Thread: Does it even pay

to purchase a fish/depth finder when the deepest water I fish is 10 - 15 feet?

I talked to a guy at Cabelas yesterday and he explained to me that in order for a sonar to work properly, it must have at least 20 feet of water.

He doesn't know what he's talking about. Even 10-15 ft waters have drop off's and structure that inexpensive finders will show. A wide beam would be best though.

Originally Posted by Skinny1

to purchase a fish/depth finder when the deepest water I fish is 10 - 15 feet?
I talked to a guy at Cabelas yesterday and he explained to me that in order for a sonar to work properly, it must have at least 20 feet of water.

I understand your quandry on this, but answer me this ....

do you know where every piece of cover is, in the waters you fish ??
do you know where every dip and hump is, in the changing contours of those 10-15ft depths ??
do you know where every stump is, or does the water level never change ??

A Sonar unit is more of a "depth" finding machine ... designed to also show structure/cover ... and is "capable" of also showing fish. In some instances, the change in depth, even if it's only a foot or two, makes all the difference in the world. It definitely can be a plus to have, when navigating unfamiliar waters ... or even unfamiliar areas of your home waters.

The Cabelas guy isn't much of a salesman maybe they need to send him to the stock room to work. He's obviously not an angler, either, or he's very limited in his knowledge of sonars.
While it may be true that a 20deg cone angle will only show a 5ft circle of bottom in 15ft of water ... it WILL show the bottom depth, and anything that enters into the cone's influence. There are also units that are capable of throwing out a 60deg cone angle signal, and these would show a 15ft circle of bottom in 15ft of water (and anything within the 60deg cone).
I wouldn't expect a unit to show me fish, only bottom contour and cover. But, since I can't see underwater, while sitting in the boat ... I let my depth finder be my eyes. So, if I was faced with only 10-15ft depths of water ... I'd still opt to have a depth finder unit, even if it was a low end unit. I just wouldn't expect it to "find fish" for me ... just show me the depth, bottom contour/structure, and cover. I'll use my bait as a "fish finder"

... cp

"Amen" Pappy.

I bought an Side Imaging unit and it shows everything, you can spot a bream bed 50 feet from the boat in 2' of water. and see the fish in the bed. It will GPS mark it and you can troll right to it.

well said pappy

I mark fish on mine all the time. Most of the time over 6 feet deep. Mark a lot from 8 on down. That dunder head don't know what he is talking about at Cabelas. Get the best unit you can afford and spend some time learning how to use it. You won't be sorry. CF

I'm looking at the Hummindird 565 or the Humminbird Piranha 240.

Any experience with these?

Originally Posted by Skinny1

I'm looking at the Hummindird 565 or the Humminbird Piranha 240.

Any experience with these?

I am looking at both of these too. The lake I fish is less than 10 feet deep over the majority of its humble 90 acres. But she is full of shellcrackers:D

After reading Pappys response and thinkin about it for a few, I am leaning toward the Piranha
"High resolution 8-level grayscale 240V x 160H LCD display. Tri-Beam sonar gives 90° of total coverage with superior bottom detail. Shows fish below as solid symbols, those around as hollow. 1600 watts PTP power. 800' depth. "\

"Highest resolution 640 vertical pixel x 320H ultra high contrast 5" LCD with 12 level grayscale for maximum image clarity and target separation. DualBeam Sonar with precision 20 degree single beam for better bottom detail and wide 60 degree beam for fish ID. 2000 watt peak-to-peak power output. Reliable performance from shallow to 800 ft."

...68, What Brand Unit Are You Using? Im Planning On Buying One, Like In A Day Or Two. Would Love To Have One With Side Imaging, But I Know It's Gonna Cost More'n I Wanna Spend. Lookin At The Pirahnamax 240 Right Now, Tho.