A
Anonymous
Guest
claiming this detector is easy to learn. While some geniuses may have it mostly figured out right away, for most of us it takes awhile. This problem is compounded when an Explorer owner has one or more other detectors that they like to use. But if an Explorer owner has put in a little time on it & is still getting bad results, the chance of it being defective is at least above 0%. Then there are some really extreme & unusual ground conditions that some users have never run into. I found one park where the Explorer kept making huge low-pitched (iron) beeps & tiny high-pitched hot rock beeps. I tried many sensitivity levels & varied the iron mask, but couldn't make it be quiet & couldn't get any coins beyond 3" or so in this 1800s park. Operator error? Maybe, but I had no trouble getting coins to 6" in another park with the sensitivity only at 16 & this ground was fairly mineralized. So I don't think the reports of coins 8"-10"+ deep are somehow faked. But since the Explorer doesn't read depth in inches & most don't bring tape measurers with them, the possibility exists that a coin reported as 10" deep may be "only" 9" deep. Still doesn't make the Explorer a bad detector. But I must admit that I enjoy using my White's MXT more. Why? Because it is very easy to learn & use, can be swept faster & doesn't give me a sore arm. In one test between the MXT & Explorer, the MXT with its stock concentric could not separate as well as the Explorer, & when the MXT with tried with the DD coil, it didn't go as deep as the Explorer. But I still prefer using the MXT! My point is that no detector is perfect, & which ones different people use depends on what type of imperfections bother them more or less than others. But if I was in a trashy 1800s site with extremely deep coins, I'd have to at least try the Explorer & would like to try the MXT there, too, if time permitted. I must confess I'm guilty of telling people what detectors they should or should not use, based on what I do or don't like. Some people may criticize Minelab because they feel the Explorer costs too much & they won't let anyone but Kellyco sell through the mail. If this bothers someone, they should buy a used Explorer. Finally, I think what bothers some new Explorer users is the complexity of it can make it harder (compared to simpler detectors) to determine if their unit is defective or just misadjusted. And people don't want to send it in until they're fairly sure its defective, but they don't want to spend a lot of time figuring out how to make it work better if it won't. So what people want is an instant way to tell if their Explorer is defective. So, what should the test be? Until someone has a better idea, I will suggest an air test. Inside the house I was getting interference beeps from cable TV or whatever, but I turned the sensitivity up to 22 manual anyway, as that is stable in most outdoor places. Could still hear the beep from the dime through those other beeps at 10". You might want to do the air test outside in an area where you don't get electrical interference beeps with coil in the air. I hope this has helped someone & is not offensive. HH, George (MN)