3 Attachment(s)
Why I use Side, Down, and 2d imaging
Here are a few images from my last couple of trips.
1. Is of some bridge pilings where I normally find fish hiding under the cross member connecting the 2 pillars. Usually they show up great on side image. Yesterday morning was cloudy and as I idled past the pilings here is what I seen. Only a couple of fish under the cross beam, but look how many fish show up directly under the boat that I would have missed without down imaging.
2. Here is a brushpile I found using 2d. I was in a cove looking at brush. I decided to leave the cove, turned the boat and accelerated. On my unit when running I use 2d and mapping. As I accelerated to around 25 mph I looked at my depth finder and seen what I thought was a brushpile. Sure enough it was a big one. Here is what it looked like using down imaging. I have found brush on long points while running 30mph. I always use 2d and mapping w BBG on running.
3. Is a stump on the end of a point. The stump is left from when the lake was created in the early 1950's, almost 70 years ago. Really nice detailed shot directly under the boat that didn't show up on side imaging and not well defined on 2d.
I love side imaging and find lots of brush and fish with it but your missing out if you don't use down imaging and 2d as well.Attachment 384549Attachment 384550Attachment 384551
Sent from my SM-A505U using Tapatalk
