"HK" wrote in message
...
Anyone publishing these?

As in, $1000 chartplotters/fishfinders, six new units tested.

That sort of stuff.

Powerboat Reports. But they don't exist anymore.

I remember reading a test they did on combo units, and they seemed to like
the combination Furuno unit the most.

Personally, I prefer Furuno for bottom machines, and Garmin for
Chartplotters, but my electronics install guy who sells them all prefers
Raymarine.

My boat has a Furuno bottom machine, a Northstar chartplotter, a Simrad
radar, and a Simrad autopilot.

I'm not a big fan of the Northstar chartplotter, but it's a decent unit.
The autopilot sucks, and if I need to replace it, I'm getting a TR-1. The
linear feedback arm on the autopilot malfunctions in rough seas, and the
TR-1 doesn't use one.

On Fri, 15 Jun 2007 07:56:22 -0700, Chuck Gould
wrote:

The "no advertising" model with head to head comparisons has been
tried. Powerboat Reports. It failed. That's why nobody is doing
it. :-)

That's not quite true. Practical Sailor is still going strong and
does a pretty decent job with most of their tests and reports. I've
avoided some expensice mistakes by listening to their advice over the
years. Unfortunately they don't cater to the fishing crowd but many
of their other tests are equally applicable to both power and sail.
It's also a good bet that if Furuno makes a chart plotter or radar
with good visibility in direct sunlight, that their fish finder will
have good visibility also. You can also glean some intersting nuggets
regarding customer service and reliability reputations.

Wayne.B wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jun 2007 07:56:22 -0700, Chuck Gould
wrote:

The "no advertising" model with head to head comparisons has been
tried. Powerboat Reports. It failed. That's why nobody is doing
it. :-)

That's not quite true. Practical Sailor is still going strong and
does a pretty decent job with most of their tests and reports. I've
avoided some expensice mistakes by listening to their advice over the
years. Unfortunately they don't cater to the fishing crowd but many
of their other tests are equally applicable to both power and sail.
It's also a good bet that if Furuno makes a chart plotter or radar
with good visibility in direct sunlight, that their fish finder will
have good visibility also. You can also glean some intersting nuggets
regarding customer service and reliability reputations.



It's interesting that chuck objects so strongly to practical, measured
evaluations of boat equipment. I wonder what is beneath the surface here.

On Fri, 15 Jun 2007 15:26:21 -0400, HK wrote:

It's interesting that chuck objects so strongly to practical, measured
evaluations of boat equipment. I wonder what is beneath the surface here.

I don't think he was objecting to the concept, just the expense and
logistical difficulty. As he correctly points out, Consumer Reports
has a much wider subscriber base to fund the testing expenses, and
they also have people on staff who resell the tested merchandise when
possible.

On Fri, 15 Jun 2007 18:04:00 GMT, "NOYB" wrote:

my electronics install guy who sells them all prefers
Raymarine.

That's interesting since their quality and reliability seem to have
gone downhill in recent years. They must be spiffing the installers
in some way.

On Fri, 15 Jun 2007 16:15:48 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Fri, 15 Jun 2007 18:04:00 GMT, "NOYB" wrote:

my electronics install guy who sells them all prefers
Raymarine.

That's interesting since their quality and reliability seem to have
gone downhill in recent years. They must be spiffing the installers
in some way.

It's almost like they were back in RI.

I'm getting more and more disenchanted with Raymarine although I had
Raymarine gear on both Contenders.

I'm still looking for a small boat radar for the Ranger.

HK wrote:
Chuck Gould wrote:
On Jun 15, 7:26?am, HK wrote:
Chuck Gould wrote:
.
It is almost impossible to check out all the possibilities in your local
West Marine or any other major marine equipment store. First, they don't
have the depth of inventory. Second, they rarely have things hooked up
so you can mess with them comfortably. Third, they never seem to have
things like manuals handy. Fourth, the sales people they employ simply
have no depth of information about much of anything.



Vs. the challenges of doing a valid head to head, real world test?

You'd need to rig an individual boat with a half dozen depthsounders,
plotters, etc. How else would you be able to compare operation under
the exact same circumstances?

Disregarding your nasty personal remarks below, (surprise, surprise),
could you please explain to the group exactly why the very same
features and functions will always be important to a guy trolling for
billfish in the Atlantic and a guy with a bass boat in Minnesota?
Whose subjective priorities should prevail? The reviewer's?


Your arguments are specious. Similar products with different feature
sets are evaluated together all the time by all manner of printed and on
line "publications."

Harry,
I am curious, since you are online in rec.boats, 7 days a week, and are
proud of the fact that your Parker has very little hours on the engine,
why would you want an expensive chart plotter/ fishfinder?

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jun 2007 16:15:48 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Fri, 15 Jun 2007 18:04:00 GMT, "NOYB" wrote:

my electronics install guy who sells them all prefers
Raymarine.
That's interesting since their quality and reliability seem to have
gone downhill in recent years. They must be spiffing the installers
in some way.

It's almost like they were back in RI.

I'm getting more and more disenchanted with Raymarine although I had
Raymarine gear on both Contenders.

I'm still looking for a small boat radar for the Ranger.


I thought that ranger was a bay boat?

Wayne.B wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jun 2007 15:26:21 -0400, HK wrote:

It's interesting that chuck objects so strongly to practical, measured
evaluations of boat equipment. I wonder what is beneath the surface here.

I don't think he was objecting to the concept, just the expense and
logistical difficulty. As he correctly points out, Consumer Reports
has a much wider subscriber base to fund the testing expenses, and
they also have people on staff who resell the tested merchandise when
possible.



BOATING mag does occasional multiproduct tests, too.

On Fri, 15 Jun 2007 16:12:23 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Fri, 15 Jun 2007 15:26:21 -0400, HK wrote:

It's interesting that chuck objects so strongly to practical, measured
evaluations of boat equipment. I wonder what is beneath the surface here.

I don't think he was objecting to the concept, just the expense and
logistical difficulty. As he correctly points out, Consumer Reports
has a much wider subscriber base to fund the testing expenses, and
they also have people on staff who resell the tested merchandise when
possible.

It's interesting that Harry objects so strongly to anything Chuck posts.
Could it be a bit of jealousy there? I wonder what Harry's *real* motives
are.