My transducer came epoxied to the boat but was wondering, when considering what material to use to mount the transducer, is it a go/no-go type decision or will the accuracy/readable depth be affected by the material?It would be interesting to evaluate which substance passes the signal through the hull best.
Makes you wonder just what that measure of a better adhesive would be ......................... reduced accuracy of the depth reading, or the depth at which the signal is finally lost.It would be interesting to evaluate which substance passes the signal through the hull best. Chief
Not sure, though I would think it would be more the overall range max. My lake is only a little over 400 ft deep and my in-hull transducer still shows that much (using RV Antifreeze in the collar mounted to the hull with silicone). The accuracy at shallow depths still seems pretty spot on, though I assume there's probably a couple 10ths variance anyway.Makes you wonder just what that measure of a better adhesive would be ......................... reduced accuracy of the depth reading, or the depth at which the signal is finally lost.
Chief, the one I use right now is a Garmin Echo150. It's the only way I will mount a transducer is with plumbers putty, and have done it several times. The only failure I've ever had was because a waxed in transducer melted. On my depth now, (which is a fish finder), it gives me contours and even pictures of little fishes swimming underneath.
Now all this could simply be just a video game or something, as I have no way to determine if there are fish or not, but I know for a fact the depth is right. I also have a depth finder in the bulkhead, w/ the transducer actually thruhulled. They both read the same.