Terry in PA
New member
On the depth difference between standard and Pro mode ?
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.
Has anyone done a depth comparison with the AT Pro...
- Thread starter Terry in PA
- Start date
Big Boys Hobbies
Well-known member
2-3 inches is what I get also. Don't put much stock in air testing though.
Frank in NH
Active member
n/t
I know air tests have their limitations when compared to a target in a soil matrix, however, the common denominator of differences in depth remains the same. Both histograms indicate the differences on each graph on the two right hand side tests. And my own conclusion based on hunting in the field validates my results.
Terry in PA
New member
n/t
The depth difference is about 1" on the dime. Good eye. Probably some human error ie. swing speed, angle of dime, guestomating to nearest 1/2 inch 
BuckeyeBrad
New member
Why the 3" difference on the two graphs reference to the 14K ring? Also, when you did these tests, did you happen to note the depths where you still got a diggable signal but lost numeric ID being displayed? Trying to compare the results you saw with what I see here to help determine if mine is "sick". Some were sorta close but none were as good as yours.
The 3" depth difference was probably due to the swing speed and orientation of the ring to the coil. Neither histograms were intended to present any accuracy towards the depth capabilities of any machine used. The first illustrations shows target responses between different metal detectors including Pro and Standard Mode of the AT Pro. I am not surprised at all at the 3" difference with that gold ring. I was using a faster swing speed across the coils, as I often swing the sniper coil 144 sweeps/minute, which is effective and proven to increase depth for targets. And, although swinging a larger coil that fast is rare and quite difficult, I tend to maintain a faster swing speed then the guys I hunt with. The second illustration shows the difference between the "DD" 8.5" x 11" vs the concentric 9" x 12" coil comparisons in both Pro mode and standard mode. No reason to swing very fast, as I am not including a sniper coil for comparisons.
So as you are quite aware Brad, the many external environmental, electromagnetic, target orientation to coil variables which can influence both the depth and audio readings on the metal detector. I probably could have gotten that gold ring to read at 18" by increasing the swing speed, disconnecting the television cable, turning out the lights and repeating the same tests in an environment free of all metal objects for a minimal distance of 25 feet. And, you could do the same test using the same targets in the same place a week later, and you would see differences in results.
I didn't pay any attention to the digital readouts on these tests. To be honest, I am not used to utilizing them for discrimination purposes, as I have no other detector which has the capabilities to give a numeric number to depth. I am used to using only audio, my gut feeling and digger to find out what a target is. If you are not sure if your metal detector is operating properly, call Garrett. They designed it and would most likely be familiar with it's operating characteristics.
Hope this helps......
http://www.garrett.com/contact.htm
So as you are quite aware Brad, the many external environmental, electromagnetic, target orientation to coil variables which can influence both the depth and audio readings on the metal detector. I probably could have gotten that gold ring to read at 18" by increasing the swing speed, disconnecting the television cable, turning out the lights and repeating the same tests in an environment free of all metal objects for a minimal distance of 25 feet. And, you could do the same test using the same targets in the same place a week later, and you would see differences in results.
I didn't pay any attention to the digital readouts on these tests. To be honest, I am not used to utilizing them for discrimination purposes, as I have no other detector which has the capabilities to give a numeric number to depth. I am used to using only audio, my gut feeling and digger to find out what a target is. If you are not sure if your metal detector is operating properly, call Garrett. They designed it and would most likely be familiar with it's operating characteristics.
Hope this helps......
http://www.garrett.com/contact.htm
BuckeyeBrad
New member
Thanks for the reply, John and when you say......"And, you could do the same test using the same targets in the same place a week later, and you would see differences in results."......I totally agree because I've seen it many times (although never quite that much). That's why if I'm ever comparing detectors either statically or in the field, it's always same time, back to back, Yes, the AT needs to go back because of a couple other obvious things but the depth might be as good as it gets. We'll see.