Fisher GB pro or Whites GMT

[nuggettones]

howdy,
looking at the GB pro or the GMT. any suggestions?
thx!
Walt

[Ads]

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

[woof!]

What were you intending to do with it?

--Dave J.

[Goodyguy]

GMT, but then I'm biased because that's what I use.

GG~

[Hoser John]

Gold Bug Pro anyday and in every way as one gold gettn' unit. After 20 years I finally found something to beat the other GB series and wouldn't ya know it, yet another Gold bug BUT Pro model only as others not the same. My Tesoro Lobo will be mine forever as that discriminate is a must in some areas but get smallest coils on all makes to REALLY cleanup nicely-tons a au 2 u 2 -John

[nuggetshooter323]

John,
Do you really think that the GB Pro is better than the GBII? I've always considered the GBII an advanced unit, definatly not for a rookie, because the amount of attention you have to give the manual GB. I still haven't seen a side-by-side comparison between the GB Pro and the GBII. I have a feeling that the GBII is more sensitive.

[signal_line]

I've been searching for a comparison of the Garrett AT GOLD and other similar priced gold machines (GBP, etc.) but haven't found anything. Someone told me the Audio Iron discriminator is very accurate. The Garrett website has videos that explain the features the other units don't have.

[nuggetshooter323]

From the Utube video's that I've seen, The AT Gold and the AT Pro seem to have very good response to gold in air tests. But, air tests and and gold in the ground are completly different. The Garrett video with the guy from Idaho nugget hunting, seems to show the AT Gold in a favorable light, but that could have been salted gold for the sake of getting good video. Until reports from real prospectors come in I won't believe company hype. Look at Fisher and the new Gold Bug fiasco. Fisher pushed the Gold Bug on to the market when it wasn't ready, then they started to updated it. There were so many versions on the market, people wern't sure if the version they got was a new version, or a newer version, or the newer new version. Fisher totally flubbed that release.

[trinityau]

Hello All, Nuggettones, if you go to Arizona Outback Forum and search for GB Pro or any of my posts, TRINITYAU, there is a lot of info on the GB Pro from hands on experience. I have used it since it came out. Fisher did not "flubb" it up. Most Americans think we are the only ones in the world. This detector was released in other countries around the world before being released here in the US. It was started on technology that Fisher has been featuring many years. The software platform has been around. If you go to Rob Allisons Forum and do the same search you will find more info from people that love it and some that dont. Myself, I have said that the GBII is a tad more sensitive as far as signal response but because of all the other features the GB Pro offers I think it is the better unit. Just my two cents. TRINITYAU/RAYMILLS

[nuggetshooter323]

Sorry I got off topic, my suggestion is for the GMT. It's a line that's been around a long time and it's a proven gold getter. The auto ground balance is extreamly fast in responding to changing ground. Also, the ground balance can be set to manual. The VSAT adjustment(variable self adjusting threshold) controls the speed in which the detector resets itself after it detects a target, can be set to a slower adjustment if your hunt cleaner ground, which makes it detect deeper, or it can be set faster for ground that has many more targets closer together so the detector will respond to each one and not pass over targets. The VSAT is something that no other company besides Whites puts into a VLF detector. The visual iron graph, the audio iron "grunt", and the internal iron analyzer which allow through multiple passes over the target, allow the detector to give you a numbered percent on whether the target is iron. Also the display has a number representing where the current ground balance is set between 1-99, and a number representing the minerlization of the target or soil currently beneath the coil from 1-99. So I think the features and capabilities of the GMT surpass the Gold Bug.

[nuggetshooter323]

Trinityau, the GB Pro is probably a very good detector, but they did totally mess up the release of the new gold bug here in the USA. The fact that it was released in other countries first doesn't really matter to Americans, we want it to work here. Like I said, I'm sure the GB Pro is a fine machine, but I still think the GMT is better.

[woof!]

Well, sounds like a new "Internet rumor" is making the rounds.

The new GB was a new platform, not something that's been around a while (although it borrowed some stuff from the Omega). And it was released both overseas and in the USA at about the same time.

However, those who say the release process wasn't very pretty, well, I can't argue with that.

Several weeks ago I asked Nuggetones what he was intending to do with the machine (new Gold Bug, or GMT). Never got an answer. If the intention is general purpose use including gold prospecting, then it's obvious, the choice would be the Gold Bug. If the intention is strictly gold prospecting, both are very good machines, but different. For gold prospecting the Gold Bug is a lot easier to use (and hence to master). The GMT has more gold prospecting features but they take some dedication to master. Both offer high performance.

Nowadays I work for Fisher, but I designed both the Gold Bug and the GMT so obviously I'm not gonna knock the GMT. If gold prospecting is the task, they're both very good machines. However, what suits one person best may not be what suits someone else best.

--Dave J.

[signal_line]

From the Utube video's that I've seen, The AT Gold and the AT Pro seem to have very good response to gold in air tests. But, air tests and and gold in the ground are completly different. The Garrett video with the guy from Idaho nugget hunting, seems to show the AT Gold in a favorable light, but that could have been salted gold for the sake of getting good video. Until reports from real prospectors come in I won't believe company hype. Look at Fisher and the new Gold Bug fiasco. Fisher pushed the Gold Bug on to the market when it wasn't ready, then they started to updated it. There were so many versions on the market, people wern't sure if the version they got was a new version, or a newer version, or the newer new version. Fisher totally flubbed that release.

So what you are saying is you don't know either. I get the feeling most people are "brand loyal" and no one really wants to find out. And I have seen some high-end machine comparisons that were very slanted--the other machines were set so they didn't do as well on that target. A lot of deception and lawyer speak, and I see your point about getting first hand knowledge. Otherwise you just take someone else's biased opinion.

On another note, I heard they are selling well. One guy said they had a long back order.

[minerjoe]

If you took the gmt and the gold bug pro and gave them to two different people, let them master them to the fullest extent, the GMT would win..... NOW> are you going to spend a thousand hours on yours? sounds silly? truth is thruth, GB Pro would be a better detector for 95% of the people in this decision. I've used both, and in gold country, the GB is just so much easier to figure out... cheers

[extractor]

Both are good detectors.