03-19-2004, 07:54 PM
wiperhunter2,
I have an older BottomLine. My one complaint about it is the cone width. I feel that it is too narrow for the lakes in this area. I fished with it in a lot of different lakes around here, and therefore lots of different depths, and I always felt that it would have been better to have a wider cone. When in more shallow water, say 40 feet or less, the area being sampled is quite small so fish would have to be exactly under the transducer to be seen. What that really means is that your fish finder is really only reporting the distance to the bottom of the pond and rarely gives you an accurate idea about how many fish you are over, especaily if the fish are anywhere near the surface. The more shallow the water, the more true this is. So you have to ask yourself what kind of fishing do you do the most. I think a narrow cone would be useful in only the deepest of lakes, like Lake Powell and Flaming Gorge. If it were me, and I had to choose a single cone width, I would choose a wide cone width over the narrow width. As was mentioned, which cone width you need will help determine which frequncy is best to get. Also, a wide cone width will work even where a narrow cone width would be best, but it is harder to say that if things are reversed.
That is my experience and my advice, for what its worth. Good luck.
m
[signature]
I have an older BottomLine. My one complaint about it is the cone width. I feel that it is too narrow for the lakes in this area. I fished with it in a lot of different lakes around here, and therefore lots of different depths, and I always felt that it would have been better to have a wider cone. When in more shallow water, say 40 feet or less, the area being sampled is quite small so fish would have to be exactly under the transducer to be seen. What that really means is that your fish finder is really only reporting the distance to the bottom of the pond and rarely gives you an accurate idea about how many fish you are over, especaily if the fish are anywhere near the surface. The more shallow the water, the more true this is. So you have to ask yourself what kind of fishing do you do the most. I think a narrow cone would be useful in only the deepest of lakes, like Lake Powell and Flaming Gorge. If it were me, and I had to choose a single cone width, I would choose a wide cone width over the narrow width. As was mentioned, which cone width you need will help determine which frequncy is best to get. Also, a wide cone width will work even where a narrow cone width would be best, but it is harder to say that if things are reversed.
That is my experience and my advice, for what its worth. Good luck.
m
[signature]