Thread: TDR question?
View Single Post
  #20  
Old 06-28-2012, 01:53 AM
1idejim's Avatar
1idejim 1idejim is online now
LawnSite Fanatic
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: State of Jefferson
Posts: 7,038
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irrigation Contractor View Post
Hat Tip to Jim R.

Project X is coming UPS, so be ready for a bunch of phone calls from Adam! LOL

The T3 Snap Shot's we purchased a few months ago are being used weekly by the service techs and I would highly recommend serious irrigation service companies to consider purchasing one unit.

Not to get off track, but this is on topic or close to it. We have a Ditch Witch Wire Locator, Rigid R22, and 5 - 521's, but we are looking to begin moving towards bringing in new locators as they older units need replacing.

What model is everyone going with right now, or which one would you want if you could have anyone unit on the market?
I like the metrotech 9800 xt sfl for various reasons but especially because you can trace wire paths and locate ground faults at the same time.
4.8 k fault freq
simul tone
ABFS & AIM
Current measurement.
digital display.

of course i am an Armada fan euen though i own more tempo / progressive / greenlee locators.

it's not that i don't like greenlees 521a so much as i feel that greenlee is such a huge company that deals with so many products that seem to be much more important than improving thcir irrigation locators.

the pro800 is the most sophisticated wire and valve locator made thanks to Bruce Nelson and his crews desire to produce the finest locator for the dollar. They listen to chumps like me and act on our needs and wants when designing a locator.

there is a need for both a compact valve locator and a high freq line locator and both greenlee and armada fill those needs in their inventories.

i would much rather have a digital LCD readout with current recognition for fault finding so we are back to the metrotech 9800 xt sfl.
i would like to take the rigid seek tech Sprinkus has for a test drive though.
Posted via Mobile Device
Reply With Quote
 
Page generated in 0.03280 seconds with 7 queries