Reckon Nox loves nickels - maybe this gives clue

Same gent
[metaldetectingforum.com]

[metaldetectingforum.com]

[metaldetectingforum.com]



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 03/27/2018 11:09AM by tnsharpshooter.

So does a Fisher CZ at a fraction of the cost.

And a fraction of the performance and versatility

88 -- It is interesting you brought that up. The CZs can sure latch onto nickel signals. In some ways, the the Nox and CZ share similar behaviors/traits. Everyone has always wondered what a CZ would be like if fitted with a DD coil, with the ability to handle higher mineralization and given a faster recovery speed to work in trash and nails. Well, IMO in some ways, that is exactly what the NOX is, and is doing. It shares that nickel locking ID, but is no slouch on the mid to high conductors either. It can be set fast for trashy sites and iron. With the added bonus of being able to go in the water.

In fact, on the 800 if a person wanted to, they could set the tone break points and sounds, to mimic a CZ really close, but it would have to be with 5 tones instead of 3 or 4 tone, pending on which CZ you had.

Maybe it's no coincidence that the man with a big part behind the CZs, is also one in the same that helped make the Nox what it is today. I can't say for sure but I can say, the Nox sure don't act like any previous Minelab machine I've used.

Much more eloquent then my Beer Thirty response Daniel.

Cabin Fever Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> And a fraction of the performance and versatility

I guess it's performance has a lot to do with ground conditions as far as a CZ's performance. It did pretty good in my 3-4 bar red Georgia clay. I found silver at 9-10" with a CZ5. Daniel that is pretty cool that you can set a Equinox up to run similar to a CZ. I have always thought highly of CZ's all except the weight of them.

The CZ’s were designed by Dave Johnson - at that time Chief Engineer at Fisher in Los Banos - Now Chief Designer at Fisher in El Paso.

The Nox was designed in Australia by (as far as I know) Australians.

The affinity for low conductors for both machines is likely due to their choice of primary frequencies in their quite different multifrequency designs.

Rick Kempf
Gold Canyon AZ- where there is no gold

Cabin Fever Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> And a fraction of the performance and versatility


93/100 is a fraction...it's also 93%. So I am wondering what fraction are you referring to.

I will say one thing. That NOX is no where near as durable as an analog CZ. If there are NOX 800's running just as good as the day you bought them 20 years from now, then that's saying something.

Daniel Tn Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 88 -- It is interesting you brought that up. The CZs can sure latch onto nickel signals. In some ways, the the Nox and CZ share similar behaviors/traits. Everyone has always wondered what a CZ would
> be like if fitted with a DD coil, with the ability to handle higher mineralization and given a faster recovery speed to work in trash and nails. Well, IMO in some ways, that is exactly what the NOX is,
> and is doing. It shares that nickel locking ID, but is no slouch on the mid to high conductors either. It can be set fast for trashy sites and iron. With the added bonus of being able to go in the wa
> ter.
>
> In fact, on the 800 if a person wanted to, they could set the tone break points and sounds, to mimic a CZ really close, but it would have to be with 5 tones instead of 3 or 4 tone, pending on which CZ you had.
>
> Maybe it's no coincidence that the man with a big part behind the CZs, is also one in the same that helped make the Nox what it is today. I can't say for sure but I can say, the Nox sure don't act lik
> e any previous Minelab machine I've used.

Good point Daniel, this is what we've been begging Fisher for for over a decade....but it took Minelab to make it happen. Interestingly both Fisher and White's (V3i) had the opportunity to do a Nox play, they already own the technology, just needed to modernize it, shame they've been so idle on their simultaneous multi-frequency technology.

therover61 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Cabin Fever Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > And a fraction of the performance and versatilit
> y
>
>
> 93/100 is a fraction...it's also 93%. So I am wond
> ering what fraction are you referring to.
>
> I will say one thing. That NOX is no where near as
> durable as an analog CZ. If there are NOX 800's ru
> nning just as good as the day you bought them 20 y
> ears from now, then that's saying something.

I never was real good at math so I won’t attempt to figure it out but no, the CZ5 is not 93% of the Nox 800..
The Equinox 800 is several Detectors in one..
5 kHz
10kHz
15kHz
20kHz
40kHz
And at least 8 different versions of Multi Frequency..
It can hunt coins, relics, jewelry, micro jewelry and gold nuggets in various ground conditions..
It’s Waterproof!
It has advanced settings like Recovery Speed, Iron Bias, audio customization, etc..

The CZ 5 has one Multi Frequency that runs 5 and 15kHz.. Oops.. almost forgot.. It has a Salt Mode too!

As far as durability it’s too early to tell with the Equinox..

I appreciate the CZ-5.. It was my very first detector when I got into this hobby in the early 90s..
It’s a true classic.. Technology gets better with time though.. Much better..

Bryan



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 03/28/2018 04:54PM by Cabin Fever.

The issue is what is not whether the Nox is the most versatile/adapatable detector around - no real arguement. The issue is more, as a tool to get YOUR detecting job done, is the Nox (or any specific detector) the one for YOUR JOB.

Deep silver in parks - maybe FBS/BBS is still the king

Gold recovery in salt water - maybe the new “Manta” from Fisher (whenever it appears) will be the champ.

Tiny nuggets in the goldfields - the Gold Bug 2 is probably still tops

Hammered gold and silver plus ancient jewelry in 3000 years of iron debris - the Europeans will decide in their own good time

Civil War artifacts in Culpepper VA or similar magnetic soils - PI’s dominate still

None of this is critical of the Nox - just considering that like a Swiss Army knife - the ultimate value of a tool might be something other than broad versitility or feature count.

Rick Kempf
Gold Canyon AZ- where there is no gold



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/28/2018 04:54PM by lytle78.

I get what your saying Rick..
The subject was CZ-5 vs Equinox 800 and if the CZ-5 was 93% of the Equinox 800..
Even if you just consider Coin hunting which is the CZs thing I would say nowhere near 93%..
Just my opinion though..
It’s a good thing we all have choice what to run..

Bryan



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 03/28/2018 05:09PM by Cabin Fever.

I think two things are not being seen clearly here. Last time I looked a new CZ was more expensive than an 800 and using the cost of a used machine vs a new one is not fair. I have owned nearly every CZ version and still have two 3Ds. Love CZs. Second, durability and weight are factors that relate. To trim weight and increase strength is almost like making gold from lead. I could say that my Equinox has never broken but I have had to send in a couple CZs, therefore the Minelab is a better, more durable machine! Oh, I hope no one takes that seriously.

Past(or)Tom
Using a Legend, a Deus 2, an Equinox 800, a Tarsacci MDT 8000, & a few others...
with my beloved, fading Corgi, Sadie