2007 Models

[Trescher]

I have my 250 and have found its worth in valuables and coins over the last 5 months, so I have reached my goal and plan to upgrade. Very happy with Garrett, so I would like to stick with them.

The GTI 1500 is enticing, but I am wondering if there are any new models that are coming out next year. Does anyone know if next year's product line has any new guys? I would wait 3-4 months if that was the case.

I know the ACE 250 came out around 2 years ago, so how long have the GTI, GTP and GTA series been around?

Thanks.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

How to Research for Treasure Hunting and Metal Detecting From Lead Generation to Vetting - Grab it through Amazon!

[Monty]

The top of the line GTI 2500 has been around a long time. I really expect Garrett to come out with a new top of the line detector to replace it before long. There is a lot of new technology out there that it is lacking. At least I hope I'm right. The 1500 has nearly all the features of the 2500 so I've been told as does the 1350. I would love to be a mouse in the Garrett engineering room for just a few days! I son't know how long the other lineup has been around except the ACE series that has been around 4 or 5 years. Tell me if you find out! Monty

 

[warsawdaddy]

I have heard rumors that a new Relic unit is in the works and possibly a new Gold unit??

 

[Monty]

I hope they are not too busy building ACE 250s to do some upgrading! I'll bet the ACE 250 has out sold any detector they ever built. With just a couple of miner modifications the ACE 250 would probably be the only detector needed by 90% of the detectorists who do it mainly for a hobby like me. Adjustable ground balance and a volume control would make it near perfect in my book. Monty

 

[hollowpointred]

i know the gti series has been around for 10 years or so. a pretty long time with no major changes for their top of the line detectors. i would hope something is in the works.

 

[dahut]

I suspect the ACE has the Garrett folks running right now. A new relic unit is in the wings, as far as anyone knows, but the Garrett folks are VERY closed mouth about such things.

The TOP of THE LINE models could use some revamping as could the old warhorse, Scorpion. And there should surely be some follow on places for the ACE crowd to expand into.

Id love to see a multi freq unit with an NMAM mode, 4 tone ID and modulated audio. Only one of these is Garrett territory, though. If they just put the NMAM in the 1350 Id be happy!

 

[Willy]

Personally, I've yet to be impressed by the multifrequency units vs. single freq. What would be nice to see is a GTI that incorporates the sizing ability of the GTP.. allowing the small coils to be used for sizing a target. That and incorporating the GTI 2500 electronics in a 1500 control box. Maybe improve the AM mode while they're at it. Also, go back to camlocks for the control rods, the present 'ramrod' setup looks/feels cheap and really makes me feel that Garrett is trying to sell a sows ear as a silk purse. When it comes to the actual operational differences between the 1500 and 2500, there's a major difference in 3 major areas: 1) Ground tracking/balance. 2)Search image (constant depth/size info without having to PP). 3) TID with depth/size AM mode. As an aside, it would be awesome if Garrett enabled a frequency shifter that allowed one to switch between 7.5 KHz and 15 KHz (Groundhog) while using the present coils. ..Willy.

 

[dahut]

Uhhh like I said how about an NM AM mode in the 1350...

 

[Trescher]

I went with a MXT after all.

Maybe my next one will be a Garrett.

 

[Phantasman]

Trescher,

Please let us know how you like the MXT. Though I have the Ace 250, I would like to also have a detector with VDI on the numerical scale. I believe the VDI would give a better trash indicator than a cursor jumping around. I may be wrong though. I'd be interested in it's ability in salty sand. I still love my Ace though.

Dan

 

[dahut]

Hey Dan, since you're new at this, heres a little tip for you:

VDI readouts are as susceptible to jumping, innaccuracy and inconsistency as cursors.

Each is just a way to represent a "point" on the scale of conductivity. The visual indicator is just potential: a visual CLUE, not an absolute. Your instruments job is to alert to the presence of something in the ground. Maybe it can ID it, maybe not. There are so many types of "trash" items that it would be impossible to catalog them all. I have a coupla mountains of trash and none of it can be catalogued as precisely this or that. Much of it read as good, much of it didnt. Here's a pic of one of my mounds:



Just yesterday I dug a nice bracelet that ID'ed as trash - jumpy cursor, crackly audio, the whole bit. If I was to solely believe my ID indications, it was a low tab reading. Finely worked jewelry has many facets and little surface area to act as an inductor, so the audio is often crappy, sometimes almost unlockable. I found a 14K gold charm that was exactly that last week. For all intents, it read as a bit of foil junk to my detector.

I only recovered these two items because I had made my mind up to dig all signals but obvious iron, no matter how iffy. At these particular locations I had a good idea of the trash suite I would encounter and knew what I could expect to find. But anomalies surface nonetheless. Yesterday, I found a few dimes that ID'ed as something else and which I would normally have passed as tab/screwcap trash. Several things I was sure were nickels (or the elusive piece of gold), weren't. And there were those hard to ID goodies.

What Ive grown more an more fond of is TONE ID. A nice compromise, it doesnt confound you with cursors or numbers, it either is or it isnt. I wish Garrett would go to 4-tone ID.

I know I sound like a broken record, but I'll risk it:

"Expecting your detector to positively ID trash from treasure is a fool's game and self-defeating. Instead of deciding NOT to dig based on some easily fooled display, your aim should be towards recovery. When a target gives a repeatable signal IN AT LEAST ONE DIRECTION, eEven if it's "iffy" - dig! Otherwise you are merely locating targets."

 

[Phantasman]

Wow, nice paperweight, Dave.

I see what you are saying. Some things work better at analog than digital. But as digital information improves, it can probably locate, on a much more defined field, treasure in all conditions and with greater accuracy. Of course that would take all the fun out of it. What sport would deer hunting be with a scope and a silencer to make sure you got the kill.

 

[dahut]

Clean signals are easy. Iron, Silver, Copper even Gold, when presented as cleanly configured objects pose little problem to the detector as we know it. Its things like soil minerals, objects in proximity, corroded iron compounds, outright masking caused by adjacent trash, simliarity of conductivity to some other item, etc, etc, that makes positive ID a crap shoot.

Put a dime an inch under clean sand and youll ID it. Put it on edge, at 6" in depth, or place a pulltab, foil ball, iron goober, handful of vicious black sand, alkali compunds or any of a dozen other nameless and unpredicatble things in the same matrix and, well ...you get the idea. This is why I gave up on test gardens as more than a neat exercise. They're nice, but they are contrived, artificial. They come nowehre close to what you find in the real world, except in general terms.

 

[Phantasman]

Good point, my friend. One thing I have learned is the MD Shuffle. That little sidestep to re-examine a hit by moving perpendicular to it to get a second opinion. A detector trying to use its frequencies to penetrate this hard clay is like a person with thick glasses trying to identify which is a ring and which is a broken pull tab. Most of the time you have to use that third sense of "feel" to determine it's authenticity.