Viper for AT MAX, Thoughts VS other coils?

Trashfinder

Forum Supporter
Joined
Oct 9, 2012
Messages
1,307
Location
Ardmore, OK
I have not really seen much since they released the viper coil for the AT series. Just curious what the Garrett users think about this coil versus other coils they have used for the AT series. Depth? Separation? Etc....
 
The impression I have is that it's like the stock 8.5 x 11 coil, but:

1. It's lighter
2. The narrow width makes it easier to use in tight spaces
3. It gets less depth
4. It gets slightly better target separation

I don't know if the above is true, but from the limited information that's available online and my understanding of how coils work, that's the impression I've got about the coil.

I too, am considering another coil for my AT Max. I'm looking at the big Nel coils (Storm, etc.), the Garrett 5 x 8, the 4 inch hockey puck and the Garrett Reaper.
 
As many Garrett users as there seems to be, i thought this thread would light up with a lot of information. Thanks for the response MH.
 
As many Garrett users as there seems to be, i thought this thread would light up with a lot of information. Thanks for the response MH.

I think the fact that it hasn't is very telling, don't you think?

Perhaps I'm reading too far into it, but I get the feeling most AT users don't really see how spending $135+ for the Viper is worth it given how the stock and 5x8 coils perform.

Right now, I'm debating whether I should sell my stock coil, use the 5x8 full-time, then supplement it with the 4 inch hockey puck and Reaper/Nel Storm/etc. as necessary.

The Viper reminds me of a "muddle in the middle" type of coil. If you could only have 1 coil, it's a solid choice. But with SO MANY other coils out there, it doesn't seem like the Viper is a good investment.

I'm guessing Garrett only spent a few hours converting the Viper coil for use on the AT series. They probably spent more time and money shipping out sample coils to their testers than they did on actual AT Viper development. Not a bad way to make a bit of money off something they already had.
 
I have a similar post on another forum and oddly lots of views but no responses. I think you might be right MH,, it does seem to be very telling. I can honestly say I did not see the lack of responses coming. I thought there were a lot of Garrett guys out there and maybe some had tried this coil.
 
Trashfinder: said:
I have not really seen much since they released the viper coil for the AT series. Just curious what the Garrett users think about this coil versus other coils they have used for the AT series. Depth? Separation? Etc....
I also thought I might read more, but let me share my thoughts on the 'Viper' coil, of which I own 4 of them.

Yes, I have four of the 'Viper' coils and that's because I own 4 Apex devices. When the Apex was first announced and the earliest video came out I was 'kind of' interested in the new-size 6X11 'Viper' because I wondered just how well it would 'fit' in and around the typically brushy and often very iron contaminated sites I usually hunt. The video impression, to me, was that it was too lengthy to be very functional.

For the record or those who don't know me, I am a very avid detectorist for over 56 years, and since 1968 I have mainly favored a smaller-than-stock search coil. Most coils I keep mounted and in use on the different makes and models in my Detector Team sport a 5" or 6" small coil, and I like something like a 5X9½ mid-size coil for modestly-littered or more open area searches. I very seldom use anything larger except for plowed fields, beaches or a wide-open / sparse-target location.

I got my 1st Apex and quickly put it and the Viper coil to work, comparing it with other detectors and coil in the ghost towns and other terribly-littered and very brushy conditions, as well as dealing with building rubble at some of them. I knew there would have to be accessory coils soon, and I was (and still am) hoping for Garrett to introduce their small 4½" Concentric coil for the tightest trash and confining conditions, so I purchased a 2nd new Apex.

And that's when they also announced the 'Ripper' (5X8 DD) and 'Raider' (8½X11 DD) coils to come out. I acquired both of them for two reasons. One, I had a want & need for a larger-size coil for the plowed fields near where I lived, and second, I especially wanted their mid-size 'Ripper' coil for general-purpose / day-to-day use. I had enjoyed that size coil on a borrowed AT Pro and AT Gold before.

As I expected, the 'Ripper' was mounted on my 1st Apex and hasn't come off ... and it won't. It is by far the best-balanced, most-comfortable of all the coils, and it works excellent. It fits in most of the tough places, and it handles common Iron Nails and other ferrous debris very well.

I mounted the 'Raider' coil on my 2nd Apex and worked it in some of the plowed fields as well as out in the open middle area of the grassy city park. It also handled well, being slightly heavier but no real problem. The Raider' stays mounted full-time on my 2nd Apex.

Still hoping for the Garrett 'hockey puck' coil, and really liking the performance of the Apex I bought a 3rd new unit My 1st Apex 'Viper' coil was used a bit for evaluation and general hunting, but when the 'Ripper' went on, the 'Viper' came off and is in my Accessory Coil Tote. I left the 'Viper' coil from my 2nd Apex in the factory box, and I did the same with my 3rd Apex. For that model I acquired the small 5" 'Sharp' coil from NEL, and put it to a little use, for about an hour, against my two Relic Hunting units that also have an almost 5" and a slightly bigger than 5" coil mounted.

Each of my Apex devices have their own set of wireless MS-3 headphones as well as their own AT Pro-Pointer w/Z-Lynk hook-up. I had a Minelab Vanquish 540 on-hand as a 'loaner-unit' for friends and family, but my Apex out-performed it in the tough iron locations, and I wanted folks to enjoy using what I like to use, so I traded it to a Dealer friend for .... you guessed it, another new Apex w/headphones.

On my 'loaner' Apex, I kept the 'Viper' coil mounted full time. I feel it is an 'OK' search coil, and will work just fine for many people, but for me and my needs, the 'Ripper' coil is preferred. However, with the 'Viper' coil at-the-ready I do grab that set-up for some side-by-side comparisons. Also, I benefit from the feedback I get from family and friends who use the loaner Apex & Viper combo.

I don't swim and I get around with a cane and that makes Beach Hunting and working in and around water something I generally do not do, thus I don't ned a waterproof AT series model. I have considered getting my friends AT MAX because he has a couple and is going to trim his outfit, but if I get it, I would only want to have the 5X8 DD coil mounted. I prefer the lighter weight and balance, and that size fits in and around most places I search. The 'Viper' coil is OK, but I encounter too many confined spaces where it hasn't worked for me.

Thus, my thoughts about the 'Viper' for the AT series. I know the coil works, but it has its limitations on where it can fit to handle dense brush and some very trashy conditions. It's not the coil for me. If I were already an AT owner / user, I would consider the standard and accessory coils and decide what I need or want. I would be most pleased to have an AT w/5X8 and, for me, I wouldn't have any interest in the in-between sized 'Viper' DD coil.

Monte
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the reply Monte. Maybe a lot of Garrett users feel like you do and that is why we are not hearing much about the new coil. I felt like the 5x8 would still be a little more popular than the viper. When i used to own an At Pro one of my favorites for it was the bigger concentric coil but it was really heavy. I will be getting an AT Max for shallow water hunting mostly but i thought if they had created a better coil (viper) for land hunting that would not call deeper silver iron, i might be interested in it as i do like the AT series.

I was wondering out West if generally targets are fairly shallow where you hunt? Like six to seven inches and up?
 
And that's when they also announce the 'Ripper' (5X8 DD) and 'Raider' (8½X11 DD) coils to come out. I acquired both of them for two reasons. One, I had a want & need for a larger-size coil for the plowed fields near where I lived, and second, I especially wanted their mid-size 'Ripper' coil for general-purpose / day-to-day use. I had enjoyed that size coil on a borrowed AT Pro and AT Gold before.

As I expected, the 'Raider' was mounted on my 1st Apex and hasn't come off ... and it won't. It is by far the best-balanced, most-comfortable of all the coils, and it worked excellent. It fits in most of the tough places, and it handles common Iron Nails and other ferrous debris very well.

I mounted the 'Raider' coil on my 2nd Apex and 2worked it in some of the plowed fields as well as out in the open middle area of the grassy city park. It also handled well, being slightly heavier but no real problem. The Raider' stays mounted full-time on my 2nd Apex.



Monte

Did you mean to say, Ripper? (see bolded)
 
Thanks for the reply Monte. Maybe a lot of Garrett users feel like you do and that is why we are not hearing much about the new coil. I felt like the 5x8 would still be a little more popular than the viper. When i used to own an At Pro one of my favorites for it was the bigger concentric coil but it was really heavy. I will be getting an AT Max for shallow water hunting mostly but i thought if they had created a better coil (viper) for land hunting that would not call deeper silver iron, i might be interested in it as i do like the AT series.

I was wondering out West if generally targets are fairly shallow where you hunt? Like six to seven inches and up?

But narrower coils have more trouble properly IDing deep targets, right? While I haven't had a metal detecting engineer confirm it for me, by looking at coil shapes and sizes, it's my understanding that wider coils (all else being equal) will go deeper...or at least be more accurate at depths that a narrower coil might incorrectly ID.

Think about it, why are so many "deep" coils wide? If you could get the same depth saving weight and going narrow, why wouldn't you? And people don't get wider coils to improve target separation. So what other reason does an engineer have to add weight and size to a coil by increasing its width? It's not to improve ground coverage either, as then the engineer would make the coil taller instead of wider. The only logical explanation is that it adds depth and/or VDI accuracy at depth (these are both the same thing in practice for many situations).

So if you want to increase your chances of your AT machine calling a silver target silver (instead of iron) when you're hunting deep, the last thing you generally want to do is get a narrower coil.

My understanding is that getting one of Garrett's big concentric coils would be ideal for proper target ID. But they struggle (compared to an "equivalent" DD coil) in high trash areas and highly mineralized areas.
 
But narrower coils have more trouble properly IDing deep targets, right? While I haven't had a metal detecting engineer confirm it for me, by looking at coil shapes and sizes, it's my understanding that wider coils (all else being equal) will go deeper...or at least be more accurate at depths that a narrower coil might incorrectly ID.

Think about it, why are so many "deep" coils wide? If you could get the same depth saving weight and going narrow, why wouldn't you? And people don't get wider coils to improve target separation. So what other reason does an engineer have to add weight and size to a coil by increasing its width? It's not to improve ground coverage either, as then the engineer would make the coil taller instead of wider. The only logical explanation is that it adds depth and/or VDI accuracy at depth (these are both the same thing in practice for many situations).

So if you want to increase your chances of your AT machine calling a silver target silver (instead of iron) when you're hunting deep, the last thing you generally want to do is get a narrower coil.

My understanding is that getting one of Garrett's big concentric coils would be ideal for proper target ID. But they struggle (compared to an "equivalent" DD coil) in high trash areas and highly mineralized areas.

Some truth to that MH,, but in my experience it is mostly machine dependent. Nokta Impact, small elliptical never came off , i constantly was able to dig good targets with solid ID down to 10 or 11 inches. My V3i, best and deepest coil i have is the 6x10 elliptical, i have dug 13 inch targets with great ID and Tone.

The At series tries to call most silver over 7 inches (which is not deep to me and my other machines) iron. I do not think it is as much coil related as it is the way the machine processes the signal. I do not have any areas i hunt where a large coil would benefit me, like it would a civil war relic hunter who hunts large pastures. The reason i liked the the performance concentric garrett coil was it actually could unmask better than anything i put on my Pro in my test garden. One thing i have learned over the years is when looking for deeper older coins is to not rely on target ID, but tone only. This applies to my CTX,ETRAC,V3i, F75, NOx 800, Deus, well actually i cannot think of a machine i own that it does not apply too. When i say the AT series calls 7 inch and deeper silver iron,,, i am not talking about number ID's but it gives a distinct iron grunt tone which is the reason i have not owned one. I am only getting one to shallow water lake hunt because i do not want to immerse my CTX or NOX.

The whole reason for the post was to see if maybe the viper coil maybe helped the iron grunt on silver, because if it did i would get one and give land hunting a go again with my new max.
 
I found the Viper coil on my Apex to be just okay. I purchased the 5"x8" Ripper coil as soon as Garrett released it and I put the Viper coil back in the Apex box. I have a NEL Superfly coil if I'm wanting to cover more ground. I personally would save my money and look at the NEL coils if your wanting another accessory coil for your AT Max. Just my 2 cents.
 
Did you mean to say, Ripper? (see bolded)
Yes, and I was tired when I typed that out and did a quick proof read just a short while ago, spotted my 'goof' (a couple of them) and corrected it. Yes, definitely, the 'Ripper' is my general-purpose search coil on my main-use Apex.

Thanks for spotting that error, or for just reading something I posted.

Monte
 
Yes, and I was tired when I typed that out and did a quick proof read just a short while ago, spotted my 'goof' (a couple of them) and corrected it. Yes, definitely, the 'Ripper' is my general-purpose search coil on my main-use Apex.

Thanks for spotting that error, or for just reading something I posted.

Monte

Your posts are always informative and I learn a lot from reading them.

Thanks for your clarification. The 5 x 8 is definitely on my list for next coil to get for my AT Max (that or the hockey puck).
 
mh9162013: said:
But narrower coils have more trouble properly IDing deep targets, right? While I haven't had a metal detecting engineer confirm it for me, by looking at coil shapes and sizes, it's my understanding that wider coils (all else being equal) will go deeper...or at least be more accurate at depths that a narrower coil might incorrectly ID.
First, let me clear a few things up for readers who might not understand what is being stated with regard to 'width' and 'length' of search coils.

• Most search coils, regarding their physical shape, used to be round. Th internal coil winding or 'type' of coil configuration was something most typical Hobbyists never understood .... and quite frankly, I don't think most do today, either.

• Because search coils were, or could be, a round shape, then it is eqsy to describe them by their diameter, such as a search coils that is 5", 6", 7", 8", 9" or perhaps 11" in diameter which can also be called 'wide' or the 'width'. Because the search coils are, or were, round-shaped, it didn't matter where you started your measurement of the radius, it was always the same and described the coils 'diameter' or 'width'. Naturally, with a round-shaped coil it also described the 'length' or 'front-to-rear' measurement which was the same.

• When we are working a search coil to hunt a site, were are sweeping the coil left-to-right and right-to-left hoping to find a desired target. We know that if a site is more littered, we want to be able to isolate a potentially 'good' target from an undesired 'bad' target. That is called 'separation' and to achieve the best 'separation' of close-proximity targets, we want to use a 'smaller-size' search coil.

A smaller-size coil should have a smaller and tighter EMF (Electro-Magnetic Field) due to its 'width' or left-to-right measurement. If we are hunting a site with minimal trash AND if we would like to increase the depth-of-detection, we would change to a 'medium' or 'larger-size' search coil. And typically that just meant increasing the 'width' or 'diameter' of the round-shaped search coil.

• Thus we have a 'wider' coil diameter to increase target depth capability, or a 'smaller' or 'narrower' 'diameter' for a smaller and tighter EMF to work in and around problem trash.

NEXT ISSUE to CONSIDER: That darn physical coil shape. We had round coils, and while some were Concentric and others Double-D internally, they were generally a round-shaped physical size. We sweep left-to-right and right-to-left so we ought to be most concerned about that coil measurement. The coil's 'width' or how 'wide' the coil is because that helps classify it as a small, medium or larger-size coil.

But way back when, somebody thought it was a nifty idea, especially with the DD coils that have overlapping Tx and Rx windings, to squeeze them into an elliptically-shaped coil rather than round. Do I have a problem with that? No, the concept is OK, but it is how people, both consumers and manufacturers, refer to these elliptically-shaped coils.

I spend the bulk of my time hunting places with a lot of trash, especially ferrous debris, and on other occasions I might hunt a modestly-littered site. Thus, I use a 'smaller-size' coil for a good 80% to 90% of my hunting, which is a 'narrower-width', and opt for a 'mid-size' search coil when it is more open with fewer targets. That might be just a little 'wider' in diameter, OR possibly helped by an elliptical-shape simply to enhance 'coverage' in a more open, sparse-target environment which would have less masking.

Some examples of 'smaller' or 'narrowed' coils would be a round 4½", 5", 6",or perhaps 6½" diameter, or an elliptical coil that could be 3½X6 or 4X7. This is how I interpret search coils, and a 'mid-size' coil might be 7", 8" or 9", if round-shaped, or an elliptical-shape such as a 5X8 or 6½X9 or 5X9½. Any of these could be a Concentric or a Double-D.

I do not sweep a search coil forward and backward. I sweep side-to-side so it is the coil's 'width' or 'diameter' left-to-right that governs what 'size' it is and the category it fits in. 'Smaller' or 'narrower' is better for tight conditions or dense trash, and 'wider' to work more open areas with room-to-spare between targets.

Now, let's consider the longer front-to-rear elliptical measurement. It is that way because they squished in the 'width' of a round-shaped coil. An 11" round coil, of DD design, can be 'narrowed' to help, somewhat, with target 'separation', and if it is also shortened, front-to-rear, that will help make it fit better and also tighten-up the EMF. So let's take the new Garrett 'Viper' coil which is a 6X11 DD shape.

The 6" 'width' is going to provide us with the primary search and target-response performance, and measuring 6" puts it in the 'smaller-size' category, but the lengthy 11" kind of bumps it into a mid-size group. The 6" 'width' is going to provide in-the-field performance more closely associated with a round-shaped 6" diameter DD coil. As for the 11" 'length', it is a narrow-shaped 11" and will not produce the 'depth' of a full-size or round-shaped 11" coil .... but it just might help a little on increasing the typical 6" performance. It will add a little better 'coverage, within a shallower-depth range, but what you really have is a 6" DD coil with 'slightly' better coverage and 'slightly' better depth .... but it is-what-it-is, a 6" coil.

And I appreciate White's labeling (when they were alive) and Garrett's to properly describe their elliptical coils first by 'width' and then by 'length'.


mh9162013: said:
Think about it, why are so many "deep" coils wide? If you could get the same depth saving weight and going narrow, why wouldn't you? And people don't get wider coils to improve target separation. So what other reason does an engineer have to add weight and size to a coil by increasing its width?
They don't. The 'width' should simply be the assigned 'size' of the search coil for general application.


mh9162013: said:
It's not to improve ground coverage either, as then the engineer would make the coil taller instead of wider. The only logical explanation is that it adds depth and/or VDI accuracy at depth (these are both the same thing in practice for many situations).
A slightly bigger-length elliptical coil might help with slightly more depth and slightly more coverage, and that little extra 'depth' is achieved by having slightly more signal strength for deeper targets. With that, there is the possibility that you can achieve a slightly better visual Target ID or VDI read-out.


mh9162013: said:
So if you want to increase your chances of your AT machine calling a silver target silver (instead of iron) when you're hunting deep, the last thing you generally want to do is get a narrower coil.
Correct. Get a wider-size search coil .... at least u to the point where it might help with smaller-size targets such as coins and rings, etc.


mh9162013: said:
My understanding is that getting one of Garrett's big concentric coils would be ideal for proper target ID. But they struggle (compared to an "equivalent" DD coil) in high trash areas and highly mineralized areas.
Close to correct. And here is where search coil TYPE is an important consideration because there has long been a noteworthy difference between Concentric and Double-D. Sadly, too many newcomers to this great sport came into the game with most manufacturers suppling DD coils, only, so they haven't experienced a good detector with a good Concentric coil.

We learned way back in the latter '70s and through the '80s how the Concentric coil, of comparable size to a DD coil, will provide slightly better depth, notably better Target ID, have better Discrimination, and still with the right size they can handle a lot of trashier places just fine, and a well-designed detector with Concentric coil can also work higher mineralized environments quite handily.


Trashfinder: said:
Some truth to that MH,, but in my experience it is mostly machine dependent.
And this is also so very true. You can have a good size coil like 5", and it might be a functional TYPE, be it Concentric or Double-D. But if you stick it on the end of a detector that works well for urban Coin Hunting and try to make it work well in a really challenging, Iron Nail contaminated ghost town, you might be surprised how that detector DOESN'T work well.

That's why I am very selective about both the detector model I rely on, and the search coil(s) I trust them to perform well with.

Monte
 
Thanks for the reply Monte. Maybe a lot of Garrett users feel like you do and that is why we are not hearing much about the new coil. I felt like the 5x8 would still be a little more popular than the viper. When i used to own an At Pro one of my favorites for it was the bigger concentric coil but it was really heavy. I will be getting an AT Max for shallow water hunting mostly but i thought if they had created a better coil (viper) for land hunting that would not call deeper silver iron, i might be interested in it as i do like the AT series.

I was wondering out West if generally targets are fairly shallow where you hunt? Like six to seven inches and up?

I can tell you out here most targets are shallow because we have lots of rock and chert and clay that has a shallow top layer of dirt to it. So most of my finds are not too deep.

Also My Garrett mostly sits in the closet and I don't feel a need for another coil.
 
"I spend the bulk of my time hunting places with a lot of trash, especially ferrous debris, and on other occasions I might hunt a modestly-littered site. Thus, I use a 'smaller-size' coil for a good 80% to 90% of my hunting, which is a 'narrower-width', and opt for a 'mid-size' search coil when it is more open with fewer targets. That might be just a little 'wider' in diameter, OR possibly helped by an elliptical-shape simply to enhance 'coverage' in a more open, sparse-target environment which would have less masking.

Some examples of 'smaller' or 'narrowed' coils would be a round 4½", 5", 6",or perhaps 6½" diameter, or an elliptical coil that could be 3½X6 or 4X7. This is how I interpret search coils, and a 'mid-size' coil might be 7", 8" or 9", if round-shaped, or an elliptical-shape such as a 5X8 or 6½X9 or 5X9½. Any of these could be a Concentric or a Double-D.

I do not sweep a search coil forward and backward. I sweep side-to-side so it is the coil's 'width' or 'diameter' left-to-right that governs what 'size' it is and the category it fits in. 'Smaller' or 'narrower' is better for tight conditions or dense trash, and 'wider' to work more open areas with room-to-spare between targets.

And this is also so very true. You can have a good size coil like 5", and it might be a functional TYPE, be it Concentric or Double-D. But if you stick it on the end of a detector that works well for urban Coin Hunting and try to make it work well in a really challenging, Iron Nail contaminated ghost town, you might be surprised how that detector DOESN'T work well.

That's why I am very selective about both the detector model I rely on, and the search coil(s) I trust them to perform well with."

Monte, have you tried the NELS Snake or Sharpshooter coils? I'm wondering if they would be a better than the Garrett Super Sniper "hockey puck" for the trashy, iron infested "ghost town" type sites that you refer to? I'm currently working one such site and the masking/rusty nails, squashed cans are pretty ferocious with my regular double D coil. Do you have a particular recommendation for the AT Max coil in that setting?
 
If your mainly going to be in the water the viper swings amazingly easy i use my apex only on salt water beaches and although i sometimes would like a bigger coil , but the viper swings so easy in the ocean i don't want to give that up
 
Rock Jock: said:
Monte, have you tried the NELS Snake or Sharpshooter coils? I'm wondering if they would be a better than the Garrett Super Sniper "hockey puck" for the trashy, iron infested "ghost town" type sites that you refer to? I'm currently working one such site and the masking/rusty nails, squashed cans are pretty ferocious with my regular double D coil. Do you have a particular recommendation for the AT Max coil in that setting?
Yes, I have used both the NEL Snake and Sharpshooter coil, on a few different makes and models. I have only borrowed an AT MAX a couple of times and only the Sharpshooter DD was available. It worked well, but I preferred the Garrett 5X8 DD, which is the 'Ripper' coil on my Apex.

I have used both those coil sizes on different Nokta and Makro detectors. On both my CoRe and Relic devices, I favor the factory small and mid-size coils. On the Racer 2, while I like both the factory 'OOR' and 5" DD coils, I was surprised how that particular model performed with the NEL Snake DD.

The important consideration is knowing if a particular model was designed to work well with one type of coil design or not, then selecting the best coil for the task-at-hand.

I have my smaller-size coil needs handled by my two Tesoro models with their factory 6" Concentric coils mounted, and with my Nokta FORS CoRe w/[/i]OOR[/l] DD and FORS Relic w/5" DD coil.

For mid-size coil needs, my XP ORX w/5X9.5 DD, Nokta FORS Relic w/5X9.5 DD,
and Garrett Apex w/5X8 'Ripper' DD.

Thus, I am well equipped and do not need a Garrett AT MAX .... but if I get one I will also get the 4.5" Concentric coil for the toughest areas.

Monte
 
Back
Top Bottom