Zercom LCR

[Dean]

Any body have any info on this unit?seen one at the Fargo sportsmans show and I am thinking about buying it. Dean

[Mille Lacs Guy]

I'm also thinking of purchasing the LPG 2000, its supposed to be the closest thing to a paper graph you can get. Everybody I've talked to says its the best unit out there, supposedly better than the X-85 Lowrance. Good Luck Shopping.

[Jeremy]

I like mine, someone posted that the zercom sends 30 signals per second and the lowrance only sends 8 per second. Mine performs as good on the mississippi as it did on simulator mode in the store

[pickerel]

I just bought a 2000. It reads the bottom great but I have yet to mark fish. The simulator marks fish so I know I have it tuned properly. I am fishing below the dams on pools 7 and 8 so I know there are plenty of fish. Anybody got any ideas??

[Jeremy]

according to the book, you may not have the correct running angle, when I was at genoa I didn't mark many fish, but I'm sure we caught one I did mark, a 31/2 lb walleye.

[Stan]

Jeremy,

What frequency transducer does the Zercom use?

[Jeremy]

all the book says is 200khz, but from the literature, it must have a second frequency for the wide and narrow beam they talk about

[wiggle]

I am also interested in the new Zercom graph. But while checking it out in the store, the image seemed blury(hard to watch), almost like the graph was showing to much detail??? I adjusted the gain but it didn't seem to help. Just wondering how it is out in the real world. The pinpoint seemed to be better. Has anyone been able to compare the 2 out on the water. Thanks...

[John in MN]

Wiggle,

I thought the same thing when I was looking at it in the store. I could not adjust the screen (bightness and contrast) to get as "crisp" as an image as the X-85. I don't know if because the pixels are so small that they don't provide the same contrast as larger pixels or what.

[Dean]

What I am mostly interested in is target sepparation from the bottom While fishing a tournament last year I was cruising slowly looking for fish with my x-65 and didnt see a thing.I dropped my bow mount down that has an fl-8 mounted on it and seen fish right away in the same spot.After that I was determined to get a good locator that displays good target sepparation from the bottom so I can effectivly find fish.Where I fish allot in North Dakota you cannot rely on a few specific spots to catch fish because they move to much.The run and gun approach is much more successfull making a high quality locator a neccesssity. Dean

[Wade]

I have had the opportunity to see one in action, the unit is very user friendly, the detail is real nice. I would be a little hesitant to believe it is any faster then the lowrance, or bottomline graphs. There are two other units you should look at, the Vexilar Edge, or the Pinpoint system 7 graphs.

I choose the Pinpoint for two reasons.
1 There is not a faster graph out there
2 I can look at two transducers on one graph at the same time, without any interferance. (no bull)

Just my opinion.

[wiggle]

I here ya! What I am also looking for in a graph is target seperation. Last year while using my aqua-vu, I could see walleyes as much as 12" off the bottom in 40' of water and my Bottomline 210 would not even pick them up. It showed me that there are walleye's down there you are not seeing without a quality graph.

[CJW]

I was looking at both the Zercom and the 7520 Pinpoint. I chose the Pinpoint because they both have flasher capability but the zercom sees at 30 and the pinpoint see's at 60 pixels per second. The higher the better. I also found out that pinpoint owns the patent on 60 per second. Also bought it because when they have an improvement, alls you do is return to the factory. It will cost whatever they charge for the update. I guess there working on incorporating gps into the existing units right now. Just my 2 cents. Fish on!! CJW

[Jeremy]

LAST EDITED ON Mar-09-00 AT 08:33PM (CST)[p]I'm sure every company has their transducers patented, but I doubt someone can patent 60 pulses per second, would be the equivalent of chrystler patenting 70 miles per hour. Even if it is a new type crystal being used, someone will find something similar to, possibly better and not have to worry about an existing patent

[Jeff Matura]

I don't think it's the crystal in the transducer that is the technological advancement. But rather the speed at which the LCD can be updated. I think they have probably come up with a manufacturing process or technology that allows such a display and also does not cost to much.

jmm

[Jeff Matura]

Wouldn't it be great if a fishing magaizine would put targets off the bottum simulating the sonar return of a fish and run the "course" with all the best graghs and actually document the results once and for all!

I would certainly pay extra for such a report!

jmm