Which detector is more sensitive to gold in wet salt water sand?

Equinox or Explorer?

I prefer the Nox. It has a much faster recovery. When running the Explorer North to South you really notice that your are running against "grain" of black sand that settle in layers. Also.... when you talk sensitivity to gold especially smaller gold the Nox wins there as well. The Explorers also arent water proof.... so you need to take some preclusions from over spray and salt air.... which can take a tole on both the machine and any dirt headphones. The Nox may ground balance a bit better as well to the wet salt sand.... thou i do like the Explores Noise cancel.

Equinox is engineered two steps further at/towards acquiring gold in a wet-salt environment.
(Tarsacci is engineered yet another step towards wet-salt/bad-ground.....for finding gold on the beach).

Depends on what you mean by "gold" . Do you mean ... normal gold rings ? Eg.: Those that read in the low to mid-range ? If so, they are equal. I've done extensive flagging/testing with many Nox 800 beach users. And they can hear/call exactly what I am calling . So-much-so that I am impressed. Since I consider my machine and my ability pretty-durned-good.

But if you meant dainty lady's solitaires (the type gold rings that read into the foil range), then : The Nox 800 hits harder on low conductors. When/if set accordingly.

Go figure : The Nox 800 (since it's designed to be a cross-over nugget hunter after all) will get micro-jewelry better than standard conventional discriminators. But the million dollar question (based on your post title) is: Can it replicate those "micro-jewelry" abilities in wet salt sand ? Because wet-salt mimics the TID range of tinsel thin chains and earring studs. Right ? So you have to "dumb down" the settings to go into the ebbing surf. Right ? Thus eliminating the advantage the Nox had. Right ? This has been the common lament !

My experience, thus far, for the wet-salt inter-tidal zone (like .... after erosion), has been that the Nox offers no advantage. I suppose the user could alter his settings to find tinsel thin gold chains (if you want to call that "gold"). But then : Heaven help the poor soul for all the falsing he will endure

And .... I sort of question this entire "micro-jewelry" objective in the first place : You can gather 100 earring studs and tinsel thin chains, to attain the weight of a single gold band. So ..... why is micro-jewelry anyone's objective ?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/18/2020 06:23PM by Tom_in_CA.

Tom_in_CA Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Depends on what you mean by "gold" . Do you mean
> ... normal gold rings ? Eg.: Those that read in t
> he low to mid-range ? If so, they are equal. I'v
> e done extensive flagging/testing with many Nox 80
> 0 beach users. And they can hear/call exactly wha
> t I am calling . So-much-so that I am impressed.
> Since I consider my machine and my ability pretty-
> durned-good.
>
> But if you meant dainty lady's solitaires (the typ
> e gold rings that read into the foil range), then
> : The Nox 800 hits harder on low conductors. Wh
> en/if set accordingly.
>
> Go figure : The Nox 800 (since it's designed to
> be a cross-over nugget hunter after all) will get
> micro-jewelry better than standard conventional di
> scriminators. But the million dollar question (
> based on your post title) is: Can it replicate tho
> se "micro-jewelry" abilities in wet salt sand ? B
> ecause wet-salt mimics the TID range of tinsel thi
> n chains and earring studs. Right ? So you ha
> ve to "dumb down" the settings to go into the ebbi
> ng surf. Right ? Thus eliminating the advantage
> the Nox had. Right ? This has been the common l
> ament !
>
> My experience, thus far, for the wet-salt inter-ti
> dal zone (like .... after erosion), has been that
> the Nox offers no advantage. I suppose the user
> could alter his settings to find tinsel thin gold
> chains (if you want to call that "gold"). But the
> n : Heaven help the poor soul for all the falsing
> he will endure
>
> And .... I sort of question this entire "micro-jew
> elry" objective in the first place : You can gath
> er 100 earring studs and tinsel thin chains, to at
> tain the weight of a single gold band. So ..... w
> hy is micro-jewelry anyone's objective ?

Tom all you need to know right here...the secret to life:

[youtu.be]

Many of the thinner gold rings are the ones that have bigger diamonds. No matter. I'll be going to Florida in 2021 and maybe detect for 2 days dry.wet sand. I had previously used the Explorer in Florida and, besides the horrendous weight, was a good beach hunter.

An interesting tidbit is that my Troy X5 was able to hit a Nickel at a solid 8" in the wet Florida sand. However, my best find was a men's wallet with 150 British Pounds..


Edited for clarity.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/19/2020 01:01AM by Detectorist.

To have you tested the Nox and Explorer here in Fl? I’d dare say there’s a difference in mineralization... and performance. I like finding small gold.... why because there is likely more of it lost. If you aren’t finding larger gold rings .... these add up... and yes some have stones. In the salt water .... yes there will be reduced sensitivity... ya get the explorer wet ya reduced it down too..... get it wet you may pay more in repairs than you found. Nox is easier to travel with by design.

Cal_cobra Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>....
>
> Tom all you need t
> o know right here...the secret to life:
>
> [youtu.be]



Haha, yup, the surf is just brimming with big diamonds that just happen to be in tinsel thin earring studs. Eh ? For that matter, so too is turf in the parks around SF and San Jose. Let's do it. Set that Nox of yours to find tinsel thin studs, and let's go to city parks. After all, ya wouldn't want to miss them, eh ?

But seriously now : The type settings that are needed to find these type earring studs (which are, as I hope you can admit, quite rare), are such that when you're on the wet-salt, and choose the settings to allow you to hunt the ebbing surf wet-salt zone, I do not think it will be any better than the Explorer . JMHO. I have found earring studs after all. It's not that the Explorer can't find them.

Yes the nox can find them better, but not when you've set your settings to allow you to get into the wet salt. IMHO.

I did, in fact, try the Nox 800 in dry white sand, at a millionaire's beach where no one (in their right mind) had ever gone looking for micro-jewelry. All of us , who've ever hunted this beach, have done so with standard machines. So I reasoned that all-those-years of standard "mere mortal" machines have been missing all the micro-jewelry (which, as you say, is loaded with Ice, right ?) . I set it up to act like a nugget hunter type settings (so that you can find insanely small pinheads, which, yes, the Explorer CAN'T DO). And yes, I was IMMEDIATELY besieged with ttteeennnsssyyy crap . Wahoo ! All that ice and gabs of tinsel thin chains is sure to be close behind, eh ? Mind you, this is dry sand. So I question whether this can be replicated on the inter-tidal zone wet-salt.

For the next 2 hrs. I dug a good 50 ttteeennnnsssyyy foil turds and pinhead type stuff. I was AMAZED at how much stuff those "mere mortals" had been leaving behind ! Places where there wouldn't even be a whisper on my Explorer. I realized that the reason for these micro-foil turds was generations of people opening wine and Champaign bottles, with the foil-top coverings. So that a teeny bit of foil gets caught under their fingernail when opening them.

After 2 hrs. of this torture, I began to question the logic of this. Mind you, you can't use a sandscoop for this. You need to be on your hands and knees with tweezers looking for the cr*p. At a certain point, I had to ask myself : "What the h#ll am I doing ?" Ok, fine, if you think that Ice is awaiting your Nox 800, then you know the beach I'm talking about. A mere 1.5 hr. south of you. C'mon down. Millionaire and Billionaire golfers, and tourists from around the world come there. And yes, I've heard of some BIG ice coming off of that beach. So why aren't you down here harvesting it ? I'll tell ya why : Because in a few short hours, you would come to the same conclusion I did. Even if you lived right here, I don't think you'd conclude that this was a worthwhile use of your time. Maybe I'm wrong. If so, I'll take you on a guided tour of the place, and stand back and watch how much Ice you can dig



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/20/2020 12:53AM by Tom_in_CA.

Tom:

There are secrets to micro hunting in the dry sand which I won't divulge right now. Suffice to say, that in my water hunting years, I found over 50 diamond rings including a 2.4ct whopper men's ring in the water using nothing else but a White's Surfmaster TR machine. I probably found 2 dozen gold chains using my proprietary methods. This was all back in the early 80s.

I was so successful that I ended up making a living beach hunting for a couple of years. Those were the days before everybody and their brother was doing it.

Detectorist Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>..... I found over 50 dia
> mond rings including a 2.4ct whopper men's ring in
> the water using nothing else but a White's Surfmas
> ter TR machine. I probably found 2 dozen gold chai
> ns using my proprietary methods. This was all back
> in the early 80s.
>

Detectorist : If I'm understanding your post correctly : The "50" were all targets that the Explorer could have gotten. D/t they were in normal / standard rings. Right ? And as for the "chains" : Those too could have been found with standard machines, right ? Based on your followup of "TR machines" and "early 80s".

If so, then what does this lend to the discussion of Explorer vs Nox, now ?

Just curious.
How does fbs compare to Eqx on small thin platinum rings?

White’s TR machine?
Didn’t they go out of business ?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/20/2020 04:23AM by tnsharpshooter.

No, this was during the 1980s. Mostly in the water. Virgin sites.

Detectorist Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> No, this was during the 1980s. Mostly in the water
> . Virgin sites.


Ok. Then is it safe to say that this doesn't address the Nox 800 vs Explorer question ?