Equinox: 2 stars, X-terra: 2 stars, Safari: 3 stars, Etrac: 4 stars, CTX: 5 stars

Minelab Discrimination Ratings

What do you suppose they mean by discrimination, ID at depth perhaps? Regardless, Minelab considers the Equinox to be on par with an X-Terra, which makes perfect sense considering the price.

My take on that is it is mostly just "marketing."

Since the E-Trac and CTX have "1750" units of discrimination that you could technically make (35x50), it's a "better discriminator" from a marketing perspective. And, again, they NEED to say that, or else who is going to spend $2500 if they can get equal performance for $900?

Again, there is no logic to what they are saying, so I conclude it is MARKETING nonsense, not solid, factual information coming from the mouth of the designers/engineers. I mean, how can you send out your chief design engineer to tout his newest invention as being a machine that has highly accurate, stable ID at depth, and then at the same time your marketing department puts out literature saying that this same machine is one of your poorest "discriminating" machines in your lineup? Does that even make logical sense?

This all, to me, is nothing more than Minelab being FORCED by the competition to create a HIGH PERFORMER, and at a competitively LOW PRICE -- but with that then leaving the marketing department in a "pickle." In other words, the marketing dept. now has to figure out how to "slot this machine into" their current lineup, in a way that "makes sense" so as to be sure not to injure the value of their higher priced units. In other words, I don't think the ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT is anywhere near as concerned about what effects them doing their jobs (innovating new, better performing machines), to the best of their ability, might result in (with respect to performance comparisons to other, older units in their product lineup), as the MARKETING DEPARTMENT is...

Steve



Edited 6 time(s). Last edit at 11/11/2017 07:29AM by steveg.

Steve....... well said.

The Equinox gets THREE stars not two

I see that. Updated based on number of discrimination segments, so it now puts it ahead of the X Terra

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
In a democracy, it is difficult to win fellow citizens over to your own side, or to build public support to remedy injustices that remain all too real when you fundamentally misunderstand how they see the world.

I'll bet etrac and CTX sales have slowed to a crawl since intro of Equinox.
The reason for the rating provided.

Folks just want to hear from Equinox users in the field before they leap to Etrac/CTX, possibly passing on Equinox.

Funny thing is, some good honest you tube video supplied by manufacturer in the field on undisturbed targets would shed light, and could indeed give solid weight to these ratings.

How about it Minelab???
Not hard to do.

Op, you need to update info in your title here.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/11/2017 12:24PM by Sod-buster.

The fact that Minelab seems to feel the need to continue to "massage" this chart speaks volumes.
The pertinent point is that at no time has the disc rating on the Equinox approached the Etrac or CTX.
The early hype about the wonderful disc abilities is apparently just that , hype.

sanjuro Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Equinox gets THREE stars not two

Interesting, it was two stars at the time I started this thread.

Bayard Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> sanjuro Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > The Equinox gets THREE stars not two
>
> Interesting, it was two stars at the time I starte
> d this thread.

If pimento says it deserves a 5 star rating they will probably raise it again,,,,,they're watching!!!!!

NASA-Tom Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Steve....... well said.

I respectfully disagree. If Minelab's marketing department thought this machine was on par with the Etrac and CTX, they'd be shouting about it. The Equinox would be allowed to cannibalize sales of the Etrac and CTX, and those models would be phased out of production.

I'm not aware of any marketing department that uses restraint when bragging about their newest product. Assuming that Minelab's marketing department is just being modest, after having a guy jump out of an airplane and claiming all single frequency VLF are now obsolete, strikes me as contradictory wishful thinking.

I'd love it if the Equinox could bring my worked out sites back to life; however, I'm not inclined to believe in Santa Claus. Yes, advances in technology can create products that are both better and less expensive; however, that is not Minelab's historical approach to the market.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/11/2017 04:24PM by Bayard.

Jackpine Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I see that. Updated based on number of discrimina
> tion segments, so it now puts it ahead of the X Te
> rra

The chart is now logically inconsistent. The Etrac and CTX are both 35 X 50 TID, yet the Etrac is four stars and the CTX is five stars. The chart originally just said "Discrimination" with no mention of TID.

I fear the changes are post hoc attempts to protect the reputation of the EquiNOT.

Not equal to an Etrac or a CTX, the new EquiNOT.

Discrimination is audio and tid.

CTX has better audio options vs the etrac.

they now have equinox 3 stars same as safari. orginally they had the equinox at 4 stars fwiw. Its all marketing trying to quantify something.

I think Minelab are watching here for free info, kinda like snooping in on a think tank lol
Hi Minelab

Sod-buster Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'll bet etrac and CTX sales have slowed to a craw
> l since intro of Equinox.
> The reason for the rating provided.
>
> Folks just want to hear from Equinox users in the
> field before they leap to Etrac/CTX, possibly pass
> ing on Equinox.
>
> Funny thing is, some good honest you tube video su
> pplied by manufacturer in the field on undisturbed
> targets would shed light, and could indeed give so
> lid weight to these ratings.
>
> How about it Minelab???
> Not hard to do.

"I offered"

LOL

Here's another monkey wrench in the works. Whether you rely on notching, ignoring a certain TID number or basing dig-no dig on the audio tone, you are discriminating in one form or another.

That said, where does fast recovery enter the equation? Using notching with a slow recovery machine could lose adjacent signals, so another star for the EQ and there goes the Safari.

LOL

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
In a democracy, it is difficult to win fellow citizens over to your own side, or to build public support to remedy injustices that remain all too real when you fundamentally misunderstand how they see the world.

Bayard Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Jackpine Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I see that. Updated based on number of discrimi
> na
> > tion segments, so it now puts it ahead of the X
> Te
> > rra
>
> The chart is now logically inconsistent. The Etra
> c and CTX are both 35 X 50 TID, yet the Etrac is f
> our stars and the CTX is five stars. The chart or
> iginally just said "Discrimination" with no mentio
> n of TID.
>
> I fear the changes are post hoc attempts to protec
> t the reputation of the EquiNOT.

Or, it goes back to my original point. It's MARKETING! They are trying to let that chart "imply" that "price" equals "better detector."

Meanwhile, that same marketing department, as you noted, had a guy jump out of an airplane to proclaim how this new machine is going to "obsolete" single-frequency VLFs...

I still claim the marketing department is in a "pickle" (presuming the engineering department is to be believed from the perspective that Multi-IQ is a technological advance, which I personally happen to believe). The marketing dept. has to walk a FINE LINE, if my speculating is correct. That fine line being, talk up the Equinox to the point that they sell like hotcakes, and yet don't talk it up in any way that might imply that it just might out-perform your flagships in some ways...

Think about it...we've been told by the marketing department:

The Equinox/Multi-IQ obsoletes ALL SINGLE FREQUENCY MACHINES (but not multi-frequency of course, which is included in several higher-priced Minelab units in their current lineup).
The Equinox/Multi-IQ will have excellent ground handling (but not quite as good as BBS/FBS, which is included in several higher-priced Minelab units in their current lineup).
The Equinox/Multi-IQ will have very stable ID and will excel at finding targets from low- to high-conductive (but not quite as good as BBS/FBS with respect to silver -- which Minelab's flagships are of course famous for).

In other words, the marketing team seems to me to be implying that this machine will surpass ALL of the competition in ability, but not quite surpass any unit in the Minelab lineup that happens to cost more than the Equinox.

Do you think that's just coincidence? Is it logical? Is there really a "slot" that exists, between the performance level of all other machines from all other manufacturers, and the performance level of Minelab flagships, such that you can "slide in" a machine that fits neatly ABOVE the flagship machines from Deus/Nokta/Makro/Rutus/AKA/Garret/Fisher etc., and yet BELOW all of Minelab's flagships? Does that "slot" even exist?

Bottom line, I can almost guarantee that Minelab's head of engineering did NOT approach Mark Lawrie and say "hey, Mark, we need you to create an innovative, new technology that leads to a machine that will surpass the performance of all single-frequency VLF units offered by all of our competitors....oh -- and by the way, make sure when you are finished, that your new technology falls just short of the CTX and E-Trac."

Obviously, we don't know anything for sure. This is all just speculation on my part -- but hopefully it is logical/reasoned speculation. We'll all find out soon enough what the Equinox/Multi-IQ is capable of, but I am willing to state up front that there is NO WAY this machine comes even CLOSE to "obsoleting" all single-frequency VLF units, without also, inadvertently, offering performance that is in many ways on par with, if not exceeding, the E-Trac/CTX. If it can't out-perform, for instance, a Deus or an Impact, then it won't out-perform FBS/FBS2. BUT, if it does INDEED outperform those two, then I truly believe that the E-Trac and CTX are in some trouble, such that a new, flagship Multi-IQ-based unit is on the horizon...

Steve



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 11/12/2017 08:04AM by steveg.

At the spring event, when there was a presentation of Max, we compared a lot of detector models at the test site, including E-Trac and CTX 3030.
I'll try to say softer that I would not offend anyone, but there are detectors that work better than these models.
(It's about ordinary ground! Not strongly mineralized!)
If Minelab wants to say that the Nox will be weaker by most parameters than its older brothers E-Trac and CTX 3030, then I would prefer to wait for independent tests from usual treasure hunters ...
/imho/

sanjuro Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Equinox gets THREE stars not two

I believe it had four stars when they initially added it...seems it's getting re-positioned quite a bit.


BTW what if by some stroke of moore's law the Nox was so good, that they throttled it down before release as to not compete with their flagship multi-freq units?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/12/2017 09:57AM by Cal_cobra.

Personally I can't see any real issue, and many are probably reading into that chart too much (since when does everybody rely 100% on marketing for definitive info). If you want a detector from the current lineup with the need for the highest resolution discrimination, FE/CO numbers, customisable settings, and are not bothered by the weight, then stick with the CTX or Etrac. If I recall there were many Etrac/CTX and Explorer users calling out for a no frills and lightweight multi-frequency detector from the Minelab stable, and I think we got more than we envisaged with the addition of a selectable frequency, fast recovering VLF as well.

Alternatively, probably the more favourable way to to look at this detector is a natural progression from the X-terra series, except with the addition of multi-frequency ability and upgraded performance to take on the likes of the Deus (also with the addition of more stable performance on salt and mineralisation).

So I guess they sort of killed two birds with the same stone so to speak - so they could have gone down the all too common route and created two seperate detectors, though instead chose to incorporate both VLF and MF into the one unit. As for where it falls in the lineup, I couldn't really care less - for the price, on paper it offers the features, abilities and lack of weight that I would want in a detector (I am currently a Deus user). The Equinox was never created to knock off it's more expensive Minelab counterparts, and the price reflects that, moreso to offer something above and beyond the hordes of other single and selectable frequency detectors currently on the market (aiming for volume sales).

Regardless of what shenanigans the Minelab marketing department gets up to, that's not my concern - remember those that took the "up to 40% deeper" figures for the GPZ 7000 as a definitive performance benchmark. The performance of the actual detector will be the proof in the pudding at the end of the day, not what is written in marketing blurbs.

+1 Great post Aurelic

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
In a democracy, it is difficult to win fellow citizens over to your own side, or to build public support to remedy injustices that remain all too real when you fundamentally misunderstand how they see the world.

I think folks are making a lot more of this and speculating way too much. I don't see marketing games or any of the other long winded conspirecy theory in depth "guesses" that have been proposed. The chart shows stars under a broadly used term... "Discrimination"... Then they were kind enough to tell us what they mean by their use of this term as far as this chart is concerned by putting the explaination in the same column for us... (Target I'd segments). I know... My theory has flaws too because the etrac and ctx have the same number of TIDs yet 4 vs 5 stars . But thats because of course one machines stars cost more. But seriously, in my humble opinion we'll not have definitive answers until its out there and we see reviews and tests by us end user folks.. Who for the most part could care less about the marketing hype and colorful charts and brochures and our only concerns are 'how well does it work" and "how much does it cost"!

vfp7 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> At the spring event, when there was a presentation
> of Max, we compared a lot of detector models at th
> e test site, including E-Trac and CTX 3030.
> I'll try to say softer that I would not offend any
> one, but there are detectors that work better than
> these models.
>

vfp7 --

No doubt there are machines that perform better in some situations/scenarios/tasks than Minelab FBS/FBS2 units. Please remember, when I personally am talking about Minelab being "the highest performers," I am SPECIFICALLY talking about deep U.S. coin hunting in moderately mineralized soil. I don't always put that caveat/disclaimer when I post, but I probably should, because there are so many different detecting styles/locations/targets of choice for which an E-Trac or CTX is NOT the top performer...

And you don't have to "state your point softly" so as to "not offend." I'm not worried about my "toes being stepped on," or whatever. This is a site for truth, data, and facts -- and if someone makes dubious, non-factual arguments, or those that are not well-reasoned, then those posts/arguments should be challenged and discussed, in my opinion. That's the purpose of this site, and why I like it so much -- fluff, nonsense, hype, etc. don't usually go unchallenged, and there is a heavy dosage of hard, factual information from highly skilled and very knowledgeable posters. I am here to learn, and learning can't take place without constant sifting of presented information through the screed of testing/reasoning...

Steve

Im still looking at it as a water machine here in Fl......different conditions, but nearly as difficult to hunt in as most coasts. There doesnt appear to be a lot of difference in finds with most water machines..... even the average Joe wont notice depth...... or they cant dig worth a hoot and believe those side targets are 24" deep. So this machine doesnt really need a lot of disc for us.... simple and light is a huge plus. IF they have a good separation of tones ...... they arent chopped like the CTX can be (not to mention needing better phones) then for use this machine will move right up there to a 4...... just because of the targets we are looking for and its lack of FER/CON screen. But then ...... where would an Xcal fall which IMO is still KING IN the water.

As a relic hunter, I don't much care how many stars it gets in the "disc accuracy department". I dig everything that sounds off as non- ferrous. Yes, I sure love it when the E-TRAC locks on in the 12-44 range but, I think for many, we want fast recovery speed, good separation in the iron, and the ability to handle mineralization. Fast multi freq with iron volume! I'm sold! I do believe Steve has a good point...the marketing department is in a pickle.

Dean

As a detectorist who relies on discrimination to determine what NOT to dig vs the other , disc trumps depth and until the Equinox can show a "non-marketed" level of disc , I'll keep my thousand bucks in my pocket. When it shows the potential to cut digging 200 nonferrous targets down to 150 with the same success ratio I'll be interested.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/12/2017 04:19PM by shoveler.

Wasn't it Monte who coined the phrase 'the best discriminator is your eyes' ?

I think people are reading way too much into stuff that really doesn't matter. How many times have you saw the reviews for a movie that were really talking it up, and how it was 5 stars or 2 thumbs up, only to go see the movie and it suck? I couldn't tell you how many times. I usually find the opposite to be true; the movies they rate lower are some of the best I have seen. You would be better off learning something I learned a long long time ago: the only way to know for sure is to try it for yourself.

That's what I plan on doing with the Equinox. Just get it, see for myself how it stacks against other machines I have used. If it does good, I will keep it. If not, I will send it down the road. It's not like you are buying a life time investment and will be stuck with it forever. The CTX is toted as the flag ship Minelab model and I will be honest with you, if it weren't for the waterproof factor in it, I wouldn't even have the thing. I much prefer the eTrac over it, especially with a 10x12 or Ultimate coil on it.

Im waiting until a few buy like you Daniel and find it doesnt stack up in the dirt........ then ill buy it for the water.><

Haha I'm buying it for the water myself, so I can unload the CTX 3030.