dirtfisher
New member
Hello everyone! I am thinking about getting a Time Ranger. I have read mixed reviews about this unit. Some say the Discovery 3300 (which I have now) is just as good or better. Any of you have an opinion on this? Thanks, DF
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.
Discovery 3300 vs Time Ranger
- Thread starter dirtfisher
- Start date
Hello everyone! I am thinking about getting a Time Ranger. I have read mixed reviews about this unit. Some say the Discovery 3300 (which I have now) is just as good or better. Any of you have an opinion on this? Thanks, DFdirtfisher
New member
I usually just go by the tone or sound it makes and listen for the high tones on silver. I dig all tones at the beach. Sometimes the numbers ID comes in handy when there are conflicting tones. Then I can check the screen for number ID. That little 3300 is a heck of a machine for the money. But it has a slow recovery time and eats batteries pretty fast. That's why I'm looking at a Time Ranger.
I use rechargeable true 9 volt batteries in my 3300 so I don't have to worry about buying more, for me that is the way to go and you are right the 3300 is a very good low priced detector. I was wondering too about the other BH's recovery speed, I have to slow down with the 3300 in congested areas.
bigolhorns
New member
I have a 3300 and a Time Ranger. Nothing about the 3300 is even close to the Time Ranger. I also own a Tejon, Vequero, Spectrum and Land Star. In my ground the machine I choose most often is the Time Ranger, it's is just hard to beat. Very easy to learn, super deep, accurate depth and target ID. Deepest dime I've dug in 25 years was with the TR.
The 3300 is an OK detector, just not in the same league as the TR.
The 3300 is an OK detector, just not in the same league as the TR.
If I were choosing between the Time Ranger and 3300, for my use I would chose the 3300. The only Time Ranger I've used was a prototype for the upgrade FT did on the current TR and it did well in the mild ground here. It had excellent depth and the numerical meter was very accurate down to 6-7 inches, but the two 3300's I bought were as deep, or very, very close, and the meter was just as accurate to the same depths. The Time Ranger build quality was much better, the 3300's lighter and easier to swing. The Time Ranger might have had a slight depth edge, but if so it wasn't much. The same applies to recovery speed and target separation, the Time Ranger was a little better, but not that much better. There wasn't enough difference in performance to sway me either way. I liked the 3300's four tone audio and the way it handled much better, but the deciding factor is that the 3300's manual ground balance affects both the all metal pinpoint and disc modes. The Time Ranger ground balance only affected the all metal mode, the disc mode had preset ground balance. I enjoyed using the Time Ranger and 3300's and made some good finds with them, but instead of choosing between those two I would go with the Fisher F4. If you're interested, there are links to the field tests of the TR proto and 3300 I did at http://jb-ms.com.