Find's Treasure Forums
Welcome to Find's Treasure Forums, Guests!
You are viewing this forums as a guest which limits you to read only status.
Only registered members may post stories, questions, classifieds, reply to other posts, contact other members using built in messaging and use many other features found on these forums.
Why not register and join us today? It's free! (We don't share your email addresses with anyone.) We keep email addresses of our users to protect them and others from bad people posting things they shouldn't.
Click here to register!
Need Support Help?
Cannot log in?, click here to have new password emailed to you
Changed email? Forgot to update your account with new email address? Need assistance with something else?, click here to go to Find's Support Form and fill out the form.
Compare real targets between FBS machine and Equinox.
- Thread starter john4840
- Start date
You have to have a machine with good masking abilities before you can even think about depth !! It reminds me of fishing for Stripers when Bluefish are starting to run.......You KNOW the Stripers are on the bottom,but you have to get past those aggressive Blues to get to them !!
BootyHunter
Active member
Jesseray said:
Man that is awesome! I’m a relic hunter too, what state or area was this in? Hot soil or not? Congrats!!
Southwind
Well-known member
The Equinox has been one of the top hyped new detector for sure, but I think it also holds the record for those who have tried to dis it more than any other. Actually, it just looks to be a certain group working hard to make the NOX look bad.
Stealing your thunder LOL. Like you had any to begin with.
Stealing your thunder LOL. Like you had any to begin with.
Zinc Penny
Member
Southwind said:
I'm not trying to make it look bad it already accomplished being bad on its own. I just cant recommend it to people when you can get better. Again if someone came to me and asked me to design a better detector I would give it a shot.
Zinc Penny said:
Have you compared F75 detector to Equinox in 4bars ground?
If you haven't you should.
Equinox whoops the daylights out of Fisher f75, others too.
What about 5 bar ground?
I haven't tried yet, but the Nox seems is well above average for punching higher mineral.
What other detectors VLF can alert on small thin gold chain in salt water? Besides the Nox?
Nox will run circles around fbs types in the iron coil size for coil size.
Nox ain't super expensive. 800 model is truly wireless headphones unlike the CTX.
Light weight too.
I have run Etrac, CTX and now the Nox.
I guarantee there will be a whole lot more coil time spent a sweeping using Nox than any of fhe boat anchor fbs types.
Every time I see some nutty comment. I have to ask. Is everyone digging 10" deep silver all the time , every time. In 100 silver coins found, how many reckon on average are 9.5 " or deeper??
C'mon you should know the answer here to this question surely.
Nox has been thrown under the bus in what couple weeks after physical release.
Shouldn't we wait, and evaluate when more time has been had?
And let's see what happens on some group hunts when the Noxers,, CTXers. Etracers are giving things a go.
I sorta feel sorry for detector manufacturers.
The crap I see said.Geesh.
nenadgbeepin
Member
Even an x-terra 705 in coins + mode is pretty impressive in mineralised soil. That's always been Minelab's strong point. Lots of testing on mineralised dirt....
littlenugget
New member
Well i Will Say this when ctx came out it was the same thing , it's was the wow machine lots and lots of YouTube videos with wonderfull findings. I have a Xterra 705 with 18.75 kHz and 7.5 kHz coils and ctx 3030 i don't need more . Been looking on some YouTube videos of ctx vs equinox and i can clearly see that those people are not real ctx Users just because the sweep speed they make ,every real ctx User knows that ctx is slow in sweep speed and also the horrible settings they use in this tests i really don't believe in 80% of this videos theres something fishi in them . Just look it up on you tube and Will see what i'm talking about .
BootyHunter
Active member
littlenugget said:
Exactly why I don’t watch or put any stock in “test” videos. What speaks volumes to me are posts like some here where guys have gone to spots they’ve beaten up with their ctx and came away with good finds from a spot that had quit producing. And I can assure you I know how to run a ctx, as I had one since it came out, and I have hunted this same area and neighborhoods with it, yet my first hunt with the Equinox I found 4
Silver coins a Great Seal button and a tiny pocket knife, all in an iron infested yard. I know you don’t want to hear it, but the Equinox has a clear advantage over the ctx in heavy iron and mineralized soils. Now if your hunt sites are neutral soil with little iron contamination, you may be better served by the ctx. But for me, the Equinox is clearly the best option for my conditions.
Jesseray
Active member
Were you in multi or single mode ? If single what mode were you using ? I was in park two /multi frequency mode/iron bias of 4/recovery speed at 5/ground balance at 4.Look I don't post much because I spend most my time detecting and finding amazing finds. I'm a hard core xp guy but this detector will keep up with it and its waterproof with the awsome minelab tones,works great on the beach. Which the Xp SUCKS !!!!!!at.If you can not see how this detector is a great buy for the money your just being mentally lazy and lack proper perspective.Its no magic machine that will make targets that don't exist in that area appear in the ground but its a killer machine.Ok now im going to go dig up some more Rebel buttons y'all have fun fighting lol.
Always Curious
New member
Used the EQ 600 for the first time around evening for about an hour, in a trashy lot I've hit many times with an Etrac. It's no Etrac but was kind of fun. I played around with the Park 1/2 and Field 1/2 modes. Initially, seemed to like bottle caps (3) and rusty nails (2) but after that I did find 3 pennies (one copper), 1 clad dime and a clad quarter 
Got dark so I had to quit.
Based on my now vast experience with it, I can say the EQ doesn't seem nearly as accurate as the Etrac at telling you the depth--on the dime and several pennies, it said much deeper than they actually were; on the quarter, I thought it was on top when actually it was a few inches under. Too bad, if true, as in many cases depth gives the best clue as to whether the target may be silver; but there are most likely tricks with the EQ I will have to learn.
One positive thing, the EQ really is better at separation than the Etrac. I have joked before about that trashy lot that it has a nail or two in just about every square foot. Using the EQ, I can see my estimate was way low.
Another thing the EQ does better is with the contrast and readability of its screen. The Etrac's LCD screen is dim even in bright light (for such an expensive machine, you'd think they could have found a better contrast screen. I'd be willing to pay an aftermarket company real money if they could replace the LCD panel with something that isn't dim). With the EQ, at dusk, I could still read the screen just fine and didn't need to use backlighting until it actually got dark.
Got dark so I had to quit. Based on my now vast experience with it, I can say the EQ doesn't seem nearly as accurate as the Etrac at telling you the depth--on the dime and several pennies, it said much deeper than they actually were; on the quarter, I thought it was on top when actually it was a few inches under. Too bad, if true, as in many cases depth gives the best clue as to whether the target may be silver; but there are most likely tricks with the EQ I will have to learn.
One positive thing, the EQ really is better at separation than the Etrac. I have joked before about that trashy lot that it has a nail or two in just about every square foot. Using the EQ, I can see my estimate was way low.
Another thing the EQ does better is with the contrast and readability of its screen. The Etrac's LCD screen is dim even in bright light (for such an expensive machine, you'd think they could have found a better contrast screen. I'd be willing to pay an aftermarket company real money if they could replace the LCD panel with something that isn't dim). With the EQ, at dusk, I could still read the screen just fine and didn't need to use backlighting until it actually got dark.