TL;DR
Get business pricing on tools and workshop supplies
- Business-only prices and quantity discounts
- Tax-exempt purchasing
- Multiple users, one account, clear invoices
Pro Tool Reviews tested six stud finders on a mock wall that included lath and plaster, reporting that the Franklin ProSensor M210/X2100 found every tested stud center and detected live AC in its tests. The Franklin M70/X700 had no missed or false stud readings but marked the center correctly 67% of the time; the report cautions that multiple readings matter because plaster walls can produce misleading results.
Pro Tool Reviews tested six stud finders on a mock-up that included lath and plaster, reporting that the Franklin ProSensor M210/X2100 correctly located every tested stud center and detected live AC in the test. The report also found that the device produced false stud readings, underscoring why homeowners should verify multiple readings before drilling or fastening into older walls.
For the plaster section, the report assigned the M210/X2100 a 100% on-center detection rate, with no missed studs or off-center readings. It also recorded 33% false stud detection and 100% AC detection. Pro Tool Reviews listed the model at $59.99 in its report; prices may change.
The less expensive Franklin ProSensor M70/X700 was the report’s Editor’s Choice. It had 67% on-center detection, marked the edge as the center 33% of the time, and recorded no missed or false studs. The report listed its price as $21.99 and said the model does not have AC detection.
Other tested models had mixed results. The Zircon HD70 recorded 67% on-center detection, 7% missed studs, 47% false detections and 50% AC detection. The JAXWQ 139-FYELLOW recorded 60% on-center detection, 7% missed studs, 33% false detections and 50% AC detection. The supplied report does not include results for the remaining two models, so their performance cannot be assessed here.
Why Plaster Readings Need Checking
These results matter to people mounting shelves, cabinets, televisions or other items in older homes, where lath-and-plaster construction can make electronic stud detection less straightforward than on standard drywall. A false reading can lead someone to mistake a pipe or another object for a stud, while a missed or off-center reading can leave a fastener poorly supported.
The comparison does not establish that one device will give the same result in every home. It shows how the tested models performed on one mock-up wall, under the report’s testing method. Users should treat the readings as guidance, not a guarantee, and confirm likely stud locations before making holes—particularly where electrical wiring or plumbing may be present.
stud finder for lath and plaster walls
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
How the Test Wall Was Built
Pro Tool Reviews says Tom Gaige built a mock wall with separate sections of single-layer drywall, double-layer drywall, and lath and plaster. Gaps between sections let the testers see the objects behind the wall. Those targets included standard studs, a stud with live AC, a metal stud, electrical conduit with live AC, PVC pipe and a water-filled copper pipe.
The report’s measurements distinguish on-center detection from readings that marked an edge as the center. It also tracked missed studs, false stud detections and AC detection. The tester says the devices were used with repeated passes from opposite sides, allowing them to reset or recalibrate; the report recommends averaging readings, especially when working on plaster.
Pro Tool Reviews also warns that stud spacing in lath-and-plaster walls can be inconsistent. While modern framing often uses 16- or 24-inch spacing, the report says readers should not assume that pattern applies reliably when measuring from one suspected stud to the next.
“Only one nailed the center of every stud.”
— Pro Tool Reviews
electronic stud finder with AC detection
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Limits of the Published Results
The provided source material does not state the publication date, the number of repeated passes for each result, or the full results for all six devices. It also describes a single constructed test wall, so the reported percentages should not be read as performance guarantees for every plaster wall, building age or installation.
The report says the M210/X2100 produced false stud detections but does not identify in the supplied material which objects caused each false reading. It also does not provide a full account of how the results might change with different plaster thicknesses, wall conditions or user technique. The listed prices are the amounts in the report and may no longer reflect current retail prices.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Verify Before You Drill
For readers using a stud finder on lath and plaster, the report recommends taking repeated readings from both sides of a suspected stud and looking for agreement among the marks. If a reading differs from neighboring results, it may indicate a non-stud object; the M210/X2100’s false detections make that caution relevant even for the report’s top on-center performer.
Before drilling or cutting, check for possible wiring and plumbing and use an appropriate method to confirm the location. A stud finder’s AC-detection feature is not a guarantee that an area is safe to open. If a project involves electrical work or uncertainty about concealed services, consult a licensed professional.
affordable stud finder for drywall
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Key Questions
Which stud finder performed best on lath and plaster in the report?
The Franklin ProSensor M210/X2100 had 100% on-center detection in the report’s plaster test and detected live AC 100% of the time. It also had a 33% false stud detection rate.
Why did the report recommend the Franklin M70/X700?
The M70/X700 recorded no missed studs and no false stud detections in the test, with 67% on-center detection. The report listed it as less expensive than the M210/X2100, but noted that it does not detect AC.
Should I trust one stud-finder reading on plaster?
No single reading should be treated as conclusive. The report recommends taking readings from opposite directions and comparing marks, with additional passes if the results do not agree.
Do the test percentages guarantee the same results in my home?
No. The percentages describe results on the report’s mock-up wall and are not guarantees for every wall or user. Plaster thickness, wall construction and concealed objects can affect readings.
Source: rss
Fall yard work Picks
leaf blowers
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
