AT Pro question

Of these latest out/latest produced AT Pros----is there some that appear to be hotter (deeper) than others?----I know there's been a lot of talk about the earlier ATP's in that regard---but I'm just asking about the latest produced ones.-----If the answer is in the affirmative--how do you find one (when purchased new)?----Or is it just a "crap shoot" upon purchase?----Any specific S/N groups or "guidelines" to look for (other than being able to get your hands on one & being able to actually test it)?---------Thanks, Del

The first AT's before they fixed the Coil noise problem was the deepest unit....after the fix the depth dropped of....

the modern ones seem to be about the same I have seen some a little hotter and a little colder but no extreme's like a tesoro used to be...

There great machines for go anywhere do anything...and excellent iron unmasker's..adequete depth.. and more depth can be massaged out by ground bal manipulation with out alot of feedback problem's...

Keith

Keith Southern Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The first AT's before they fixed the Coil noise
> problem was the deepest unit....after the fix the
> depth dropped of....
>
> the modern ones seem to be about the same I have
> seen some a little hotter and a little colder but
> no extreme's like a tesoro used to be...
>
> There great machines for go anywhere do
> anything...and excellent iron unmasker's..adequete
> depth.. and more depth can be massaged out by
> ground bal manipulation with out alot of feedback
> problem's...
>
> Keith


Thanks Keith----That's what I was trying to determine.---Sounds like the newer AT Pros are fairly consistant then as to depth capabilities.----I've read your past posts on gb manipulation on the AT Pro, I will go back & try to find that info again.---I just purchased a new AT Pro from Richard & this one seems to me to be hotter than an earlier one I had.---------Thanks again, Del

> > -I just purchased a new AT Pro from Richard & this one seems to me to be hotter than an earlier one I had.....is it a blonde or brunette ?

Just the opposite for me. Last weekend I had my AT Pro on the dry sand of a NJ beach. I was very disappointed in the depth I was getting. My first AT Pro was deeper. There is also a flaw in the new shaft system. After only one use in the sand my shafts were virtually locked together. I am lucky that I got them apart. Well the AT Pro is gone. I sold it within one hour of my return from the beach. I have sold quite a few detectors. Many I miss after they are gone. Not the AT Pro. I have never seen a detector where you can max out sensitivity and It leaves you wanting more. Almost every other detector out there you reach a point of unstable operation. Not my recent AT Pro. It just remains as stable as can be with lousy depth. A great detector for the iron. But I wanted a dry sand detector with target ID.

I kind of agree with you, goodmore. My experience with the AT hasn't been lousy depth, but it could definitely be more in many areas if Garrett would just notch up the sensitivity the equivalent of a couple bars..

Anytime you have a detector you can run at max sensitivity most places (not to mention usually with a negative GB bias), that machine should have the sensitivity cranked up at the factory.

X3 on what goodmore said!! I went back and found some video of me with my first AT Pro and it was better on depth. From my video it would air test about an inch more than the latest one I just had. So in other words, it would air test a minie ball at approx 11 inches vs the latest one I had on the same settings, that would go about 10. The in ground stuff was better as well...in the video I have, I am taking the old one through my test garden and it's actually hitting the deeper minie ball I have buried there around 7"...vs the newer one that I had, which wouldn't hit it.

I thought the one I had would be just fine for me...that it would get good enough depth, and handle each different situation I would encounter for no more than I planned on hunting. I quickly found out that I just wont settle for sub par performance when I KNOW there are better things out there on the market. So I may only use it once a month but when I do, it's going to be the best I can afford. I'm back with an F75 now and I tell ya what...I almost bit the bullet on a CTX 3030 instead...just for the nerd in me. Hahah.

I would like to see Garret give us a stripped down, higher powered unit. How many of you run in anything but Pro Zero? I only did once...by accident...and was confused at what the hell that awful bell tone was, lol. And let us crank it up, most of us have no problem dealing with the pops n clicks

deathray Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I would like to see Garret give us a stripped
> down, higher powered unit. How many of you run in
> anything but Pro Zero? I only did once...by
> accident...and was confused at what the hell that
> awful bell tone was, lol. And let us crank it up,
> most of us have no problem dealing with the pops n
> clicks

LoL

Not used to Garrett machines Death??

That "BellTone" is Garrett's way of informing you of a coin (possibly ring) under the coil! Of course --- it could also be a soda can/large object too but that's easy enough to determine...

I do agree with the "let us crank it up" statement --- but --- Garrett has never been known for allowing the user to do so on any of their machines for like the last 20 yrs or so

they changed when the computer era/age came to be, and made all of their machines with predetermined settings based on which "mode" you're running in

that's been the downside to their machines since.

yeah a deep machine that we can hunt in trash and parks and for relics I would get it and start hitting a lot of places I know gold rings and coins are just too deep to find. Wish Tom could work on other detectors and hot wire my At gold though I have no idea how deep it is yet.

LowBoy

TAKE A LITTLE TIME KICKBACK AND WATCH SOME OF MY DETECTING VIDEO'S BELOW ON YouTube

[www.youtube.com]

If you don’t dig it, then how are you going to know what you’re missing!
How can you have your pudding if you don’t eat your meat!

Hi, My findings are kinda just the opposite of the prevalent occurring responses.....My personal stored data collection shows that my updated AT Pro was a good two inches deeper than the first ones out... I also noticed that they made an improvement on it's ability to ID more accurately at greater depths.....The batch consistency seems to be very uniform with one another with only some very slight variations.....It seems like we all want more depth, but right now I believe Garrett has these AT's pumped to the maximum while still maintaining a stable unit....I own two of these AT's and both of them have to simmer down when I first fire them up,,,yes they need to be preheated....It takes a couple of minutes then the chatter goes away and they are ready to hunt....I personally don't need anymore sensitivity and find myself running it down a tad to better distinguish the deeper targets....I also have not found the small coil or the iron audio doing anything magical for me as of yet... I have tried these new fangled things and settings in different hunting scenarios with little or no benefit ....Now don't get me wrong I want to be a BELIEVER and still have not given up yet....Those of you that are getting a lack of depth or erroneous results in the field or in test gardens should consider that the moisture content of the soil along with other contributing factors will give you inaccurate results to make a reliable comparison....I been running this beautiful black beast almost daily since they first came out with them...WoW I made a tongue twister, try saying this ten times "beautiful black beast ".....HIH....JJ

I never said it got horrible depth, just average I would say. Certainly not in the same league as the vista gold I had, or my Sov. Mines always been quite and smooth. Definitely a nice detector though, and yes Wayne, this is my first Garrett, lol. Hope I never hear those dam bells again, lol.