AT Pro Depth Readout

Must811 · Feb 19, 2011

I have been using my AT Pro for a couple of months now and overall, I am very pleased with it. One thing that has stuck out like a sore thumb though is the depth readout. I know that at best, it is an approximation, but, wow, most of the time it is not even in trhe ballpark. Targets that are 1 inch down read 8 inches, targets that are 8 inches read 2, etc... I have learned to basically ignore the readout. My question is.....has anybody else noticed this with their AT Pro's or is my machine needing a little attention in the shop?

John-Edmonton · Feb 19, 2011

Any metal detector giving a readout for depth, conductivity, numerical ID etc. is set to deal with coin sized objects and the targets in the first several inches in not too mineralized matrix. Throw in a large target, high mineralization, a coin not lying horizontal and the ID probability starts to decrease. Using the modulated audio in the Pro mode (deeper targets sound quieter) should help tremendously. Overall, I find the AT Pro more of an audio hunting machine then a TID machine. Just set it up to your liking, ground balance it and dig all targets. If you expect all metal detectors to read accurately with all their probable TID abilities, you are going to set yourself up for a great deal of frustration. The key to learning your metal detector well is to be aware of what TID abilities your metal detector has and their limitations.

Sandman · Feb 19, 2011

So true John........Since the makers put a screen on the thing everyone wonders why it isn't accurate or reads different than another detector's screen. :icon_scratch:

The-Bone · Feb 19, 2011

totally disagree with the direction this thread is going...the TID is there to aid you in your decision to dig or not..i primarily look for gold rings/jewelry and have been fairly succesful in this quest...WITHOUT a machine that accurately displays TID numbers i would have packed up metal detecting years ago(the one exception being water hunting where digging is easy)...i realize that there are many things impacting the TID numbers but if i am paying for a machine that has them then it better be somewhat accurate at least 85% of the time in moderate ground condition...if it can't do that then you might as well buy something that runs a lot cheaper

gleaner1 · Feb 19, 2011

Who needs stinking numbers to decide when or if to dig? The sounds are enough. If you can't tell how deep the coin is by the machine sound, then the machine needs to be the thing in the ground. 6 feet under.

Keppy · Feb 19, 2011

gleaner1 said:
Who needs stinking numbers to decide when or if to dig? The sounds are enough. If you can't tell how deep the coin is by the machine sound, then the machine needs to be the thing in the ground. 6 feet under.

God gleaner..Your right again...........

gleaner1 · Feb 19, 2011

Be careful Keppy, I am not trying to be "right", now or again or ever. Can anyone be right? I don't know. I am offering an opinion. If you agree with my opinion, you agree that surely some others must think that my opinion stinks. But that is okay, nobody is really right or wrong, it depends on the scope of the topic, and the individual preferences, experience level on and on. I like this post about depth readout, it is a good question, and the OP will figure it out after a while. Personally, I never ever look at the screen other than to check battery strength. Is this right or wrong? I wonder.

Digger · Feb 19, 2011

DD coils read from front to back but pinpoint/depth off the center. You may get a target at the very front of the detection field but shows a depth of 6-8" because it is 6-8" away from the coils center. Pinpoint the target and then run the coil over the target at the center and you'll get the correct depth.

gleaner1 · Feb 19, 2011

Keppy no no no! don't take me wrong! I want you to agree with me, I like it, don't let me down. I want you to take back what you said and say I am right again, please. Good work also Digger, very nice. The-Bone, you talked about tid, not depth ID so you are off topic. Must811, you better send your machine to the shop for a little attention. Right

?

gleaner1 · Feb 19, 2011

Must811, I was being sarcastic about sending it back, that was not fair. I hope you don't send it back. You just got it. It's a Garrett. I am 100% sure that after 100 hours with the machine, you will be 100% confident in your depth meter, but you already learned to just say no to that, so it doesn't matter. Do not send it back to the shop until you give the poor thing a chance. Now that is right as rain.

Keppy · Feb 19, 2011

Must811 said:
I have been using my AT Pro for a couple of months now and overall, I am very pleased with it. One thing that has stuck out like a sore thumb though is the depth readout. I know that at best, it is an approximation, but, wow, most of the time it is not even in trhe ballpark. Targets that are 1 inch down read 8 inches, targets that are 8 inches read 2, etc... I have learned to basically ignore the readout. My question is.....has anybody else noticed this with their AT Pro's or is my machine needing a little attention in the shop?

You will find out after you get to use it you will get better at knowing your depth....... Some will swing there coil 2 or 3 inches above the ground so the target will only be down 1 inch but read 4 inches for it is reading that 3 inches of air space..... I have seen some with there coil swinging 4 inches above the ground and think they were only a inch above the ground........

Must811 · Feb 20, 2011

Thanks for all the input guys......I won't be sending it back right now. I have used quite a few different detectors in the last 20 years and definitely know the depth meter can be an approximation at very best and should be taken with a grain of salt so to speak. I have been used to the meter being at least ballpark. I operated mostly by audio anyway and the Pro mode is fantastic for that. It just seemed to me that the depth indication on the AT Pro was so far off that maybe it was indicitive of the machine itself and other people had perhaps noticed it.....

gleaner1 · Feb 20, 2011

Well it must be so far off if you say, you are experienced and should know far off. Nobody else has mentioned it except you. You have a couple months hard time with it so you are one of the pioneers with the machine, not too many users out there for advice yet. But you know there is a problem in your heart. You clearly got a bad machine, you are experienced enough to know when something is wrong. Send the frikken thing back and get it over with.

Born2Dtect · Feb 21, 2011

Must811,

The depth reading on a metal detector is based on the reflected signal expected from a nickle sized object/target. It is usually assumed the target is flat with the largest surface area facing the detector coil. A smaller or larger coin, a coin on edge, other metal, cut or bent coin and even the soil compostion, and your detectors settings all effect this reading. If it not correct all the time you may have a problem.

A good test , that takes time, would be to bury a nickle at 2,4,6,8" or what ever, flat in the ground. Clean and check the area before burying. Water the area, fertilize, maybe even grow grass. Check after 6 months, a year, two years. If your detector is Ok you should get good depth indication every time on those nickles.

Ed D.

Swartzie · Feb 21, 2011

Must811 said:
I have been using my AT Pro for a couple of months now and overall, I am very pleased with it. One thing that has stuck out like a sore thumb though is the depth readout. I know that at best, it is an approximation, but, wow, most of the time it is not even in trhe ballpark. Targets that are 1 inch down read 8 inches, targets that are 8 inches read 2, etc... I have learned to basically ignore the readout. My question is.....has anybody else noticed this with their AT Pro's or is my machine needing a little attention in the shop?

Could be the size of the object. Bigger objects will actually be deeper than what's indicated and smaller objects will be more shallow. Like some have suggested, learn to listen more to the signal rather than look at the screen. Your ears are your most reliable tool.

-swartzie