Some duel results : Nox vs Exp II yesterday

Tom_in_CA Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 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 ?

Nope not yet, but we will one of these days, seems inevitable. Yet at all the relic sites we detected and compared signals, you've never produced anything 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.
>
> 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.

I doubt anyone's dug a 10" deep silver coin w/the 6" coil. I was referring to the 11" stock coil.


>
> > ....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.

Perhaps for their hunting environment, the 6" coil was the wrong tool for the job. However, I'm telling you and everyone else here that for the right situation the 6" coil works great (unless you got a sub-par coil). Believe me, if it sucked, I'd be the first one to say it sucked, you know I don't sugar coat things. It's odd you'd take the word of complete strangers and just deem the 6" coil ineffective, it's simply not the case.


>
> > ..... 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.

Tom bottom line, that median strip is not the smartest place to have a "duel" because you well know that it's plagued with EMI, you've stated that to me before. So in reality, testing a machine there is more a testament to it's ability to handle EMI than anything else, yet any machine is going to be handicapped there. Given the EMI situation nobody is likely to be digging 10" deep coins right?. Perhaps the E2 is better equipped to handle EMI than the EQ? You didn't seem to have any noticeable (to you) issues at the park scrape running your 11" coil, yet I did w/the 11" EQ coil, which was mitigated with the 6" coil. There's no doubt the EQ is more prone to EMI than the E2.

The other option is that Greg simply had an off day and couldn't get his machine dialed in for whatever reason. We've all had them haven't we?

NASA-Tom Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> VERY PASSIONATE thread. Folks feverishly wanting e
> xacting data...….. all the way down to finite reso
> lute 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: Wid
> e 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).

NASA-Tom,

Are you able to elaborate at all on "wide angle wrap?"

I'm glad to hear that the EQX "should be the winner" on deep high conductors in turf, all else being equal...because this confirms what my testing and experience reveals, so everything is consistent in my mind.

One question...is there anything about Multi-IQ that would "prevent" the possibility of FE-CO numbers, and a "smartfind" type of display being incorporated on some future Multi-IQ iteration? I am not asking if Minelab would ever do so, as I know that would be something you couldn't answer, I'm just asking if there is anything inherent about FBS that permits the 2-D capability, that can't be replicated via Multi-IQ. My gut sense is, based on knowing both platforms from the "user" perspective, that it certainly could be done with Multi-IQ, and be equally effective as compared to FBS, but I wanted to check. As I said in a prior post, that's my "dream machine," right there -- Multi-IQ, but with FE-CO numbers and a smart screen...

Thanks!

Steve

Hi Steve, comments below:

steveg Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 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!

Tom loves to argue err debate to the Nth degree, believe me we've had some good debates on our road trips.


> 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 bet
> ter 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.

Sure there's no disputing that it's one of the best deep turf coin detectors ever made. But even if, as Tom stated, moving to the Equinox was a lateral move, I suspect that when Tom learned to use the E2 by his mentor, and the light bulb went off on just how good of a deep coin unit it was, it was leaps and bounds better than anything else on the market at that time (what are we talking 1999?). I don't think that the EQ has that magnitude of technological leap, yet given the price to performance ratio, the light weight and waterproof design, along with other features (I personally love the WHP) and in the right users hands the ability to dig coins just as deep as FBS machines, and relic hunt and wade into the salt water, it's an undeniably versatile and capable platform.

>
> 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 one s 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.

Yep and that's why I don't care to convince anyone that any machine is better then any other. If you don't like it, or it doesn't work for you, then don't buy one, simple as that. It's been working great for me, hunting behind spots that have been pounded by FBS, Dues, F75, etc., and pulling out lots of great finds is, at least to me, very telling.

>
> 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

Yes that would be great to see, the best of both worlds. Let's see what the Vanquish brings to the table, seems to be their next Multi-IQ machine on their roadmap.

HH,
Cal













>
> Cal_cobra Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > steveg Wrote:
> > ------------------------------------------------
> --
> > -----
> > ....And the Equinox slightly trumps all three of
> t
> > hem, depth-wise -- the SE Pro, the E-Trac, and t
> he
> > CTX, in my dirt.
> > >
> > > I am left to wonder if the Equinox is handicap
> pe
> > d in your particular dirt; both places I have us
> ed
> > the Equinox (central Oklahoma and southwestern P
> en
> > nsylvania) show it to be an excellent performer,
> b
> > ut perhaps your CA dirt entirely changes the equ
> at
> > ion? Otherwise, it makes ZERO sense to me, that
> y
> > our buddy's Equinox's settings had to be "massag
> ed
> > to the max" to even get "a peep" on a 5" to 7" t
> ar
> > 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 EQ80
> 0
> > in the same California dirt that Tom hunts, he's
> n
> > ever flagged a deepie that I couldn't hear. I'v
> e
> > dug several measured 10" deep silver dimes and o
> th
> > er deep targets, it's not lacking on depth in an
> y
> > way, shape or form. Perhaps the persons Equinox
> h
> > as a problem or some misconfiguration in the set
> ti
> > ngs, because I can attest to the fact that (at l
> ea
> > st the unit I own) it's one of the deepest detec
> to
> > rs I've used. Now the particular spot that the
> Eq
> > uinox was purportedly struggling at is in the 14
> th
> > 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 EQ8
> 00
> > 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 E
> 2
> > handles EMI better, after all, as heavy as it i
> s,
> > it probably has a lot more shielding right?
> 8
> > -)
> >
> >
> >
> > > BUT -- with that said, to imply that the Equin
> ox
> > may not offer that same ability to clue a user i
> n
> > 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 communica
> te
> > 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 -- b
> el
> > ieve me -- if the Equinox did not offer similar
> ab
> > ility to accurately communicate to me what I'm d
> ea
> > ling with, on a deep target, I would not be s
> wi
> > nging it.
> >
> > That echo's my experience as well.
> >
> >
> > > There's a REASON that my CTX is largely collec
> ti
> > ng dust right now... And the reason is, the "me
> "
> > using FBS is "trumped" by the "me" using Multi-I
> Q.
> > Not by a TON, but by enough that it matters. Wh
> et
> > her the "me" using an Equinox can trump "you" us
> in
> > g FBS, I doubt it. I think you are simply a bet
> te
> > r etectorist than I am, and I KNOW you have at l
> ea
> > st double, if not triple, the years of experienc
> e.
> > 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 h
> im
> > race (and they say the E2 is slow) around sites
> (h
> > e's very competitive, trying to hoover everythin
> g
> > up ) and have always been amazed at ho
> w
> > 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 ear
> li
> > er than I did. He is a detectorist with over 40
> y
> > ears of experience, was a "deep turf" coin hunte
> r,
> > and like you, there was NOTHING anyone was going
> t
> > o do to pry FBS out of his hands. I got the Equ
> in
> > ox, with the intention of it being my "heavy tra
> sh
> > " specialty machine, but over time, I began to f
> in
> > d
> > > it slightly out-performing FBS for me.
> >
> > I bought it because I needed something that c
> ou
> > ld handle the mineralized California and Nevada
> so
> > ils that cripple my Makro/Nokta and Fisher machi
> ne
> > s, and a SMF is the way to go, it's shined in th
> os
> > e sites. You do have to set it up correctly. O
> ne
> > site with heavy alkali soil I found that the EQ8
> 00
> > 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 improvem
> en
> > 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 flute
> y
> > sound, accompanied by 5 shovels on the display a
> nd
> > 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 tha
> t
> > he was FORCED to listen... SO, he bought an Equ
> in
> > ox, as a skeptic, intending to put it through th
> e
> > paces at a few of his "very deep coin sites," an
> d
> > then sell it off, proving to himself that "he wa
> s
> > 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 g
> et
> > the opportunity to, and I figured that if he spe
> nt
> > 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 f
> or
> > a few days and sold it off on ebay. At the time
> t
> > he Equinox was selling for a premium, I can't he
> lp
> > but wonder if the allure of making a quick buck
> ov
> > ershadowed giving the EQ800 a fair shake. Oh we
> ll
> > , there's always the Vanquish
> >
> >
> > > Again, I know this is anecdotal -- qualitative
> a
> > nd not quantitative. But, all these folks touti
> ng
> > the ability of the Equinox to "hang," very favor
> ab
> > ly, with FBS when deep coin hunting, are not jus
> t
> > a bunch of crazed Equinox fan boys. There's som
> et
> > hing to it...although as I said, maybe your CA d
> ir
> > 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 lik
> ed
> > his CTX better and now he's a Dues fanboy, I'm s
> ur
> > e that's a major influence and I have no idea ho
> w
> > thoroughly he tested it. He is mainly a relic h
> un
> > ter.
> >
> > At the end of the day, use whatever works for
> y
> > ou, I used to try to talk people into getting ma
> ch
> > ines when I felt they were superior, but I don't
> a
> > ny longer, I just want to enjoy detecting and ha
> ve
> > nothing to prove, but I do want to use the best
> ma
> > chine I can as some of these sites are a one tim
> e
> > opportunity or so short lived the few targets th
> ey
> > hold make them a one hit wonder. I like having
> th
> > e best odds of my machine detecting everything i
> t
> > can and not wandering around wondering if I was
> mi
> > ssing targets like I have (and proved I was) wit
> h
> > some of my previous [made in USA] machines.

NASA-Tom Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

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



thanx NASA -Tom. Then with this being true, it should not be hard to get a duel where this is shown to-be the end-result.

For example, that's what brought me "kicking and screaming" away from Whites in 2001 to 2002-ish. Thus ....it shouldn't be unreasonable to desire to .... likewise .... see a difference here in this case.

steveg Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "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.

SteveG, this is where there needs to be CROSS flagging. So that it's not only the Exp. II flagging things for the Nox 800 to try, but also in the converse. And if .... for example .... at the end of the hunt : One machine has flagged 10 "wild" oldies, but the other machine has only flagged 3 "wild" oldies, then .... you'd have to wonder. Or put another way: Whether flagged or not, if one guy is bagging 10 oldies, and the other bags 3 oldies, and each is equally skilled, and EMI and soil conditions are not-a-factor, then I would think that : That would be revealing.

> ..... 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. >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...

I love it ! I love that story !! That is EXACTLY what I want to happen to me. Not sure why some people think that's "argumentative" or whatever. That is EXACTLY the type of tests that are what md'rs should RELISH. For example, I'll bet your friend is happy that you and him did that duel. Right ? Either to prove his existing arsenal, or ... in your case, to have disproved it.

Also, I understand everything else you're saying , that it is going to be very subjective, a lot of times. Still though, as your story shows, it can be beneficial to test machines against each other. People do-in-fact make decisions on choice-of-machines via testing. Why do you think Minelab stole the market all during the 1990s and early 2000s ? For this exact reason: They were kicking the pants of Garrett, Whites, Fishers, etc.... And how did people determine this ? By testing machines, comparing results like this .

Cal_cobra Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It's odd you'd take the word of complete strangers and just deem the 6" coil ineffective, it's simply not the case.

Huh ? Those "complete strangers" are guys you mutually respect on tech issues. Right ?

I just pointed out that some respectable voices did not care for the 6" on the nox. I also pointed out that others say it's the cat's meow. Just trying to sort it out. Bear in mind that some people are saying they're using it for junky parks and kicking b*tt. And all I was saying was, that it didn't do so here (assuming, of course, that 5 or 6" should have been child's play, depth-wise, for the 6" coil.) NOT saying that, of course, the 11" goes deeper. But .... conversely, the 6" should un-mask things on the junky strip.


> ... not the smartest place to have a "duel" because you well know that it's plagued with EMI, you've stated that to me before.


Yes I hear you. And I agree. Remember it just so happens that that strip was the EXACT PLACE I took my own 800 to , as one of the stops, on my ~1 week trial (in addition to a stop in Sacramento), in-so-far as it concerns turf. And I wasn't impressed at that time. But yes, I'm willing to acknowledge that this is just a singular zone which doesn't like 800's. And/or that I hadn't had the right settings a year ago with my new 800 . Eg.: Didn't know to slow down the recovery speed.

As an example of the EMI in that "certain big city" that we speak of: There's a certain park that ... we had to learn the hard way, to detect it at odd hours of the night (or crack of dawn, etc...). Because at "high noon" there was simply too much microwave radio signal cell-phone EMI or whatever. But .... magically ... if you go at 4am, you get an automatic 3" more depth and more stability. Doh ! People are sleeping so their devices are turned off, radio stations turn down their transmitting power ? Or Whatever.

Mmmmm... Wonder which big city

Tom,
Sounds like you need to buy another EQX 800 and then you can do your own comparisons with Ex2. Flagging this and that. Alternating which one is used to flag a target. And doing so in multiple venues.
And report on.

I’ll read.

Actually having 2 different folks do. Brings in each person’s subjectivity. So results could be tainted somewhat.

And if you can take a Fisher F75 along to check each sites mineral levels.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 09/05/2019 12:54AM by tnsharpshooter.

tnsharpshooter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Tom,
> Sounds like you need to buy another EQX 800 and th
> en you can do your own comparisons. Flagging this
> and that. Alternating which one is used to flag a
> target. And doing so in multiple venues.
> And report on.
>
> I’ll read.

Yes. But then what if those studies show that the Nox is lacking ? And you "read" this opinion/conclusion ? Then the reader can merely say : "He didn't practice enough" (15 yrs) ? Or "Durned that EMI", etc.... ?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/05/2019 12:56AM by Tom_in_CA.

Tom_in_CA Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> tnsharpshooter Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Tom,
> > Sounds like you need to buy another EQX 800 and
> th
> > en you can do your own comparisons. Flagging th
> is
> > and that. Alternating which one is used to flag
> a
> > target. And doing so in multiple venues.
> > And report on.
> >
> > I’ll read.
>
> Yes. But then what if those studies show that th
> e Nox is lacking, and you "read" this opinion/conc
> lusion ? Then the reader can merely say : "He d
> idn't practice enough" (15 yrs) ? Or "Durned t
> hat EMI", etc.... ?


Do some real comparisons. There is enough info on this forum to get you quite proficient using Eqx. Btw listening to some EX2 flagged targets with EQX just might expedite your learning curve.

I have said this before.
There has been some cheating going on of sorts by some here. Meaning they take a new detector to them and listen to some targets located with a using a detector they are more familiarity with. Does by doing give the tell all necessarily of a new detector? Nope, it’s a start though.
Have I done it?
YES!!

Remember your eyes and your ears (brain) must be compared to yourself. Not someone else.

Also swing speed of EQX at first. Some folks were baited I think and swung too fast. Why? Deus may be a reason and the speed of recovery talked about of the detector. Even the video showed in UK prerelease. Plus the fact quite a few folks here don’t detect in milder ground- includes myself. Hence reporting on the EQX 800 with slower speed settings was limited.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 09/05/2019 01:05AM by tnsharpshooter.

tnsharpshooter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Do some real comparisons.

I don't disagree. The bugaboo will be: What is considered "real" ? haha

> There is enough info on this forum to get you quite proficient using Eqx.

I agree: The net (and this forum) is filled with hobbyist md'rs evaluating the pro's and con's of settings.

> Btw listening to some EX2 flagged targets with EQX just might expedite your learning curve.

Yes. The flagging needs to go both ways. And if one person/machines flags tend to turn out to be shallow clad, or bent nails, etc... While the other person's flags turn out to be deep old coins, then : That should be "telling". Right ?

> they take a new detector to them and listen to some targets located with a using a detector they are more familiarity with.

Which is why any comparisons need to be done between users who are "familiar" with their respective machines. So that ... in hindsight, no one's going to claim "gee, I guess they weren't familar with the machine"

> Have I done it? YES!!

This will date me, but : I distinctly recall (late 1980s ? early 1990s?) flagging what turned out to be a deep merc, with the machine I was using up-till-that-time: A Garrett ADS II . Because I wanted to try it on the then-new Whites Eagle SL II black-box. It was a moment seared into my memory, that "opened my eyes" to the advantages of the then-new TID (well, to me anyhow) technology.

> Some folks were baited I think and swung too fast.

Yes yes yes: This was a common mistake @ the early days of when some guys made the transition from Whitse (6000, XLT, etc...) to the Minelabs (Excal, Sov, etc...) It was a new concept that "faster swing" didn't necessarily mean "deeper". Doh !

I've been using an Etrac for the last 6 years. I've dug over 300 silver coins with it, almost all of them from six inches or deeper. I almost exclusively hunt in parks and yards.

I bought an Equinox 600 when they first came out, got it in February 2018. At first, I was not impressed with the Equinox; however, I eventually set it up to mimic the sounds of the Etrac: two tones, high tone for silver and low tone for nickels. I've since grown fond of the Equinox despite its weaknesses, those being poor ergonomics, inaccurate depth gauge, and inferior pinpointing.

I still prefer the Etrac for hunting deep silver coins; however, the Equinox is a great complement to the Etrac. I normally try to clean out a site with my Etrac. I then attempt to find whatever masked coins remain with the Equinox. This has gotten me some great extra finds, including a Barber half. I also switch to the Equinox when I'm too tired to swing the Etrac. Swinging an Equinox is better than going home early due to fatigue. The Equinox is also a great machine for travel. I've taken mine on several vacations where the Etrac would have stayed home because it doesn't pack well for air travel.

Bayard Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> .... I still prefer the Etrac for hunting deep silver coins;
>

Thanx for the input Bayard. The above quoted sentence of yours, is what I hope to sort out for my own. Because, as you've seen: There are others who are saying the reverse: That their Nox's spanked Etrac for deep silver coins.

Even if it it doesn't end up "deeper", and is only beneficial for "certain tasks" (eg.: junky sites where perhaps the Explorers mask), that too would be interesting info.

steveg…….. Wide Angle Wrap. A large coil will envelop a electromagnetic footprint that is (angularly)…… very wide. Not only does this allow the (doughnut shaped) energy to reach deeper...….. but..... also...…. from a wide tangential angle; subsequently, 'lighting-up' deeper targets...… especially targets that are tilted, on-edge..... or non-uniform shaped targets.
Another way to look at it is...… a tiny coil looks into the ground....,,,,,, pretty much on (primarily) a X and Y axis. A large coil looks into the ground on a X and Y …… and also (greater) Z axis...… ,,,,,,,, …….. subsequently; allowing for a better 3-Dimentional view...… giving better ID's on targets that are deep.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,., as long as nothing is in the way (masking) the target.
If two human eyes are close together...….. spatial perception is very narrow. If two human eyes are greatly spaced apart..... MUCH greater spatial/depth perception is achieved. If two human eyes are extremely far apart...…. you can almost see around the back of the target. (Over-exaggerated …. to make a point).

steveg……. to answer your other question(s)/concern(s): The EQX is only a mid-line unit.

NASA-Tom,

Thank you for the description, and excellent "visualization" aid you elaborated on, to help me understand what you meant by "Wide Angle Wrap." You illustrated it in a very understandable way. Very interesting.

And, thanks for the answer to my other question...

Steve

Hey Tom

I’d like to hook up with you maybe even with Brian, at an old park in area run test comparisons and compare signals. I’m running an SE now, must be a hot one not seeing it getting less depth based from others mentioning the SE was the weakest model. I’ll bring the Equniox as well, have done well with it at Parks.

Weather will be cooling down soon, hopefully we can hookup somewhere in your area.

Paul

Apolonio (CA) Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hey Tom
>
> I’d like to hook up with you maybe even with Brian
> , at an old park in area run test comparisons and
> compare signals. I’m running an SE now, must be a
> hot one not seeing it getting less depth based fro
> m others mentioning the SE was the weakest model.
> I’ll bring the Equniox as well, have done well wit
> h it at Parks.
>
> Weather will be cooling down soon, hopefully we ca
> n hookup somewhere in your area.
>
> Paul

Hey there Paul. Are you retired by now ! ? If so, by all means plan a trip to the coast. I've got an army cot bachelor pad for ya ! Gonna plan some tests.

But in-so-far as it concerns SE vs Exp II (or etrac or Xs or CTX, etc....), that wasn't part of our plans. That's a very subtle distinction of "how much effort" it takes to get a hint-that a person should "chase" vs "not chase".

I suppose that differentiation could be deduced by the same flagged target-test in turf. But my "aha moment" for that difference came on the wet-salt-eroded beach. Not turf:

I arrived at Santa Cruz main beach . Armed with an SE pro (which I had purchased merely to get the x1 probe). I began to get deep "nail" (iron) signals. Which, of course, I passed. After passing 4 or 5 such deep-nail signals, (telling me I was in an area where mother nature was possibly grouping targets), I finally got one which caused me to slow down and criss-cross it. It gave me enough doubt to dig it.

Lo & behold it was a clad dime ! But the funny thing was, it was at-a-depth (6 or 7" ?) that I would have assumed it should have given a better locked-on TID.

So, on a hunch, I strolled back over my footprints to try again on some of those "nails" that I had passed. And ... studying them further, discerned that maybe there was an occasional bounce into the conductive range ?? So I dug each of them and, to my surprise, they too were each deep coins. WTF ??

I posted my observations. And got SEVERAL CONCURRENCES (including Ron from Rocklin) that .... yes.... the SE pro was prone to giving weak signals on deeper coin-hits. Such that you had to "coax" them. Versus the Exp. II or others, where they got a "hit" on the first pass over them.

If you recall, from the evolution of that line, that the SE's supposed claim to fame (ie: the improvement) was not only a superior all-metal pinpointing VCO sound, but also a superior faster "recovery speed" . Right ? And the cost of faster recovery, is the risk that if you speed it up, you risk "erasing" deeper signals. Such was the case with the SE pro incarnation. Even choosing the slower recovery speed option didn't solve it (it was still too fast).

Not sure how we could substantiate this with flagged target tests. Because, of course, if the SE "scrubs" a target long enough, then ............. sure ........ it'll eventually get hints. But the REAL question is: Can the user be drawn to such targets IN THE FIRST PLACE ? And the only test of that might be: Final tallies of oldies. Very risky that the "endless list of fall-back-excuses" don't get rolled out. Eg.: One person is simply faster at digging. Or the SE guy simply isn't as experienced and/or not into "turf" hunting in-the-first-place, etc.....



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/07/2019 07:50PM by Tom_in_CA.

All of the Minelab Explorer's were very coil responsive.....if that makes sense. Both factory coils on the SE were terrible matches. Two of the best matches were to put the 11" Pro coil on the Exp2 and the 10x12 SEF on the SE. These changes makes all the difference in performance. Regardless of Explorer coil, the slower the better. The SE was Bryce Brown's favorite go to machines. The Etrac was a whole different machine (tho still FBS) .......it was much easier to use, but didn't have as good tones. Not sure about the CTX. It has been said that the XS was the deepest of all, but also the slowest. Generally both depth and numeric ID accuracy suffer with speed. The Nox is fast and deep, but also has a very small numeric ID scale. Are tones still King??

There was a fellow in SoCal called CaptSE. He's the only person I know of that dug over 1,000 silver coins turf hunting parks in a single year!! These are pounded to death Los Angeles County parks, not too old, and most silver is deep or masked. He had the uncanny ability with the SE to sniff out the silver that no others could, I don't think I'd write off the SE so easily just because one or two people poo pooed it. Mike Walding (local detecting legend) also swings the SE and he can keep up with and exceed the best of us (and he's darn near 80 years old to boot!!!).

Hello Tom,

Not retired, still have a few years maybe three. That’s funny you mentioning the army cot, I remember staying there about 18-20 years ago. Roaming around the shop remember seeing a bust coin on the work bench, one of your terrific finds.

Looking forward to getting out with you in the near future, I’ll bring a few detectors you probably haven’t tried yet. And we’ll pickup and discuss more on the SE, yeah I’ve read from others sharing the same poor experience with the SE like you experienced. I’ve owned a few, but this later model is deep running the Pro coil. With the Equniox, I’d rather run the SE on park turf.

Getting more involved with drones for research, lately been locating Native American Indian villages with several different types of drones. Finding more pictographs on rock walls and Rock caves, I’ll try and post a few pictures of a small set of pictographs found the other day, This village starts about 1/2 mile up hill then extends further up about a mile.

Take care of your knees, i remember you mentioning having knee issues.

All the best,
Paul







Tom_in_CA Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Apolonio (CA) Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Hey Tom
> >
> > I’d like to hook up with you maybe even with Bri
> an
> > , at an old park in area run test comparisons an
> d
> > compare signals. I’m running an SE now, must be
> a
> > hot one not seeing it getting less depth based f
> ro
> > m others mentioning the SE was the weakest model
> .
> > I’ll bring the Equniox as well, have done well w
> it
> > h it at Parks.
> >
> > Weather will be cooling down soon, hopefully we
> ca
> > n hookup somewhere in your area.
> >
> > Paul
>
> Hey there Paul. Are you retired by now ! ? If s
> o, by all means plan a trip to the coast. I've go
> t an army cot bachelor pad for ya ! Gonna pl
> an some tests.
>
> But in-so-far as it concerns SE vs Exp II (or etra
> c or Xs or CTX, etc....), that wasn't part of our
> plans. That's a very subtle distinction of "how m
> uch effort" it takes to get a hint-that a person s
> hould "chase" vs "not chase".
>
> I suppose that differentiation could be deduced by
> the same flagged target-test in turf. But my "ah
> a moment" for that difference came on the wet-salt
> -eroded beach. Not turf:
>
> I arrived at Santa Cruz main beach . Armed with an
> SE pro (which I had purchased merely to get the x1
> probe). I began to get deep "nail" (iron) signal
> s. Which, of course, I passed. After passing 4
> or 5 such deep-nail signals, (telling me I was in
> an area where mother nature was possibly grouping
> targets), I finally got one which caused me to slo
> w down and criss-cross it. It gave me enough doub
> t to dig it.
>
> Lo & behold it was a clad dime ! But the funny t
> hing was, it was at-a-depth (6 or 7" ?) that I wou
> ld have assumed it should have given a better lock
> ed-on TID.
>
> So, on a hunch, I strolled back over my footprints
> to try again on some of those "nails" that I had p
> assed. And ... studying them further, discerned
> that maybe there was an occasional bounce into the
> conductive range ?? So I dug each of them and, t
> o my surprise, they too were each deep coins. WT
> F ??
>
> I posted my observations. And got SEVERAL CONCURR
> ENCES (including Ron from Rocklin) that .... yes..
> .. the SE pro was prone to giving weak signals on
> deeper coin-hits. Such that you had to "coax" the
> m. Versus the Exp. II or others, where they got
> a "hit" on the first pass over them.
>
> If you recall, from the evolution of that line, t
> hat the SE's supposed claim to fame (ie: the impro
> vement) was not only a superior all-metal pinpoint
> ing VCO sound, but also a superior faster "recover
> y speed" . Right ? And the cost of faster recov
> ery, is the risk that if you speed it up, you risk
> "erasing" deeper signals. Such was the case with
> the SE pro incarnation. Even choosing the slower
> recovery speed option didn't solve it (it was stil
> l too fast).
>
> Not sure how we could substantiate this with flagg
> ed target tests. Because, of course, if the SE "
> scrubs" a target long enough, then ............. s
> ure ........ it'll eventually get hints. But the
> REAL question is: Can the user be drawn to such t
> argets IN THE FIRST PLACE ? And the only test of
> that might be: Final tallies of oldies. Very r
> isky that the "endless list of fall-back-excuses"
> don't get rolled out. Eg.: One person is simply
> faster at digging. Or the SE guy simply isn't as
> experienced and/or not into "turf" hunting in-the-
> first-place, etc.....



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 09/08/2019 07:38AM by Apolonio (CA).

Arkansas Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> .... The Etrac was a whole different machine (tho still FBS) .......it was much easier to use, but didn't have as good tones

Yes. This was a common complaint about the Etrac. TID tones not quite as expanded or tell-tale.

> .... Generally both depth and numeric ID accuracy suffer with speed

Bingo ! Why do you think that Nox 800 users generally agree that if you slow down the Nox recovery speed, you'll get more depth ? (albeit with the inherent drawbacks of slowing down the speed). Hence: The CONVERSE would be EQUALLY as true: If you speed it up, that you loose depth (as was the case with the SE pro). Albeit with the inherent benefits of speeding up (more target separation).

In other words: The benefits or lack-of-benefits WORKS BOTH WAYS. And yes, the SE pro was simply following this rule-of-thumb.

Cal_cobra Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ..... a fellow in SoCal called CaptSE.....

Dan had the after market 10 x 12 coil, right ? To FINALLY pull even with results of the Exp. II with 11" coil. And also, you gotta factor in that .... Capt SE is hardly human. He's a legend in turf-skills. Such that ... even if you handed him an Ace 250, he'd probably kick our b*tts. But yes, you're right, he did have an SE . Also don't forget to factor in: It's possible that the parks he was working (blighted areas of So. CA urban sprawl) might have been zones where junk is the main concern, and not depth.

But in any case: Point -duly-noted.

> ..... Mike Walding ....

Did he have the SE in the Exp. series ? I knew he'd switched to trying the Explorers, d/t the "raving fanfare" of the 2002 to 2005-ish period there in SF. But I didn't know if it was the SE in-the-series. But I'll bet that if it had been the XS or II, the results would have been the same for a "machine" like him. Heck, it could be argued that he'd have "done even better" with another in the series other than the SE. We simply don't know, since I believe that's the only one he ever toyed with.

Apolonio (CA) Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> .... Looking forward to getting out with you in the near future,......

You got a deal. Army cot is always available to ya !

Tom_in_CA Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Cal_cobra Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > ..... a fellow in SoCal called CaptSE.....
>
> Dan had the after market 10 x 12 coil, right ? To FINALLY pull even with results of the Exp. II with 11" coil. And also, you gotta factor in that .... Capt SE is hardly human. He's a legend in turf-skills. Such that ... even if you handed
> him an Ace 250, he'd probably kick our b*tts. But yes, you're right, he did have an SE . Also don't forget to factor in: It's possible that the parks he was working (blighted areas of So. CA urban sprawl) might have been zones where junk is the
> main concern, and not depth.
>
> But in any case: Point -duly-noted.

Not sure what coil he used, I thought it was the Minelab 11" procoil? Probably could find some of his old posts and/or videos and find out?

>
> > ..... Mike Walding ....
>
> Did he have the SE in the Exp. series ? I knew he'd switched to trying the Explorers, d/t the "raving fanfare" of the 2002 to 2005-ish period there in SF. But I didn't know if it was the SE in-the-series. But I'll bet that if it had been the XS or II, the results would have been the same for a "machine" like him. Heck, it could be argued that he'd have "done even better" with another in the series other than the SE. We simply don't know, since I believe that's the only one he ever toyed with.

When Mike was hunting the demo by the "painted ladies" we hunted a few years ago, he was using the SE. He did mention that he didn't like it as well as his old Explorer (not sure what model, had to be either the XS or II), but he was kicking butt with it. Mike and Dan are not human, their detecting machines

Even with all the newer models I still like to have at least one Explorer. The SE was so edgy and raw one had to detune it. One could trade coil for coil with the Exp2....that 10" (1050) coil really smooths out the SE. Still the butterfly coil SEF seperates better. They all love silver....LOL I can't comment on the Nox.....the videos show it digging more trash. Perhaps more trash, more treasure.