Some duel results : Nox vs Exp II yesterday

A buddy and I got together yesterday for some hunting. He had the Nox with 6" coil (unfortunately he did not bring the stock 11" coil). And I was using the Exp. II with 11" pro coil.

First stop was a turf zone "back-pocket site". A portion of turf that .... anytime I'm passing through this city, I can always reliably get some more wheaties and/or silver. Normally anything less than 5" tends to be clad. So I ignore all shallow coin signals, in my quest to angle for wheaties/silver. But this park is also very junky. Lots of shallow clad to mask deeper oldies, lots of foil, tabs, etc... So I was a bit curious if his Nox with 6" coil might get stuff that my Exp. II has missed over the years. Since, admittedly, the power house Exp. II with pro coil is going to be more prone to masking.

The results were: Me: 9 wheaties, 2 silver washingtons, 2 mercs, skeleton key. Him: 1 wheatie and 1 silver roosie . I flagged most of my deepie coin signals (5 to 7") and .... the results were pretty miserable: It was all he could do to get a peep off of them. Ie.: nothing he'd have heard or chased, if they had not been pointed out to him. He even took careful time, on a few of them (before digging) to play with multiple setting changes. Eg.: slower recovery, higher sens, different modes, re-ground balancing, etc.... To no avail. The only one of the flagged signals that he did say he'd have guessed was a deep high conductor, was one of the silver washingtons at about 5 or 6" He was growing very disgusted. Even the silver roosie he got was a shallower fluke

But we wrote it off to the fact that the 6" coil was going to be handicapped on depth. And since turf is more of a "depth" game, that .... it just wasn't a fair comparison.

Next stop : A park scrape demolition renovation site going on. The site has turned up 150+ silver and hundreds of wheaties, scores of IH's, V's, buffalos, etc..... over the past few months. Even 2 LC's, some reales, etc.... This site does have some iron-riddled zones, so we thought maybe there'd be some merit for his Nox with 6" setup. End results: Me: 9 wheaties, 1855 French copper coin, and 1891 s seated dime. Him: 5 wheaties and a merc.

But again, perhaps this just didn't mimic "ghost-townsy conditions" that would merit the 6" coil ? The only reason I post these results, is that I've read some posts on md'ing forums, where Nox faithful are touting the 6" coil as being killer, still respectably deep, and "reeling in goodies from worked out parks", blah blah

Would love to try the same duels with a good Nox user using the 11" coil. I've tried with my CA Nox users, but .... so far no rendezvous for such a duel. Done some side-by-side hunts in ghost townsy sites with Cal Cobra, and the results seem to be about a draw, at best. Once all other factors are equal, the tallies come out about the same. Granted, the Nox will tend to excel on lower conductor targets better (eg.: .22 shell, teensy grommets, etc...). And perhaps it's better in blankets of nails. But beyond that, I don't think anything is going to beat the mighty Exp. II on most all hunt situations. In others it's merely a step sideways at best.

I would love nothing else to meet up with a skilled user for normal deep-turf strategy . If anyone here considers themselves fluent with the nox for turf, and finds themselves in CA, give me a shout-out. Would love to meet up.







Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 09/02/2019 09:05PM by Tom_in_CA.

Got it.
Minelab engineers were looking sideways. Lol

Nice report Tom. Great finds too.

The Exp - Etrac line are killer units for coin hunting. Hard to beat them in that regard.

Why don't you take Cal Cobra to your turf sites? I would also be curious how it does with the 11" in a deep turf situation as all we ever see is the Nox Relic hunting. I am a deep park turf guy myself. Like Relic hunting deep turf silver hunting is a different ball game altogether. That is where Etrac/Explorers and CZs shine.
A lot of Relic hunters on this forum just don't understand.

Tom,

I wish I was in CA, I'd take you up on it. I don't have as many years in, as you do, but I spent a good 7 years with the Explorer SE Pro, and now have a reasonable amount of experience on the Equinox. For me personally, my silver finds have increased slightly with the EQX, and my trash digs have not. That is certainly anecdotal, and not quantitative, but at this point, comparing "myself to myself," I can say that the Equinox is a bit of an improvement, for me. In my dirt, it's a bit deeper than FBS, and I have proven to myself that it's better in trash, as well.

This of course is NOT putting down FBS units; I learned to hunt deep, and target deep coins in turf-type environments, with FBS, and so I will always have an affinity for FBS. But, I would love to take you up on your challenge.

One other thing I'll say is this, I don't think it's totally fair, at this point, to say that the Equinox "is a sideways step, at best." Reason being, I believe what makes one an expert, is time on the machine. And since FBS is 20-year old technology, there is not only 20 years of collective wisdom to be found, which can really help someone improve if they commit to absorbing this "collective wisdom," but in addition to that, some individuals (like yourself, I'd assume), have more than a decade of personal experience running FBS -- to where you become a true expert with the platform. And to be fair, NO ONE has more than about 19 months of Equinox experience under their belts, no matter WHO they are (except some field testers, who have a couple more months than that). I can promise you that I was MUCH better, at the end of 7 years of using the Explorer, than I was after 19 months...

Just my two cents worth...

Steve



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/03/2019 12:34AM by steveg.

My three cents.....If you want to cherry pick silver then FBS is your tool. The Equinox target ID is just not up to the task. I have had Lincolns all over the twenties.

If you are hunting for masked conductive targets the Equinox is a better tool in my opinion.


The 6 inch coil for the Equinox is a waste of money.


One cent for each opinion. Labor Day sale.

I agree 6 inch coil waste of money....

Harold,ILL. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Why don't you take Cal Cobra to your turf sites? I
> would also be curious how it does with the 11" in
> a deep turf situation as all we ever see is the No
> x Relic hunting. I am a deep park turf guy myself.
> Like Relic hunting deep turf silver hunting is a d
> ifferent ball game altogether. That is where Etrac
> /Explorers and CZs shine.
> A lot of Relic hunters on this forum just don't un
> derstand.

I have tried. But he's not interested in machine comparisons as much as some other md'rs are. We have done some occasional traded flags in relicky sites. But none in turf. I think the biggest reason (to answer your question), is that he's simply not much of a turf hunter as I am. He puts hardcore effort into our relicky sites, research, etc.... But when it comes to turf, it's just a low priority on his scale of sites.

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

>
> I wish I was in CA, I'd take you up on it. I don'
> t have as many years in, as you do, but I spent a
> good 7 years with the Explorer SE Pro, and now hav
> e a reasonable amount of experience on the Equinox
> . For me personally, my silver finds have increas
> ed slightly with the EQX, and my trash digs have n
> ot.


Steveg:

The SE pro was he wimpiest, on depth, of the Explorer incarnations. Thus perhaps, yes, the nox 800 was better in turf for you. If you think that the SE pro was on-par equivalent , in depth, to the other explorers, we can start a separate thread and discuss that . D/t that's a different subject. But as far as it concerns this thread: I would agree that the 800 could give the SE pro a run-for-the-money. But for the other explorers, in-the-right hands, I am doubtful that any Nox 800 can out-duel them, in normal turf-type hunting.


>
>
> One other thing I'll say is this, I don't think it
> 's totally fair, at this point, to say that the Eq
> uinox "is a sideways step, at best." Reason being
> , I believe what makes one an expert, is time on t
> he machine. And since FBS is 20-year old technolo
> gy, there is not only 20 years of collective wisdo
> m to be found, which can really help someone impro
> ve if they commit to absorbing this "collective wi
> sdom,"


If this were a comparison of tallies of random wild finds, perhaps. But in THIS case, we're talking about flagged known signals. Where the Nox user can play around with settings, to-his-heart's content. And adding 15 yrs. to that formula therefore, will not change things.

Oh, and let's clarify another thing (an easy psychological trap to fall into) : The other machine user fiddles with his controls, and causes it to get a "beep", right ? He might be tempted to conclude : "ok, it's capable. I can hear it too", etc... Right ? BUT THE BIGGER QUESTION IS: Does he move from that target, and dig the exact same signal somewhere next to it, that turns out to be junk that's fooling him ?

For example: There are many machines that can "ring the bells of notre dame" on super deep coins, right ? But the devil is in the details perhaps: If every other signal near it LIKEWISE sounds the same (such that he's effectively only strip-mining), then what good is that ?

This is why, when 2 hunters go to compare over flagged targets, it's imperative that each one ask himself honestly: " Would I have heard that on my own?" & "Does it sound like known junk I'm routinely passing ?", etc....

goodmore Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> My three cents.....If you want to cherry pick silv
> er then FBS is your tool. The Equinox target ID is
> just not up to the task. I have had Lincolns all o
> ver the twenties.
>
> If you are hunting for masked conductive targets t
> he Equinox is a better tool in my opinion.
>
>
> The 6 inch coil for the Equinox is a waste of mone
> y.
>

Goodmore, I agree. But you will find a legion of Nox 800 users that will adamantly insist that the Nox 800 is the superior step up, even for turf @ cherry picking high conductors.

As for the other part of your post, you mention : "Masked high conductors". That was sort of what I'm hoping to find someone to duel with. Because, yes, it's possible that another machine can get that deep turf coin that hiding below foil and nails that the cherry picker is skipping. But .... based on what I see so far, I'm having my doubts that this is the case . This would be a "reverse flag test".

Here's a mock example: The Nox 800 user tells the Exp. II user : "Here's one that I suspect is a deep high conductor". The Exp. II user goes over it and says "I wouldn't have chased it". The Nox 800 user digs it up. And after tossing a beaver tail, foil wad, and nail out of the hole, then presto: A deep silver coin or wheatie. Personally, I don't forsee that happening. I would certainly love to duel with someone and see that happen though. If so, then I'd love to stand corrected.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/03/2019 06:30PM by Tom_in_CA.

calabash digger Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I agree 6 inch coil waste of money....


Even while the jury might still be out on the issue of 800 vs Exp II in turf : I agree with you guys on this particular machine's 6" coil for ANY uses. Here's why :

The Nox 800 is ALREADY renowned for separation and averaging. Right ? So it's not like you need to go to a smaller coil to accomplish those objectives.

For example: I use a Tesoro Sabre and Bandito for nail-see-through objectives. And I noticed that when I went to Tesoro's miniature hockey-puck coil, it was a waste of money. All I did was rob myself of valuable depth. And the stock coil and innards were ALREADY MORE THAN CAPABLE of iron-see through and target averaging. There was utterly no need to get the hockey-puck.

So too can I imagine that the same concept is at play with the Nox 800.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/03/2019 01:23AM by Tom_in_CA.

Well my 6” inch coil must be a wired wrong... because mine is pretty deep!...open fieldsI like my Etrac... in trash My Equinox with 6” killer....

Nice barrel tap Tom!

mascard1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well my 6” inch coil must be a wired wrong... beca
> use mine is pretty deep!...open fieldsI like my Et
> rac... in trash My Equinox with 6” killer....


Mascard, that is exactly the conversation that I had with my friend, prior to starting our hunt. I distinctly/specifically asked him questions about depth on his 6" Nox 800 coil. He recounted a comparison he'd done , with flagged targets on a signal at a prior site with another friend. And he described getting a good repeatable signal on a flagged/shared target, which turned out to be a copper penny (memorial ? wheatie ?) at a respectable 7 or 8" or whatever. Hmmm, ok, sounds good so far. Right ? But ....

mascard1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well my 6” inch coil must be a wired wrong... beca
> use mine is pretty deep!...open fieldsI like my Et
> rac... in trash My Equinox with 6” killer....

I know you're from Sacramento area. Are you game to meet up in Sacramento and trade off some flagged signal comparisons ?

I would have to find some time....Tile Contractor...And super busy....Right now...Maybe in October sometime...Take it easy!!!

Tom_in_CA Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Harold,ILL. Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Why don't you take Cal Cobra to your turf sites?
> I
> > would also be curious how it does with the 11" i
> n
> > a deep turf situation as all we ever see is the
> No
> > x Relic hunting. I am a deep park turf guy mysel
> f.
> > Like Relic hunting deep turf silver hunting is a
> d
> > ifferent ball game altogether. That is where Etr
> ac
> > /Explorers and CZs shine.
> > A lot of Relic hunters on this forum just don't
> un
> > derstand.
>
> I have tried. But he's not interested in machine
> comparisons as much as some other md'rs are. We
> have done some occasional traded flags in relicky
> sites. But none in turf. I think the biggest rea
> son (to answer your question), is that he's simply
> not much of a turf hunter as I am. He puts hardc
> ore effort into our relicky sites, research, etc..
> .. But when it comes to turf, it's just a low pr
> iority on his scale of sites.


All you did was (1) prove the operator is still inexperienced and (2) prove that an 11" coil trumps a 6" coil in depth, no rocket science there although from my experience the 6" coil on the EQ800 has nabbed some pretty deep targets, but obviously the 11" is going to go deeper.

Tom and I have flagged several targets between his Exp2 and the EQ800, when both had their factory 11" coils. As I seem to recall, the last trip we had where we compared targets and I checked his, and called it junk or iron, or a good target based on the audio from the EQ800, it was more accurate than the Exp2.

I just don't get that excited about turf hunting these days, been too spoiled digging seated liberties, capped busts and gold coins from relic sites to waste time turf hunting for wheaties and mercs Besides when I detect, I kind of get into my detecting zen and don't really enjoy flagging and comparing a ton of signals...a few is okay, but more then a few is annoying and wastes precious digging time

As for the demo site, I seem to recall the last time you and I detected there, me with the EQ800 w/6" coil and you w/the Exp2 w/11" coil, I spanked you on silver, you 3 me 9 So does that mean my EQ800 is superior to your Exp2 and Gregs EQ800? Was it luck? You're much faster at target recovery then I, so typically I'm always handicapped to a degree. My point is that your "duel" isn't exactly apples to apples and about as scientific as climate change doubter data.

BTW there's more to 6" coils then depth, they also have superior separation in iron dense/junky environments, and at the demo site it also significantly helped mitigate the massive EMI the 11" coil was suffering from, and allowed me to increase my sensitivity significantly. So it has it's place, I proved that again last weekend hunting ghost towns (more to come Anyhow, I guess I don't understand the desire to dethrone the EQ800. Just buy one, and keep it long enough to actually get the hang of it and I suspect that you'll find that it's a darn good detector....but using it for just a few days and declaring the Exp2 that you have like 20 years of experience on as superior doesn't exactly provide an honest apples to apples comparison between the machines IMHO.

Cal_cobra Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
>
> All you did was (1) prove the operator is still in
> experienced

Brian, as I said to SteveG, this "fallback line" would not be applicable to flagged target tests. If someone is pointed out, point-blank, a wild-target to listen to, and has ample time to try a variety of setting-options, then ....... : No amount of "years of experience" is going to change the results.

I agree that for a tooty-fluty orchestra machine, then yes, there is a degree of truth to this. Where someone can "hear it", yet .... if they are dreadfully honest, can not tell that apart from any other targets in the sea-of-targets in the area. Yet to a person experienced in the "orchestra", they can tell a distinct difference between that and the bent nail. Right ?

But let me tell ya : If this were to be applied to the Explorer (which is indeed an orchestra), .... speaking for myself and others I have talked to, those "lights went on" in a single day. Not "15 yrs.". I distinctly recall tearing my hair out with the flock of sick geese sounds. Till an experienced user flagged 4 or 5 signals. I watched how he swung. I listened to what he was listening to. I cross-flagged targets for him to check, etc.... Within 1 hr (not 15 yrs.) the "lights had gone on".

So perhaps your right in one sense. Perhaps there's another Nox 800 to whom the "lights have gone on" already (gee, in less than 15 yrs.). If that's true, I would certainly love to meet the person and see. But to perpetually write off poor dueling results as "user must have been inexperienced", can prop up even the wimpiest of radio shack bounty hunter machines. In other words no one can EVER compare machines. Because whenever one machine is shown to be lacking, a casual observer can simply do as you have done and say: "Gee, I guess they weren't experienced enough".



> ..... and (2) prove that an 11" coil trumps
> a 6" coil in depth, no rocket science there

Yes. I acknowledged that in my post. But still posted the observation anyhow, since there is a much-touted benefit of see-through/averaging angle attributed to it. And since this particular zone (which you are familiar with) has lots of foil, tabs, zinc, etc..... But when it comes to raw depth, sure, I agree with you.


> although from my experience the 6" coil on the EQ800 has
> nabbed some pretty deep targets,

Correct. I too have seen the same claims. Which, as I said, is why I decided to post the results. And as our friend and I saw, it was utterly not "pretty deep". But I should add, in this particular spot (which you know of), there's a lot of inner-city EMI. Not sure whether that played a factor. Both the Nox and the Exp. II have similar noise-cancel buttons, right ?

>
> Tom and I have flagged several targets between his
> Exp2 and the EQ800, when both had their factory 11
> " coils. As I seem to recall, the last trip we
> had where we compared targets and I checked his, a
> nd called it junk or iron, or a good target based
> on the audio from the EQ800, it was more accurate
> than the Exp2.

I don't recall this in our relicky sites. Seems that for our ghost-townsy sites (all other things being equal), we've been pretty much a draw. This recent trip I got shut down for some reason, in that "certain spot". Static everywhere. But that's not a reflection of the Nox vs the Exp. That was something unique to the site or soil that was playing havoc on me @ that particular day (moisture content in the soil ? EMI that only-affected Exp's ? I dunno). But whenever your Nox and my Exp. are on equal relic hunt ground, I have never seen that the 800 was "more accurate". However, we have not tried them on extreme iron blanket zones yet. Right ? If we did, then similar to your Racer, I'm sure the Exp. II would get its b*tt kicked.


>
> I just don't get that excited about turf hunting t
> hese days,

Yes. I have to drag you kicking and screaming to go off route to hit a park on any of our trips. And sure enough, after 30 minutes, you're itching to get on with our travels to the stage stops and such. Sheesk, why don't you get excited about merc's and wheaties ? haha


> I kind of get into my
> detecting zen and don't really enjoy flagging and
> comparing a ton of signals...a few is okay, but mo
> re then a few is annoying and wastes precious digg
> ing time

Correct. If you're more than 30 paces away, you tend to have no interest in hearing what I'm pointing out. Or conversely, if you're about to dig, and I say "wait, lemme hear it", you have little patience for waiting for me to walk over and try. Doh ! :/


>
> As for the demo site, I seem to recall the last ti
> me you and I detected there, me with the EQ800 w/6
> " coil and you w/the Exp2 w/11" coil, I spanked yo
> u on silver, you 3 me 9

Uhhh, I think we were even-steven on oldie count, as I recall. Once we included wheaties, Vs and buffalos, etc.... Right ? Did you have the 6" coil there ? I don't recall that. If you did, then that would make me wonder whether Greg's 6" coil was "made on a Monday" ??


>
> BTW there's more to 6" coils then depth, they also
> have superior separation in iron dense/junky envir
> onments, and at the demo site it also significantl
> y helped mitigate the massive EMI the 11" coil was
> suffering from, and allowed me to increase my sens
> itivity significantly.

Which is exactly why Greg and I were curious to try some duels. Because, yes, I'm the first to admit that the larger coils (of ANY machines) have drawbacks that can be solved with smaller coils. And yes, he tried "increasing sens.". To no avail.


> Anyhow, I guess I don't understan
> d the desire to dethrone the EQ800.

Really ? Well .... maybe this is a year-late in coming (since the 800 has been out for 1.5 yrs. now), but .... in case you don't recall .... It was the Nox faithful (not the older-machine-users) who went on record as regaling the hobbyist community of how this "far and away spanked their prior machines". So ... no ... it's not me or anyone else wanting to "dethrone" the 800. It's those-of-us who are observers who MERELY ANSWER the claims being presented to them. In other words, it seems to us that it's the 800 users who want to "dethrone" the prior generation, and we are merely answering the claims. So ... me thinks you've got it bass-ackwards.


> .....but using it for just a few da
> ys and declaring the Exp2 that you have like 20 ye
> ars of experience on as superior doesn't exactly p
> rovide an honest apples to apples comparison betwe
> en the machines IMHO.

Which is exactly why I did not, and do not, rely on those "few days trial period" as definitive. Any observations I drew from that week-long trial period, are anecdotal only. And I have gone on record multiple times stating this. And you will notice that is NOT the subject matter (ie.: my opinion drawing) for this post. I am strictly/only trying to draw on someone who DOES have much hours on the machine. And someone who HAS sat for long hours in front of a computer screen reading other's pro/con tips, settings, etc...

Might he have still failed to avail himself of a setting option that could have solved it ? I suppose. But he and I went to great length to close that gap. Even to the extent where .... when I went to dig one of the wheaties, he said "no, let me try a few more this and that". And I could tell he was drawing on his reservoir of studies. You know who I'm talking about, and you know he's one to avail himself of any options . Might he still have been numb-nuts ? I suppose. This is why I say that I would love nothing more than to compare to an 11" in-the-hands of a skilled confident user. Greg, admittedly, had not used his outside of relicky sites prior to this. But I just found it odd that once we progressed to the relicky sites, the results were still 2x to 1x. But if you were using the 6" coil at the park demo. the last time you and I were there, then that's good info. In that case, maybe Greg just wasn't having a good night. Ie.: wasn't getting the coil over the coins.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 09/03/2019 07:24PM by Tom_in_CA.

Tom,

I have heard it said, by many of the "long-time" Explorer users, that the XS or the II were deeper, with their 10" stock coil (the FBS 1000), than the SE with the Slimline, or the SE Pro with the Pro coil. Since I never used the XS or the II, I can't comment, so I'll take your word for it. I WILL say, though, that the SE Pro is no less deep than the E-Trac in my dirt (I've tested it quite a bit), nor the CTX (which I own). And the Equinox slightly trumps all three of them, depth-wise -- the SE Pro, the E-Trac, and the CTX, in my dirt.

I am left to wonder if the Equinox is handicapped in your particular dirt; both places I have used the Equinox (central Oklahoma and southwestern Pennsylvania) show it to be an excellent performer, but perhaps your CA dirt entirely changes the equation? Otherwise, it makes ZERO sense to me, that your buddy's Equinox's settings had to be "massaged to the max" to even get "a peep" on a 5" to 7" target -- ESPECIALLY one that was already flagged. That simply does not match my experience at all.

And yes, I agree with you that MANY machines can "see" a deep target that is previously flagged...but that it is a TOTALLY DIFFERENT story to be able to find the deep targets, AND have your machine give you enough information as to which ones need to be dug, and which ones don't. I have said many times that very thing -- and that's why I ended up as an FBS user all those years ago. The machines I had used previously could see EVERY ONE of the targets my E-Trac-using hunting partner would flag, but those machines FAILED to clue me in that THIS deep target was somehow different, and worthy of digging, than any of the OTHER deep targets the machine would sound off on. That was when I finally switched to FBS, and I never looked back...

BUT -- with that said, to imply that the Equinox may not offer that same ability to clue a user in on which deep targets "need dug," and which ones "don't," would not be correct, in my experience. For me, the WHOLE GAME, as a deep coin hunter, is not just "raw" depth, but INTELLIGENCE communicated to the user, on those deep targets. As I say, that being of paramount importance to me is why I gravitated to FBS in the first place, and so -- believe me -- if the Equinox did not offer similar ability to accurately communicate to me what I'm dealing with, on a deep target, I would not be swinging it. There's a REASON that my CTX is largely collecting dust right now... And the reason is, the "me" using FBS is "trumped" by the "me" using Multi-IQ. Not by a TON, but by enough that it matters. Whether the "me" using an Equinox can trump "you" using FBS, I doubt it. I think you are simply a better detectorist than I am, and I KNOW you have at least double, if not triple, the years of experience. But, comparing "me," to "me," the Equinox is the trump card. NOT by much, but it's measurable...

One other thing I can say on this, is that I have a hunting partner who swung an Explorer for MUCH longer than I did, and then he switched to a CTX MUCH earlier than I did. He is a detectorist with over 40 years of experience, was a "deep turf" coin hunter, and like you, there was NOTHING anyone was going to do to pry FBS out of his hands. I got the Equinox, with the intention of it being my "heavy trash" specialty machine, but over time, I began to find it slightly out-performing FBS for me. And when I'd tell him that, he'd laugh at me. But I kept producing the finds, to the point that he was FORCED to listen... SO, he bought an Equinox, as a skeptic, intending to put it through the paces at a few of his "very deep coin sites," and then sell it off, proving to himself that "he was right," and that it can't compete with FBS. After a few months, guess which of the two machines started collecting dust? Hint...NOT the Equinox...

Again, I know this is anecdotal -- qualitative and not quantitative. But, all these folks touting the ability of the Equinox to "hang," very favorably, with FBS when deep coin hunting, are not just a bunch of crazed Equinox fan boys. There's something to it...although as I said, maybe your CA dirt renders your results otherwise...

Steve



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 09/04/2019 03:48PM by steveg.

Quite the discussion going on here.

I do keep up here.

Anyone see Nasa Tom’s comments on the small coil for Eqx as far as what advantage percentage wise it gives over stock coil.
A low percentage I think he stated 12 %.

If we took Fbs u it any model and compared advantage 6” coil gives over stocker 11” coil the number would be higher. And many other detectors too,

Why?
Seems Minelab really geared programming of EQX to really fit the 11” DD coil. NASA Tom I think has said this too.

Next.
Remember what Brandon said prerelease time frame of Eqx. He said he had witnessed more depth using EQX vs CTX in at least some areas. And it seems some others have said this too.

NASA Tom just recently has stated in his area evidently multi IQ has advantage over FBS.

Maybe we can get him to describe more in-depth. He may be still under NDA and can’t do though.

I have been watching Cal and Tom as far their their finds go. My opinion based on what I have read and seen here. Cal seems to be a step up using what’s he uses in the sites hunted by both. Call it luck call it skill. He said Finds pouch see,s when emptied has some nice goodies.

Some folks will not give up theor older units. Fine by me. Some folks are still using those blue box units too., Again fine by me.

Imo Multi IQ is able to solve more situations (equations) overall vs fbs2 or fbs. Or even bbs.

Yep give the Minelab engineers credit. And the folks that’s helped them test units.

So, what would I take to a site that has been pounded by fbs or fbs2 unit like tomorrow. Another FBS or fbs2 unit? Nope. Give me EQX 800 instead.

Silly to have a duel with any VLF detector with one with 6” coil and the other with 11” coil. Real silly if you ask me.
Wonder if we would ah e reversed coil sizes and compared? Which would have won?
Again would have been silly to have done and certainly silly to post about.

I just call balls balls and strikes strikes.
Cheers.

Btw,
If I didn’t know better someone here has let the EQX get in their head. And they can’t seem to shake. Lol

Another btw.
I was a 4.0 student as far as psychology classes go.

Remember Emi could affect one model detector more vs another.



Edited 7 time(s). Last edit at 09/03/2019 10:32PM by tnsharpshooter.

steveg Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> the SE Pro is no less deep than the E-Trac in my dirt (I've tested it quite a bit), nor the CTX (which I own)
>

Interesting. Because the E-trac and CTX , just like the XS and II, are said to be deeper than the SE. I am surprised that you're saying that your SE pro accomplished the same depth as the Etrac and CTX.

But , even though I said it was off-topic, let me clarify further : It's not so-much that the SE pro CAN'T accomplish the depth of its kin-sisters. It's just that you have to make a couple of passes over the target to get the TID decided on. Versus the II, for example, where you get the TID on the first swing over the target. This was the cost of the faster recovery that the SE touted. That many who came-up-through-the-ranks said resulted in lost depth, in the final analysis.

But in any case, we digress. The point remains that , yes, there are people who say their 800's are meeting and exceeding the prior generations in deep turf type cherry picking strategy hunts. And I'm just saying I would really like to see it. Because, just like my switch from Whites to the Explorer, so too would I drop my exp. II in a heartbeat, if I could see it in actual side-by-side testing.


> ... it makes ZERO sense to me, that your buddy's Equinox's settings had to be "massaged to the max" to even get "a peep" on a 5" to 7" target -- ESPECIALLY one that was already flagged ....

I agree ! It made no sense ! Hence the reason for my post ! It equally confused Greg. And it wasn't just a "lone singular target". It was like 10 flagged-known targets (wheaties and silver) in a row. At depths that he could have sworn that machine & coil was capable of (5 to 7") .

As for the demolition site we did after that, we were not comparing flagged targets. So that could simply be luck-of-draw outcome. And thus should probably have been left out of this.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/04/2019 12:58AM by Tom_in_CA.

tnsharpshooter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> He said he had witnessed more depth using EQX vs CTX in at least some areas. And it seems some others have said this too.

Yes. There has been no shortage of glowing testimonials, of how the Nox is out-pacing the explorers, CTX, etc....


>
>Cal seems to be a step up using what’s he uses in the sites hunted by both. Call it luck call it skill. He said Finds pouch see,s when emptied has some nice goodies.

You mean cal cobra ? Or calabash ? If you meant cal cobra , then: Not just the Nox, but he's also done good with the kruzer and racer at our sites. I haven't seen how the Nox has been any different (that I recall).



>
> Silly to have a duel with any VLF detector with one with 6” coil and the other with 11” coil. Real silly if you ask me.


Did you not read my commentary on that ? No one here is disputing the depth difference, thus unfair comparisons IF THE SOLE QUESTION WAS DEPTH.

But for your sake, will repeat again : Smaller coils have advantages that bigger coils don't. And one "edge" I wanted to see if it could help on, in this particular site, was NOT depth comparisons, but rather : To see if it'd wriggle out targets in junk. Since, as I had stated, this is a junky turf zone, & riddled with clad that I routinely pass. And when a power-house machine like the Exp. II goes to cherry pick deepies in such situations , then you can imagine that stuff's gonna get missed. And also I remind you that there are Nox users with 6" coils that have stated they've gone into worked out parks, and pulled old coins that their prior machines had missed. Hence, not really "silly" eh ? If it were ONLY about depth, then yes, it'd be silly.


>
> I was a 4.0 student as far as psychology classes go.
>

Ah, then with that grade, you would be well aware that the way hobbyists sort out machine strengths and weaknesses, is to compare machines. Like on tech-related forums such as this one.

Tom,

Got it, on the "depth." I can see how that "nuance" that you are talking about, could be stated as "lacking depth." But for me, once I learned the "tells" on the SE Pro, i.e. how it behaved on a deep coin, then obviously I knew what to listen for, and would stop and "Minelab wiggle" the target, and wait for it to "lock on" to the best ID I could coax...and doing things that way (which, was "normal" to me, since I didn't have the experience of an earlier Explorer in my back pocket, to draw on/compare to), it was just as deep as the E-Trac, or CTX.

In fact, I bought the SE Pro ONLY because I could not afford an E-Trac at the time; my hunting partner/mentor was an E-Trac user, and once I became convinced that FBS was superior, as a deep turf coin hunter, as compared to any other machines (in my opinion), I wanted to buy an E-Trac. But, since they were out of my price range, I settled for it's "cousin" -- a used SE Pro.

After I had used it for several years, I was ready to "trade up," to an E-Trac. There were some things I liked better about the E-Trac -- but, I preferred the tones on the SE Pro. Still, as long as I could prove to myself that it was even a LITTLE deeper, I was going to cough up the extra cash, and buy one. I had a buddy with an E-Trac, and he had a surgery and was out of commission for awhile, so he let me borrow it. I took it out several times, over the course of a couple of weeks, and did a lot of testing. First, in my test garden, and then, on "flagged" targets, that I'd find with one unit, interrogate the nuances of the behavior of the target, and then re-interrogate with the other machine. It was similar enough to the SE Pro, that there wasn't much of a learning curve; I felt pretty good about knowing what the machine was telling me, in just a very short time. So, it was easy to compare the two machines, even though I didn't have a ton of experience on the E-Trac specifically. Anyway, after all that testing, I concluded that both were EXTREMELY similar, in terms of the nuances of how they reported on each flagged target, and -- interestingly -- the E-Trac was NOT deeper! Not in my test garden, and not on the flagged targets. SO -- in the end, I didn't buy one; I continued to hunt with the Explorer.

Finally, several years later, the last of my SE Pro's died; my choice was, find a used one, or buy an E-Trac or CTX. I knew if I was going to buy something other than an SE Pro, and "learn a new machine," it would be the newest technology -- i.e. CTX, not the E-Trac, so in the end, I decided that instead of buying another aging, used SE Pro, I'd make the 15-year newer technology leap, and jump into FBS2. And, lo and behold, I came to learn that...it is NOT deeper, either! I definitely like it better in trash than the Explorer, for sure. But, it is NOT any deeper, in terms of raw depth, in my dirt. And, I like the tones on the SE Pro better, and I like the adjustability of the "gain" (modulation) on the SE Pro MUCH better than on the CTX.

So, when I say that the SE Pro is just as deep, in my dirt, as the E-Trac and CTX, I say that with some experience, to back it up.

And likewise, when I say the Equinox is a bit deeper than the SE Pro for me, in my dirt, I say that ALSO with some experience, to back it up. Here's one story, just to illustrate (and this only one small, isolated test, amongst a TON of testing, during the "learning stage" with my Equinox).

I was out one day with my "mentor" -- the same one who was the E-Trac user, the one who taught me to use FBS, and who facilitated my move from other units, to the SE Pro, many years ago. I had just convinced him that the Equinox was "the real deal," so after more than a decade of expertise using the E-Trac, he decided to add an Equinox as a "backup machine." We went to an old park, and he wanted to swing his Equinox with 11" coil, to "get used to it." So, I chose to hunt with my CTX and 17" coil, as I knew at this park that targets could be DEEP, and I thought it would be good if he was using his Equinox and not his E-Trac, that I should use my CTX, and not my Equinox, so that we had "one of each" running -- FBS, and Multi-IQ.

We were working along, comparing signals as usual, but even moreso on this day, since he was relatively new with the Equinox. I was working along, and hit a target that I was almost sure was a real deep coin. It was faint, and subtle, the kind of signal that a novice might have passed right over and either not even heard, or passed off as "nothing good." You know the kind. So, since it acted the way a very deep coin acts on an FBS machine, so I called my buddy over to have a listen. He swung over it, and said "oh, yeah, I'd dig that, it's DEEP, and sounds good." I could hear the tones he was getting, through his headphones, and I couldn't believe it! I said "let me see that machine." He gave me his machine, and his headphones, and I "Minelab wiggled" the target. And I was shocked. It was a DEFINITE dig-me target! In fact, it was a fairly substantially easier target than with the CTX and 17" coil! So, I dug it, and it was a 9" deep Indian Head. We were BOTH impressed with the Equinox. So, afterward, he started to walk away, and I started swinging again. Less than 18" away from my plug, I got another signal, almost identical -- faint, subtle, but I knew it was a deep coin. I was pretty sure it was another Indian. I called my friend back over to have a listen, and -- same deal! Lest we thought the last target was for some reason ideally oriented for the Equinox, or whatever, this one behaved EXACTLY the same -- sounded clearer, better, and a more consistent VDI than the CTX. It turned out to be an 8 1/2" deep Indian Head. Needless to say, this fully confirmed what I had already experienced, in my test garden, and in the field, that the Equinox is a bit "deeper" than the CTX, in my dirt.

Finally, one last thing...you said that the only coin your buddy said he might have dug, with his Equinox, was the 5" deep Washington. Just about 10 days ago, I dug a '42 Washington quarter, with the Equinox (but was using the 11" coil). I did not measure it, but it was a SOLID 6" deep, possibly 6 1/2" to 7". And it was a knock-your-headphones off signal. NO doubt it was at least a quarter, if not a half...NO ONE would have missed this signal that I was getting from the Equinox. I was guessing half dollar, because the ID numbers were ranging from 30 to 35 -- nothing lower than 30. However, as I have come to learn -- and had reinforced to me on this dig -- when you are "Minelab wiggling" a deep target with an Equinox, the LOWEST numbers in the range of VDI numbers you get, are almost always the proper ID. If you get a bunch of upper 20s/low 30s, but a bunch of 23/24/25 mixed in, it's a WHEATIE most often. However, if you get those same upper 20s/low 30s, but NOTHING LOWER than upper 20s, there's a good chance that's a silver dime. Of course, the caveat to this is "in MY dirt..."

ANYWAY, my point there is, while I was using the 11" and not the 6", that 6"-plus silver quarter was simply a no-brainer, classic silver signal... It HAS to be your dirt, out there...

OH -- and one last thing, that "no-brainer, classic silver signal" is EXACTLY what I would have gotten, using an SE Pro or CTX...

Steve

Tom_in_CA Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> steveg Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > the SE Pro is no less deep than the E-Trac in my
> dirt (I've tested it quite a bit), nor the CTX (wh
> ich I own)
> >
>
> Interesting. Because the E-trac and CTX , just li
> ke the XS and II, are said to be deeper than the S
> E. I am surprised that you're saying that your S
> E pro accomplished the same depth as the Etrac and
> CTX.
>
> But , even though I said it was off-topic, let me
> clarify further : It's not so-much that the SE pr
> o CAN'T accomplish the depth of its kin-sisters.
> It's just that you have to make a couple of passes
> over the target to get the TID decided on. Versu
> s the II, for example, where you get the TID on th
> e first swing over the target. This was the cost
> of the faster recovery that the SE touted. That
> many who came-up-through-the-ranks said resulted i
> n lost depth, in the final analysis.
>
> But in any case, we digress. The point remains t
> hat , yes, there are people who say their 800's ar
> e meeting and exceeding the prior generations in d
> eep turf type cherry picking strategy hunts. And
> I'm just saying I would really like to see it. Be
> cause, just like my switch from Whites to the Expl
> orer, so too would I drop my exp. II in a heartbea
> t, if I could see it in actual side-by-side testin
> g.
>
>
> > ... it makes ZERO sense to me, that your buddy'
> s Equinox's settings had to be "massaged to the ma
> x" to even get "a peep" on a 5" to 7" target -- ES
> PECIALLY one that was already flagged ....
>
> I agree ! It made no sense ! Hence the re
> ason for my post ! It equally confused Gr
> eg. And it wasn't just a "lone singular target".
> It was like 10 flagged-known targets (wheaties and
> silver) in a row. At depths that he could have sw
> orn that machine & coil was capable of (5 to 7") .
>
> As for the demolition site we did after that, we w
> ere not comparing flagged targets. So that could
> simply be luck-of-draw outcome. And thus should
> probably have been left out of this.



Edited 10 time(s). Last edit at 09/04/2019 03:54PM by steveg.

steveg Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
....And the Equinox slightly trumps all three of them, depth-wise -- the SE Pro, the E-Trac, and the CTX, in my dirt.
>
> I am left to wonder if the Equinox is handicapped in your particular dirt; both places I have used the Equinox (central Oklahoma and southwestern Pennsylvania) show it to be an excellent performer, but perhaps your CA dirt entirely changes the equation? Otherwise, it makes ZERO sense to me, that your buddy's Equinox's settings had to be "massaged to the max" to even get "a peep" on a 5" to 7" target -- ESPECIALLY one that was already flagged. That simply does not match my experience at all.

Nor does it match my experience with the EQ800 in the same California dirt that Tom hunts, he's never flagged a deepie that I couldn't hear. I've dug several measured 10" deep silver dimes and other deep targets, it's not lacking on depth in any way, shape or form. Perhaps the persons Equinox has a problem or some misconfiguration in the settings, because I can attest to the fact that (at least the unit I own) it's one of the deepest detectors I've used. Now the particular spot that the Equinox was purportedly struggling at is in the 14th most populous city in the U.S., so there's tons of EMI to deal with. I've had detectors that were completely unusable in said city, and at the demo site Tom mentions, I found the 11" coil on the EQ800 was picking up so much EMI it was unusable, but switching to the 6" coil mitigated the EMI and it worked better in all the junk. Could be that the E2 handles EMI better, after all, as heavy as it is, it probably has a lot more shielding right?



> BUT -- with that said, to imply that the Equinox may not offer that same ability to clue a user in on which deep targets "need dug," and which ones "don't," would not be correct, in my experience. For me, the WHOLE GAME, as a > deep coin hunter, is not just "raw" depth, but INTELLEGENCE communicated to the user, on those deep targets. As I say, that being of paramount importance to me is why I gravitated to FBS in the first place, and so -- believe me -- if the Equinox did not offer similar ability to accurately communicate to me what I'm dealing with, on a deep target, I would not be swinging it.

That echo's my experience as well.


> There's a REASON that my CTX is largely collecting dust right now... And the reason is, the "me" using FBS is "trumped" by the "me" using Multi-IQ. Not by a TON, but by enough that it matters. Whether the "me" using an Equinox can trump "you" using FBS, I doubt it. I think you are simply a better etectorist than I am, and I KNOW you have at least double, if not triple, the years of experience. But, comparing "me," to "me," the Equinox is the trump card. NOT by much, but it's measurable...

Tom is really tuned into his E2. I've seen him race (and they say the E2 is slow) around sites (he's very competitive, trying to hoover everything up ) and have always been amazed at how successful his hunts are.


> One other thing I can say on this, is that my hunting partner swung an Explorer for MUCH longer than I did, and then he switched to a CTX MUCH earlier than I did. He is a detectorist with over 40 years of experience, was a "deep turf" coin hunter, and like you, there was NOTHING anyone was going to do to pry FBS out of his hands. I got the Equinox, with the intention of it being my "heavy trash" specialty machine, but over time, I began to find
> it slightly out-performing FBS for me.

I bought it because I needed something that could handle the mineralized California and Nevada soils that cripple my Makro/Nokta and Fisher machines, and a SMF is the way to go, it's shined in those sites. You do have to set it up correctly. One site with heavy alkali soil I found that the EQ800 performed excellently in Beach mode, whereas it didn't perform well at all in Field modes (didn't try Park modes, but can't see it being an improvement). Thus far it's exceeded my expectations, but it takes time to learn it. I have a fair amount of time on mine by now, and I enjoy that soft flutey sound, accompanied by 5 shovels on the display and maybe no pinpoint audio...nothing like seeing a silver disc at 10-11" deep


> And when I'd tell him that, he'd laugh at me. But I kept producing the finds, to the point that he was FORCED to listen... SO, he bought an Equinox, as a skeptic, intending to put it through the paces at a few of his "very deep coin sites," and then sell it off, proving to himself that "he was right," and that it can't compete with FBS.

That was my hope when I orchestrated a great deal on a group buy, Tom hunts a LOT more then I get the opportunity to, and I figured that if he spent a few months of hard core detecting with it, he'd see the light and would master the EQ800, but he did as your hunting buddy envisioned, tested it for a few days and sold it off on ebay. At the time the Equinox was selling for a premium, I can't help but wonder if the allure of making a quick buck overshadowed giving the EQ800 a fair shake. Oh well, there's always the Vanquish


> Again, I know this is anecdotal -- qualitative and not quantitative. But, all these folks touting the ability of the Equinox to "hang," very favorably, with FBS when deep coin hunting, are not just a bunch of crazed Equinox fan boys. There's something to it...although as I said, maybe your CA dirt renders your results otherwise...

Nope it's not the dirt. Tom's "mentor" tried the Equinox (he lives in CA gold country) and liked his CTX better and now he's a Dues fanboy, I'm sure that's a major influence and I have no idea how thoroughly he tested it. He is mainly a relic hunter.

At the end of the day, use whatever works for you, I used to try to talk people into getting machines when I felt they were superior, but I don't any longer, I just want to enjoy detecting and have nothing to prove, but I do want to use the best machine I can as some of these sites are a one time opportunity or so short lived the few targets they hold make them a one hit wonder. I like having the best odds of my machine detecting everything it can and not wandering around wondering if I was missing targets like I have (and proved I was) with some of my previous [made in USA] machines.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/04/2019 05:45AM by Cal_cobra.

goodmore Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> The 6 inch coil for the Equinox is a waste of money.

I haven't found that to be the case.

At a park scrape demo (the one Tom reported in this post) I found the 6" EQ coil to be an excellent coil, mitigating EMI and working better in the junk zones then my 11" coil. At the end of that hunt I had 9 silver coins to Tom's 3 Yes our coin counts were, IIRC, almost exactly the same, he was using the 11" coil and I was using the 6" coil, and I thought Tom would hammer me with almost 2x the coil coverage, but that didn't turn out to be the case.

Last weekend I hunted a hard hit ghost town that started life as a stage stop, then a major train station/telegraph station and ore processing plant as mining towns around it boomed. It was long lived (had about a 100 year run). It's been hammered hard for 40+ years, these days if you can get one or two coins or tokens out of it, you had a great hunt (me and my fellow hunters have been skunked many a time at this site). This place is as iron/junk infested as ANY place you can imagine.

The first hunt last weekend I hunted an ultra junky area in this ghost town with the EQ800 and 11" coil, and managed two coins and a token. The next day, I hunted the exact same patch with the EQ800 and 6" coil and found three more coins.

At this particular site, depth and unmasking are paramount to an optimal hunt.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/04/2019 06:26AM by Cal_cobra.

steveg Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>..... this one behaved EXACTLY the
> same -- sounded clearer, better, and a more consis
> tent VDI than the CTX. It turned out to be an 8 1
> /2" deep Indian Head. Needless to say, this fully
> confirmed what I had already experienced, in my te
> st garden, and in the field, that the Equinox is a
> bit "deeper" than the CTX, in my dirt.
>


Steve, enjoyed your post. Great summary on the Se pro. Yes, you had to coax them more than was needed on the II. But ... even after sufficient "coaxing", .... it still just seemed that the SE pro wasn't as deep. But in any case, glad we understand what each other is saying.

And as far as your net results of the 800 vs your two guy's CTX and Se pro and Etrac : All I can say is: I'd love to see it happen. I would love to have a signal shown to me by an 800 that I could honestly say "I wouldn't have heard that", or "I'd pass it", and then see it turn out to be a coin.

And as before: This is strictly about deep conductors in cherry-pick-turf situations. Nothing to do with lower conductors (like for the beach), or relicky ghost-town nail-see-through spec's etc.... In those situations, the Exp. II finds itself outpaced by scores of other machines .... granted.

Cal_cobra Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ..... Nor does it match my experience with the EQ800 in the same California dirt that Tom hunts, he's never flagged a deepie that I couldn't hear.

And we have never done side by side @ park turf yet. Right ?

>.... I've dug several measured 10" deep silver dimes and other deep targets, it's not lacking on depth in any way, shape or form.

Yes. So too did Greg ........ when asked about depth with his 6", tell of a signal shared between him and Kevin, where it was some 7 " + copper penny, that he said his 6" coil heard with ease. But once in the field .... , at least where we were .... it just wasn't happening on flagged tests.

> ....Perhaps the persons Equinox has a problem or some misconfiguration in the settings

Anything's possible. It's also possible that, as attested to be a few folks here, that the 6" on the Nox is just not the cat's meow. But aside from the 6", I am still curious how 2 skilled users would compare, with 11" coils on each, for deep-turf cherry pick scenarios.

> ..... so there's tons of EMI to deal with

Could very well be. I've found my Exp. II handicapped in certain places (but only rarely). Either via a super unique soil type that becomes unstable with certain moisture content. Or EMI that's only affecting me, and not the next guy's machine. Thus ... yes..... this could have nothing to do with the Nox , when "all other things are equal". But it renewed my interest in wanting to compare.

VERY PASSIONATE thread. Folks feverishly wanting exacting data...….. all the way down to finite resolute answers.
For additional unsuspecting reasons...…. a 6" coil equipped unit....is difficult to compare to a 11" coil equipped unit. (One reason: 11" coil has: Wide Angle Wrap attribute).

In a nutshell: The EQX should be the winner...… if all units are maximum performance properly config'd. (Yes; in turf, high-conductors, deep).

Tom_in_CA Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> All I can sa
> y is: I'd love to see it happen. I would love to
> have a signal shown to me by an 800 that I could h
> onestly say "I wouldn't have heard that", or "I'd
> pass it", and then see it turn out to be a coin.
>
> And as before: This is strictly about deep conduc
> tors in cherry-pick-turf situations.

Tom,

Admittedly, that doesn't usually happen for me; it's not that "black and white" most times. Usually, what the Equinox can "see," FBS can "see," also. And vice versa. When I say that Multi-IQ is "deeper," on in-ground targets, it gets down of course to where you are splitting hairs. In my test garden, for instance, it comes down to asking the question of yourself, on a "fringe-depth" coin, "would I dig that; would I have heard that if I was moving along at normal detecting speed?" Take a 10" quarter. For me, the 10" silver quarter in my test garden "sounds better" on the Equinox, than the CTX. Sure, I can coax a few blips out of it, with the CTX, but those blips are quite a bit more consistent/repeatable on the Equinox. So, in the end, what I'm trying to judge, of course, is "if I passed over that coin in the wild, not knowing it was there, would the CTX have signaled me to stop and interrogate?" Then, likewise, "if I passed over this coin with the Equinox, would IT have signaled me to stop and interrogate?" And on that 10" quarter, the answer for me is "yes, the Equinox would almost definitely signal me to stop; with the CTX, it almost definitely would not signal me to stop." And as you said, that's the key. If I called a buddy over to that 10" test-garden quarter, and said "my Equinox hits this; does your CTX," he would wiggle the target, and say "yes, I can hear it." BUT, as you said in a prior post, "coaxing a chirp" out of a coin is totally different than getting a signal that, in the wild, would catch your attention enough to cause you to stop and investigate. And so, along those lines, it's not usually as "clear cut," for me, with the Equinox, on a deep target, as you are wanting it to be -- i.e. "the Equinox can see the target, FBS can't."

But, I do have one anecdote. I was hunting with my same buddy, about 6 months ago. I hit a pretty deep target, but it was mixed in with some junk, not a totally clean signal. He was swinging his trusty E-Trac this day, and I was swinging my Equinox, both with 11" coils. Like I said, it was not "clean," but it was a "dig me," on the Equinox. I was guessing wheat or Indian. I called him over to have a listen, and he worked it, rotated around, interrogated it, and he was making these "yuck" faces, turning up his nose, and eventually he looked at me, saying "you would dig that?" I said YES, I think there's a deep coin there. So he worked it some more, rotated around it some more, looked at me, shook his head, and said "I wouldn't dig that." So, I dug it, and out popped about an 8" deep Indian. He was in disbelief. There were a few prior targets that were similar, over the course of several prior hunts, where he agreed that the Equinox "sounded better." But that one, was the one in particular that turned out to be the straw that broke the camel's back. He's been swinging his Equinox, not his E-Trac, ever since...

Long-winded point, it does happen -- the Equinox will say "dig me" on a target that FBS can't seem to. But not "frequently," in my experience, at least not 100% CONCLUSIVELY, and not usually due to purely a "depth" argument. Usually, it's on a deep, but "not so clean" signal, that is "clean enough" on the Equinox to dig it, but not clean enough, with FBS.

BUT WITH THAT SAID, I'm now at the point, in terms of experience with both FBS and Multi-IQ, where I'm confident enough to reverse your challenge...I'd love to see someone find a deep, presumed high conductor in turf, with an FBS/FBS2 machine, that gives a "dig me" clue on, that an Equinox won't ALSO give a "dig me" signal on...

Steve



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 09/04/2019 04:11PM by steveg.

Cal_cobra,

Thanks for being a part of this conversation; I have never been able to figure out you and Tom's relationship! If I didn't know that you two were hunting partners, and only had your posts to go by, I'd think you were antagonists, LOL! But, it's all good. It seems like a great, honest partnership where you both speak your minds, don't "mince words," and yet don't let it get under you skin, either. I like it!

But, still, it's really interesting to see the two of you debate. Tom really has his heels "dug in," on his Explorer, and I can respect that. In fact, I can understand it. If, as a deep coin hunter in turf, you are going to "dig your heels in," it better be for a machine that is top-of-the-heap, and FBS really is that, IMO -- or, at least "was," until Multi-IQ showed up...

Seriously, though, I respect the bull-headedness, so to speak, that Tom has about FBS; if he felt that way, as a deep coin hunter, about a "lesser" machine, I'd question his sanity. But, to feel that way about FBS, I get it. It has EARNED the devotion/loyalty that he shows for it -- over time, consistently, on HUNDREDS of digs...I get it.

But, I'd also like to think that if he were going to listen to ANYONE, and give the Equinox a true "fair shake," it would be when OTHER, long-time FBS users, who have/had the same devotion/loyalty to FBS, for the same reasons that HE does, are the ones saying that the Equinox IS WORTH a fair shake.

BUT -- in the end, it comes down to exactly what you said, in your last paragraph..."use whatever works for you." And that is truly the bottom line.

One last thing...I STILL hope to see a Multi-IQ platform released, that utilizes FE and CO numbers, and a smart screen. If THAT shows up, I may become like Tom, and NEVER set that machine down...

Steve

Cal_cobra Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> steveg Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> ....And the Equinox slightly trumps all three of t
> hem, depth-wise -- the SE Pro, the E-Trac, and the
> CTX, in my dirt.
> >
> > I am left to wonder if the Equinox is handicappe
> d in your particular dirt; both places I have used
> the Equinox (central Oklahoma and southwestern Pen
> nsylvania) show it to be an excellent performer, b
> ut perhaps your CA dirt entirely changes the equat
> ion? Otherwise, it makes ZERO sense to me, that y
> our buddy's Equinox's settings had to be "massaged
> to the max" to even get "a peep" on a 5" to 7" tar
> get -- ESPECIALLY one that was already flagged. T
> hat simply does not match my experience at all.
>
> Nor does it match my experience with the EQ800
> in the same California dirt that Tom hunts, he's n
> ever flagged a deepie that I couldn't hear. I've
> dug several measured 10" deep silver dimes and oth
> er deep targets, it's not lacking on depth in any
> way, shape or form. Perhaps the persons Equinox h
> as a problem or some misconfiguration in the setti
> ngs, because I can attest to the fact that (at lea
> st the unit I own) it's one of the deepest detecto
> rs I've used. Now the particular spot that the Eq
> uinox was purportedly struggling at is in the 14th
> most populous city in the U.S., so there's tons of
> EMI to deal with. I've had detectors that were co
> mpletely unusable in said city, and at the demo si
> te Tom mentions, I found the 11" coil on the EQ800
> was picking up so much EMI it was unusable, but sw
> itching to the 6" coil mitigated the EMI and it wo
> rked better in all the junk. Could be that the E2
> handles EMI better, after all, as heavy as it is,
> it probably has a lot more shielding right? 8
> -)
>
>
>
> > BUT -- with that said, to imply that the Equinox
> may not offer that same ability to clue a user in
> on which deep targets "need dug," and which ones "
> don't," would not be correct, in my experience. F
> or me, the WHOLE GAME, as a > deep coin hunter, is
> not just "raw" depth, but INTELLEGENCE communicate
> d to the user, on those deep targets. As I say, t
> hat being of paramount importance to me is why I g
> ravitated to FBS in the first place, and so -- bel
> ieve me -- if the Equinox did not offer similar ab
> ility to accurately communicate to me what I'm dea
> ling with, on a deep target, I would not be swi
> nging it.
>
> That echo's my experience as well.
>
>
> > There's a REASON that my CTX is largely collecti
> ng dust right now... And the reason is, the "me"
> using FBS is "trumped" by the "me" using Multi-IQ.
> Not by a TON, but by enough that it matters. Whet
> her the "me" using an Equinox can trump "you" usin
> g FBS, I doubt it. I think you are simply a bette
> r etectorist than I am, and I KNOW you have at lea
> st double, if not triple, the years of experience.
> But, comparing "me," to "me," the Equinox is the t
> rump card. NOT by much, but it's measurable...
>
> Tom is really tuned into his E2. I've seen him
> race (and they say the E2 is slow) around sites (h
> e's very competitive, trying to hoover everything
> up ) and have always been amazed at how
> successful his hunts are.
>
>
> > One other thing I can say on this, is that my hu
> nting partner swung an Explorer for MUCH longer th
> an I did, and then he switched to a CTX MUCH earli
> er than I did. He is a detectorist with over 40 y
> ears of experience, was a "deep turf" coin hunter,
> and like you, there was NOTHING anyone was going t
> o do to pry FBS out of his hands. I got the Equin
> ox, with the intention of it being my "heavy trash
> " specialty machine, but over time, I began to fin
> d
> > it slightly out-performing FBS for me.
>
> I bought it because I needed something that cou
> ld handle the mineralized California and Nevada so
> ils that cripple my Makro/Nokta and Fisher machine
> s, and a SMF is the way to go, it's shined in thos
> e sites. You do have to set it up correctly. One
> site with heavy alkali soil I found that the EQ800
> performed excellently in Beach mode, whereas it di
> dn't perform well at all in Field modes (didn't tr
> y Park modes, but can't see it being an improvemen
> t). Thus far it's exceeded my expectations, but i
> t takes time to learn it. I have a fair amount of
> time on mine by now, and I enjoy that soft flutey
> sound, accompanied by 5 shovels on the display and
> maybe no pinpoint audio...nothing like seeing a si
> lver disc at 10-11" deep
>
>
> > And when I'd tell him that, he'd laugh at me.
> But I kept producing the finds, to the point that
> he was FORCED to listen... SO, he bought an Equin
> ox, as a skeptic, intending to put it through the
> paces at a few of his "very deep coin sites," and
> then sell it off, proving to himself that "he was
> right," and that it can't compete with FBS.
>
> That was my hope when I orchestrated a great de
> al on a group buy, Tom hunts a LOT more then I get
> the opportunity to, and I figured that if he spent
> a few months of hard core detecting with it, he'd
> see the light and would master the EQ800, but he d
> id as your hunting buddy envisioned, tested it for
> a few days and sold it off on ebay. At the time t
> he Equinox was selling for a premium, I can't help
> but wonder if the allure of making a quick buck ov
> ershadowed giving the EQ800 a fair shake. Oh well
> , there's always the Vanquish
>
>
> > Again, I know this is anecdotal -- qualitative a
> nd not quantitative. But, all these folks touting
> the ability of the Equinox to "hang," very favorab
> ly, with FBS when deep coin hunting, are not just
> a bunch of crazed Equinox fan boys. There's somet
> hing to it...although as I said, maybe your CA dir
> t renders your results otherwise...
>
> Nope it's not the dirt. Tom's "mentor" tried t
> he Equinox (he lives in CA gold country) and liked
> his CTX better and now he's a Dues fanboy, I'm sur
> e that's a major influence and I have no idea how
> thoroughly he tested it. He is mainly a relic hun
> ter.
>
> At the end of the day, use whatever works for y
> ou, I used to try to talk people into getting mach
> ines when I felt they were superior, but I don't a
> ny longer, I just want to enjoy detecting and have
> nothing to prove, but I do want to use the best ma
> chine I can as some of these sites are a one time
> opportunity or so short lived the few targets they
> hold make them a one hit wonder. I like having th
> e best odds of my machine detecting everything it
> can and not wandering around wondering if I was mi
> ssing targets like I have (and proved I was) with
> some of my previous [made in USA] machines.