Thinking about a Tesoro Tiger Shark...nee inputs and stuff people have found with it

[ron lord]

The sand shark is very good in fresh water also . I use mind in fresh and salt and get very good depth and find very small gold.One other thing The AT PRO, Excal and Whites water detector all have a 1 or 2 year warrenty,were the tiger and sand shark have a life time warrenty and buy NEW.

[Ads]

TreasureNet.com is the premier Treasure Hunting Forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see these ads. Please Register - It's Free!

[Sandman]

Stick with the new Tiger Shark Bobby. You can't compare the BHID 300 with the Tesoro since the White's is a two frequency detector like the CZ-21 and 20. The coil on the White's BHID wants to float like a cord and you get worn out holding it underwater near the bottom. The Tiger Shark is the one for freshwater

[lookindown]

Ive never used a Tiger Shark...besides the lifetime warranty, what does it do better than the AT Pro?

[Bobby S]

Stick with the new Tiger Shark Bobby. You can't compare the BHID 300 with the Tesoro since the White's is a two frequency detector like the CZ-21 and 20. The coil on the White's BHID wants to float like a cord and you get worn out holding it underwater near the bottom. The Tiger Shark is the one for freshwater

are those your finds with the Tiger Shark?

[ron lord]

Ive never used a Tiger Shark...besides the lifetime warranty, what does it do better than the AT Pro?

Can go 190 feet deeper than the AT PRO and is better on small gold than the AT PRO.Oh I own an AT PRO so I know. The AT PRO is better on Land.

[Hag730]

I love these threads......so many different opinions.

[Bobby S]

Most seem to be for the tiger shark

[lookindown]

Can go 190 feet deeper than the AT PRO and is better on small gold than the AT PRO.Oh I own an AT PRO so I know. The AT PRO is better on Land.

The AT will hit at 6 inches on a 0.4 gram 10k ring and 3 inches on a 0.4 gram hollow earring. Its lighter than the Tiger Shark, has a screen, can change coils and easier to change batteries. Im not trying to argue because Ive never used a Tiger Shark, just trying to figure out why it would be better than the ATpro. I was going to buy a Tiger Shark but the AT pro was released and I decided to go with it because I was using an Ace 250.

[Bobby S]

The AT will hit at 6 inches on a 0.4 gram 10k ring and 3 inches on a 0.4 gram hollow earring. Its lighter than the Tiger Shark, has a screen, can change coils and easier to change batteries. Im not trying to argue because Ive never used a Tiger Shark, just trying to figure out why it would be better than the ATpro. I was going to buy a Tiger Shark but the AT pro was released and I decided to go with it because I was using an Ace 250.

Even though I don't have a tiger shark either, I think it just comes down to the fact that as much as OEM's try to make one detector that can do it all, that's just not going to happen. The tiger shark was made clearly for freshwater...it has a capability for Salt water, but you get mixed results as I hear when it comes to minerals and such so lets just say freshwater...Sure it can be used on land as well, but it's reputation is known for being killer in freshwater. The AT pro is known for having multiple abilities, but it's reputation is not based off it being used in water even though it can be. I think when a company puts one main focus on a detector compared to another brand trying to do many things with one detector, the winner will go to the primary focus one. I'm sure the at pro can pick up smaller gold, but maybe not chains like the tigershark? Idk. Plus the tigershark is built like a tank and has a lifetime warranty. That's my .2 cents

[creskol]

Just curious what anyone's experiences are using it as a land machine?