Menu
What's new
Find's Treasure Forums

Welcome to Find's Treasure Forums, Guests!

You are viewing this forums as a guest which limits you to read only status.

Only registered members may post stories, questions, classifieds, reply to other posts, contact other members using built in messaging and use many other features found on these forums.

Why not register and join us today? It's free! (We don't share your email addresses with anyone.) We keep email addresses of our users to protect them and others from bad people posting things they shouldn't.

Click here to register!

Need Support Help?

Cannot log in?, click here to have new password emailed to you

Changed email? Forgot to update your account with new email address? Need assistance with something else?, click here to go to Find's Support Form and fill out the form.

AT Pro vs the E-Trac and DFX on gold video.

Southwind

Southwind

Well-known member
OK so I can't count. Not sure why I kept saying "these 4 items" when there was only 3.

Anyway, as I said this test is only meant to show me what detector to take where. The E-Trac doesn't do as well on the gold, but it is the detector I test all other against when it comes to deep silver.

[video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_5IzyhvtOd4[/video]
 
Thanks for posting ! Interesting results !!
 
Impressive differences. Thanks for doing this and posting it.

Jerry
 
My guess from the start was that it was given the 15 kHz to be hot on both gold and the machine is also very hot on holed objects such as rings, pull tabs, earrings etc. My guess is that there will soon be gold ring finds that will pay for the AT Pro in one hunt.
 
Yes, the ATpro is hot on gold. I found 3 nice pieces in my first two hunts. (posted on this forum) Plus the depth on high conductors was insane. I'm sure deep silver will make it's way to light as soon as it warms up around here. Thanks for the test.
 
Well that less expensive Garrett made those more costly detectors look pitiful! Good video....!

I just cant rap my ears round those Minelab tones......just weird to me.

Alan
 
Looking good, AT pro really showed who is the man, to those overpriced detectors ...:thumbup:
 
The AT is about to make a lot of detectors look pitiful. Old Charles and crew slipped it to them again. First the red hot 250 followed by the even hotter 350 and now the AT PRO. Should really be a banner year for Garrett and I don't think they are finished yet and more surprises may be on the way.

Bill
 
First we'll consider the AT Pro which you said you set in the PROportional Mode with Zero Discrimination. I don't recall the Sensitivity level used.

Next, the E-Trac which you said was with all the programs accepted, but to be similar you should have used the Iron Mask setting set to zero for all metal accept, just like the AT Pro in the PRO mode set at Zero.

With the DFX I didn't hear mention of the settings used, but it, too, should have been set close or very similar. I would have used the Relic mode setting and accepted everything from at least -40 to +95. That would have been much closer.

The three models should have had very similar Discriminate mode selections as well as Sensitivity level settings. Naturally, the next step would be to compare the three models, using very similar settings, out in-the-field on naturally located targets. I know, it's not easy to do when comparing gold jewelry responses, but the rest of the models could have been set very similarly.

Still, a nice set of target samples, and yes, I know what the AT Pro might do with the settings described ... in an 'Air Test.'

Since you have those three models to compare with now, it would be good to hear what the results would be after some field time together. Yes, this is a Garrett Forum, but honest evaluations are still meaningful.

Happy Hunting in 2011!

Monte
 
OK, I realize you don't know me from Adam. I've been swinging a detector for more than 30 years and while I've only been using the E-Trac for a little over a year, I've been a DFX user since the day they came out. I guess what I'm trying to say is I do know how to get good depth out of my detectors.

The AT PRO's sensitivity was at default/7.
The E-Trac WAS started with Quick Mask everything set to 0, sensitivity at Auto +3.
The DFX was set to accept everything from +93 down to -30.

I make it a point to run my detectors at the maximum STABLE settings.

I have run all 3 in the wild quite a bit. As expected, the E-Trac does very well on deep silver(a 1926 merc at 8" to be exact) and the AT PRO hit it as well, although not quite as clean, and the DFX saw nothing. So far the E-Trac has found nothing the AT PRO couldn't also see, but the AT PRO did find a wheat the E-Trac called likely junk. The E-Trac would hit from 1 side while the AT PRO hit from all sides.

I know these were only air tests, but I really have no doubt the E-Trac wouldn't do any better on the gold if it were in the ground.
 
For gold it looks good, I am sure silver would be another matter. Thanks for the vid
 
you dont compare multi freq detectors by air testing them.
 
you dont compare multi freq detectors by air testing them.
Click to expand...

The DFX is a multi-frequency and it does just fine.

Tell you what, I've been using the E-Trac for over a year now and love it to death for the one thing it does better than any other detector. Tell me when a deep copper or silver is there. My other detectors can hit those extremely deep targets, but they can't tell me it's a coin as well as the E-Trac.

People are making up all kinds of excuses as to how I made this misleading video, so here is the deal for you conspiracy freaks. You tell me how I need to adjust the E-Trac to pick up that earring and cross and I'll make another video using them. I did the test in quick mask with no discrimination period. A completely blank screen. I even tried using pinpoint mode and the E-Trac saw nothing. Now I will tell you both the DFX and AT PRO were in the same modes I hunt with all the time. The E-Trac was the only one I changed trying to get it to see the gold. I would love to see the E-Trac get this gold, if it can.

So there you go. Tell me how to make it see that gold and I'll do another video using those settings.
 
From my field experience (limited as it is) the AT Pro is not as quiet or as stable as the E-trac around salt water.
I have had conditions on a dry sand beach (just today) that the AT Pro went nuts reporting 15 hits per swing in various tones.
This was after using it on a beach just a few miles away at max sensitivity with no problems.

The E-trac was stable and quiet (in the beach mode) and that is what I used there.
Found one penny (6") and a lot of foil pieces.

Not saying one is better than the other ... they are very different in the way they work ... and each detector will have certain conditions they will work best in.
It's just that I have not found anywhere the E-trac would not work like it was expected to.
And no ... I aint gonna dunk my E-trac in the salt water like I can the AT Pro ... :surprised: ...
A real field test takes time in the field ... ideally ... with two people each checking the same target before it is dug up.
However, using one detector in a given area and then the other in the same area is also valid but limited as to results.

Air tests are valid when a detector can not detect a small piece of gold touching its coil bottom while another can see the same target inches away.
I doubt the detector that could not detect the target on its coil would ever see it in the ground.
 
you can't air test multi-frequency machines air testing. My Fisher F2 beats my ETrac air testing...LOL, but when I found the back of a gold earing at a Pittsburgh park at about 6" that not much even picked up at all + I was digging everything to clear the park out, trust me, gold shows up, it's running a range of 28 frequencies at once....LOL. The key is knowing your machine...the Etrac isn't a run--gun machine like some of the others. You go slow-n-low and clear an entire park out in a day.
 
I would have to agree...3 totally different beasts there....Though I have heard the e-Trak is better suited to deep silver than gold...I am shocked the DFX has so much trouble though...

HH,
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top