A friend who's Name I want to remain anonymous wrote me a response on my inquiry on the Garrett
At Pro! Remember! The Man Owns Both the Etrac and AT Pro but uses the AT Pro for days that have
to much moisture to take his etrac out.. I believe he Hit the Nail on the head with his thoughts and
his intentions are honest without any malice toward both the Etrac and the AT Pro! So read it with an
open mind knowing his intentions and opinions are at best "Helpful"
Keep in mind since his response to me I have since just purchased a Brand New AT-Pro
and anxiously await it's arrival
Hope this helps someone who might have a few questions of there own....Duggr
[bI use an AT-Pro as lightweight backup for my Etrac, especially on rainy days miles back in the woods! So far the AT does a good job finding targets in iron laden sites, even with the 8x11 2D coil. My ground here balances around "84" which on Garrett's scale is fairly high iron mineralized. Ground balances are dynamically made and quite easy to do. The Etrac is effortless because ground balance tracking is handled by algorithmic circuitry automatically.
Depth is almost as good as the Etrac in some areas of lesser mineral and iron, but the Etrac is still king in the tough areas. The Garrett runs a bit noisy in the upper sensitivity range in the PRO mode, not as smooth as the Etrac. It does not have a threshold to hear iron nulls like the Etrac, but you can use the Iron Audio feature to know if you are getting close to a dwelling site. I have to turn it off to enjoy myself at the site though. I do find the Garrett, because of single frequency operation to be quite sensitive to gold items and its high speed recovery gives good detection and separation close to rejectables.
The display is tiny compared to the Etrac, but fortunately I can just read the target numericals with these older eyes! The LCD screen could use a better contrast... Etrac is adjustable. The numerical ID's are fairly consistent for the same type of target, but at depths greater than 9-10", the numericals can go blank or inconsistent while the audio is still alerting you. Etrac goes deep with consistent resolute ID in my soil. I like the AT audio even though it is digital. Sounds a lot like my old Groundhog. I love the audio on the digital Etrac, smooth and warm sounding.
Like the Etac, you won't lose your settings when the 4AA batteries are changed. Battery changes are quite easy considering the waterproof designation. However you need to mark the battery carrier as to the correct orientation upon reinsertion. You won't burn the detector up on a wrong insertion, you just have to do it all again if you are wrong. Etrac battery carrier enters the housing in only one way.
Not in love with the Garrett connectors, quality made, but poor design. Can be difficult to insert by virtue of the waterproof rating. Not thrilled about the backward travel of the headphone wire from the control housing near the hand grip. The Etrac rear end of pole jack mount, concealed coil wire and connector, and camlock shaft adjustment are superior to many detectors, but not waterproof. Garrett control tactiles are nice and easy to feel, their designation not so easy to read by these eyes. The hand grip on the Garrett feels nicer in your hand than does the Etrac. The control panel layout and features are quite straightforward like the Etrac. The Etrac is menu driven, but once you take the time to learn and setup the detector correctly for your hunt and conditions, it becomes the easiest true "turn-on-and-go" machine in my opinion.
Given the Etrac's greater weight, you would think it would not handle better than the Garrett, but it does with the 8AA batteries under the arm cup. Garrett is a tad front end heavy, but swings nicely regardless. At the end of a long day both detectors are heavy! Coils on both detectors are quite well made, but the round 11" Etrac coil is the same weight as the Garrett 8x11.
The small dislikes about the Garrett aside, I think the AT-Pro is a very good detector considering the difference in the price paid for both my detectors. Good enough for me when the weather gets nasty! I give it a 4 out of 5 stars.][/b]
At Pro! Remember! The Man Owns Both the Etrac and AT Pro but uses the AT Pro for days that have
to much moisture to take his etrac out.. I believe he Hit the Nail on the head with his thoughts and
his intentions are honest without any malice toward both the Etrac and the AT Pro! So read it with an
open mind knowing his intentions and opinions are at best "Helpful"
Keep in mind since his response to me I have since just purchased a Brand New AT-Pro
and anxiously await it's arrival
Hope this helps someone who might have a few questions of there own....Duggr
[bI use an AT-Pro as lightweight backup for my Etrac, especially on rainy days miles back in the woods! So far the AT does a good job finding targets in iron laden sites, even with the 8x11 2D coil. My ground here balances around "84" which on Garrett's scale is fairly high iron mineralized. Ground balances are dynamically made and quite easy to do. The Etrac is effortless because ground balance tracking is handled by algorithmic circuitry automatically.
Depth is almost as good as the Etrac in some areas of lesser mineral and iron, but the Etrac is still king in the tough areas. The Garrett runs a bit noisy in the upper sensitivity range in the PRO mode, not as smooth as the Etrac. It does not have a threshold to hear iron nulls like the Etrac, but you can use the Iron Audio feature to know if you are getting close to a dwelling site. I have to turn it off to enjoy myself at the site though. I do find the Garrett, because of single frequency operation to be quite sensitive to gold items and its high speed recovery gives good detection and separation close to rejectables.
The display is tiny compared to the Etrac, but fortunately I can just read the target numericals with these older eyes! The LCD screen could use a better contrast... Etrac is adjustable. The numerical ID's are fairly consistent for the same type of target, but at depths greater than 9-10", the numericals can go blank or inconsistent while the audio is still alerting you. Etrac goes deep with consistent resolute ID in my soil. I like the AT audio even though it is digital. Sounds a lot like my old Groundhog. I love the audio on the digital Etrac, smooth and warm sounding.
Like the Etac, you won't lose your settings when the 4AA batteries are changed. Battery changes are quite easy considering the waterproof designation. However you need to mark the battery carrier as to the correct orientation upon reinsertion. You won't burn the detector up on a wrong insertion, you just have to do it all again if you are wrong. Etrac battery carrier enters the housing in only one way.
Not in love with the Garrett connectors, quality made, but poor design. Can be difficult to insert by virtue of the waterproof rating. Not thrilled about the backward travel of the headphone wire from the control housing near the hand grip. The Etrac rear end of pole jack mount, concealed coil wire and connector, and camlock shaft adjustment are superior to many detectors, but not waterproof. Garrett control tactiles are nice and easy to feel, their designation not so easy to read by these eyes. The hand grip on the Garrett feels nicer in your hand than does the Etrac. The control panel layout and features are quite straightforward like the Etrac. The Etrac is menu driven, but once you take the time to learn and setup the detector correctly for your hunt and conditions, it becomes the easiest true "turn-on-and-go" machine in my opinion.
Given the Etrac's greater weight, you would think it would not handle better than the Garrett, but it does with the 8AA batteries under the arm cup. Garrett is a tad front end heavy, but swings nicely regardless. At the end of a long day both detectors are heavy! Coils on both detectors are quite well made, but the round 11" Etrac coil is the same weight as the Garrett 8x11.
The small dislikes about the Garrett aside, I think the AT-Pro is a very good detector considering the difference in the price paid for both my detectors. Good enough for me when the weather gets nasty! I give it a 4 out of 5 stars.][/b]