EQUINOX VERSE EXPLORER DEPTH TEST,

Its the best I could do . I gave a shout out to the guys who responded to the thread where I needed help. Im sure someone with more experience with the Explorer could have done better but I tried. EXPLORER VERSE EQUINOX



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 08/25/2018 07:05PM by calabash digger.

How high was the sensitivity on the Equinox when comparing?

Tommy C.
(southernexplorer)
Deus - Etrac - GPX 5000

Explorer 24, Equinox 23. I kept getting some kind of feed back on the Explorer when I was over the deep stuff. (Hence the low toning in the video) . Is there a way to get rid of it? I love the sound of the Explorer over the silver at 5 and 6 inches.

The thing with The Explorer\ Etrac models is the deep coins at the edge of depth will have a clipped type tone that the SE was giving. This tone is beyond the Silver warble tone. But the Numbers at least in the Etrac are dead on. You really have to know the detector to get the really deepies. And I am talking like a year not a couple months. IMHO.
It would be interesting to see a Tom tuned CZ-3D on the deep coins alone. Sorry but I am not sending You mine. Ha!



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 08/25/2018 07:52PM by Harold,ILL..

That is the comparison video I been waiting for. The FBS detectors do not like some cell phones or video cameras either. Electric fences, power transformers, and other electrical can be a nuisance also. Running the Explorer Se at 24 sensitivity is kinda low compared to the Equinox at 23. You would have to have the Equinox at about 19 to be at the same percentage.

Tommy C.
(southernexplorer)
Deus - Etrac - GPX 5000

OLE HAROLD …. Why not? Just kidding really don't have time fields are being cut as we speak. Equinox is one of those detectors that's pretty straight forward on the deep ones …..What I mean is it has a nuance that s pretty easy to recognize on the deep ones kinda like the Deus.

EMI is a factor around my house....

Great effort there Calabash! Thanks for the 'shout out!'

Nearly had me running out to buy an SE... Lol.

In fairness, it hit those targets. Many don't go by numbers: they're Tonal diggers.

Noted the 'E Trac Pro coil' on the borrowed SE.

The Slimline FBS1000 coil that originally shipped with the SE wasn't favoured by hunters.
It had the tendency to go really wide - wider than the widescan FBS beige or black non-epoxy filled coils making it difficult to zero in to more than a single target.
It was poor with multiple targets in close proximity.

My tests were all done using a black Explorer 2 coil.
The decision to put a Slimline on the SE was in my opinion a flawed one that cast a shadow on it.
Many bought after-market coils and the SEF was popular on the SE
The E Trac a few years later revived the FBS pedigree.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/25/2018 08:09PM by Des D.

Thanks ,I tried...lol . I love the silver tone on that explorer. I was hoping I didn't do anything to dumb. I new I would get hammered if I did. BTW I don't think a lot of people are giving the Nox credit for the depth it has on silver. IMO



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/25/2018 08:14PM by calabash digger.

Hey Des, Do You think it's fair to say the Explorer is deeper on tone, But a Etrac I.D.s deeper by Number?
I will admit I do not have a lot of time on Explorer as the Etrac. I just seemed to bonded better with the Etrac than even the CTX.

Nice vid Calabash.

Good job, calabash; enjoyed the video. It directly mimics the results I got, comparing the Equinox to the CTX. And thanks for the "shout out" to me as well, assuming I was the "other guy on the forum, who runs conductive..." that you mentioned. LOL!

Steve

You cheated Des if you used the Exp 2 10 coil..... those were the coils we all jumped on... because you are right .... the slimline was really not a very good coil. But the Pro coil or even an SEF was killer coils. I agree Harold...... about a year before you realized..... OMG those are deep weak signals ive been missing all this time. Well except for silver. Its a darn good beach machine too.

Thanks Calabash for putting in the time and effort. The Explorer SE was the most powerful of the Explorers, but could be unstable depending on coil and settings. Those that hung on and put in the hours harnessed the power and could tell everything by audible signal.....even at depth. The SE was the only Explorer that showed ID in pinpoint mode. The Etrac didnt have as sweet of a silver tone, but the numbers tended to lock on better. The Etrac menu was easier, but once the Explorer was set-up.....all needed was selecting a program for the conditions. The Minelab 1050 coil was a smooth running coil. Thanks again.

Explorer XS was probably the deepest of that line but still feel the 8 inch CZ coil will go deeper than the 10.5 Explorer coil for deep silver...so ole Harold I am with you...

I need to see one of them there CZ machines in action....

A Dankowski tuned CZ for sure are deep, no doubt. The Sovereigns were no slouches either. Have to love the multi-frequencies.

Nothing beats an FBS on deep silver (tones & I.D.)----and I've got a bucket full of silver to prove it! JMHO

I have to agree with Del, here...NOTHING beats FBS on deep silver -- tones AND ID. It would seem, from what I've heard, that a CZ (especially a NASA-Tom-tuned CZ-3D) is way up there, especially in terms of depth, but I've never swung one. But -- for me, I can't imagine something being better on deep silver, overall, complete package, than FBS.

Steve

D&P-OR Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Nothing beats an FBS on deep silver (tones & I.D.)
> ----and I've got a bucket full of silver to prove
> it! JMHO

I thought Hombre cleaned out Your site's when He came out there with that Pantera?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/26/2018 05:55PM by Harold,ILL..

D&P-OR Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Nothing beats an FBS on deep silver (tones & I.D.)
> ----and I've got a bucket full of silver to prove
> it! JMHO


steveg Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I have to agree with Del, here...NOTHING beats FBS
> on deep silver -- tones AND ID. It would seem, fr
> om what I've heard, that a CZ (especially a NASA-T
> om-tuned CZ-3D) is way up there, especially in ter
> ms of depth, but I've never swung one. But -- for
> me, I can't imagine something being better on deep
> silver, overall, complete package, than FBS.
>
> Steve


I agree with both statements. The problem with the CZ's is that although they can be very deep, they tend to id deep targets as iron. At least that has been my experience with all the CZ's I've owned over the years. FBS units continue to impress...

Thoroughly enjoy your vids man. Found you when researching a new reel (Daiwa Steez A...was going to try and contact you about that!).
I've been using an Etrac, Deus, and CTX over the last 10 years or so. After my time with the Etrac's, and my love for its silver tones, I keep coming back to the ML offerings. I admit I'm an ID guy as well, as like hunting the older homes for silver coins, etc., and have EMI to deal with in most places. Having rambled...another great vid. Would love to see the same between your 800 and your Deus on those same targets. I might use this type of comparison moving forward on jumping back into a new Deus, or the 800. My experience with the Deus years ago was it was pretty chatty in my hunts.

calabash digger Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> OLE HAROLD …. Why not? Just kidding really don't h
> ave time fields are being cut as we speak. Equinox
> is one of those detectors that's pretty straight f
> orward on the deep ones …..What I mean is it has a
> nuance that s pretty easy to recognize on the deep
> ones kinda like the Deus.


remember ole cal! don't forget to take your tesoro mojave!
ehe! he! he!

(h.h.!)
j.t.

jrk look at the video I posted deus in 28 kh on deep silver and you will see it. BTW the Daiwa Steez A is the best fishing reel I have ever seen. I have had all the top tier shimanos and lews reels. ABU doesn't even deserve to ride in the same boat …….. as a Steez.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/26/2018 04:32PM by calabash digger.

You're the man! Thanks for that quick reply. You just sold a reel for Daiwa (and I've been using Shim's DC reels for extra distance now for years, but recently tried a Coastal TW for distance in surf...was blown away), and might have just sold a detecter for ML! I appreciate you putting these vids out there...great way of presenting and tons of energy/passion many lack. I must have missed the vid you mention...as I've watched several of yours recently...I'll jump back on and take a look.

Randy

Thanks Randy...

Harold,ILL. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hey Des, Do You think it's fair to say the Explore
> r is deeper on tone, But a Etrac I.D.s deeper by N
> umber?
> I will admit I do not have a lot of time on Explor
> er as the Etrac. I just seemed to bonded better wi
> th the Etrac than even the CTX.


Even though, I prototyped all three, I'd still find it difficult to answer that Q.
My ear is 'trained' differently to yours: I'm always listening out for Low > Med 'warbles'...even with the X-505 today, I was on the look-out for TID's 6-24
Yes, I'd agree on favouring the E Trac the most. It's one of THE BEST detectors ever made and I have little time for the sheateex.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/26/2018 06:40PM by Des D.

Des --

What do you not like about the CTX? (Or is that opening up a can of worms you don't wish to open?)

Steve

steveg Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Des --
>
> What do you not like about the CTX? (Or is that o
> pening up a can of worms you don't wish to open?)
>
> Steve


Yes Des, I would be interested in hearing what you DON'T like about the CTX myself.----Just curious!----------Del

I tested the NOX 800 for about 50 hours on 100s of real in ground targets against my 11.9 Tom CZ 6a and CTX and in my soil the Nox was lacking. The Nox 800 loves old beaver tails at the 6 to 7 in range. It would give a great tone and bounce between 12 and 13. I would flag about 50 good nickel signals then cross check them with the CZ and would only dig at best 10 of them. I Did This 3 different times. Results all the same. The weird thing about the Nox is it performed real well in my test garden but out in the old parks around me it lacked depth on deep targets I could only attribute to my soil conditions here in colorado. My CZ and CTX ar definitely deeper then the Nox here in my soil, results elsewhere may be different. Trash from treasure ratio I can't see it would be better in any soil against a CZ or CTX.