Garrett AT Pro vs Fisher Gold Bug Pro..

[LuckyLarry]

Fisher could have fixed it, maybe even for free. I knew a guy who had a BH that was too sensitive so he taped a big washer on top of the coil. It had auto-retune. That washer fixed the problem. Kinda' funny though..

It sounds like someone may have internally set your CZ way too high, maybe at the factory.

From the CZ 21 manual: "you may reduce your sensitivity level so you just ignore the very deepest target" (referring to deep iron targets out of range for most metal detectors).

I do know that CZ's were initially CREATED to find deep civil war iron, brass, pewter, copper, and lead items. In my own experience I discovered that my CZ could find a rusty tin can lid clear down to Hades in bad soil if I turned it up to full sensitivity. If I back mine to under 4 I couldn't find the rusty lid any more. Mine likes to find guns, it's real good at the task.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

A History of Mining on the Kenai Peninsula, Alaska - Grab it through Amazon!

[LuckyLarry]

Something else interesting..
[h=2]GNRS 2013:[/h] Not sure about 2014, but it looks like FT had a hayday:


March 18, 2013 ·
Team Teknetics® and Team Fisher® place first and second
at the 2013 Grand National Relic Shootout
First Texas Products led a field of more than 200 of the best metal detectorists in the U.S.A. in equipment, talent and finds at the 2013 Grand National Relic Shootout (GNRS), held March 1 and 2 at a site near Richmond, VA.
GNRS is the Super Bowl of metal detecting so we entered two of our most well-known and proven hobby brands in the competition, Teknetics® and Fisher®. Three of our employees – all experts in metal detecting – were in the hunt: Mike Scott and Lupe Guerrero were on our Teknetics® team, and Gene Scullion was on our Fisher® team.
The hunt area contained a colonial village site dating back to the early 1600’s and in 1864, General Ulysses S. Grant charged over this same property with 40,000 Union troops. The site, now a beautiful swath of countryside, is ripe with Civil War relics.
Two of the best overall finds of the competition were an ID badge and a sword. Using his Teknetics® T2, Jeff Rees found a Civil War silver soldier ID badge bearing the name of a soldier and all the battles he had fought. Using his Fisher® Gold Bug, Tracy Short unearthed a Rapier sword with silver overlay, from the early 1600’s.
Here are the final results of the 2013 GNRS:
Team standings:
#1 Teknetics®
#2 Fisher®
#3 Minelab
#4 Garrett
#5 Orphan
#6 Nautilus
#7 Tesoro
#8 Whites
Top individual point scorers overall:
#1 Mike Scott – Teknetics®
#3 Gene Scullion – Fisher®
#4 Michael McKinney – Fisher®
#5 Dan Knight – Teknetics®

 

[DiggerinVA]

When i was a kid, i wore the shoes, etc. that the big name athletes wore.......Now i am a grown man and i buy what i like!

 

[dirtscratcher]

Something else interesting..
[h=2]GNRS 2013:[/h] Not sure about 2014, but it looks like FT had a hayday:


March 18, 2013 ·
Team Teknetics® and Team Fisher® place first and second
at the 2013 Grand National Relic Shootout
First Texas Products led a field of more than 200 of the best metal detectorists in the U.S.A. in equipment, talent and finds at the 2013 Grand National Relic Shootout (GNRS), held March 1 and 2 at a site near Richmond, VA.
GNRS is the Super Bowl of metal detecting so we entered two of our most well-known and proven hobby brands in the competition, Teknetics® and Fisher®. Three of our employees – all experts in metal detecting – were in the hunt: Mike Scott and Lupe Guerrero were on our Teknetics® team, and Gene Scullion was on our Fisher® team.
The hunt area contained a colonial village site dating back to the early 1600’s and in 1864, General Ulysses S. Grant charged over this same property with 40,000 Union troops. The site, now a beautiful swath of countryside, is ripe with Civil War relics.
Two of the best overall finds of the competition were an ID badge and a sword. Using his Teknetics® T2, Jeff Rees found a Civil War silver soldier ID badge bearing the name of a soldier and all the battles he had fought. Using his Fisher® Gold Bug, Tracy Short unearthed a Rapier sword with silver overlay, from the early 1600’s.
Here are the final results of the 2013 GNRS:
Team standings:
#1 Teknetics®
#2 Fisher®
#3 Minelab
#4 Garrett
#5 Orphan
#6 Nautilus
#7 Tesoro
#8 Whites
Top individual point scorers overall:
#1 Mike Scott – Teknetics®
#3 Gene Scullion – Fisher®
#4 Michael McKinney – Fisher®
#5 Dan Knight – Teknetics®

The thing about the big hunt is they would if they could. I mean what company wouldn't want bragging rites. There is something to the first Texas detectors.

 

[LuckyLarry]

It seems that FT has been taking 1st and 2nd for maybe the last 3-4 years or more. I think Naughty carried the load before that.

 

[dirtscratcher]

It seems that FT has been taking 1st and 2nd for maybe the last 3-4 years or more. I think Naughty carried the load before that.

Exactly, if somone could beat them it would be great publicity if nothing else. I'm sure garret would love to have that trophy but the atp or gold don't seem to be the ones to get it done with.

 

[LuckyLarry]

I seriously doubt that an ATP or ATG even enters the huge event, unless they wish to foolishly enter the contest and waste their time and money to get there. Those Fishers, Teknetics, and Minelabs are in a completely different league than the rest of them. Here are 3 videos from the big hunt:

 

[bigfoot1]

I seriously doubt that an ATP or ATG even enters the huge event, unless they wish to foolishly enter the contest and waste their time and money to get there.


I'm curious if you know which garretts took 4th.

 

[LuckyLarry]

I don't know Bigfoot, but here are the results for 2011:

Bounty Hunter / Teknetics - 640 points
Nautilus - 472 points
Fisher - 417 points
Minelab - 335 points
Tesoro - 261 points
Whites - 257 points
Garrett - 174 points ;;
Grand National Relic Shootout (GNRS) | Treasure Quest Metal Detecting Forum

 

[dirtscratcher]

I seriously doubt that an ATP or ATG even enters the huge event, unless they wish to foolishly enter the contest and waste their time and money to get there.


I'm curious if you know which garretts took 4th.

They are using one in the second video.

 

[LuckyLarry]

I saw that too DS, but I didn't see him or his name in the winnings. Some people really do waste their time doing foolish things:

"to foolishly enter the contest and waste their time and money to get there."

Here is another way too look at it:

"Don't wrestle a hungry grizzly bear unless you want to be eaten."

 

[DiggerinVA]

I have hunted civil war relics with every machine I have owned....and I have found 2 plates....both were in public areas that have been detected since I was a kid. Guess what I found both those plates with Larry.....the ATpro!!! Alot of it has to do with how good you know your machine. Just wondering when you are going to be done trashing Garrett with another of your ridiculous posts. You act like a child over a sports team.....people like and do well with garrett machines. ..get over it....

 

[LuckyLarry]

I'll say this one more time Digger.. although I think you already know it..

I like the Master Hunters, the GTI's,
the ATX, VERY much
the old ADS Deepseekers,
the Infinium,
Except for (my) Tesoro Tejon, my old Deepseeker had the deepest all-metal I've ever seen, even outdoing a Fisher 440d, but barely.
The Sea Hunter II that I currently own and almost treasure, is a BEAST!
The new ATX, I like it better than the Minelab PI's, BY FAR.
But the Aces and the ATP's with their "boing" or "bong" sounds were and still are really annoying to me, and to others too.
I found the Aces and the ATP's still needing some more work to be very good cherry-pickers, they don't auto-retune quickly because their (basic) circuitry is really old-school, slower, and not improved like the ATG. And that's why those forerunners stutter and mask targets when swung very fast. They really did a good job at tweaking them and turning them into the ATG.
The ATG is a lot better detector than the ATP or the Aces, although the (BASIC) circuitry for all three is similar inside. THE ATG sounds better too.
I didn't make the videos, someone else did. I don't make videos, but I try to tell people that I discovered a video, am posting it, but it is up to them to make their own judgements calls about them. I know 1st hand that the Fisher GBP is a better-made detector, and that the ATP uses a lot {{older}} technology because it does, and that the GBP is better technologically, and that the GBP finds gold nuggets better. However, I did not write anything untruthful at all - and I don't point fingers at people or insult them either, it just causes trouble.

I wrote this, and posted someone else's video evaluation of the two side-by-side.
Quote: "I discovered this and thought I'd post it. ATP owners often get real emotional about theirs, but this does show somewhat of a difference between the two for discrimination/cherry-picking abilities.. Enjoy.. "

Here is the ATP, and this man is really, really trying to get good results by swing it v-e-r-y slowly, but the old borrowed technology is just plain too slow to get the same clean results like many other detectors with newer, better technology do, i.e. First Texas, Minelab, or Tesoro, etc. The following Whites uses the same basic technology that the ATP does, but it is engineered better, so it works better in this test.

 

[DiggerinVA]

Your posts only show your lack of knowledge on this subject....It is also very clear that you have never used an ATpro as the recovery speed is very good...probably in the top 5 or 6 machines made in the U.S.! But you only get this speed if used in the pro mode....you also will not get that "booing" sound in the pro mode. The audio in pro mode is very similar to that on the CZ machines that you love so dealry....And the ATpro lacks nothing in heavy iron! This is 90% of my spots.....HEAVY IRON TRASH....the ATpro or gold do great in iron with the 5x8 coils....and also so you DO know: The ATpro has twice the recovery speed of any of the CZ line!

 

[LuckyLarry]

Well, I think you may have missed something though Digger, The CZ is ALSO very slow at return, it was designed that way, purposely. It's not a gold nugget machine, it's a relic machine. It was designed to be used to hunt (slowly) for deep relics or on salt/black sand beaches. The cz however is not my favorite dry land detector, my little $59 Chinese-made/American Company owned park machine and my Compass GS Pro are. My Garrett SH II and my CZ are my wide-open tools, what I use to hunt with when the black sand level is extremely high or if I am out hunting in a big pasture. It's a real poor cherry-picker and no better than the ATP. The ATG does a better job at that task than either of those, it's basic circuitry has been modified and improved.

I learned a lot about metal detectors when I re-designed them as time went along, and I ran a crew that also processed their PC boards, controls, etc., I still learn more about the devices every time I use one. And even though I worked for the Department of Defense using Top Secret metal detectors that the retail market can not buy or sell because they will locate a 5 gallon can at 200 feet and overpower and possibly ruin another device used to aid people's personal safety such as radar, magnetic imaging, or sonar in case the trained seals (yes, we used animals to retrieve them) cannot find it to hook up to a tow line to retrieve test torpedo modules in case they fell and malfunctioned way too deep, and even though I worked in designing the high tech electronic command-control and doppler enable modules for the National Defense Mark 48 Nuclear Torpedo Guidance Systems, there is still a lot I don't know about metal detectors and a lot of other things too.

However, if I were to say to you, "your posts only show your lack of knowledge on this subject" would be offensive, combative, and rude. I do not do that to you, and I have no ax to grind either. I am not easily offended, although some other people are. I am not brand-loyal either, and my favorite detector is this little $59 cheap jewel made in China through an American patent. In other words, it too is American-made. My second best detector is my old Compass GSP, and it finds small gold nuggets better than any other detector I have ever owned.

However, in spite of what electronics I have worked at, or studied in college, or learned on my own, I do not claim to be a shill for Garrett or any other company of any kind, save for my own. And I do not claim to know everything about all other detectors either. But I do understand their circuitry differences, and that's a fact. And from my own experiences, both the ATP and the CZ line are equal in "recovery" speed, and auto retune with the CZ having a somewhat wider +/- on return to null, and it's how they were designed, and that's the end of it. If I wanted a do-all metal detector, it doesn't exist, but a 705 isn't a bad choice, and neither is an F75. I can't show the electronics in these or in the super powerful metal detectors though, it's Top Secret information for the Department of Defense, and high treason if I put it on here.

 

[DiggerinVA]

Here's a chart i found on recovery speed by a metal detecting group from Austria...if you notice the ATpro does quite well, even twice as fast as the F75 and T2. Almost up there with the Deus.....not bad for antique, out of date technology!
http://i1155.photobucket.com/albums/p557/Johnnyanglo/DetectorRecoverySpeed_zpse7a7b3a2.jpg~original

 

[Fletch88]

Digger, they do not indicate what units are on the y-axis. I assume seconds maybe? Milliseconds? I know for a fact something is way off with the data though. There is no way a Ctx is faster than a t2, F75 or G2. I have not had my coffee yet and I just scanned through the list of machines, but that literally JUMPED out at me!

 

[SouthFLdigger]

Digger, they do not indicate what units are on the y-axis. I assume seconds maybe? Milliseconds? I know for a fact something is way off with the data though. There is no way a Ctx is faster than a t2, F75 or G2. I have not had my coffee yet and I just scanned through the list of machines, but that literally JUMPED out at me!

Yes i found that chart very odd, a dual processor G2 is the fastest detector i have used faster than T2, F75, CORE hear the DEUS is just as fast as the G2/Gbug Pro. CTX/ FBS cant compare in recovery speed.

 

[DiggerinVA]

Honestly guys...I have very little faith in the data on this chart. The point is that if a person wants to dig long enough they can find a chart or video to support their claims. I know that the ATpro or gold are not the best machines made....but I also know if they were so inferior I wouldnt have have all the great coins and relics that I have. This head to head forum is designed to help a person chose between two or more machines that they like. It is not to trash a brand and try to brain wash people to beleive that a top selling company is using ancient technology and is selling crap. My hat is off to garrett as they are the only company making a weather proof all purpose machine for less than $2k. To compare the ATpro as a nuggett shooter is ridiculous to begin with...it doesnt even have an all metal mode! It is a coin and relic machine.... The biggest selling point for the AT machines is that they are fairly easy for a newer user to be successful with. They dont require alot of adjustments for every situation as it should be with todays technology. I strongly dislike the CZ machines but I dont feel a need to post their shortcomings every week. If you do well with one and are happy with it, thats great! They just werent for me so I sold mine and moved on..... The worst part is I have never read ANYWHERE that the OP has ever owned an ATpro or AT gold...

 

[SouthFLdigger]

Actually the recovery speed on the AT Pro is pretty quick, just not as fast as some of the others. The AT Pro is a great machine in my opinion, im not a brand loyalist and have tried an AT Pro myself for 3 months, however there is more to it than just recovery speed. It's also about programing, hardware configuration,circuit design.



Here is an interesting video that in my opinion is a much realistic simulation of what conditions are in the wild, it takes into account recovery speed and DSP processing---nyquist/fourier algorithm analysis of newer machines. The Monte nail tests simulates a 2 dimensional scenario while the 2 X 4 test is 3 dimensional and more realistic. Often good targets are masked by objects that lie at different depth, typically iron trash above a few inches. This tests is much more challenging for detectors because the objects above typically iron nails induce magnetic fields when excited by RF from the search coil, these magnetic fields usually overpower anything laying below, especially those of smaller non ferrous objects. This ultimately tests a detectors ability to parse filter through differing magnetic fields to find the nonferrous and much weaker one below.