Thread: lowrance sucks
View Single Post
Old 08-08-2013, 07:43 PM   #15
Cadillyak
Team Get $$
 
Cadillyak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 841
Quote:
Originally Posted by jorluivil View Post
Is there a possibility that the you're expecting more than the unit was built to handle? I did a sh*t load of research before I bought my HDS-5, most of it had to do with the differences between the 83/200 transducer and the 50/200. After talking to a Lowrance Rep at the FHS I came to find out that the standard 83/200 gives lower quality reading in depths exceeding 100 feet. I'm no Lowrance guru but I'm willing to bet that the scope on your unit isn't setup to perform in depths exceeding 100'. If you're having issues with it in all depths its safe to say the unit is bad but if its only happening in depths exceeding 100' than (like I said earlier) you're expecting more than the unit was built to handle.........just my 2pesos



P.S.
Lowrance DOES NOT suck
X2. There the difference between 83/200 transducer and 50/200 transducer is like night and day.
__________________
The "Y" is silent
2012 Olive PA 12
2011 Papaya Outback
Cadillyak is offline   Reply With Quote