Well, MY face is RED.  

Just for grins, I hooked up the aforementioned solar panel to my Cuda 168.  At the moment (in full sun) it is running (in simulator mode) like a top.  I guess I need to go back and check my math! Either that or the Cuda draws much less power than I suspected.  I can tell that 300 mA is near the lowest level that will do ... in partial shade, the Cuda turns itself off (for lack of power).

I guess its time for a field test to see if there is ample juice to run the transducer.  I CAN hear it pinging, but that's no indication that the signal strength is sufficient to produce a clear bottom image.

dd

Postscript:  I guess it pays to read the manual.  The documentation for the Cuda 168 indicates that the current draw is 110 mA with backlight off and 250 mA with backlight on. 

So, the original question:  Can you power a depth finder from a solar panel?  The answer is:  It depends on your depth finder power draw (and solar panel output).  But for the specific configuration I tried, the answer would be YES. 

BTW: 

I did try the depth finder with another solar panel that only produces 60 mA and that was insufficient to power up the Cuda (which, based on the manual, would be the anticipated outcome).  This also explains why my 300 mA solar panel kept the Cuda running when 1/2 of the individual cells were in shade.

So, refigurring how long an 8-pack of 2500 mA AA's would last:

2500 X 8 / 110 = 181 hours.  (I guess THAT's why my battery pack is sufficient to last for a 2-week trip!) 

On a side-bar note:  I think you will find that the current draw at power-up is somewhat more than 110 mA.  So apparently there is a power-up spike.  This would explain why I could not do a power up with some of the individual solar cells in shade, but would run with the same number of cells covered.

Quote:


Great idea!  

I'd like to hear more about how you did this...

Thanks!  I will have to crack mine open and take a look...