on my trolling motor mounted unit. I find it useful for telling me what side of the boat the fish are on.  It does take a bit of getting used to because if yoiu are turning the trolling motor then one side looses "bottom" or a reference line. But like I said I can see fish on one side or the other.

[Uncle Fred]

Hello.  I'm a newbi to this forum. Am located in Webster, Ma.  Late last year I decided to get the 1197C.  Experimented a lot with the SI and 2D, split screens and different colors.  Then decided
to add the Quadrabeam.  I have both transducers mounted on the trolling motor and switch from one to the other.  The SI is only good going straight on and in high speed - about 3mph.  I find it useless beyond the 100 foot (one side) range due to the bottom terrain.  Didn't get too much time
on the water with it as the 200 Optimax died while idling at the ramp one day at the beginning of November.  Got into the 'HULLTRUTH' forum for help.  By the time I went thru a bunch of suggestions
and the time it took to get a repair manual (not the $100 one from Merc) it was getting rather cold
up here.  I did find foreign matter in the grey hose section of the gas line and some got into the first
LP fuel pump.  When all was replaced, repaired and ready for testing a bad snowstorm was due in
the following day.  I pickled the boat for the winter.  Ice out was just the other day with the
torrential rains we had for 3 days.  Now I'm getting anxious to find out if it'll fire off.  In the meantime
in comes the info on down imaging.  Am waiting on info on how to download it.  Love the forum so far.
Uncle Fred

[sonar2000]

Depth plays a big part in the distance you want to select for the side to side.  and the detail you want as the total distance is only the screen width.  Normally we find that 75 feet is a good side to side for depth 50 feet or less.  Forward speed is good at 1.5 to 3 mph for an average although it might work higher.  what is the average lake depth for your scans.  chuck

[Uncle Fred]

Average depth for Lake Chargoggagoggmanchaugagoggchaubunagungamaugg (FACT!!)  is
roughly 15 feet.  Has a lot of ridges and valleys, some areas of a few acres almost flat at 25'.
Tough lake to find bass consistently.  As scuba divers my son and I spent quite a bit of time
down there.  Largemouth are not friendly whereas smallmouth are.  Feed one a crawfish and
you'll have a dozen following you.  Won't take it from your hand but release one and it don't get
6".  Deepest hole is 50'.  My son who stands 5-10 wanted to see how deep the fine silt was down
there.  He positioned himself straight up, pointed his 16" fins straight down and  sunk himself up
to his shoulders and never hit a hard bottom.  Needless to say getting any closer than 5' stirs
that stuff up.  Like sneezing in a big bowl of talcom powder.  :^))   
Back to the point, I recieved my "HOW TO" do the download for the DOWN IMAGING today. 
That is going to be interesting.   Looking forward to using it. 

[sonar2000]

you guys should be fine at those depths.  with the silty bottom you will get a very big soft display but with your setting you will get fantastic scans.  give us some screen shots of the SI and the DI.  Chuck