Went through your exact dilemma. Ended up going with M265LH. I went with Low/High because we mainly fish for tuna and swordfish. It read very clear and crisp down to 1200ft+ on low, and same on high for the 0-400ft range for tuna (didn’t really try to look deeper on high).

I’ve never used a medium band transducer, always stuck with traditional low/high. Either way I think you’ll be happy with the M265. It’s a beast for a 1k ducer. I think you get more versatility with the M265 over the 175 since you get 2 frequency bands.

Have the gain pretty high in this pict because we were trying to see if we could mark a swordfish. The column of noise was from reversing boat with engines. But in general it gives you a great picture.

This post was edited on 11/11/23 at 8:00 pm

2 ...

Report Post

Posted by baldona

Florida

Member since Feb 2016

20553 posts

Posted on 11/12/23 at 5:09 pm to CP3

Great info! Just to be clear you went with the M265 which is in hull and not one of the thru hull options?

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by scrooster

Resident Ethicist

Member since Jul 2012

37805 posts

Posted on 11/13/23 at 7:12 pm to CP3

quote:
Went through your exact dilemma. Ended up going with M265LH. I went with Low/High because we mainly fish for tuna and swordfish. It read very clear and crisp down to 1200ft+ on low, and same on high for the 0-400ft range for tuna (didn’t really try to look deeper on high).

I’ve never used a medium band transducer, always stuck with traditional low/high. Either way I think you’ll be happy with the M265. It’s a beast for a 1k ducer. I think you get more versatility with the M265 over the 175 since you get 2 frequency bands.

Have the gain pretty high in this pict because we were trying to see if we could mark a swordfish. The column of noise was from reversing boat with engines. But in general it gives you a great picture.

Awesome info!