Heading out this morning with both units and a bag full of golf tees to test out the differences of the CTX and AT Pro. Since I have more time on the Pro I'll start out with her and mark suspected good signals then hunt the same areas with the CTX and mark good signals with different color tees to see which hit the same targets, missed targets etc... Guess I just want to get an idea of what these machines will do side by side...
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.
Field testing CTX to AT Pro today.
- Thread starter SE-5
- Start date
DirtAngler
New member
I disagree about test gardens. While they will not give accurate indications compared to real world hunts until they have been in place for quite awhile, they are still a good learning tool for comparison and testing, or why would Norfolk Wolf and Dankowski as well as many others suggest and use them. JMHO.
Ed Steinhoff
Active member
I like the golf tee idea! I had thought abut using the little wire flags surveyors use but the wire would interfere. If you don't mind I will borrow your idea and do some of my own comparison's. HH Ed in Co.
TheMarshall
New member
(1).....I disagree about test gardens.
(2) While they will not give accurate indications compared to real world hunts until they have been in place for quite awhile, .............................................................................
...........they are still a good learning tool for comparison and testing, or why would Norfolk Wolf and Dankowski as well as many others suggest and use them. JMHO.
*****************************************************
Hi Dirty !!!!.....Happy new year to you......and all the readers.
Wow...what a hectic Christmas!!!!.....All the grandchildren etc., are back in their own paddocks...We've cleared all the Xmas 'debris', and are slowly getting back to normal.
Thought I'd have a peak at the forum, and maybe offer a comment on a favourite topic.....Testing is one such item.
The first observation is really about peoples perceptions.
Often they make the wrong assumption that 'creative testing' is meant to be a definitive comparison to some other results in a different location, time, zone etc.,
It is not, and never can be so, for a dozen or more basic reasons.
So why would anyone criticise the proposal?.......Only if they've not thought about matters.
Test gardens:- Simple ' Pop it in the ground'...'.on the ground'....one foot deep.....all are legit.
AS LONG AS YOU ARE SENSIBLE ENOUGH AS NOT TO COMPARE ONE METHODOLOGY WITH OTHER DIFFERING ONES !!!
They are UNIQUE, and meant to be considered within their own limitations,
Targets are found....on top off the ground...shallow....in loose soil.....etc.......So what is 'STANDARD'?
The important thing about ANY test or proposals, is that they should be WELL DEFINED......[size=large]That,[/size] legitimises the test.
Every individual 'real time' target find is unique, and different from the next one, and unless you can extract it, still contained within its own cubic lump of soil, and x-ray it for actual depth, angle, soil properties etc.,.......then we only 'approximately' know about that find's situation.
An established and well documented test garden is far more likely to be a meaningful test of ALL your detectors.
Just a few personal thoughts on the subject.......Matt.
(2) While they will not give accurate indications compared to real world hunts until they have been in place for quite awhile, .............................................................................
...........they are still a good learning tool for comparison and testing, or why would Norfolk Wolf and Dankowski as well as many others suggest and use them. JMHO.
*****************************************************
Hi Dirty !!!!.....Happy new year to you......and all the readers.
Wow...what a hectic Christmas!!!!.....All the grandchildren etc., are back in their own paddocks...We've cleared all the Xmas 'debris', and are slowly getting back to normal.
Thought I'd have a peak at the forum, and maybe offer a comment on a favourite topic.....Testing is one such item.
The first observation is really about peoples perceptions.
Often they make the wrong assumption that 'creative testing' is meant to be a definitive comparison to some other results in a different location, time, zone etc.,
It is not, and never can be so, for a dozen or more basic reasons.
So why would anyone criticise the proposal?.......Only if they've not thought about matters.
Test gardens:- Simple ' Pop it in the ground'...'.on the ground'....one foot deep.....all are legit.
AS LONG AS YOU ARE SENSIBLE ENOUGH AS NOT TO COMPARE ONE METHODOLOGY WITH OTHER DIFFERING ONES !!!
They are UNIQUE, and meant to be considered within their own limitations,
Targets are found....on top off the ground...shallow....in loose soil.....etc.......So what is 'STANDARD'?
The important thing about ANY test or proposals, is that they should be WELL DEFINED......[size=large]That,[/size] legitimises the test.
Every individual 'real time' target find is unique, and different from the next one, and unless you can extract it, still contained within its own cubic lump of soil, and x-ray it for actual depth, angle, soil properties etc.,.......then we only 'approximately' know about that find's situation.
An established and well documented test garden is far more likely to be a meaningful test of ALL your detectors.
Just a few personal thoughts on the subject.......Matt.
BarberBill
New member
I agree with TheMarshall. Additionally, many malign air tests, but IMHO they have their uses. They're useful for a quick comparison if a particular detector/coil combination's performance seems to have deteriorated compared to an earlier test - or distance of detection between one coil and another on the same machine with the settings unchanged. I'm not saying they're a good substitute for real world in ground tests, but still offer another check on performance.
BB
BB
TheMarshall
New member
SE-5 said:Loaded up the truck, came back inside to get my coffee and bam, wife derailed me!!
*****************************************************************
"Many Happy Returns Of The Day"......even if it isn't your birthday!
Leisure...........................................................by W. H. Davies
WHAT is this life if, full of care,
We have no time to stand and stare?