Here in the south west, the closest fishable ice it will be on shallow lakes that also have a lot of weeds.
Last year I started using the Lowrance Elite 4 on the ice. I only got out 6 days, but now I will never willingly get on the ice without some type of sonar. The graph is nice, but it is mostly about watching the amplitude meter. There is a learning curve with the Lowrance, and I still have a long way to go. There are a lot of settings, and it takes some practice to get it dialed-in. At times, in order to see my lure I would need to increase the sensitivity to the point where the screen is cluttered. It is a very small screen, and I’ve considered upgrading to the Elite 5. However, while that would offer a wider amplitude meter, it would not improve the vertical resolution (just a wider blob). I’m sure that I can get more proficient with the Lowrance, but I’m curious about the limitations of the Elite 4 vs a flasher.
I’ve watch a few “real world” demos of flashers, they seem so much simpler to use, and seem to offer a more delineated view of both lures and fish without the clutter I was experiencing with the Lowrance. However, I have never had the opportunity to do a side-by-side comparison over a shallow weed bed.
Will a flasher (Limited to those available in the $400 range) offer significant improvement over a Lowrance Elite 4 in identifying fish in water under 10’ with weeds?
I don’t mind making the effort to get more proficient with the Lowrance, but if a flasher ultimately has more upside in my most common fishing conditions, I want to make the switch.
Thanks,
Mark
Last year I started using the Lowrance Elite 4 on the ice. I only got out 6 days, but now I will never willingly get on the ice without some type of sonar. The graph is nice, but it is mostly about watching the amplitude meter. There is a learning curve with the Lowrance, and I still have a long way to go. There are a lot of settings, and it takes some practice to get it dialed-in. At times, in order to see my lure I would need to increase the sensitivity to the point where the screen is cluttered. It is a very small screen, and I’ve considered upgrading to the Elite 5. However, while that would offer a wider amplitude meter, it would not improve the vertical resolution (just a wider blob). I’m sure that I can get more proficient with the Lowrance, but I’m curious about the limitations of the Elite 4 vs a flasher.
I’ve watch a few “real world” demos of flashers, they seem so much simpler to use, and seem to offer a more delineated view of both lures and fish without the clutter I was experiencing with the Lowrance. However, I have never had the opportunity to do a side-by-side comparison over a shallow weed bed.
Will a flasher (Limited to those available in the $400 range) offer significant improvement over a Lowrance Elite 4 in identifying fish in water under 10’ with weeds?
I don’t mind making the effort to get more proficient with the Lowrance, but if a flasher ultimately has more upside in my most common fishing conditions, I want to make the switch.
Thanks,
Mark