| Author | Comment | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
 Resolve C42 MKII |
Raytheon 2KW (RL 9) |
Lead | ||
|
Posts: 11 04/18/08 07:44:10 |
I am also a new owner and radar is completely new to me. I am also a novice in the newer electronics. I am used to a self contained, mapping GPS (Garmin 176C).
I would like to have a color chart plotter that I can both split the screen for radar or overlay the radar on the chart. Can this be done? Will I have to
replace the radar antenna?
Thanks for the help!
Mike Vaccaro
"Resolve" 1995 C 42 MKII #483 WK 2 Cabin Pullman Sailor's Wharf, Mill Creek Annapolis, MD USA |
|||
|
|
||||
|
garrywillis |
#1 | |||
|
Posts: 280 04/18/08 08:01:24 Moderator |
Hi Mike,
If you have a Ratheon RL9 radar then it's a nearly 20 yr old design and a lot has happened in technology since then. You cannot use that radar antennae with any of the new stuff so the whole system needs to be replaced. I have the same radar and have been thinking about replacing it too - not a cheap or inexpensive job. I will be going with a 4kw antennae for sure and it may even be an open array as mine is located on a pole on the transom and the open array will give you better resolution than a dome. Most of the newer units from Furuno, Garmin and Raymarine will do overlays for you. Right now, I'm leaning toward the new Garmins because they took a lot of weight out of the new ones and they are always so intuitive to learn. Anyone had any experience with Garmin radars that they can share??
Garry
"Breezn" #502 2-Cabin |
|||
|
|
||||
|
tomca |
#2 | |||
|
Posts: 80 04/18/08 09:10:29 |
The Garmin units are great for those on a budget and really aren't too interested in the finer points of radar. Their little 4kw dome for less then $1,000
is nice, but the detail really isn't there in the unit. It's beam width is larger then the competitors which reduces it's efficiency at detecting
smaller objects. Also the Garmin units don't really allow for fine tuning the unit to your specific requirements. Raymarine units are pricier but you
really get what you pay for. Raymarines units have been rated top units by many. Their 2kw unit out performs Garmins small 4kw. Other benefits of the raymarine
units are that they draw less power to run, meaning longer running times and less recharging of the batteries and they have fine tuning adjustments for the
radar unit. Also the capabilities of the raymarine display units is amazing. They can basically sail your boat w/o you. Again Garmin units are great, I do find
them a little easier to use in the beginning, but I feel that once you play around with the Raymarine units you'll find them just as easy to use and with
many more capabilities. One last thing, as far as charting goes, raymarine has the most up to date charts out there. Navionics cards are far superior to
Garmins Bluecharts. Navionics do not rely just upon current charts, they actually send out their own vessels to aquire up to date info on changing sea floors
and new hazards. Over all I think you'll be much happier in the long run with the raymarine units, especially the 4kw dome.
Tom
Maxwell #766 2-cabin Pullman Dana Point, CA |
|||
|
|
||||
|
garrywillis |
#3 | |||
|
Posts: 280 04/18/08 10:24:51 Moderator |
Tom,
Thanks for the through and thoughtful reply but I need to clarify something with you. Are you talking about the new or old generation Garmin radars??? The new ones that just came out are quite a bit better than the first gen sets. I just did a spec comparison of the new Garmin GMR-18 (4kw) and the Raymarine RD424 (4kw) and found the following: The Ray does indeed have a narrower beam width than the Garmin (3.9 to 5.0) but then again unless I'm missing something here, we're on a sailboat that does indeed heel and unless you have a gimballed mount for the antennae, I would think that you would need a slightly wider beam width because otherwise the beam is either looking at the sky or deep down into the wa wa. The current draw is, well, a draw. 33.5w as opposed to 34.0w for the Raymarine in operational mode. The Garmin weighs over 6 lbs less that the Ray antennae - critical for keeping weight down especially on the mast. The Raymarine is over $1,000 more than Garmin!!! So, that being said, I'm sure that the Ray unit is packed with more features (and it better be for that amount of dough) and the chart with Navionics may have more details but I'm not convinced yet. Anyone know anything about the new Furuno radars??
Garry
"Breezn" #502 2-Cabin
Last Edited By: garrywillis 04/18/08 10:38:21.
Edited 1 time.
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
Resolve C42 MKII |
#4 | |||
|
Posts: 11 04/18/08 11:33:01 |
Wow... thanks Garry & TOm. This is all great information.
Mike Vaccaro
"Resolve" 1995 C 42 MKII #483 WK 2 Cabin Pullman Sailor's Wharf, Mill Creek Annapolis, MD USA |
|||
|
|
||||
|
tomca |
#5 | |||
|
Posts: 80 04/18/08 14:22:59 |
Garry and Mike,
The following is a link to Cruising World Magazines Oct. 07 test of a couple radar units. I found it very informative. In response to Garry, yes a wider beamwidth could help if the unit is not gimbled, but in reality the radar should be gimbled to gain any practical perfromance from the unit while under sail. And yes the unit does weigh more, but there again I believe that that additional weight can be addressed by mounting the unit lower, say on a pole or backstay reducing its effect on boat motion. Also figure that 6lbs of weight can be removed from the mast by using lower stretch lines in reduced sizes too. Finally, Price is a consideration in everything. Yes the raymarine is more, but right now I know raymarine is having a sale on most electronics and also I believe that the benefits from the unit will superceed the price point. Mike good luck with your decision, as I have stated earlier both Garmin and Raymarine are excellent units, it really is all up to you. http://www.cruisingworld.com/gear-and-systems/for-the-navigator/with-radar-the-more-power-the-better-21017574.html
Tom
Maxwell #766 2-cabin Pullman Dana Point, CA |
|||
|
|
||||
|
garrywillis |
#6 | |||
|
Posts: 280 04/18/08 15:52:02 Moderator |
Tom,
Thanks for the link and observations. Interesting stuff. Also interesting that the folks in the CW test found the Garmin to have a much higher current draw than the Garmin specs say it should. I wonder what the Garmin techs thought of that?? Anyone Care to make comments about the Furuno or any other brand??
Garry
"Breezn" #502 2-Cabin |
|||
|
|
||||
|
captjohn |
#7 | |||
|
Posts: 75 04/18/08 15:57:13 |
I just installed the Garmin 4212 at the helm. I could not be more pleased.
Wonderful chart plotter. I don't think any other manufacture comes close to ease of use and daylight readability. Garmin just introduced a 18 inch HD radar. That will go in next. John |
|||
|
|
||||
|
do335 |
#8 | |||
|
Posts: 257 04/22/08 14:56:38 |
In my experience having a gimbled mount for the radar antenna isn't a requirement, it is a nice to have if you have the budget. Even when heeled over the
boat cycles from heeled to more upright so every few seconds you will detect any target you are likely to be interested in before you need to worry about it.
Steve 642-2f TESA
|
|||
|
|
||||
|
Doug Boyd |
Radar beamwidth clarification? | #9 | ||
|
Posts: 33 04/25/08 11:05:16 |
Folks,
I've enjoyed following this thread, yet wanted to make sure I understand something. As I remember, the 'beam-width' we discuss is technically horizontal beam-width, which should have little or bearing on a radar's ability to sense contacts while heeled. It has immense influence on granularity of target display--the narrower width beam will differentiate between two contacts at the same range and very similar bearings, while a less narow beam will display them as a single contact. Similarly, the radar's pulse-width influences the set's ability to differentiate two contacts on the same bearing at very similar ranges. Cheers, Doug Doug & Peggy,
|
|||
|
|
||||
