Results of 2 different park turf tests. Nox vs Exp. II duels

steveg Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yep, it's a good point, Cal_cobra. That would have been an interesting comparison, had he done an equal amount of flagging with the EQ. But still, it would have been difficult for the EQ to do well
> for him, even in that scenario. I contend that when someone has spent years, over literally thousands of targets, honing their mind, ears, and senses to know how to get in the "zone" and zero in on the subtle signals that deep > > coins present on a given machine, it's going to be next to impossible for that person to pick up a brand-new machine, and then assess clearly which one "gives a better dig signal." Now, if one will not hit a target AT ALL,
> and it's not a "settings" issue, then obviously it's not just a "tune your ears" issue. Otherwise, though, it takes time and experience to know the nuanced clues a given machine gives, on a tough target. And you simply don't
> KNOW those clues, when it's a machine "unfamiliar to you."
>
> Here's what I am guessing was going on. Tom trusts his Explorer. It has earned that over the years, from him. I understand that. For him to consider a switch, that Equinox would have had to have blown his socks off on deep
> coins. Not just "almost as good." Not even "possibly hit the targets as well or even a tad better in some cases." But truly blown his socks off. He came in "biased" toward his Explorer, and I really don't blame him one b
> it. BUT -- whatever the case, the Equinox just didn't "wow" him enough cause him to consider giving it some more time -- let ALONE cause him to consider the possibility of setting down his trusty weapon! And to me, that's really > what it boils down to. He was skeptical (and rightfully so), and he gave it a short, small window to "wow" him. It didn't. So, he's parting with it. Totally understandable.

Steve I totally agree. That's why I tried to impress upon him that a couple of short turf hunts were not going to paint the entire picture. Also that after using his tried and true Exp2 for 15 years his audio muscle memory is fine tuned to that machine, so it's ingrained in his mind. The EQ800 is not an Exp2, their different, Minelab said right out of the gate that their different, so their going to sound different, function different, and operate differently, that's kind of the point really, as their had no intentions of merely extending the FBS family of detectors, but to make something entirely new and different. Perhaps it's easier for me to grasp as I haven't had a minelab detector for 5-6 years, my audio muscle memory is more in tune with the Racer/Racer2/Impact/Multi Kruzer machines, so it's definitely taking an adjustment to switch over to a 50 tone detector.

Believing that more time to learn how the machine works or the subtle nuances wasn't going to change his mind I believe imo. If your a very experienced detectorists you know if a machine is special for your type of hunting pretty much the first time you use it. I have a small old park in my small town that was made in tie early 1900s that is about 20 acres large. As far as I can tell I have been the only one to hunt it over the last 10 years or so. I started using an mxt pro and F75 in this park then got an minelab se pro. I was getting silver and wheats here and there with my earlier machines but nothing like my first day with the explorer. First wow moment. Then in 2013 I got a CTX and the first day in the park I pulled 4 silvers and 6 wheats. Second holy crap moment. I had pounded this park for years with other machines and never had a day like that. Heck I was at the point in this park where I was happy with getting an occasional wheat or silver. I have seen the videos of the Nox against the etrac on actual in ground silver. The Nox saw the silver but the TID bounced anywhere from 21 to 34 and the etrac hit 12 48 14 47 and registered 7in. I knew it was silver just from the readings on the etrac alone let alone the sound. If your just a coin hunter and plan to dig all coin targets I can see how the Nox would be a great machine. But if your trying to optimize the amount of old coins and don't want to deal with all the clad then there is no comparison even in heavy modern trash.

steveg Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> SO, does that make more sense, Tom?

Steve, yes, it makes perfect sense. Thanx for clarifying. And your post is great. It shows you have a deep grasp that a lot people don't have. For example: I used to watch in envy, as my CZ6 buddy pulled deep coins that I couldn't even hear with my Eagle SL II. For field hunting, beaches, relicky sites, etc... So I raced out and bought a CZ6. Took it to a park where I suspected more deep silver whispers are. Flagged a few. Pulled out my new CZ6. It got the deep whispers with ROOM TO SPARE. I was impressed. However, the devil was in the details: The minute I move around, and find what seems to be the exact same signal: So too does shallower clad sound exactly the same. Or a deep bent nail false, blah blah blah. Thus yes, I totally get what you're saying.

Tom,

Thanks for taking the time to read my lengthy post, and respond.

Yep, you get what I was trying to say, now. You are SO GOOD with your Explorer, and it is SO GOOD at deep coin hunting, that the combination -- you and it -- are tough to beat. It would be extremely difficult for ANY machine to perform better for you, for that type of hunting -- we both agree on that. First off, the machine would have to be WORLD CLASS as a deep coin hunter, and then you'd have to commit to giving yourself the time to "become one" with it. And that is a hard thing to do -- because you have to trust that if you are going to "dive in," and commit the time, that there is a "payoff" at the end -- a payoff meaning that there is more "capability" there, waiting for you, once you've mastered it. The concern is, of course, that you invest all that time, and commit all that energy, and in the end, the machine is not capable of providing you with the capability you require, EVEN AFTER you have mastered/become one with it.

This is exactly why I didn't switch to a CTX until this past fall (well, that, and the PRICE, LOL). But seriously, I KNEW what my Explorer was capable of. It proved it to me time after time after time. And I'd still be hunting with it today, if the main PCB hadn't died. My options at that point were, buy ANOTHER one (which I strongly considered), or -- finally -- bite the bullet and change to a new machine. I knew full well that if I DID change, I was in for a long period of time where I'd have to dig and dig and dig, and invest the time to learn all that nuance and subtlety of the new machine that only comes from evaluating a target, and then digging...evaluating a target, and then digging...over hundreds and hundreds of targets. EVEN THOUGH I was moving only from one FBS unit to an FBS2 -- i.e., close cousins -- I expected that it would take me at least a year before I'd start to feel as comfortable with the CTX as I was my Explorer.

Here I am, 6 months in. YES, I'm digging silver and other old coins with the CTX. YES, it has "surprised me" a few times, in an "eye-opening" kind of way. But, truth be told, I have yet to reach the point where I have more confidence in my ability with the CTX, than I did with the Explorer. I do believe that I can see that day approaching. But it's not here yet. And I can tell you right now there are things I like better about the Explorer...subtleties about what the two machines do that I feel the Explorer does better. But, there are some things the CTX does better, as well. And I believe, based on the trajectory I'm on and what I know thus far about the CTX, that it won't be too much longer -- probably by the end of this year -- that I will be as confident, if not more, with the CTX than the Explorer. The Equinox? I am really not even TRYING to make it "compete," as a deep coin hunter. While it is "deep," it will have to convince me that it is as capable as FBS in that "niche," and I'm not expecting that it will be, for reasons we've talked about. BUT -- I DO believe that once I learn it, it will have it's OWN "niche," parts of parks, or certain sites, where it will pull silver that the CTX won't. In other words, I believe that in time it will be a one-two punch that will make me a more capable "silver digger" than I was when hunting exclusively FBS.

You ever thought about committing to a CTX, Tom? NOT necessarily because it's "better" (though I think it will be, once I master it), but moreso because the Explorers won't last forever -- so you will likely HAVE to switch, eventually. And the CTX IS at least "equal" in its capability as compared to your Ex. II -- i.e., worthy of your trust...so you wouldn't be "wasting your time" to learn/master it...

Steve

Explorer is still an awesome detector. It's not for me anymore, but it remains a super great park detector.

steveg Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> You ever thought about committing to a CTX, Tom?
> NOT necessarily because it's "better" (though I th
> ink it will be, once I master it), but moreso beca
> use the Explorers won't last forever -- so you wil
> l likely HAVE to switch, eventually. And the CTX
> IS at least "equal" in its capability as compared
> to your Ex. II -- i.e., worthy of your trust...so
> you wouldn't be "wasting your time" to learn/maste
> r it...
>

I tried the CTX before, when it was first making the rounds. But since it doesn't allow for an in-line probe, it didn't work for me. Couldn't get the hang of those free-standing probes (carrot , etc...). The sunray, with the full-sounds piped into the headphones, is much better. I sure would have liked to have the CTX benefits of water proof (I do a lot beach storm erosion hunting), and the ability to put that 17" coil on there (which goes deeper on coin sized targets). But without the sunray probe, I could just never get the hang of it.

Gotcha, on the probe, Tom. Definitely a big drawback for those who have gotten used to the SunRay probes...

Steve