That performance difference is really puzzling to me. I'd be curious to know if we ever figure that one out. Especially since NASA Tom did some of his testing in Florida. But, if the ground varies alot like PA that may mean very little. I really don't think being the detectorist NASA Tom is has anything to do with it... there's very little to adjust wrong on the 3D. With you being familiar with the CZ-5 you were already ahead on the general layout, etc. of the 3D. The performance issue on nickels was either your machine or soil... IMHO. There is no doubt though that the 3D is definitely not suited for some areas. For me, when I bought the CZ-3D it was between the 3D and the CZ-70Pro. At the time, I did not realize the CZ-5 was such a good machine too. Since I hunt mostly 100+ year old sites the 3D was a good choice for me. I really don't hunt any sites that are modern. If I am not finding at least mercs I pack up and leave. Otherwise, I would have probably went with the CZ-70Pro.
-Bill
-Bill