Another "Which 1kw transducer" question....B164 vs M260

[skelly22]

Hi All,


this question has come up before but it is still hard to know what it the best way to go. I would like to see if anyone has first hand experience of either, or both, and get your thoughts.


I could get either the B164 thru hull transducer, or the M260 wet box/inhull transducer for my HDS5 sonar.
http://www.airmartechnology.com/uplo...hures/B164.pdf
http://www.airmartechnology.com/uplo...hures/M260.pdf
http://www.airmartechnology.com/uplo...esentation.pdf

I fish in 20-50m of water frequently and am reasonably happy with my current generic 83/200 transducer, but would like better performance on the move. However, I also troll and bottom fish in 100-200m and would like to be able to pick up a clear picture of the bottom and mark mid water and bottom fish both when moving and at rest.


I asked airmar about it and their response was:
"""
The main difference between our transducers and other makers is the low ringing and better resolution. “Ringing” is noise in the signal which translates on your sounder as a very thick band on the surface (called surface clutter) that can mask many returning signals.

B164 is 1KW capable and offers greater sensitivity and depth range than the regular stock transducer you have. It is about 20 times more sensitive at 50 KHz.

The M260 is better than the B164 as it uses separate ceramics for each frequency (the B164 has 3 ceramics working simultaneously in 50 and 200 but the M260 has dedicated ceramics for each frequency). It is one our best transducers to use with the HDS generation. The beam is narrow and super sharp in 200 KHz (6°)and 19° in 50 KHz. If the hull is fiberglass and no thicker than 17 mm you will have no loss of signal quality. The M260 is designed to be shooting through the hull.
"""




Looking at the data sheets, the M260 is better on paper- it has more and separate elements for each frequency, and it gets a Q (quality-lower is better) value of 8 for both 50 and 200hz. However is it not very clear to me if the loss due to hull is accounted for in those numbers.


The B164 gets a Q value of 7 at 50HZ, and 17 at 200HZ, indicating it should be slightly better at 50, but worse at 200. It is also cheaper in price that the M260. Installation requires a 95mm hole in my hull...which could be as painful as it sounds!


The M260 would cost a bit more, save me drilling a big hole and should get better performance. However I have heard second hand that the hull will dull its signal enough to make the thru hull better. In my mind I am drawn towards the B164, as being a thru hull it may give the best results. I have considered the TM260 but transom mount is not really what I want.


Any experience out there that might help?


thanks
Shane

[honda900]

Shane,

you can buy a p79 shoot through hull, put it in the spot you want the M260 or b164 and test the signal loss.

PS, I bought a B164 it works fairly well although can be a bit finicky in large tides, dropping the bottom at speed, In saying that running with the same tide it will hold very well.

Regards
Honda.

[Vitamin Sea]

Shane

I run a M260 in my boat with a 585, very good definition, reads very well at speed, will read at twice the depths that you have mentioned.

No complaints from me except the beam (200khz) is a bit narrow in shallow water, <30m.

cheers
VS

[skelly22]

Hi Honda, what kind of depths have you been fishing in? Does it mark well over 100m?
Thanks
shane

[skelly22]

G'day VS, sounds like you are happy with yours. Do you mark fish well enough in 100-200?
i know what ya mean about the narrow angle. Do you ever try the lower 50hz in close? I something switch my generic transducer to 83hz when downrigging so that the wider angle keeps the ball in the screen and I still get good fish marking in those shallower depths
Shane

[Vitamin Sea]

G'day VS, sounds like you are happy with yours. Do you mark fish well enough in 100-200?
i know what ya mean about the narrow angle. Do you ever try the lower 50hz in close? I something switch my generic transducer to 83hz when downrigging so that the wider angle keeps the ball in the screen and I still get good fish marking in those shallower depths
Shane

Hi Shane

yep to both q's, 100m is like 50m with definition, i have fished 170m with my old p66 without a problem.

I do on occasions switched over to 50, it also reads very well, just tend to get a little more clutter, interference, fine at sounding speed though. I get a clear read at 30 kts with the 200 though.

cheers
bill

[peterowen]

Shane,
Unfortunately I have had no experience with lowrance only furuno and Raymarine in mainly commercial vessels. "under 17mm" is a generalized "best practise" statement however I have often found changes in performance occur even with vessels of similar thickness solid fiber. Also is the vessel solid, sandwich , how thick is the glass, composites used etc etc are all a huge factor. Ive installed allot of transducers and sometimes wet boxes are fine, I have even seen thru hulls transducers sikoflexed flat can work excellent. My best advise to all is thru hull and if you dont have to slip your vessel its almost as quick (please ensure your deadrise is calculated prior to ordering and or you may need a fairing block) as the p260 (surfaces must be super smick and lightly sanded before installing). The easiest way to see if you have degradation through he hull is to borrow a thru hull (and it helps if you are friendly with your local marine electronic store, yeah you pay more but you get better knowledge than cheaper stores). Dont install it just plug it in and chuck it over the side and check you image make sure auto sensitivty is set of on your sounder and adjust to you just start getting speckling through the water column. Then throw a bucket of water in your bildge and try the transducer in this water, check sounder if same pic then great if less speckling appears and you need to wind the gain up a fair bit then chances are in deeper water you may struggle to pick up at speed.
I seen people screw this install up when they do it themselves. Honestly for an extra few hundred get an expert to install it. Youll never have to stress again and it should last 10 years. Most Marine teks and boat builders/repairers can tell you aprox cost by having a quick sticky beak at the vessel.

Cheers and good luck
Pete

[Oceanranger24]

Shane I run an M260 in my glass boat connected to a Raymarine c90w. My fishing is mainly at the shelf and I read happily in the 300 to 800m depth range.

the M260 is a great unit
phil

[bigjimg]

G'day Shane,
I had fitted the Airmar b164 thru hull, connected to a Raymarine c120 classic. Reads fantastic at all speeds and easily picks up fish at speed.
Awesome piece of kit and money well spent. Jim

[Ripples]

Hi Shane
i have a M260 that I have taken out of my Haines for sale if your interested
Ten pin plug to suit Furuno
the sounder worked fine at speed to depth of 300 to 400 mtrs
send me a pm
i upgraded to an Airmar 2KW

Lance

[Aquaholic 632]

So what transducer is the winner????

[scottar]

As has already been raised, the "best" transducer will depend on the hull. Some hulls simply do not produce good results with through hull installations whilst others seem to have a minimal reduction in signal quality. The catch is you can't tell without experimentation. This can be the same with a through hull install though in relation to getting the position correct. As for better performance on the move, simply changing
transducer may or may not have the desired result. Some sounders simply fill the screen with noise at speed once you turn the gain/sensitivity up to the required levels for deeper water. This can come from a variety of sources as well. I did some experimentation on a few different rigs some years ago in relation to achieving better deep water results and ended up mounting transducers in areas well forward of the conventionally accepted areas. These were based around the JRC sounders at the time. On one particular vessel with two shoot through hull transducers, the transducer at the stern worked perfectly in shallow conditions but in deep water as soon as the revs went up, the screen filled with noise. The same transducer mounted in the corner of the under bunk area, worked perfectly with no noise in deep water until the point at which the hull left the water in that location - the conclusion - prop noise. The sounder in this instance was a 600 watt unit in 140 metres. If you are never going to go much deeper than 200 metres, another option may be a sounder upgrade to something like a furuno at 600 watts