Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'garrett atx'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • Metal Detecting & Gold Prospecting Forums
    • Meet & Greet
    • Detector Prospector Forum
    • Metal Detecting For Coins & Relics
    • Metal Detecting For Jewelry
    • Metal Detecting For Meteorites
    • Gold Panning, Sluicing, Dredging, Drywashing, Etc
    • Rocks, Minerals, Gems & Geology
    • Metal Detector Advice & Comparisons
    • Metal Detecting & Prospecting Classifieds
    • First Texas - Bounty Hunter, Fisher & Teknetics
    • Garrett Metal Detectors
    • Makro / Nokta Metal Detectors
    • Minelab Metal Detectors
    • Tesoro Metal Detectors
    • White's Metal Detectors
    • XP Metal Detectors


  • Best of Forums
  • Gold Prospecting
  • Steve's Guides
  • Steve's Mining Journal
  • Steve's Reviews


  • Catalogs & Brochures
  • Owners Manuals
  • Minelab CTX 3030 Programs
  • Spreadsheets

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start





Website URL






Gear Used:

Found 87 results

  1. Turned my ATX on today and it makes no noise when I pump it to ground balance it. Still makes noise over targets but I don't know if it is ground balanced. Anyone else had this problem?

    Atx? Yes Or No.

    🤔No pressure but yes or no? I’m not worried about the weight and they seem fairly simple to use. I already have VLFs. I’m ready for a PI. I’m looking at the closed double d coil and maybe the small mono in the future. Ive been watching videos and reading reviews and most people like them with the exception of the weight. I like the fact the collapse because I hike a long ways sometimes and will most likely have a trusty VLF in hand. I just want something new,different..I don’t know maybe I answered my own question. Are you still happy with yours? Thanks
  3. Detected an area that has a history of producing gold including small nuggets -- and have found pickers and larger yet small nuggets in my sluice here in past years with predictable confidence of finding more if put in the energy/ time -- but has a lot of ferrous trash above and below surface, and high mineralization. Experienced difficulty with the GB/ threshold and/or volume of the ATX. Did 4 resets -- factory reset 1st, then a freq scan, and then a GB readjustment, in that order -- trying to achieve a uniform response/ background noise. Detected and dug up nails and trash so it was working. But it was difficult to find the "right" threshold to assure a stable reliable pattern of signaling. At times, despite having just redone the GB, the ATX sounded nonstop -- loud continuous signaling despite having volume set at default (10) and headphones volume barely audible, and also tried with volume set higher and at max volume, with headphones volume adjusted low as could go, as is advised. But had the sensitivity set at the max of 13, not default setting of 10. So maybe that is the cause for the trouble finding its stability sweet spot. IDK Also at times, the very same areas where this incessant signaling occurred then yielded no signal at all -- total silence as if the ATX was switched off. For example, I'd sweep slowly to the left and the voice was loud/ nonstop loud signaling as if the volume was set at max (which it wasn't; volume was set at 10); sweeping back to the right over the same area it would do the same; sweeping further to the right however led to total silence/ not a peep; but then, I swept the area to the left again, and that same area that had had the loud incessant chatter was then totally silent as if the ATX was off. This was a repetitive issue and totally destroyed my confidence in its use. I tried it in water and on land. And regardless of location in that area it was the same pattern. I got so frustrated with it I put it away and got out the shovel, buckets and sluice. GB2 however (used by my wife) found gold minus any of these GB/ threshold issues. On a related note ... I have read (on other forums and websites) that others say the VLF and PI both produce a steady, stable background hum. Not for me. The GB2 has a reliable hum that makes it super easy to detect the faintest shift change. ATX? Not even close. ATX doesn't have a reliable hum at all. ATX hum is virtually impossible to discern distinct from its signaling (hard to know what the hum is, and is supposed to be, versus what is assumed to be a false signaling). Creates a frustrating guessing game.... So, it seems to me the VLF and PI differ markedly in what kind of hum is produced; and the PI absent of such a hum perhaps. So, am wondering do other ATX users find the same thing? Or might the hum/ lack of hum experience differ by type of ground detected -- water versus land; highly mineralized versus low to none; heavily trashed versus negligible ferrous crap littering the subsurface layers, etc. Maybe I just don't grasp the volume/ threshold equation specific to the ATX. Dare I admit it, more often than not, I have trouble setting it to a barely audible threshold/ volume. If I put the ATX volume at max (level 25) and try to adjust the headphones volume to barely audible, it's impossible to get the noise level that low. It's loud. And my hearing isn't even all that great yet the noise remains loud, not barely audible. Volume settings between factory default of 10 and max of 25 just do not allow me to adjust the headphones to barely audible -- the detector's voice remains loud regardless. Countless detectorists on YT videos and forums advise "turning the detector volume to its max and adjust the headphones volume low enough as that the detector's voice/ threshold/ hum/ background is just barely audible, which makes it easy to detect a variance." This is a piece of cake on the GB2. What am I doing wrong on the ATX???
  4. How important is bench testing the ATX versus just learning the detector's response via actual detecting? I have read that some detectors give very different signals on a bench test than when signaling on the same item that's been buried in the ground, and so it being not too helpful/ worth doing.
  5. If does help to have a bulldozer and jackhammer also! Published on Oct 6, 2014 - Yes, over his 35+ year prospecting career Matt has found more than his body weight in gold nuggets.
  6. I have used the Minelab GPX 5000 since it was introduced, and in fact probably owned the first one in Alaska. I have used the Garrett ATX also since it came out with one of the first units off the production line. I have been putting this review off while I got to know the ATX. I now have over 100 hours on the detector in a variety of environments so the time has come. This metal detector comparison review was very challenging for me to write. It pits two very different yet very similar detectors against each other. In a way it is almost like discussing three detectors instead of two, and there is the issue of a huge price difference. I apologize for the length but this is a case where I wanted to be as thorough as possible on the subject. This is the review you will never see published in a magazine! In a way it is all about that price differential. If the two detectors were priced similarly there would be much less debate than is going to occur amongst people and a far easier buying decision for some to make. For me personally it really is a story of the Garrett ATX being two very different detectors at once and so I will start the review there. I have been metal detecting over forty years now, and metal detecting is very important in my life. Not a day goes by that I do not think about, write about, or actually go out metal detecting. Luckily for me a large chunk of my income is derived from metal detecting and so I can justify a collection of metal detectors for what I do. I engage in quite a few detecting activities and I strive to have the very best detector possible at my disposal for whatever it is I am doing. Because of this I am constantly on the look for new detectors that might help me in some way. However, now that the technology is maturing I have the bases pretty well covered. The only thing I was still looking for was a detector that satisfied me while water detecting in Hawaii. Every other detecting scenario I have covered to my satisfaction, but every time I hit the water in Hawaii I was left wanting something better than was available. The combination of salt water, volcanic rock, and military grade electrical interference is very challenging for any detector. What I generally want is a combination of stability and power with good ergonomics. The perfect detector should only signal on desired targets and nothing else, at good depth, while feeling good on my arm. I obviously reject detectors that get poor depth - these are usually the lower price detectors. Most top tier models are very competitive in the depth department. Other detectors I have put aside solely due to an inability to handle electrical interference. Fine machines otherwise, but unstable in an urban environment. Other detectors are too noisy in mineralized ground or too chatty in dense trash. And finally, some detectors are holdovers from the old days of heavy and clunky. I do not like detectors that make my arm hurt! I was therefore very excited when I heard the Garrett ATX was on the way. I was very familiar with its predecessor, the Garrett Infinium, which was tantalizingly close to my perfect Hawaii detector. Unfortunately the Infinium suffered in the stability department. I was also aware of the Garrett Recon Pro AML-1000 military demining detector. I was intrigued by its having a non-motion monotone search mode and wondered if that could be incorporated into a new improved "Infinium Pro" model. I not only had Hawaii in mind but started envisioning scenarios involving underwater sniping for gold employing a metal detector. Add to this that neither Minelab nor White's seemed interested in putting a waterproof ground balancing pulse induction metal detector in my hands. I never expected it would be Garrett that would come out with a second generation model based on the Infinium before anyone else got to first base. I have told you all this to explain what I was expecting and hoping for in the Garrett ATX. The fact is Garrett delivered with flying colors on my desires and the ATX is now one if the most important detectors in my collection. I have already paid for the detector with jewelry found and it is the Hawaii detector I always hoped for. Garrett ATX in Hawaii If we are talking about the Garrett ATX as a new waterproof detector for use on black sand or volcanic island beaches the review can end right here. The Garrett ATX is a superb detector for those conditions and well worth the money. There is only one fly in the ointment. If you look at the full page ads for the Garrett ATX it is clearly being marketed as a prospecting detector, and one pretty clearly aimed at Minelab's top end models. Specifically "The ATX performs head-to-head with the most expensive prospecting detectors in the world." ads by Amazon... Interestingly enough this idea was not even on my radar. I had always thought it was a huge mistake for the Infinium to be set up as direct competition for the high end Minelabs. Anyone involved in that remembers the hype and resulting disappointment and backlash. The Infinium eventually found its place but more as a water and relic hunting machine than a prospecting detector, although it is a capable enough unit. My hope was to avoid a similar scenario with the ATX. I do not like hype and prefer things to be under sold so people are pleasantly surprised when their expectations are exceeded. Hype leads to disappointment when inflated claims cannot be met. The reality here however is that Garrett has chosen to make prospecting the battlefield of choice. There is a lot of money at stake here for a lot of people, and so I am going to do my best here to compare the two units as dry land prospecting detectors. I think we can all agree that if you are looking at both the Garrett ATX and Minelab GPX 5000 and need the detector to be waterproof the Garrett ATX wins hands down. The funny thing here is that if Garrett was gunning for Minelab then in my opinion they went about it the wrong way. I get the distinct impression the design process was backwards. It was not a matter of "what do prospectors want in a metal detector?" I think it was "we have this housing on the shelf we developed at great expense to go after a military contract. We need to leverage our development cost by putting something in that housing we can sell to the public." In other words, I do not see any sign of design following function. All I see is a prospecting detector crammed in a box inappropriate for the desired end use. If Steve Jobs was into metal detectors he would be rolling in his grave. I will have to suffice instead by simply shaking my head at missed opportunity. I will explain more about that later. Let's set ergonomics aside though for now and just talk about straight up prospecting performance. How does the Garrett ATX fare against the Minelab GPX 5000 on gold in mineralized ground? I have done fairly extensive tests but I do have to throw in the caveat that the world is a big place and when you discuss prospecting detectors one truth is paramount. It is all about the ground mineralization and hot rocks. What works well in one place fails in another, and for this reason alone I cannot offer 100% assurances. I have spent a month traveling Western Australia detecting every day and so I am quite familiar with what prospectors face there. I am not about to begin to offer more than an opinion about how these two detectors fare in the worst Australian ground but I do think my conclusions will prove to be true. I can tell anyone right now knowing detectors the way I do that either machine will prove superior at certain locations given their differing capabilities. In a nutshell, the Garrett ATX has a ridiculously good circuit. The engineers at Garrett have done a superb job of producing a detector that out of box performs extremely well on a wide variety of gold in a wide variety of ground conditions. I tested both units in some very red mineralized soil, both outfitted with stock DD coils. The ATX comes with a 12" x 10" DD coil. The GPX 5000 comes with two coils, one of which is an 11" round DD coil and this is what I used. The nuggets ranged from 0.1 gram to 6.5 ounces. Test conditions The impression I was left with was definitely not how the GPX 5000 blows the ATX away but instead by how well the Garrett ATX does. It is impossible to not be impressed by how well the $2120 detector does when run head-to-head against a $5795 detector. Garrett has done a fantastic job and in my opinion their advertising claims are not off base. This is a serious prospecting circuit well worth consideration. The two detectors basically differ in the range of gold they find best. The Garrett ATX skews towards the smaller more commonly found gold nuggets. The Minelab GPX 5000 skews towards larger gold nuggets that tend to be the goal of professional prospectors. Out of box with similar coils the ATX will find small gold nuggets the GPX 5000 would normally miss without special coils and tuning tricks. It does this simply and with no fuss. However, in mineralized ground with similar coils the GPX easily bests the ATX on large nuggets. By large I mean one ounce and larger and by easily I mean by a margin of 10-15%. The GPX 5000 does this using a coil that in my case had never been on the detector before. Most Minelab users would never consider hobbling the detector by putting the 11" round DD coil on if hunting large nuggets at depth. It is informative therefore that even doing this in the interest of "fairness" and with nothing more than stock Normal timing with Gain bumped to 16 (out of 20) the Minelab GPX 5000 easily outperformed the Garrett ATX on a 6.5 ounce nugget. The ATX was at max Gain of 13 for the test. Now the depth differential here was only about two inches but I have to throw in the huge caution note again that it will vary depending on ground conditions. Absolute depth was about 17" ATX versus 19" GPX for good solid signals. The kind nobody can miss. Again, do not take these as some sort of magical numbers as ground conditions and even nugget shape and alloy could cause you to get some surprising differences. That is why I hate mentioning exact depths and differences in most cases and just stick to relative conclusions. But you are going to ask so there you go. For reference a Fisher Gold Bug Pro with 13" round DD coil and White's GMT with 14" elliptical DD both with settings jacked to the max were barely able to obtain this solid gold 6.5 ounce nugget at 12" in this ground and the GMT in particular would not really have been able to hunt maxed out the way it was. Depending on who is reading this the response may be "really, only two inches?" or "wow, two whole inches!" Similarly, it is interesting to see the GPX with DD coil scrub a little nugget with no signal that the ATX easily detects at a couple inches. This however does end up being my basic and not new finding by any means. Others have reported similar results. The ATX does better on small gold and the GPX on large straight out of box with stock DD coils. I do believe the GPX has more ability to handle more varied and more intense ground conditions and hot rocks due to its many adjustments. However, this is more a belief than a fact as so far the ATX has easily handled everything I have thrown at it, including salt water, basalt rocks, and electrical interference in Hawaii. Garrett does make use of a salient fact in its advertising. The ATX handles a wide range of conditions with deceptively few settings. This makes it very easy to set up and it avoids a common complaint with the GPX detectors. They are so complex people are often left wondering if they have the optimum settings for the conditions. I know for a fact from observation that many people tend to use timings that are too aggressive for the actual conditions when using a GPX. The tendency often is to find something that seems to work well and then to just default to that way if doing things, even if conditions change. To get the best performance out of a GPX does require that a person be somewhat of a tuning wizard. The bottom line for many more casual prospectors in the United States especially is that the Garrett ATX represents a fantastic value. It is truly impossible to say but in my case at least most of the gold I find in the US with my GPX an ATX would have found it also. In particular when hunting areas where bedrock is a foot or less the ground would have to be extremely hot indeed for the ATX to not only find what the GPX will but to have an edge on the more common small gold. Even in deeper ground as long as the gold is measured in grams and not ounces and the ground not extremely mineralized the ATX is going to be a close match with the GPX. Again, out of box with stock DD coils. Where the ATX is going to clearly come up short is on large nuggets, especially those sought after 1 ounce and larger nuggets at depth and on gold in the worst mineralized ground and hot rock locations. To be perfectly honest I feel my putting an 11" inch round DD coil on my GPX 5000 in the interest of being fair does not reflect for one second how I look for gold. I am not out there being fair, I am out there looking for gold. I will be running a larger mono coil with settings optimized for larger gold and then the difference in large gold performance between the ATX and GPX is even more pronounced. I would consider a 10-15% to be a bare minimum advantage gained while in effect running the GPX with its hands tied. I have not done comparisons on the iron discrimination systems but I find the method used by the ATX to be inherently more reassuring. The GPX reacts to shallow ferrous targets by blanking out, a sort of non response. The ATX has a momentary ferrous check that kicks in at the touch of a button, and that gives a low tone growl on iron, which provides a more nuanced and natural response expected by most detector users. I am not a big fan of using discrimination on either unit but I did find the ATX method more to my liking for confirming shallow ferrous stuff as trash that I already thought was trash due to the response. Note that on either detector the ferrous rejection only works on shallow items and only with a DD coil. The amount of rejection is adjustable on the GPX and preset on the ATX so more tests really need to be done in this regard to determine which is the more accurate and useful system. Minelab GPX 5000 and Garrett ATX (Minelab outfitted with optional Nugget Finder coil) I do own both detectors and there is a simple reality here. If I am going looking for gold in the water, be it jewelry or nuggets in a creek, I will grab the ATX. For any other prospecting, the vast majority of it, I will be using the GPX 5000. I am not sure where the line between casual and serious is, but I am way, way over on the serious side. I spend a great deal of time targeting and hunting deep ground looking in areas where very large nuggets have been found historically. Most of the ground I detect I am hunting because it has produced nuggets weighing a pound or more in the past. I hunt tailing piles a lot so bedrock is tens of feet down, and the gold can be at any depth from shallow to extremely deep. I think most professionals would tell you that small gold is what happens along the way while looking for the big stuff, and at the end of the day it is the big stuff or the lack of it that makes the difference. I found over thirteen ounces of nuggets metal detecting in 2013 which is no great sum of gold in my book, but well over half of it was in the form of two nuggets, one weighing 6.5 ounces and the other 2.37 ounces. Now in this case the ATX would have found both these nuggets. Yet I would not use anything but a Minelab GPX for what I am doing. I am spending a lot of valuable time going over ground that I may only get one shot at. I plan these things well in advance and not only time but good money is invested in taking my best shot at getting good results. I basically cannot afford to be running anything that I feel does not give me the best chance of delivering that make or break it big nugget. One nugget can make all the difference between a month of lackluster results and fantastic success. If both the Garrett ATX and Minelab GPX 5000 detectors had exactly identical electronic performance I would still be swinging the GPX. I am on one hand very impressed with the ATX as a nugget detector and on the other hand very disappointed by it. The up front decision to use the Recon AML-1000 housing is an automatic fail from a nugget detecting perspective in my opinion. It adds not only needless weight but weight that is very much an impediment in rough, uneven terrain. This is accentuated by a stock coil that is sensitive to knocks and bumps. It requires an extra level of coil control to manipulate the detector in such a way as to not produce excessive false signals. This differs from Minelab coils that basically do not false at all unless something is wrong with them. I would caution anyone using a detector the way I do that the ATX requires extra care as regards the possibility of repetitive motion injury. Trust me as somebody who detected too much one year and ignored the signs this is something to regard seriously. A harness is a must for weeks of long daily use of the ATX. I shudder to think about how the detector feels with the 20" long rear mounted mono coil hanging off the front. That is an ergonomic nightmare. The ATX features silicone lubricated battery door o-rings that collect dirt. The coil connectors also have o-ring seals and even worse delicate pin connectors subject to damage if not carefully lined up. The headphone connector is similar to the coil connectors. All these are required to make the detector waterproof and not only unneeded for normal dry land use but an impediment as regards serviceability in the field. The coils are sold as a unit with the telescoping rod assembly adding needless expense and weight and making carrying an extra coil around something to be avoided. The rear mount enables the ability of the detector to fold up but is another weak point from a serviceability aspect and ergonomically the worst way to mount a coil. I always considered ergonomics to be the easy low hanging fruit for anyone considering manufacture of a detector to compete with the Minelab PI series, and I am frankly amazed anyone could make something even heavier I am less excited about handling. It is an absolute fact I would put the GPX aside for an alternative, even if that alternative was next best in overall gold ability, if it offered a big advantage ergonomically. I in fact often do decline to "harness up" and set the GPX aside in favor of a lightweight VLF at times because I am just too tired or not in the mood. More importantly, in steep terrain bedrock is often shallow and so when hunting hillsides and slopes there really is no advantage to using a GPX in ground only inches deep. I would very gladly use a properly designed Garrett ATX instead of a Minelab GPX in many situations that I currently encounter. In particular areas where bedrock is less than a foot deep or in areas where large nuggets have historically never been seen. The only reason right now that is not going to happen is I do not want the ATX on my arm. Yes, the ATX has an inherent advantage on small gold but nothing I can't negate by putting on a small mono coil and running the GPX hot. No, in my opinion Garrett missed a major opportunity to wow somebody like me by putting a fantastic prospecting circuit in a package very inappropriate for the target audience. Metal detectors are tools. Now the fact is that for the average person Craftsman tools do just fine and represent good value. But the guy making his living with his toolbox is probably going to be investing in Snap-on tools. It is an apt analogy accentuated by the real performance difference that exists between the Garrett ATX and Minelab GPX detectors on the kind of gold most pros are looking for. The vast number of accessory coils and other aftermarket options on top of a well proven platform makes it an easy decision for the serious prospector. Minelab makes a tool designed specifically for a certain job. The Garrett ATX unfortunately I feel is a duck out of water when employed for normal prospecting uses. I do have to say my hat is off to Garrett for producing a detector that is the first to really give Minelab a run for the money. I hope they do follow up and produce a model expressly designed from the ground up as a dry land prospecting machine. It may well become my primary prospecting detector if they do so. If you have read this review carefully you should understand the issues involved. For many people wanting maximum bang for the buck a Garrett ATX straight up and used properly is a real bargain in a PI prospecting machine. It can and will find gold and find it very well. The guys like me (you know who you are) that probably already have a Minelab PI plus extra coils, batteries and so forth can continue waiting for the next big thing in nugget detecting. You may also consider the Garrett for exactly the reason I did. It is waterproof, and currently is the closest thing you can get to a Minelab PI in a waterproof package. In closing I am curious to see how both detectors do for me this year. The ATX has the lead with about 2.5 ounces of gold and platinum jewelry found so far. I plan on using it often to hunt jewelry every chance I get in 2014. The GPX I will once again be taking to Alaska for a couple months of nugget detecting which may or may not pay off with a large nugget found. I will be hunting the right places but large gold is rare almost anywhere you go. Given the lead the ATX already has the GPX has its work cut out for it so it should make for an interesting year. For those of you trying to decide between these two very fine metal detectors I can only sympathize and count my blessings for not having to make such decisions. However, I hope this helps you with your decision because I have done my best to try and do just that. Good luck and good hunting! Detailed information on the Garrett ATX Detailed information on the Minelab GPX 5000
  7. I own both a Garrett Recon and an ATX, can someone remind me what was found to be best 10 x14 Infinium coil to be used on each? I was thinking someone found the Infinium 10 x 14 mono coil was best for Recon and Infinium 10 x 14 DD coil best for use on the ATX Is this correct or are all interchangable?
  8. Yellowstone

    ATX Beach Coil

    I have the ATX with new DD enclosed coil. It's a killer on dry sand, wet sand, shoreline. But when I get into water more than a foot deep, it wants to float. Question - which would be better water coil for Southern California beaches - 8" mono coil or 12 x 10 open DD coil? Thanks
  9. I’m a new member from Wasilla, Alaska. I am new to detecting for gold and was hoping you can help me make a final decision on which P.I. detector I want to buy. The reason why I want to get a P.I. Detector is so that I don’t have to worry about hot rocks setting off my detector much like in Petersville, note I have been using a gold bug pro. Now saying that I live in wasilla and knowing that the majority of nuggets are small I will be mainly hunting in relatively close areas such as Hatcher Pass and Petersville. I know that VLF detectors are hard to use in Petersville due to the graphite slate hot rocks. The main reason I am looking towards an SDC 2300 and the ATX machines are because of there ability to be compact for hiking and waterproof which makes it easier to walk through the bushes following streams. Other wise I would love to save up for the relatively new gpz 7000 which I may consider later on down the line or maybe even get a gpx 5000. I like the fact that the 2 machines I am interested in are pretty good on small gold. I want to be able to detect mainly along streams with the thought that if I find a small nugget I would also be able to pan that same spot of a found nugget. The things keeping me from making a decision are the quirks of each machine. ATX can change coils and go deeper which I really like but also don’t like how I hear it can false on targets if bumped into a clump of grass or protruding rocks. I like how the SDC is hot on smaller gold and specimen gold since I think the reality of me finding big nuggets are slim, but I also don’t like the idea of it being a shallow detector and mainly for small gold. Do you think you can help me out on making a decision here?
  10. Garrett is releasing two new, larger 11”x13” closed searchcoils for the ATX pulse induction detector. Available in either a DD or mono configuration, the new ATX coils will be lighter weight and offer increased depth versus the standard ATX searchcoil. The new closed style provides more resistance to falsing due to scrubbing of the coil against the ground and allows gold prospectors to use the upper coil deck to sift/find tiny nuggets easier. The new ATX searchcoil includes an exclusive Garrett design slide-lock system that creates a center-mount style while still allowing the ATX to collapse into its soft cover carrying case. Designated for a mid-year release, the new ATX coil will be available as the new standard offering on ATX detectors and can be purchased as an accessory coil by existing ATX customers. More details and pricing on the new ATX packages will be forthcoming. http://www.garrett.com/hobbysite/pdfs/Garrett_New_Products_2016.pdf
  11. LipCa

    ATX Battery Use

    As ATX users know, it uses two sets of 4 AA batteries. Each going into separate compartments. The other day, my detector said it was going dead after several days of use. Before removing the batteries from their holders, I decided to check the voltage. One set was about 2.4 volts and the other was about 4.9 volts! I am using rechargeable which normally charge up to about 5.1 or 5.2 volts per set. So, one set had little use. The detector was operating normal. What feeds on these batteries...... does one set get more use than the other?
  12. vanursepaul Posted February 25, 2015 Steve, I would like to see you superimpose the ATX on this bar graph to see where it fits. Paul The whole graph isnt there, but you know what i mean, eh? Steve, remember this one? ...Did you ever do it? Maybe you could have a go at superimposing 2 new columns for each of the 3 nugget pics. (space to the left and right of the GPX and GPZ). Time permitting of course! I'm thinking 1 column representing the old style DEEP SEARCHER 15" x 20" coil, and another for the new flat style, 11" x 13" closed DD coil. If you had space,... stretch it, or create a new chart,... you could even throw in the TDI, and even a Golg Bug for reference/fun. Also assuming similar ground conditions, good or bad. For example:- How close is the 11" x 13" DD coil to the STD coil on the GPX 5000? And whats it like against the SDC2300 on small bits? And is the 15" x 20" coil deeper than the STD GPX 5000? And how far away from the GPZ is it, on big bits? Doesn't have to be an exact scientific test orientated job, more of an approximate one based on your time and experience with this machine. I know its not you No1 gold machine (but is, & could be for others), and you love it for wet beaches, but you won't sell it which says a lot about it... I think. With all the latest new vlf stuff (equinox/gm1000/impact/mx sport/at max) getting all the headlines & peoples attention, does no harm to reflect on something old, something different. After all, YOUR elusive/magic/dry land/sub $2000/lightweight/LTX PI machine hasn't arrived yet! (MINELAB/GARRETT/FISHER/NOKTA/MAKRO/XP??? Wonder who will be first then?)....THAT WILL DEFINATELY GET EVERYONE EXCITETED! I don't think its (ATX) a dead duck. I'm still thinking there's more to it (prospecting) than being relegated to a SUPERB beach PI machine. Just don't bring the weight into it!!! Have you tested the closed DD coil? Improved falsing and balance issues? Thankyou in advance! jim
  13. Tiftaaft

    ATX Deepseeker Coil

    I received the deepseeker coil when I obtained my ATX. I have only been using the stock coil to date, but had a few questions on the larger coil. Since my shaft on the stock coil is partially stuck in the extended position (as much as I have tried to loosen it), and I would like to take the ATX to Houston next week on a business trip (that I hope to find time to do a little Galveston beach hunting... suggestions welcomed)... will the 20" be overkill for my intended hunting? What experiences have you had using the deepseeker coil on the beach? What should I know?
  14. I did a bit of Google searching for posts in the last year to see if I could get a feel for how much use the Garrett ATX gets and what people are finding with it. Not much to see though. The Garrett Australia Facebook page has some gold nugget finds https://www.facebook.com/GarrettAustralia/ The Findmall ATX Forum would have you thinking the ATX is strictly a beach detector http://www.findmall.com/list.php?96 and other than that a few relic hunters out there using it. The ATX is one of my favorite detectors and quite a capable nugget detector, but after some early nugget detecting it now only gets used seriously as a beach and water detector. The problem is with ATX at $2120 and 6.9 lbs, limited coil selection, it is a tough machine to recommend for prospecting with a Minelab GPX 4500 running only $2699 at this time. I still consider the ATX to have been a missed opportunity. At $1699 in a lighter weight dry land package and sporting less expensive dry land coils the machine could have made a real impact on the prospecting world. Instead it is a rare sight on the goldfields.
  15. I am very new to the ATX, just received mine this past Tuesday, but have been out for a few hours each day since, including a couple attepts at a local lake/swimming home. My hunting at this point is mainly geared toward jewelry and coins (prospecting at some point.. but that is another forum). My question is about the iron grunt feature... will a non-iron target give an iron response depending on depth or mineralization surrounding the target? Especially in the lake, where I have to trust the feel of my foot and scoop in murky water... I have experienced several hard hitting targets (both low-high and high-low tones) giving the iron grunt. Am I making a mistake by passing up those targets? Thanks, Tim
  16. jimmymac

    ATX Ground Balance

    Doing research on my atx I'm so glad I found this site. Atx is driving me bonkers in the salt water on the gulf coast florida panama city beach to be exact and my trips to south beach. Problem I'm having is trying to run with factory settings with sens 13 , what happens is a lot of drift which is fine I can hear targets thru drift but then atx screams like it is locked on to a target and stays that way with the yellow dots fixed on the far right screen which doesn't allow me to hit targets even my scoop. I then retune and after a few swings same thing again. If I ground balance sens 13 I can run fairly smooth with some drift however only targets I'm digging are shallow. I watched a video on ground balancing on detectors comparisons on u tube with the infinium and atx side by side on wet sand both were hitting targets deep , then atx was ground balanced and lost a dime at 10 inches which it picked up easily in factory mode with sens at 13. So it looks like if ground balancing is used depth is really reduced ? Another test they did was run sens at 10 in factory sens and still couldn't pick up dime at 10 inches. Not sure what I'm doing wrong really would appreciate any tips as losing faith in atx. By the way my duelfield runs smooth in the drink , thinging its much less sensitive than the atx ? My detector is ctx which runs smooth. I bought the atx to use in sanded in conditions but not working for me so far. thanks jimmymac
  17. Going to pick up a garrett atx for nugget detecting which of the packages would you recommend? Have VLF gold detectors but want to venture into pulse now and seems to be the ATX would be a great start.
  18. Firstly, thanks for sharing your stories and knowledge here. I can't tell you how grateful I am for the lessons that you have saved me from having to experience for myself. I would be very grateful if some of the ATX users would share some of their Saltwater / Beach set-up preferences and experiences. I am pretty new to the Hobby and I am having a little difficulty trying to work out the best way to set up my ATX for use in saltwater. I live in T&C and the water here is VERY saline as we don't have any rivers. While Steve H has some good info from his ATX in Hawaii, our beaches are more Parrot fish by-product than volcanic sand. Any feedback would be very helpful and much appreciated.
  19. Well, coffee and tools in hand I got going with the fun part - taking stuff apart! Click on these photos to see larger views. You can probably see where I am going with this. Circuit board in a box with single AA battery holder and control panel tacked outside with controls. All in one box that can be rod mounted or hip or chest mounted. If rod mounted, I want to be able to use stock DD coil, or Infinium 5" x 10" DD and 4" x 7" DD. Not willing to pop for another ATX 8" mono at this time as the one I have stays as it is to use with the other ATX I will be getting. We will see how this works out first. In theory I would like to do a real professional box with drop in battery, just like a White's TDI SL but the box would have to be longer. I may however go cruder than that, more like a Surf PI with a lid I need to open to replace batteries. Be nice to use rechargeables and rig to just plug detector in to charge it but again, I may not want to work that hard at it. Paul would do a bang up professional job. I am all about expediency myself. If anybody want to see a closeup of anything or has any questions about how this thing comes apart ask away. I know I had to go buy yet another stupid tool to remove the Torx security screws!
  20. I am unfortunately time limited right now, with family stuff occupying quite a bit of time the next couple weeks. However, Garrett was kind enough to rush me a couple of the new 11" x 13" coils to check out and I wanted to give at least a preliminary report on the mono version at this time. The new coils are aimed at a couple issues that owners of previous ATX coils have complained about. First, the rather unique rear hinge design of the stock ATX coils that allows the detector to fold up into a particularly compact configuration. This design has two issues. As the coils age the forward weight tends to cause the coil to slowly sag forward. Not a huge factor but it can result in constant small adjustments to level the coil out. More important it throws the weight of the coil forward, hurting the center of balance. Again, not a huge issue, but one that becomes more apparent if you try and mow through high grass and weeds with the ATX. Garrett came up with an ingenious fix for this issue, that both allows the coil to fold up as desired while delivering that center mount coil so many have craved. The new coil design has a sliding channel that lets you move the coil attachment point from rear to center or anywhere in between. You don't see something really new in metal detecting very often but this really is. And it works. Here is a shot of the new coil with the old design inset into the upper right (Click on all photos for large version). The old stock coil is an epoxy filled 10" x 12" DD design that together with the attached rod assembly weighs 3 lbs 7 oz. The new 11" x 13" mono weighs in at 3 lbs 7.5 oz, again with the attached rod assembly. Basically a wash, although the new coil is slightly larger in overall dimensions. Electronically however it is a much larger coil. A mono coil normally will get better depth than the same size DD coil although in the worst ground DD coils have an edge. DD coils also offer a form of iron discrimination on the ATX that will not work on a mono coil. The ATX seems to be optimized for DD coils and for most gold prospecting the DD coil is probably the better option. For sheer depth on the largest nuggets however mono is often the way to go, and in this case the coil itself is not only a mono but also slightly larger than the stock coil. That is why this coil got my attention first over the 11" x 13" DD version. I made a quick run out to the northern Nevada goldfields. The weather has finally let up but everything is still real wet out east of Reno. I mean real wet - stick to the bottom of your boots mud kind of wet in places. That oddly helped a bit in this case as the ATX is a PI that can easily handle wet salt ground, and in fact it is my favorite salt water detector. The ground balance range runs well into the salt range so I don't think there is any wet salt ground it can't handle. I should point out however that ground balancing out salt does also balance out small gold signals that read identical to the salt signals. This is one of those unsolvable issues with the way current metal detectors work. But better to tune out the worst of the salt in some places and take what gold can be found still. Listening to constant salt signals masks gold also, so there is no perfect solution. In any case, the ATX did prove its capability on this little test run as the ground is both wet and salty where I was, and the ATX 11" x 13" mono ground balanced to it with ease, even with the sensitivity cranked all the way up to the highest setting. Unfortunately I found no gold this day although I did recover some ridiculously small ferrous targets plus some bullets. I did learn a few things to report though. First, the new center mount coils really do balance better and push through grass and weeds much better than the older rear hinge design. The second thing however is more important. One thing I mention in my earliest ATX reports is that "The stock coil is marginally sensitive to false signals when contacting rocks. This is a bit odd since it is an epoxy filled coil so in theory the coil windings cannot move to produce false signals when bumped. The signals do not occur consistently or often but in my case at least happened most often when the coil would catch a rock on the surface and roll the rock under the coil. It is possible that the coil cable, even though protected by being enclosed in the lower shaft assembly, is jiggling enough to produce the signals." I never determined exactly what the cause of these false signals were, but others also reported them. They typically occurred only at higher sensitivity settings and could be tamed with careful coil control, but they were an annoyance. The good news is the new coil design appears to have alleviated this problem. I won't go so far as to say completely eliminated yet, as more hours are needed and more reports from other people under other circumstances, but I did not experience any falsing caused by bumping this coil against rocks or other objects. I was getting some faint signals from running a mono coil at max gain riding directly on salt and mineral ground, but that is because I was in all truth running the sensitivity higher than I perhaps should, a habit of mine. I tend to push my detectors hard. The 11" x 13" mono shares a common mono trait by being hottest around the outside edges. Very small surface targets will tend to signal twice, once for each time an edge passes over the target. This can be handy for knowing you are dealing with tiny surface items before digging a deep hole chasing one. There is also a tendency for the signal to sharpen at the four "corners" of the blunt end coil design. Small targets can be pinpointed by turning the coil on edge and running one of these corners around in the dirt as a sort of pinpointer. When using a plastic scoop to isolate small targets, use those corners as your hot spots. As I noted earlier I am tied up with family business for a while, but I will be reporting more on this and the DD version in the future. These new coils will have me breaking the ATX out for more prospecting this summer than has been my norm in the past. I have tried the 15" x 20" mono coil for the ATX, and frankly this new mono coil in my opinion is a far better option for prospectors. The rear mounted open 20" length of the larger coil made it difficult to handle in the grassy sagebrush areas I frequent. More importantly, I found that although the 15" x 20" coil does offer more depth on very large targets the gains on normal size nuggets were minimal if any and the smaller stuff can't be detected at all. My honest opinion the main benefits with the 15" x 20" are found both in ground coverage and on very large targets but the lack of sensitivity to smaller gold nuggets is a concern. The 11" x 13" mono is a much better size that in my opinion will offer better depth on the larger nuggets prospectors are likely to find than the 15" x 20" mono coil. However, do not think the 11" x 13" is going to be some kind of huge improvement in depth over the stock coil on large nuggets. People always seem to overestimate the advantages of larger coils. That extra inch? Yes. Twice the depth or even 50% more depth? No, don't set yourself up for those kinds of expectations, they are not realistic. If I was buying a new Garrett ATX today for gold prospecting, I would be looking hard at these two new coils because the ATX can now come equipped with one of them as the stock coil. The new knock resistant fully enclosed coil design that is also less likely to hang up on sticks and obstructions. The center mount design handles far better. I don't see how any avid ATX user could be unhappy with this new coil design. The DD coil is still probably the better option for most people with the mono more for those chasing the largest nuggets at depth.
  21. Garrett is really disappointing us, I bought an atx when they were released in 2013 Nov, their stock coil had a lot of issues, they never cared. Just imagine 2013!!!! They replied n 2017, with their 2 new expensive coils, (price of an AT gold detector), well currently I was hoping that they will do test and tell us the differences amongst these 3 coils, but they don't bother!!!! Up to now in their Web site there is nothing on performance of their new coils. it seems they are concentrating on vlf detectors and for us, we just took a risk buy buying their PI detector - oh poor zimbabwean I thought Americans were far better than the Australians, now I am stating to doubt, maybe I should have gone minelab, should I buy another coil for atx??? (or it will b another piece of lemon AGAIN) or just sell my atx and get a minelab?????
  22. Hi there, is there anyone who have used the 11x13" garrett mono coil so far?how is it,compared to the stock coil??in terms of depth,and mineralization handling??
  23. Thinking about getting a new PI detector. I have had a Minelab GP3000 and Whites TDI. I really liked the GP3000 for the depth, but I quickly found out the area I hunt had too much EMI and the gold tends to be more porous and sometimes "sugary like", and the GP 3000 just couldn't see the gold. So I have pretty much just been using a Gold Bug II. Would really like a GPZ 7000 but don't think it will be possible. So I was looking at the Garrett ATX or Minelab SDC 2300. Reading reviews on the ATX it seems quite a few people complain about coil falsing when hitting objects with the coil. Does anyone know if this has ever been fixed by Garrett? Or have the new coils fixed it? Would the ATX detect this porous gold? It's been a long time since I bought a new detector and I haven't really kept up with any of it. Thanks.
  24. The new 11" x 13" mono and DD closed coil options have now been incorporated into new detector packages for 2017. This means you can get your choice of one of several stock coil options when buying a new ATX. I would like to see more of this from manufacturers so good for Garrett! Prices below are manufacturer suggested retail price (MSRP) so figure 15% off for internet pricing. More details at the Garrett website.
  25. Well, it looks like Garrett finally has the New ATX coils added to their web site! http://www.garrett.com/hobbysite/hbby_atx_searchcoils_en.aspx Beav