What a disapointing test...

[Trass Boulba]

Hello,

Here is a link to http://www.detectortest.info/index.html . Numerous detectors are tested by experienced users. The tests showed are really bad for the Garrett ACE 250. (double click on the photo to maximise)




The methode looks clever, but the results are far away all the good reviews available around the web on that detector...

What about my ACE 250 then ?

Regards
Raphaël

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Upgraded Night Vision Monocular Digital Infrared Monocular Telescope for 100% Darkness with 8X Zoom - Grab it through Amazon!

[ShootTheMoon]

What a nice debate. I didn't name the "high dollar" machine (up to $500+ (plus) as in more than $500), to avoid just such a debate.
Seems I am getting enough of one over my 2 "measly" machines I have now.
Typical "you say tomato and I say tomahto" replies.

Not everyone likes the machines they paid for...
Hence, why there are bad reviews to match the good ones, you can pull up as many bad reviews as good.....seems to me I am getting peoples personal reviews right now.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Cry Of The Eagle: History And Legends Of The Cherokee Indians And Their Buried Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[Digger]

Well Shambler I hunt iron infested places, just like their test site, and personally find my DFX the better performer than my E-Trac in those conditions. The DFX just seems far more stable making the really tiny stuff detectable. Also my E-Trac doesn't like freshly plowed ground near as well as my DFX. But when it comes to flat out depth in schools and parks the E-Trac is my go-to machine.

 

[Shambler]

The DFX just seems far more stable making the really tiny stuff detectable.

That was one of the reasons I kicked the F75LTD to the curb. I just don't want to find BB's and earring backs. I've never tried the DFX or the E-Trac so I can't comment on that. I did have a hunting buddy with a DFX and when we'd call him over to listen to signals, he couldn't hear them. I mean not a signal. He sold it and bought a V3 - I won't go into how that worked out.

Here's the problem with your assumption though - you'll never know what you didn't find. The only way to compare machines is a test like they did. I think what they've done is commendable and using real users is genius for credibility. If you choose not to take it into account as another cog in the wheel - your issue.

 

[Digger]

I just don't want to find BB's and earring backs.

I completely understand, but as I've read somewhere, you'll never know what you didn't find. I've found some might nice gold chains that way.

I make no "assumptions" at all, I'm speaking from experience. I know my DFX will easily find even a small silver ring at 6" in iron infested soil. I've done it many times. Any attempt at such tests will prove worthless other than a great way to start arguments. In fact I'm quite sure my results would be completely different doing the same tests at the exact same location. Thats just the way it seems to work.

These results are very similar to that other very unpopular *cough* depth test done from across the pond. The one where $100 European detectors went 12" deeper than the best American made detectors.

 

[Newt]

Don't we also have to account for the halo?
Testing doesn't always take this into account.
Newt

 

[bazinga]

What a nice debate. I didn't name the "high dollar" machine (up to $500+ (plus) as in more than $500), to avoid just such a debate.
Seems I am getting enough of one over my 2 "measly" machines I have now.
Typical "you say tomato and I say tomahto" replies.

Not everyone likes the machines they paid for...
Hence, why there are bad reviews to match the good ones, you can pull up as many bad reviews as good.....seems to me I am getting peoples personal reviews right now.

To be honest, I love the fact that you use cheap machines. It just means that you are leaving more in the ground for me to find. I truly appreciate it. Thanks!

 

[Silver Searcher]

I looked at my detector chart, and then the Minelab chart hardly any difference....what a load of Cr@p

SS

 

[Shambler]

haha - even the goldmaxx users hate the test.

 

[Tin Nugget]

What a nice debate. I didn't name the "high dollar" machine (up to $500+ (plus) as in more than $500), to avoid just such a debate.
Seems I am getting enough of one over my 2 "measly" machines I have now.
Typical "you say tomato and I say tomahto" replies.

Not everyone likes the machines they paid for...
Hence, why there are bad reviews to match the good ones, you can pull up as many bad reviews as good.....seems to me I am getting peoples personal reviews right now.

To be honest, I love the fact that you use cheap machines. It just means that you are leaving more in the ground for me to find. I truly appreciate it. Thanks!

They may leave some stuff behind, but not much. You lose some depth compared to the big buck machines, once again, not much. The biggest thing they lose is the adjustability for tough dirt. Heavy iron, heavy mineralization etc. but how often do the majority of people detecting find themselves in a spot like that? I think the ACE, F2, BH etc. is an excellent choice for allot of people. That being said, they will also find 80 to 90 percent of any high dollar machine under normal conditions. Definitely nothing to laugh at!

 

[Shambler]

Having swung an Ace for a season and an F4 for another, I know that your percentages are a tad off - but I like your enthusiasm

Multi-freq and delta pitch make all the difference in the world.

 

[bazinga]

Having swung an Ace for a season and an F4 for another, I know that your percentages are a tad off - but I like your enthusiasm

Multi-freq and delta pitch make all the difference in the world.

THIS

 

[ShootTheMoon]

Thanks Tin....I agree.

 

[Minrelica]

This is my first year detecting and using an ACE 250 and many of the replies in this thread are intelligently "discrediting" the machine which I was told so many good things about.

Don't get me wrong though, I know it's a test that may or may not be very credible, I know it depends on where you're hunting and it also depends on YOU.

So what detectors are recommended for someone new to the hobby that's a fast learner?? Preferrably something $500 or less.

I like the ACE but I wanna get down to business

-WIT

 

[Newt]

I say get a Tesoro Tejon and learn it. It's great for relics. Not beach hunting.
Of course this is the machine I currently use, but, it's really good and you dig everything within a preset Disc. if properly GB.
Newt

 

[Shambler]

Preferrably something $500 or less

Something used.

 

[Tin Nugget]

Having swung an Ace for a season and an F4 for another, I know that your percentages are a tad off - but I like your enthusiasm

Multi-freq and delta pitch make all the difference in the world.

No enthusiasm to it as I am quite dull, I don't accept hype or slanted opinion. I get my percentages from 32 years of detecting experience with many different machines and believe they are pretty much right on.

 

[Tin Nugget]

This is my first year detecting and using an ACE 250 and many of the replies in this thread are intelligently "discrediting" the machine which I was told so many good things about.

Don't get me wrong though, I know it's a test that may or may not be very credible, I know it depends on where you're hunting and it also depends on YOU.

So what detectors are recommended for someone new to the hobby that's a fast learner?? Preferrably something $500 or less.

I like the ACE but I wanna get down to business

-WIT

How about a used ExplorerII at under 500.00 with the stock coil and a 10X14 SEF coil as well as the stuff it came with in the box. A great machine for the money! It's not mine, I traded mine long ago. If your willing to trade and buy used you can have allot of fun trying different machines. You will know when you have found the best detector made, it will be the one you enjoy using the most.

 

[Trass Boulba]

Hello all,

Thank you for your answers, regrettably, I am not more advanced because the opinions are very too much opposed.

These tests seem to me very interesting even if they are not the best. I decided to build a similar device to test my own detector and compare it with others.

This is probabely not the panacea but it is certainly the only means i have to compare detectors on my ground in a reliable way.

Yesterday i dug a hole and then put a coin a 5ct napoleon III (25mm/1" 5g/77gr) inside. I was able to see it 20cm/8" deep (from the back side of the coil to the upper side of the coin). The sensitivity was set to the maximum and the coil was the big one (9"x12"). It is not so bad but really not enough for prospecting in the forest cause of the amount of dead leaves on the ground.

I read quite everywhere that a coin burried for longs years would be seen deeper. I don't remember having found any coin deeper than 10cm/4" with my ACE250 so we could say about 15cm/6" from the coil in addition with the dead leaves... Does anyone has ?

@+
Raphaël

 

[Woodland Detectors]

anybody that has used an Ace 250, could tell you that test is bogus. I've personally seen things pulled up with an 250 that you wouldn't believe. from the looks of the tests, this guy doesn't spend much time with each one. he's got a garden that he knows where everything is, who knows where, and does a quick scan. you have to practice with a machine to learn what it's telling you

agreed

 

[desmobob]

"What about my ACE 250 then ?"


I don't have much faith in that "test."

I have an Ace 250 and a White's DFX. I love the 250 and use it often.

Good hunting,
desmobob