[CA] [CA11] Potential Upgrade to my E97 MFD and Transducer

[fclemente695]

I currently have a 2014 Monterey 34FT Cruiser and it came with an E97MFD as well as a Thru Hull Transducer that says it is a BC60 20 Deg TLTD, Element E66087. Not sure if it a Raymarine Transducer but I think it is since Monterey buys only Raymarine Electronics. I am curious what I can do with the system and transducer I have as I would like to get the down vision and side vision views as is now available. I see Raymarine makes certain modules that can be wires in to add the down and side vision but I am not sure my MFD will support them. Also what will my existing transducer do as I see those down and side vision modules each say they need their own stern mounted transducers ??
After looking at the cost of the modules (and if I had to add 2 transducers as well) maybe a newer MFD would be more cost effective ? Obviously I need something compatible with all the wiring I currently have and I also have the Raymarine HD Radar Unit on the hard top that is the 18" diameter one. Just looking for what I may be able to do with my existing system and or what upgrades I might need. I really would like the live or real view capability but I think that might require an entire new system ? Its too bad really as the year or 2 after I purchased my new boat Monterey started putting your Axiom Units in the boats and I believe they already do the down and side vison. I realize my unit does have a down vision but the clarity is not as good as the newer technology I see. I am very interested in underground structures and hazards that are present in the lake I am on in upstate NY.
Thanks for any information you can provide
Frank Clemente

[Chuck - Raymarine - Moderator]

Welcome to the Raymarine Forum Frank,

Q1. Thru Hull Transducer that says it is a BC60 20 Deg TLTD, Element E66087. Not sure if it a Raymarine Transducer.
A1. This is indeed a Raymarine B60 20 degree tilted element fishifnder transducer.

Q2. I am curious what I can do with the system and transducer I have as I would like to get the down vision and side vision views as is now available.
A2. The B60 transducer in conjunction with the MFD's internal 50kHz/200kHz fishfinder circuitry will support traditional conical 50kHz/200kHz fishfinder sounder imagery. If seeking to have your system additionally support DownVision fishfinder imaging, then the system would need to be interfaced to a CP100 DownVision Fishfinder Module, which in turn would need to be interfaced to a compatible thru-hull or transom mounted DownVision Transducer . The CP100 would be interfaced to an unoccupied Ethernet Network (RayNet) socket of either MFD or of the system's HS5 RayNet Network Switch via an appropriate length of RayNet (F) to RayNet (F) Cable.

Q3. After looking at the cost of the modules (and if I had to add 2 transducers as well) maybe a newer MFD would be more cost effective ? Obviously I need something compatible with all the wiring I currently have and I also have the Raymarine HD Radar Unit on the hard top that is the 18" diameter one. Just looking for what I may be able to do with my existing system and or what upgrades I might need.
If seeking to replace the currently installed MFDs, you may want to consider Axiom Pro MFDs ... more specifically one Axiom Pro 12 S MFD and one Axiom Pro 12 RVX MFD with a RealVision Transducer. The combination would be compatible with the currently installed Power/NMEA 0183/Video Input Cable and Ethernet Cable(s). The SeaTalkng Cable may be easily adapted to be mated to the Data Master MFD's NMEA 2000 socket. Of the items specified within your system to date, these MFDs would be compatible with but the currently installed B60 transducer which may be replaced with a compatible E66085 B60 transducer. The sonar capabilities of the new system would include the following:
- RealVision sonar imaging ... produce 3D imaging of structures and objects within the water column
- SideVision sonar imaging ... I find this type of imaging particularly useful in locating structures and objects to the sides of the vessel
- DownVision sonar imaging ... produces detailed bottom/structure imaging of such items as the vessel passes over them
- 50kHz/200kHz sonar imaging ... as you have today. It is recommended that this capability be retained for operation at planing speed and in deeper water.

[fclemente695]

Thanks for all the great info Chuck. I appreciate it. 2 follow up questions. What does it take to replace the current thru hull transducer? Does it require a complete removal and new installation or is it possibly just replacing the internal or in hull part of the transducer not requiring modification to the existing [censored] already there?

Also what would I get as far as views if I were to purchase a new Element unit and all in one transducer? It looks like it may be better quality images of structure, etc? The lake I am on was previously farmland that was flooded in the 1930's so my main reason for buying this is underwater identification of rock piles and stone walls, tree stumps, etc.

I forgot to mention in my previous reply that I would be adding the Element GPS unit to my boat and keep my already existing E97.

Thanks again
Frank

[Chuck - Raymarine - Moderator]

Frank,

Q1. What does it take to replace the current thru hull transducer? Does it require a complete removal and new installation or is it possibly just replacing the internal or in hull part of the transducer not requiring modification to the existing [censored] already there?
A1. It would be necessary to remove the entire transducer. Thru-hulls are commonly sealed with 3M 4200. Removing the transducer typically involves removing the transducer's locking nut and the rotating the transducer's housing to break the seal. After doing so, the transducer housing is pushed from inside of the hull toward the outside of the hull. Doing so is a fairly easy process and there are a number of videos on YouTube demonstrating how one would go about doing removing an replacing a thru-hull transducer.

Q2. Also what would I get as far as views if I were to purchase a new Element unit and all in one transducer? It looks like it may be better quality images of structure, etc? The lake I am on was previously farmland that was flooded in the 1930's so my main reason for buying this is underwater identification of rock piles and stone walls, tree stumps, etc.
A2. the sonar imaging supported by element is similar to that supported by the Axiom Pro RVX system and RealVision transducer referenced within my initial response. Because of the higher frequencies used by Element, imaging is a bit better. However, HyperVision is limited to 300'. Element's 3D imaging is not corrected for heading and attitude as is 3D imaging from an Axiom RV or Axiom Pro RVX system.

Q3. I would be adding the Element GPS unit to my boat and keep my already existing E97.
A3. The Element chartplotter fishfinders are also not designed to be networked with MFDs.

[fclemente695]

Thank You Chuck. What does it mean when you say 3D imaging is not corrected for attitude... as it is with an Axion unit? If I bought an element unit I would still see a structure at whatever depth it is under or to the side of my boat?
I think I would buy the Element unit to identify the underwater hazards versus upgrading my existing simply due to cost. It appears , as you said, the image quality is better. You can see in the videos that it is easy to tell between structures or rock piles and fish.

[Chuck - Raymarine - Moderator]

Q1. What does it mean when you say 3D imaging is not corrected for attitude... as it is with an Axion unit?
A1. RealVision transducers designed for use with Axiom RV MFDs, Axiom Pro RVX MFDs, and the RVX1000 feature an AHARS (Attitude Heading and Reference System) which is responsible for sensing yaw (heading), pitch, and roll of the vessel. This information is used within the Axiom RV MFDs, Axiom Pro RVX MFDs, and the RVX1000 to adjust sonar imaging for the motion of the boat. In contrast, the Element transducer does not feature such motion sensing. Accordingly, the best Element imaging will result from a vessel which is operating in calm water and is maintain a constant heading at trolling speeds. Should the vessel be operated in seas or not maintain a constant heading, the resulting imaging would be adversely affected (not as sharp, smeared, etc.).

Q2. If I bought an element unit I would still see a structure at whatever depth it is under or to the side of my boat? It appears , as you said, the image quality is better. You can see in the videos that it is easy to tell between structures or rock piles and fish.
A2. As indicated, the quality of the imaging rendered is dependent upon the factors indicated within my response to Q1. Should the vessel be operated under favorable conditions, then the quality of the HyperVision imaging observed onboard one's own boat should be very similar to those which has been advertised when operating in depths less than 100'.

[fclemente695]

That would work great for me I think since I will be in less than 100 ft at all times as our lake on average is about 25-30 feet deep or less. Also I would be going slow or stopped when identifying these underwater hazards. Since I would add this as a separate unit I am comparing to Garmin Livescope as it does add a forward view feature. Do you have any thoughts on this comparison or the livescope system?
Thanks again - this will be my last post on this subject,

[Chuck - Raymarine - Moderator]

fclemente695,

Base upon the imaging which i have seen posted on Garmin's Panoptix LiveScopeâ„¢ System's web page, these are not similar technologies. If seeking the sharpest imaging, the Element screen shots appear to be superior. If seeking to have the boat remain stationary and view passing fish, then Garmin's Panoptix LiveScopeâ„¢ may be better suited for your needs.

[fclemente695]

After looking at you tubes and videos on your web site I agree that the resolution on the element are better than the garmin videos. The forward view garmin offers is nice but that leads me to a question. If you were looking on the elements sidevision mode and had the range set to say 100 feet and looked for any hazards (that's my main interest - not fish) and then turned the boat to go that way essentially you did look forward of the boat since you are now heading in that direction. How good would the views be in sidevision mode if you did look 100 feet or further if possible? The lake is only 25-35 feet or less.
Thanks again.

[Chuck - Raymarine - Moderator]

fclemente695,

Q. If you were looking on the elements sidevision mode and had the range set to say 100 feet and looked for any hazards (that's my main interest - not fish) and then turned the boat to go that way essentially you did look forward of the boat since you are now heading in that direction. How good would the views be in sidevision mode if you did look 100 feet or further if possible? The lake is only 25-35 feet or less.
A. I operate my own boat in such depths. When the boat is turned ninety degrees to the direction of travel, the image may be a bit blurry/smeared in the portion of the plot during the turn, but will then begin to build an image of what had been forward of the vessel. To that end, this would not expected to be a effective alternative to forward looking sonar, should that actually be the primary feature being sought.