Pond Boss Forums INTRO Questions & Observations Fish finder advice- Cheap but decent

So I'm looking at getting a fish finder for the boat (14' aluminum jon boat).
I've been looking for a while and hummingbird which used to be a great brand has not been getting the best review lately.
So I'm leaning towards a Garmin.
Any other suggestions?
I would love to have built in surface temp, but not necessary.
BPS has the Garmin 140 for $120us, amazon $103 w/free shipping. After looking for a while this seems to be a decent deal, good size screen and good reviews.

Any one own a Garmin 140?

Is a color fish finder worth the extra cash or just a gimick?

Thanks,

Matt

No experience with the Garmin 140, but for your needs I doubt you need a color display. B&W will work fine... I have always used Humminbirds and have loved them, but the multiple review feature of sites like BPS and Cabela's often doesn't lie.

I don't know what their prices are like, but Lowrance has been in the fish finder business for quite a long time. I've got a Hummingbird that's a few years old - 3D with side scan and it really works great!

Aren't those so cool. I used one last year on a research project. We were pulling a net along the bottom of the stream and had to see if there was anything we would get hung up on.

if you can afford side-imaging, it's worth it but otherwise...here's what I posted in another thread (my experiences and my opinions - your mileage may vary)

Seriously, fishfinders - even really good ones - don't show much of anything in shallow water. I've got a really nice Hummingbird that I rigged to be portable so I can switch it between different boats we keep at different ponds but, I hardly ever take it out any more because they are all 20' deep (or less) at the deepest part. My own pond is barely 10' deep in the 2 creek channels.

At a depth of 10', even a really expensive sonar is going to show you a circle, straight down, about the size of a dinner plate. You get good, accurate info on depth and water temp and sometimes you get lucky and see a stump or a submerged log if (BIG IF) you learn how to read the thing.

Sonar is not like a TV - you see stuff but half of what you "see" isn't really there once you understand how it works and how to read it. You might see an actual real fish on your screen some day but, don't bet on it.

After a couple of years of practicing with mine, I'm pretty good at reading the soft-bottom or hard-bottom info and figuring out what is really a stump or a rock. Still, just seeing the depths change gives you a lot of info about how to fish a spot if you combine that with some experience about how those fish are likely to relate to those features depending upon species, habitat, forage base, seasonal and weather patterns, shoe size, favorite flavor of ice cream, etc.

Seriously, if you buy any fishfinder for fishing waters less than 50' deep, you are probably wasting your money to get anything more than a depth finder and a water temp readout. No need to even worry about screen size or color or anything like that.

What I've discovered is that once you've done a good job scanning a pond to find the channels, humps, holes, etc. then, you're done. It's not going to change much for many years.

Hope this helps.

Where the side scan helped the most was when I was fishing in a lake for BG that were schooling in deeper water (8' down in 10'-12' deep water). I could sit in 6' water, see the school move 20'-30' out to the side of the boat, cast to them with a slip bobber rig and get into 'em.

For fishing water under 30' or so, get a transducer with a wider down view. Some lakes here are <30' at max depth.

I've only used fish finders in lake michigan before, they make pretty pictures, and we could watch the down riggers as we dropped them down, but not sure they ever helped us catch fish.
Then again this was 20 years ago and we had some of the first non-paper fish finders (boy the fumes from those paper ones could make me sick in a confined cabin).
What I'm really looking for in this case is just bottom mapping sonar.
I want to know where the holes and channels are, I'm not expecting to use the thing to find the fish as much as bottom contours and structure.
So it sounds like my expectations are reasonable.

I will look into the side scan, but I'm not sure about pricing and we have to remember it is going on a $500 boat, so I shouldn't get too carried away.

Thanks for the info.

Matt

Cheapest side scan sonar is about $900 as I recall. I have the Humminbird 757c. I really like the GPS and the maps you can get by using a Navionics software upgrade. It can be foggy and/or dark and as long as I don't hit another boat or something floating, I can find my way home. The quadrabeam capability of the transducer is much improved over older technology. Granted, when fishing shallow water for bass, its about worthless but I do a lot of trolling for stripers, trout and walleye. That is when its value is felt.

Mu buddy uses the Humminbird 565 and likes it. Its easy for me to use because many of the functions and menus are the same as mine.

I've done some more looking and I think I will pull the trigger on the Garmin 140.
It has surface temp, dual beam, 45 or 15 degree, (not side scan).
Gets good reviews, except for the trolling motor transducer mount (cable tie it under the trolling motor).
The 140 also gets decent marks for shallow water capability.
I looked at some lowrance's and found out why they weren't on my radar, cheapest unit was $200 and the next cheapest was $350.

Any more comments are welcome, as I don't plan on ordering this for a few more days. I was fairly well decided before today and after more research I think the Garmin 140 will be the winner.

I really want to see what the bottom looks like at the Sportsman club, it's deep and drops off quick (over 6'-8' deep less than 10' from shore almost every where.

My biggest suprise while using one was up in Wi. The bottom was a consistent 30' and the next time I looked it was 60'. I just had to turn around and see what I missed. There must have been a sheer rock wall down there, it dropped 30' in roughly a boat length, and it was like that for about a quarter mile (the sheer face).

Raystown Lake in PA is cool to run a high quality fish finder on. You can actually see the homes, chimneys and stuff 80 to 180 feet below the surface. They flooded several small towns when they built the lake. Some pretty good diving I've heard, but that isn't my thing...

You should check out the Eagle Fishmark 320. It costs about $150 and is a better depth finder than the Garmin in my opinion. I also have a Garmin and I like the Eagle better. It is easy to use and very accurate. Just a thought.