Which is deeper, Omega w/11" DD or AT Pro w/11" DD :shrug:

[Cal_Cobra]

Both are very capable machines, about the same price point, and both have a 11" DD coil.

Has anyone compared these machines? If so, what were your results and what settings did you use on the machines?

Thanks, and HH!
Brian

 

[TerraDigger]

Excellent question. Look forward to the replys.

 

[John LA]

The depth detecting the coins with the Omega in d2 (or d1) and the Garrett is about the same. With Omega in d3 or d4, the AT Pro can ID the coins at a greater depth. The AT Pro can identify coins at a greater depth than it can pinpoint them. The AT Pro detects deeper if the GB is set correct and that may be tricky. The AT Pro has a broad setting that it considers GB; you will have to work with that some to get max depth.

 

[Ronk]

n/t

 

[Big Boys Hobbies]

The depth detecting the coins with the Omega in d2 (or d1) and the Garrett is about the same. With Omega in d3 or d4, the AT Pro can ID the coins at a greater depth. The AT Pro can identify coins at a greater depth than it can pinpoint them. The AT Pro detects deeper if the GB is set correct and that may be tricky. The AT Pro has a broad setting that it considers GB; you will have to work with that some to get max depth.

I dont really find this true on coins. Maybe nickles because of lower freq. Everyone's soil and conditions are different though.

I find the 11" a tiny bit deeper but not very noticeable. Separates better but you lose the better target ID and locking on coins like the 10" stock coil is so good at. I still prefer 10" stock.

 

[BuckeyeBrad]

With the two examples I have, the former is consistantly deeper overall and the disparity around depth with numeric ID is even more.

 

[John LA]

Of coarse my post is just my opinion. AT Pro;For max depth one must get the GB right on not more than 3 numbers off. I don't know how you would do that unless you manually set for max depth, trial and error.
Probably someday they will work out the GB problem. Maybe they have on the AT Gold. AT Gold with threshold and adjustable GB width may just do it.

 

[rick (nova scotia)]

Brian hi,

From someone who has used both at the same time, AND, not trying to sell you anything. On an approximate 12 inch deep big copper (early english half panny) Both machines hit it with stock coil. The fact is the Garrett hit it more "solidly" than the Omega.


Having said that, depth is not necessarily the most important factor. as most coins you will find are certainly less than 12 inches deep. If you do a lot of hunting, the Omega is a lighter, and far better balanced ergonomicly. Aaaa, but the Garrett is waterproof...so how do you compare with that ? as they say no one perfect detector...which one is right for you ?

 

[John LA]

I've never found a coin at 11". Most of the good ones around here are 6 to 7". That said I buried a dime on edge at 10". A perfectly ground balanced AT Pro will detect it in my soil (test garden). Come to think of it; it was kind of dumb to put one down that deep.

 

[Bill_S]

I had both. I still have the Omega. In my soil the Omega was just a little deeper. Not much. The biggest advantage the Omega had over it was a more stable TID. It was lighter too, better warranty, better audio. The AT Pro was not very good on nickels as far as accurate TID after a few inches. I mostly coin hunt in trashy areas and that is important to me. They both do a good job in iron though. AT Pro has had a lot of units that leaked or falsed or had other issues but Garrett seems to be taking care of those problems. Both of the ones I had had to be sent back.