5900/Di-Pro sl verses the XLT

[MarkCZ]

Okay, its looks like I have an XLT coming and my idea is it to be an upgrade to my 5900. Now I bought the 5900 about a year and I did because its a known dependable analog detector and just a really good to fall back on machine and I believe its just that!

But I started getting an itch for an XLT. Now I know the two units have two totally different types of displays, I'm sure that the old analog would be less problems in years to come! But I also know that whites seems to be geared up for taking care of problems with even their MUCH older units. So, with that mind I'm thinking that the move to the XLT is going to be well, maybe save for lack of a better term.

So, my question is other than the XLT's menu driven display what key improvements can I expect with the XLT vs the 5900?

Mark

 

[padgett79]

just keep in mind the XLT requires a faster swing of the coil than the 5900 with the 950 coil other wise a slower sweep speed will result in more trash digging. I also went from the 5900 to the XLT years ago and do not regret the move what so ever,and you wont regret it either.

 

[Monte]

Each one has it's sown strengths and weaknesses, but in the long run some prefer the simple knob adjustment while others like the menu driven set-up and some added features such as the Signagraph display or Tone ID.

Okay, its looks like I have an XLT coming and my idea is it to be an upgrade to my 5900.

In '94, when the XLT was release, I made an 'upgrade' move to the XLT by trading my 5900 Di Pro SL. It was a late version with the CB (Composite Board) circuitry. In some ways I was pleased with my move to the XLT, but I did miss some of the merits of the easy-to-adjust 5900 Di Pro SL.

Now I bought the 5900 about a year and I did because its a known dependable analog detector and just a really good to fall back on machine and I believe its just that!

The XLT is one of my all time favorite White's models. I have owned many of them and the one I have now is here to stay. However, I am also quite partial to the good analog type circuitry and get performance of the 6000 Pro XL and renamed XL Pro that were the replacement model(s) for then 5900/6000 Di Pro SL. Like the XLT they used the smaller 'SL' housing and 8-AA battery tray so their balance was better.

I still like the 5900 Di Pro SL, however, mainly because of the manual Ground Balance feature rather then the automated GB. I have also found the XL Pro (6000 Pro XL) and even the 5900 Di Pro SL models I have owned since, to provide a little better detection depth and more accurate Coin Depth read-out than the XLT's I've had. The 5900 Di Pro SL is quite versatile and, with the best coil mounted and adjustments made, you should have it learned well in the year you've owned it.

But I started getting an itch for an XLT. Now I know the two units have two totally different types of displays, I'm sure that the old analog would be less problems in years to come! But I also know that whites seems to be geared up for taking care of problems with even their MUCH older units. So, with that mind I'm thinking that the move to the XLT is going to be well, maybe save for lack of a better term.

The needle meter display is quite efficient, with the circuitry of those models, and provides ample info. However, one of the reasons White's discontinued the XL Pro is because the source for the needle meter is dwindling. Too many electronic equipment makers have gone the way of the LCD and other digitally-based designs of displays and away from the more sensitive and more expensive needle meters.

White's will do their best ti repair older models, but only to a point. The have a back-date year cut-off, as such to guarantee some repairs, but some older models just don't have some of the parts available any more. Another example is the 4-position mode select switch on your model. Those have also become almost extinct. So, continue to enjoy your 5900 Di Pro SL. Pamper it so abuse won't wear it out, and make the best use of that fine performer.

So, my question is other than the XLT's menu driven display what key improvements can I expect with the XLT vs the 5900?

I expect most typical XLT users to tinker with all of the controls, make random unnecessary adjustments, not master what they can and can't do, with the result being poor performance, questionable display information or an inability to cope with how simple the XLT really can be.

Make sure you learn the strengths and weaknesses of the various controls. For example, I DO like the XLT's Tone ID for a lot of coin hunting work I do. I DO NOT, however, always use Tone ID. It is turned 'Off' in my 'Ghost Town' program that I use in heavily littered older sites. I DO like to use the Auto-Trac function when hunting wide-open grassy parks or plowed fields when using my 'Open Range' program, but GEB Tracking is turned 'Off' when using my 'Bushwhack' program (95%-98% of the time) as the other program selections are seldom chosen.

I think you will like the lighter weight and balance of the XLT. I hope you already have a smaller-than-stock coil for your 5900 Di Pro SL because that can be used on your XLT as well. When I get another XL Pro I will keep the stock 950 or perhaps a thin-profile 8" coil mounted because I like that model for open area searches and/or where depth of detection is needed the most.

Most hunting I do is in trashier sites and I usually keep a 6

 

[TerraDigger]

Mark, listen to Monte. I think he's owned something like 18 XLT's over the years. Kinda the go to guy if you have questions. Like I need to be increasing Monte's workload here on the forum

 

[MarkCZ]

Each one has it's sown strengths and weaknesses, but in the long run some prefer the simple knob adjustment while others like the menu driven set-up and some added features such as the Signagraph display or Tone ID.

Okay, its looks like I have an XLT coming and my idea is it to be an upgrade to my 5900.

In '94, when the XLT was release, I made an 'upgrade' move to the XLT by trading my 5900 Di Pro SL. It was a late version with the CB (Composite Board) circuitry. In some ways I was pleased with my move to the XLT, but I did miss some of the merits of the easy-to-adjust 5900 Di Pro SL.

Now I bought the 5900 about a year and I did because its a known dependable analog detector and just a really good to fall back on machine and I believe its just that!

The XLT is one of my all time favorite White's models. I have owned many of them and the one I have now is here to stay. However, I am also quite partial to the good analog type circuitry and get performance of the 6000 Pro XL and renamed XL Pro that were the replacement model(s) for then 5900/6000 Di Pro SL. Like the XLT they used the smaller 'SL' housing and 8-AA battery tray so their balance was better.

I still like the 5900 Di Pro SL, however, mainly because of the manual Ground Balance feature rather then the automated GB. I have also found the XL Pro (6000 Pro XL) and even the 5900 Di Pro SL models I have owned since, to provide a little better detection depth and more accurate Coin Depth read-out than the XLT's I've had. The 5900 Di Pro SL is quite versatile and, with the best coil mounted and adjustments made, you should have it learned well in the year you've owned it.

But I started getting an itch for an XLT. Now I know the two units have two totally different types of displays, I'm sure that the old analog would be less problems in years to come! But I also know that whites seems to be geared up for taking care of problems with even their MUCH older units. So, with that mind I'm thinking that the move to the XLT is going to be well, maybe save for lack of a better term.

The needle meter display is quite efficient, with the circuitry of those models, and provides ample info. However, one of the reasons White's discontinued the XL Pro is because the source for the needle meter is dwindling. Too many electronic equipment makers have gone the way of the LCD and other digitally-based designs of displays and away from the more sensitive and more expensive needle meters.

White's will do their best ti repair older models, but only to a point. The have a back-date year cut-off, as such to guarantee some repairs, but some older models just don't have some of the parts available any more. Another example is the 4-position mode select switch on your model. Those have also become almost extinct. So, continue to enjoy your 5900 Di Pro SL. Pamper it so abuse won't wear it out, and make the best use of that fine performer.

So, my question is other than the XLT's menu driven display what key improvements can I expect with the XLT vs the 5900?

I expect most typical XLT users to tinker with all of the controls, make random unnecessary adjustments, not master what they can and can't do, with the result being poor performance, questionable display information or an inability to cope with how simple the XLT really can be.

Make sure you learn the strengths and weaknesses of the various controls. For example, I DO like the XLT's Tone ID for a lot of coin hunting work I do. I DO NOT, however, always use Tone ID. It is turned 'Off' in my 'Ghost Town' program that I use in heavily littered older sites. I DO like to use the Auto-Trac function when hunting wide-open grassy parks or plowed fields when using my 'Open Range' program, but GEB Tracking is turned 'Off' when using my 'Bushwhack' program (95%-98% of the time) as the other program selections are seldom chosen.

I think you will like the lighter weight and balance of the XLT. I hope you already have a smaller-than-stock coil for your 5900 Di Pro SL because that can be used on your XLT as well. When I get another XL Pro I will keep the stock 950 or perhaps a thin-profile 8" coil mounted because I like that model for open area searches and/or where depth of detection is needed the most.

Most hunting I do is in trashier sites and I usually keep a 6

 

[Monte]

WoW! very nice and helpful response!

Thanks, I hope it helped.

I do have a blue max deep scan 600 coil for the 5900
and I have a blue max deep scan 800 coming (fleaBay)

The Blue Max 600 coil was later changed to a black plastic instead of white, and the decal had the new name of 5.3 Black Max. Later the decal was changed to 5.3 BullsEye. They are all the same, compatible 6

 

[Monte]

I won't part with another all time favorite, to be sure.

 

[MarkCZ]

Well, the factory manual that came with my 5900 states "CB" on the cover?
I believe the earlier model 5900 had the signal balance control in a different location, yes? No?

Here is a couple of pics of my 5900, notice the different coil wrap style? I coined the phrase "Hank Style Coil Wrap" But is was forum member Dave-J's idea! No kinked cable! Its easier to change coils! its WAY better on the cable! Now, it was really late in the year when I changed ALL my detectors over to the Hank Style and I've not got much hunting time in with it, but I don't see any problems with it so far.

Mark

 

[MarkCZ]

For a used one I think I got a NICE ONE!

Mark

 

[nw1886]

Just going to chime in here. The XLT is the easiest (heavily adjustable) digital machine I've ever used and it took me a while to get my DFX to out hunt it. You did good and that box is still as great as the first day it came out.

Concerning "moving up" from analog:

I am one of those guys who will always have an analog machine as a second/primary. (It is the audio that is the keeper.) Even though I've migrated "up" through each succeeding digital development, I have found that I NEED to wind down from a long digital hunt by using analog audio. You can say it is because I've been running it from the early '70's and I'm "just used to it". That is only part of it because.....I'm gonna say it.....digital audio strengths are too huge to ignore but....IT IS TWISTED AND UNNATURAL. Don't get me wrong, I'd leave my analog at home way before I'd leave my digital there, but processing tens of thousands of strictly ON/OFF inputs to my noggin' is not the best end to an 6 hour hunt! Some guys don't look back, but myself (and a few hunting buddies) all are still loving and using analog as "end of day" machines. They are.....butter. Wait a while before getting rid of your 5900....even though aspects of digital trump it.

 

[Monte]

Well, the factory manual that came with my 5900 states "CB" on the cover?
I believe the earlier model 5900 had the signal balance control in a different location, yes? No?

It might also state the version inside the battery door cover.

Yes, the originals had the Signal Balance control on the front part of the control housing opposite the coil connector. Later they had some re-do and moved it up on top. I am not sure how many revisions they had but I believe the 'XB' version was the last one before the final 'CB' offering.

Here is a couple of pics of my 5900, notice the different coil wrap style? I coined the phrase "Hank Style Coil Wrap" But is was forum member Dave-J's idea! No kinked cable! Its easier to change coils! its WAY better on the cable! Now, it was really late in the year when I changed ALL my detectors over to the Hank Style and I've not got much hunting time in with it, but I don't see any problems with it so far.

I've seen that method used decades ago when many models had excessively long cables (for hip-mounting the detector), but I don't recall any name assigned to it.

Personally, I don't have a problem changing search coils.

1st.. I only have the short-length cables, and if I had an earlier version with the long cable, like on the 9500 or Blue Max 600 coils, I simply had them shortened to 'normal'.

2.. I keep my search coils wrapped on the rod so they don't dangle or snag, and since I hunt a lot of sagebrush and other vegetation sites where it can be. I don't need the looped coil cable.

3.. I usually have a 6

 

[MarkCZ]

Monte,
The reason I started doing ALL my cables loop style is because wrapping the cable around the small shaft is NOT good for the cable and it leaves them a kinked up mess. (Like below)

I guess I officially gave it the name "Hank Style" but it wasn't my idea.

During another topic on here talk came up about the cable, forum member Dave-J stated that he never wraps the cable up the shaft, he said that he runs it straight up the shaft and makes a "Hank" at the control housing.

Well, then I don't guess anybody really knew what a "Hank" was so another forum member did an Internet search and came up with a basic loop of wire or rope (normally made by wrapping it around the hand and the elbow into a hank)

It didn't take me long to grab one one my detectors and cable it with a loop at the control box. Then I came back and started calling it the "Hank Style" cable wrap.

Dave-J said that those cables were not designed to be wrapped in that small of coils, he said the manuals illustrations really shouldn't show the cables being wrapped up the staff. He also said that those little coils around the staff puts a lot of stress on the cables.

So, now even my short cabled coils are "Hank Style"
But I don't leave any of the cable flopping! and I don't make the loop big enough to contact the ground when I set the detector down. And the cable is strapped to the shaft in at lest three places with velcro straps.

Mark