Welcome to the Hatteras Owners Forum & Gallery. Sign Up or Login

Enter partial or full part description to search the Hatteras/Cabo parts catalog (for example: breaker or gauge)
+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 35
  1. #11

    Re: transducer question

    That's neat! When I put the new ones in - '06 or thereabouts, I didn't see any option of such a transducer. Admittedly, I didn't look at the air guide catalog - just looked at the optional transducers in the Garmin package and fairing blocks came with them. I replaced the oem wood one because it was starting to deteriorate anyway. But had I been aware of this transducer (if it was available then) I would have removed the old block and installed this 'ducer!
    Mike P
    San Miguel de Allende, Mexico; Kent Island MD; San Antonio TX
    1980 53MY "Brigadoon"

  2. #12

    Re: transducer question

    Mike - x2. I pulled that rotting wood block out and installed a high speed dual frequency block and ducer abut 3 years ago. It really paints structure well at cruise (important for a MY at 13 knots)!
    Formally Top Hatt and Tails
    1980 53MY

  3. #13

    Re: transducer question

    Mike,
    Because of the direction this thread was going, I've started looking at the transducers that mount inside and shoot through. I'm not looking for fish, just skinny water, and I don't need water temp or vessel speed from the transducer, so maybe an in-hull is what I'll use and just keep the still-functioning DM for now.

    Advantages:
    I can do the install myself, at my leisure, while still in the water.
    It will provide a second depth readout, so I'll have redundancy.
    Avoids yet another hole in the bottom.

    Disadvantages:
    ?
    Searching...
    Daytona Beach, FL

  4. #14

    Re: transducer question

    I can't come up with a disadvantage as far as just depth is concerned. Perhaps if the water is deep enough, the in-hull might lack the power necessary since it has to shoot through the fiberglass, but so far, in the Chesapeake Bay, it has never failed to read the depth. Admittedly, the Ches is fairly shallow and I don't think I have ever seen over 80-90 feet. But up to those depths, at least, both systems agree at all times.

    I installed it 3 years ago, used antifreeze (same stuff you use to winterize the boat's water system) as the liquid for the sensor enclosure. If you are not familiar with the installation of one of these/immersion of the ducer in liquid, you'll read about that with the ducer instructions. Any number of liquids will work.

    As you noted, it's a pretty easy install - especially when contrasted with a through-hull.
    Mike P
    San Miguel de Allende, Mexico; Kent Island MD; San Antonio TX
    1980 53MY "Brigadoon"

  5. #15

    Re: transducer question

    Thanks, I think that helps with the decision.
    I'm not going fishing, so I'm a lot more concerned with knowing where the water gets skinny than where it gets deeper than several hundred feet. If it's that deep, I'm not going to run into anything immediately, and if I sink in 1,200 feet, I guess it isn't much worse than sinking in 100 feet.
    Searching...
    Daytona Beach, FL

  6. #16

    Re: transducer question

    The transducers that shoot through the hull just plain suck in comparison to ones mounted through the hull. I've installed a bunch of them and not one has performed even close to the real ones. In fact I have installed through hulls in most of the boats that have the shoot through. If you use the boat and want reliable depth buy a decent sounder and get a tranducer put in. It may be time for a bottom job soon anyway.
    Scott
    41C117 "Hattatude"
    Port Canaveral Florida.


    Marine Electronics and Electrical Products Distributor.

  7. #17

    Re: transducer question

    Z28 - I noticed that your boat is an "Ocean" brand yacht. I don't know if they have cored or solid FG hulls. An in-hull transducer won't work with a cored hull so that's a critical thing to know before you make a decision.
    Mike P
    San Miguel de Allende, Mexico; Kent Island MD; San Antonio TX
    1980 53MY "Brigadoon"

  8. #18

    Re: transducer question

    Quote Originally Posted by Boatsb View Post
    The transducers that shoot through the hull just plain suck in comparison to ones mounted through the hull. I've installed a bunch of them and not one has performed even close to the real ones. In fact I have installed through hulls in most of the boats that have the shoot through. If you use the boat and want reliable depth buy a decent sounder and get a tranducer put in. It may be time for a bottom job soon anyway.
    X2

    Nice to hear someone with hands on experience with the equipment, giving advice through first hand knowledge. A shoot through might work somewhat on a thin hull, there is no way they can compensate for signal attenuation on thicker well built hulls.

  9. #19

    Re: transducer question

    I have a nice fresh 2kw dual frequency transducer (50-200kz) mounted in a high speed fairing block and an equally new Furuno fish finder powering it.
    I can see the bottom crisply when it's 2,000 feet down. It works fine at 25 knots too.
    Le's see a shoot-thru-the-hull ducer do that.
    "The older I get, the faster I was......."

    1979 60C "Ohana" hull# 331

  10. #20

    Re: transducer question

    Sounds like you did it right Dave. For fishing there is no compromise. You need the fairing block to get the transducer below the layer of water the boat disturbs. For cruising the flush mounts are great. For emergency's the shoot through are a temporary fix.
    Scott
    41C117 "Hattatude"
    Port Canaveral Florida.


    Marine Electronics and Electrical Products Distributor.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts