basstrackerman
Well-known member
Looks like Garrett made the upper handle on the ATMax longer where the arm cuff is.. I hope this is true.
Find's Treasure Forums
Welcome to Find's Treasure Forums, Guests!
You are viewing this forums as a guest which limits you to read only status.
Only registered members may post stories, questions, classifieds, reply to other posts, contact other members using built in messaging and use many other features found on these forums.
Why not register and join us today? It's free! (We don't share your email addresses with anyone.) We keep email addresses of our users to protect them and others from bad people posting things they shouldn't.
Click here to register!
Need Support Help?
Cannot log in?, click here to have new password emailed to you
Changed email? Forgot to update your account with new email address? Need assistance with something else?, click here to go to Find's Support Form and fill out the form.
ATMax upper handle...
- Thread starter basstrackerman
- Start date
basstrackerman
Well-known member
I froze the video of the two guys in park and screen shot it then blew it up.. Looks a lot longer than the ace 250
It sure looks like it with Steve holding the AT Max.
The box is the same size. They did make changes to the problems associated the box breaking off the upper stem on some units, about a year ago. Hope this helps.......
I am quite familiar with Viking detectors.
basstrackerman
Well-known member
well garrett website says length of atpro and gold are 42-51 inches and the atmax is 43-56 inches .. that is really awesome for my long arms and being 6'4" tall... i bet it feels better balanced.
basstrackerman said:
Nice catch on the length. A few more inches can really change the balance. Appears Garrett listened and changed all the things being asked for plus it's affordable. Garrett has hit a walk off grandslam with this machine. I still think the pro is best at identifying bottlecaps but I haven't tried the Max. YET !!
marcomo said:kajunman said:
How can you hit a walk off grand slam before you even get up to the plate?
Overthink much ? It's cheaper than the R2 and waterproof. It's cheaper than the MXS with wireless capabilities. Garrett has incorporated all the things missing on the ATP while adding depth and still kept it affordable. They were smart to not change the head and risk a faulty new design.
kajunman said:marcomo said:kajunman said:
How can you hit a walk off grand slam before you even get up to the plate?
Overthink much ? It's cheaper than the R2 and waterproof. It's cheaper than the MXS with wireless capabilities. Garrett has incorporated all the things missing on the ATP while adding depth and still kept it affordable. They were smart to not change the head and risk a faulty new design.
Not overthinking at all. I have high hopes for this detector just like you do. It may very well turn out to be a "walk off grand slam" like you say. But I'm not claiming my hopes are facts.
You've listed some of the nice features of this detector, but features don't equate to improved performance. "Improved depth" could mean a grand slam (a couple inches) or it could be substantially less. There's no way of knowing until reports start coming in from trusted unbiased sources.
All we know is what the Garrett marketing dept. has put out there. I'm not willing to assume great performance based on a source that is, by definition, biased.
basstrackerman
Well-known member
Well talked to Garrett today. They measured from back of hand grip to back of arm cuff and it's 10"... I thought it looked longer but she said it measures the same as the atpro. I was hoping they changed it.
marcomo said:kajunman said:marcomo said:kajunman said:
How can you hit a walk off grand slam before you even get up to the plate?
Overthink much ? It's cheaper than the R2 and waterproof. It's cheaper than the MXS with wireless capabilities. Garrett has incorporated all the things missing on the ATP while adding depth and still kept it affordable. They were smart to not change the head and risk a faulty new design.
Not overthinking at all. I have high hopes for this detector just like you do. It may very well turn out to be a "walk off grand slam" like you say. But I'm not claiming my hopes are facts.
You've listed some of the nice features of this detector, but features don't equate to improved performance. "Improved depth" could mean a grand slam (a couple inches) or it could be substantially less. There's no way of knowing until reports start coming in from trusted unbiased sources.
All we know is what the Garrett marketing dept. has put out there. I'm not willing to assume great performance based on a source that is, by definition, biased.
Exactly ! garrett builds great detectors and adding the wireless and other slight features are great as well but until there out there in the hands of everyday users and gone through the everyday hunts with unbiased results instead of the results from those that are picked to test them like dealers and those that like to jump and hang from trees leaves a lot to be proved. not trying to be all negative as I like the AtPros but they are far from well balanced and ergonomic friendly from us Older guys. JMHO so bash me if you want
BarryL said:
No need to bash. I don't have a problem at all with the AT ergonomics though and I'm 54.
As for me , I take a positive stance on the Max being better with more capabilities and added features. The Max isn't a new platform, if it were I might have some trepidation. It isn't so I don't.