PI test: Sand Shark, Dual Field, Headhunter Pulse and PI 1000 video comparison

hobbit

New Member
Joined
May 4, 2012
Messages
16
Here are some comparison tests of the Tesoro Sand Shark, White's Dual Field, Detectorpro Headhunter Pulse and White's PI 1000 pulse induction metal detectors. They are tested in the manner recommended by Eric Foster. I do not claim to be an expert and make no value judgements.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=g5wDQnDi_wE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=RfAOJTAAV4w

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=8Dch7XjHcSE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=q951fA2lMW8
 
Test

GOT IT CRAIG!! :thumbsup: It just seems there is so much back and fourth over the subject!! 99% of it is whos doing the detecting 1% which P.I they are using for the most part. Happy hunting all!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't know.... I know a lot of tests have been posted on all the forums but I do not feel that anything is wrong with a member making a post like this, even if it is his/her first post.

It was well done and I don't see any ulterior motive for making this post, although it may be boring some, others may find it interesting. IMHO
 
Very Informative tests. Why didn't you use a 10.5 inch Sand Shark? I think everyone knows a larger coil will go deeper.
phil
 
I don't know.... I know a lot of tests have been posted on all the forums but I do not feel that anything is wrong with a member making a post like this, even if it is his/her first post.

" I don't see any ulterior motive for making this post"
Free self promotion. :yes:
 
Yeah the tests are fair looking... the bottom line though is air tests and actual performance in the salt and minerals are going to be different... :yes:
 
He was asked to post these tests on these forums, after posting them over at treasure.net.

These aren't pointless tests... I think they show a lot about how the machines stack up with each other. Would love to see the Sea Hunter or Infinium added, I may end up doing a Infinium video of my own, but different ground and everything would skew the results.
 
I am going to make ONE comment..

The new poster and member, Tony (Hobbit on Treasurenet), decided I could not possibly be right when I said the Tesoro Sand Shark performs just as well or better than ANY PI detector on the market today priced at $1,200.00 or less.

He proceeded, along with "The Core Four" (four guys that disagree with every word I type), to explain to me how the Sand Shark was a second rate machine. That is why these videos were made - with the expressed intention of trashing the Sand Shark.

As with most people that have just enough information to be dangerous, he spent all day in his back yard trying to prove his point and "show me." :wow:
Well Tony, you showed me buddy - and everyone else. The question is what did you show us?

You showed us you are just another hobbyist with an opinion, and not much more. Again, thanks to you, I won $50 from several friends that bet against you actually making these videos just because you disagreed with my assertions. I'm still waiting for the photos of all the booty you have found with your "other" machines. Especially after I "showed you mine" first.. :laughing:

The Tesoro Sand Shark is just as good or better, than ANY other pulse induction unit costing $1,200.00 or less. You can't find anything with a DF, Headhunter, Infinium - whatever, that I can't find with my Sand Shark. If you want to pay twice as much for the optional hype - Go for it! :cool:
 
I don't know, it's a helluva way to introduce yourself, re-stir the poo-pot of which PI detector is "better". There's never ANYTHING good comes from this topic and I feel that this should be pulled for that reason.

But I guess, let's get ready to RUMBLLLLLLLLLE!
 
Looked like a fair test to me, too bad the Tesoro didn't have the larger coil or it may have fared better.
 
Cfmct-PI had it right. The only way to test these units are in the conditions they were made for. You can have a sensetive deep seeking detector but by being a sensetive deep seeking detector it makes the detector vunerable to the soil/sand conditions as well, where as a less sensitive detector may be easier to operate over the same ground making deeper targets stand out.
I once had a PI that was not top of the line but extremely stable tone, I could hear a change in tone so very faint I dug allmost in faith and it never failed .
 
The fact that the Dual Field and the HeadHunter PI both get roughly the same depth, and the Sand Shark gets 4+ inches less depth on every target, I think proves everything. These tests were done because Terry is constantly saying the Sand Shark is as good as all the other PIs, when those of us who have owned the Sand Shark and other PIs know that is far from the truth.

I found the same results on the beaches in southern california, the Sand Shark gets much less depth on every target than the Infinium, the Infinium gets about the same depths on air tests as the dual field, and HH PI in these videos, except it hits a .5 gram ring at 6 inches, 1 gram at 9". It isn't coincidence that the 3 top PIs all air test the same, and the Sand Shark gets much less depth, it translates the same in the sand.

I'm sick and tired of seeing Terry fooling new beach hunters into buying a mediocre machine, and telling them that it is just as good as the others, when it isn't... not even close.

The way these tests are done, the coil is on the ground, the field is detecting the ground minerals, according to Eric Foster, this is the best way to get a close to real conditions test.

I'll be linking to this thread every time Terry starts spewing his "Sand Shark is comparable to any other PI" B.S.
 
The fact that the Dual Field and the HeadHunter PI both get roughly the same depth, and the Sand Shark gets 4+ inches less depth on every target, I think proves everything. These tests were done because Terry is constantly saying the Sand Shark is as good as all the other PIs, when those of us who have owned the Sand Shark and other PIs know that is far from the truth.

I found the same results on the beaches in southern california, the Sand Shark gets much less depth on every target than the Infinium, the Infinium gets about the same depths on air tests as the dual field, and HH PI in these videos. It isn't coincidence that the 3 top PIs all air test the same, and the Sand Shark gets much less depth, it translates the same in the sand.

I'm sick and tired of seeing Terry fooling new beach hunters into buying a mediocre machine, and telling them that it is just as good as the others, when it isn't... not even close.

The way these tests are done, the coil is on the ground, the field is detecting the ground minerals, according to Eric Foster, this is the best way to get a close to real conditions test.

I'll be linking to this thread every time Terry starts spewing his "Sand Shark is comparable to any other PI" B.S.

So I'm not the only one! :cool:
 
I was looking to get a sand shark, but this has me 2nd guessing. I wish they tested the larger coil. My Etrac could hit an 11inch Nickle with the sensitivity maxed out and an open screen. 11 inches on a pulse machine is a bit lousy.

I do love the mature color scheme of the Tesoro, I can't stand the 1980's flourescent color schemes of the Whites, and especially the Excallibur. Looks cheap and like a super soaker squirt gun. :laughing:
 
My Sand Shark had the 10.5" coil, it still got much less depth than the Infinium.
 
I was looking to get a sand shark, but this has me 2nd guessing. I wish they tested the larger coil. My Etrac could hit an 11inch Nickle with the sensitivity maxed out and an open screen. 11 inches on a pulse machine is a bit lousy.

I do love the mature color scheme of the Tesoro, I can't stand the 1980's flourescent color schemes of the Whites, and especially the Excallibur. Looks cheap and like a super soaker squirt gun. :laughing:

If my Dual Field was pink with purple poka dots on it I would still use it over the others. :lol:
 
I'm surprised the 1.1 gram earring was getting such poor depth on all machines, I'm getting like 6 inches on a .5 gram ring, but ring shaped objects hold the charge better than an elongated one. Wish you had a 1 gram ring and .5 gram ring to use in the tests.
 
Back
Top Bottom