Raytheon Questions

[Red]

I am in the process of researching equipment for a new rig. I was wondering if any of you are running the Raytheon RC 420 for a GPS unit? Along with any opinions on Raytheon's fishfinders.

Thank you in advance for the information.

Red

[phm]

I have the 425 WAAS system paired with an L750. I think that they both work very well.

I have used a friends X-15, and I think the 425 chart plotter is a little easier to use. The 425 allows you to place your heading up on the chart plotter with Navionics charts. I like this feature because it makes orientating yourself for navigation a little easier. It must be a bug with the X-15/Navionics combination, I'm sure they'll fix it. The X-15 does come with software that allows you to make custom maps. The Raytheon doesn't have this. I also haven't dug into how I can download my waypoints for safe keeping.

The 750 fish finder works great, and has a screen that's easy to see anywhere in the boat. The X-15 has better resolution, but sometimes it can be hard to see with the sun directly on it.

If I had to do it over, I would make the same decision. I like having seperate units. I also like the fact that I've missed a lot of the e-prom issues that the Lowrance folks have had to endure.

[Big Santa]

Red,

I just installed an L750 and RC425 on my new boat. The following are my obvervations so far. I have only had the boat on the water 6 times and fished it three of those,so I have limited exposure to date. I had an LMS 350A on my previous boat, decided to go this route for various reasons. Most of my fishing is Lake MI for salmon and trout. I just returned from a trip to Lake Erie with this rig (that is my only fishing experience to date).

L750

Initially had to do some tweaking to get the transducer angle / depth nailed down. The Raytheon transducer is more cumbersome to adjust than the Lowrance. So far, the unit has done a great job of marking fish / structure. Have not yet been able to determine the maximum speed that I will be able to mark fish when running. Have not marked a thing yet on the sidefinder transducer (don't know if it's a matter of no fish, not marking properly or operator error). Overall, very happy so far.

RC425

Unit did not work properly (no date / tide info, no plotting). Just found out that Raytheon "admitted" that they had a manufacturing issue with some of the early WAAS antennas. I was one of the lucky ones. I was just sent a new antenna which I have to swap out. I have not tried the mapping capability yet. Plotter did not work intitally, so can't comment on that. From my limited experience, the WAAS technology gets you back to the waypoint on the nuts. Unit seems a bit cumbersome to hit a waypoint (I liked the "waypoint quick save" button on the 350A). Again, I have not spent much time with the unit yet. Jury still out from my perspective.

If I were to do it over, I would probably go this route again, with the exception of maybe taking a harder look at Furuno for the fishfinder.

[Kevin]

I have the 420 and love it.No problems at all in 2 years.Easy to figure out how to use,because if you're like me I hate to read directions until I have to. I have the Navonics depth contour cards and wouldn't leave home without it now.

[ND]

I've run a 420D ever since it came out.....No problems with it ever.Like the large screen and the ease of use.
The 420 is being replaced by the 425 and should have a reduced price.
The 420 does not have a WAAS antena.....also, check and see if you can get the mapping you need for the area you're interested.
I lake the Raytheons ability to talk to other instruments.Like autopilot.