Garrett AT Gold vs. MineLabs Eureka Gold

[GOLD Billyen]

(I always try to do a solid search of the forums and the net before I make a new thread but, I was surprised to find very little on this comparison.)
I'm going to buy a detector soon and I'll buy a cheap $100 unit but, then I'd like to buy a top of the line VLF. Then buy a PI.

Now I'm a newbie and some of you will cringe with these points but, I'm thinking these are the top VLF from 2 of the best brands. So that's something.
The price is about the same but, I'm seeing some cheaper used AT Golds. Now the 2 things bugging me are this. I think the Eureka Gold "may" be the better machine for finding gold. However, I have to admit the LCD display on the AT is cool (for a newbie) . I also like the waterproofness of the AT. I think I'll be doing some detecting in areas where it will be wet and I like the idea if putting the detector underwater.

The Eureka does have the 60kHz where the AT only goes to 18.

What do you guys think?

 

[user 1769]

If you'll be doing any relic hunting or coin shooting, the AT Gold seems to de very well for those. I'm happy with mine but I'm only just learning to use it.

 

[Nugget]

The thing about comparisons is to provide an accurate one you must have used both machines extensively.

Here's a couple of things to consider when deciding on which detector you should buy;

• What is your maximum budget.[/*]
• What specific features are you looking for.[/*]
• What type/s of detecting will you be doing.[/*]
• Where will you primarily be detecting (certain ground calls for certain machines).[/*]
• How much detecting are you planning on doing (now the question of "how much should you really be spending" comes into play). [/*]

Once you've answered the above, you should then be able to research and choose a detector based on your needs and not what someone else tells you to buy.

 

[Nugget]

Based on my experience using the AT Gold, I've found it to be a capable VLF detector for the price. I've never had any issues with build quality or anything like that and with the right config and settings it can handle mineralised ground quite well.

If considering the AT Gold, here are a couple of topics that might be useful;

https://www.prospectingaustralia.com/forum/viewtopic.php?id=3442
https://www.prospectingaustralia.com/forum/viewtopic.php?id=1500 (check out my review on post #4)

If you have any specific questions relating to the AT Gold I would be more than happy to answer them.

 

[Brumble-Gum]

Hi Gold Billyen

I have had experience with the AT Gold and a XT 18000 (The model prior to the Eureka).
Both work well and are proven gold finders, one is an exclusive VLF Gold machine (With the 3 frequencies) the other is a Specific frequency Gold machine that can be used as a Coin/Relic machine also (But not on wet beach sand).
Are you an analogue or digital person? Allot of our older generation like to use the Eureka or older Whites machines as it is what their generation are used to, switches and dials can be adjusted for ease of use. The younger generation usually prefer the digital screens with the variable noises, numerical and depth indicators for identification, these take some getting used to but once learned both make for a deadly combination.
A quick note before I upset anyone, these are my observations only and are not set in concrete. There are some older people who own and run digital machines and vice versa for the younger generation with the Eureka.
Only the other day I assisted a mature gentleman travelling Australia who required assistance with his 705 settings. The buttons, noises and different frequencies on coils confused the heck out of him. I set him up as best I could with a smooth threshold and showed him how to ground balance etc. He thanked me and the last thing he said was "I wanted to buy a Eureka but i was talked out of getting what I wanted by the sales staff. I think I would have found the dials easier to use".
Both find gold and are great in the right hands, if you are technologically minded go the AT Gold if not go the Eureka.

Best of luck.

 

[GOLD Billyen]

Thanks Nugget & Brumble-Gum,

Nugget I can't believe there were 2 threads...I couldn't find them.

I hear what your saying about choosing. I actual decided on the AT Gold but, wanted someone to talk me out of it in case I was wrong...no no did.

My only concern is it maxes out at 18 kHz but, I have to tell myself this is going to be my middle detector as I will get a PI once I learn a bit more and get out there. By then the 5000 should be about 1k

Brumble-Gum...I'm 42 so I don't know if I'm young or old (I swear I was 18 just the other day) but, I'm a bit of a techie and like the pretty pictures on the AT. Sad...I know. It actually has a thing that says "GOLD" how bad can it get? I also like the depth readout.

For the 5000...I don't know why they couldn't make it a "bit" more user friendly but, I guess for that market they like to fiddle with the switches.

 

[GOLD Billyen]

Hold the phone...I just saw a video of Todd Hoffman saying he likes the AT Gold. That did it for me.

Dam...Minelab here I come.

 

[Goldpick]

For some reason, you see very little evidence of finds on the Eureka, many people seemed to have owned them, only to trade up to something else. The Whites GMT and Fisher Gold Bug2 seem to have a lot more success at finding gold, with many videos and testimonials to back them up.

As mentioned previously, the higher kilohertz machines are preferable, as they can weed out very small gold that may have been undetetable to the current crop of PI detectors, hence why many PI owners also have a GMT or Goldbug in their arsenal to clean up on any small gold or specimens. The only real advantage on paper that the 18kHz detectors have over the 48-70kHz detectors is a bit better depth (and in the case of the ATGold, fully waterproof). The X-Terra 705 is more of an all-round detector. I have seen gold detected with the Goldbug2 that is so small, that I doubt anything else on the market would even sound off on it, bar something like the Falcon MD20 probe. You always consistently see reports from GMT owners finding gold (Tibbooburra comes to mind).

If it were me, I'd go either the Whites GMT or Goldbug2 over the Eureka purely on their proven performance.

 

[Bluevein]

I finally took the plunge by buying an AT GOLD. Get to test it out over the weekend. Very excited.

 

[user 1769]

Hi Bluevein,

I bought my AT-Gold to look for gold, but got instantly hooked on coin shooting. It does very well with pretty good discrimination.

 

[Phantom]

Goldpick,

when you say "ATGold, fully waterproof" does that mean they are ok in seawater, beach environment?

Regards,

Eric

 

[GOLD Billyen]

I finally took the plunge by buying an AT GOLD. Get to test it out over the weekend. Very excited.

Me too. Bought a used one. It is exciting as it's a decent gold machine even though some people seem to want to knock it.

It's a bit rough as I bought it a few days ago and I live in Sydney but there really no place to use it here. Going to have to take another trip out in the next few days as I got gold ants in my pants.

 

[GOLD Billyen]

Goldpick,

when you say "ATGold, fully waterproof" does that mean they are ok in seawater, beach environment?

Regards,

Eric

Hi Eric,

You can only use it in freshwater.

Bill

 

[Stoney]

I'm still a newbie to the game. So I can't compare machines, but I went with the AT gold and love it.

Haven't had the chance to find gold yet, but she has been great for everything else.

Best advice I've heard is,
"all detectors work best when taken out of the closet"
So get out as much as you can and enjoy.

 

[Guest]

I think when comparing units the detectors need to be tested in the actual goldfields
to see which handles the mineralisation better.

 

[Joshwasere]

I have been thoroughly swinging the ATGold since July 2013 and love it. I just cashed in over $1000 (found with the ATGold) the other day to go towards an ATX.
I bought the ATGold for finding gold but I ended up doing stacks of beach combing as I live close to the beach.

I have found gold in both dry and wet to semi-wet sand but it is difficult and you need stacks of patience. I have to say I probably would have preferred the AT Pro for its custom settings too and I have heard that it is a little more stable in the wetter sands. I haven't used the AT Pro but I would like to!

Hope this helps.

 

[Guest]

Where are you guys using your machines?

 

[Joshwasere]

I search wherever I can parks, beaches, dirt carparks, walkways, sportsfields, showgrounds old churches and new! and especially make the most of the summer period on the beaches, I like searching Boat harbours too - they are great for wet sand searching! (even with the AT Gold!)

 

[Bluevein]

Took the AT Gold out to a creek with a little beach over Easter. Managed to discriminate against trash and find a lead sinker in the first 20 mins. Really chuffed with the results knowing early on how to find heavy metals.

Spent the rest of the weekend fishing with the family and having a few drinks. Wife and I are keen to head out again soon to do some uninhibited prospecting.

 

[GOLD Billyen]

Seeing a lot of minelabs for sale but, hardly ever see any Garrett AT Golds.