This test worked out pretty much the way I thought it would. The CTX and E Trac are just about the same in any depth test I have watched. The Deeptech hit the deepest, but is limited in discrimination and target ID so it is not a true coin hunting machine. The AT series detectors are not as deep, but show good target seperation. Over all I think the test was well done. I would love to see the Deus in there with the new 11" coil.
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.
CTX in the Test Trench
- Thread starter Carter NY
- Start date
TellYaWhut
Member
goodmore said:
The Deus, Blisstool, and Fisher F75ltd all compared in the Trench by the above author, back in March 2013.
Southwind
Well-known member
We must have watched difference videos LOL.
What I saw was the CTX was slightly deeper than the E-Trac thanks to being more stable. I saw what happens when you try and compare a small coil to large coils for depth. I saw a AT Pro run in beginner STD mode being compared to top of the line machine in boost mode for depth. I saw a comparison that wasn't thought out. I like the idea of the trench, but to anyone who has used a detector must at all would get no use out of the comparisons. Unfortunately, someone new would possibly pass up some really nice machines and buy one that would give them buyers remorse once they tried to use it in their local trashy park.
I saw a video designed to do one thing. Make the Deep Tech look good.
What I saw was the CTX was slightly deeper than the E-Trac thanks to being more stable. I saw what happens when you try and compare a small coil to large coils for depth. I saw a AT Pro run in beginner STD mode being compared to top of the line machine in boost mode for depth. I saw a comparison that wasn't thought out. I like the idea of the trench, but to anyone who has used a detector must at all would get no use out of the comparisons. Unfortunately, someone new would possibly pass up some really nice machines and buy one that would give them buyers remorse once they tried to use it in their local trashy park.
I saw a video designed to do one thing. Make the Deep Tech look good.
Southwind
Well-known member
Sorry to post one after another but the edit time limit must be short.
I wanted to add that I'm not dissing the Deep Tech at all. I think it has shown it would be a great relic detector. I have voiced my opinion so strongly because I fell for the same misleading type video before and would like to keep it from happening to someone else if possible. I bought a F75 SE based on the same type video which didn't do a proper comparison but rather did compare based on the F75's strong points based on conditions. I took my new F75 SE to the city park, full of 125 years of trash, and found it pretty much useless. No comparison to the E-Trac or CTX 3030 in a old city park situation what so ever. Had the video compared them under a relic hunting setting it would have been a great video.
I wanted to add that I'm not dissing the Deep Tech at all. I think it has shown it would be a great relic detector. I have voiced my opinion so strongly because I fell for the same misleading type video before and would like to keep it from happening to someone else if possible. I bought a F75 SE based on the same type video which didn't do a proper comparison but rather did compare based on the F75's strong points based on conditions. I took my new F75 SE to the city park, full of 125 years of trash, and found it pretty much useless. No comparison to the E-Trac or CTX 3030 in a old city park situation what so ever. Had the video compared them under a relic hunting setting it would have been a great video.
I think the concept of the trench test is sound. It just has to be followed through without bias to be a valid comparison. Either everyone uses standard modes, or no one does. Either everyone use sniper coils, or no one does. That kinda thing. I'm gonna dig one in my yard to see how my Tesoros compare.
Dan
Dan
Southwind
Well-known member
I also agree 100%
I really like the trench testing concept.
For me and my "6 plugs a day" the issue is very deeply buried trash to go along with those few keepers. And I don't mean iron trash only, but foil, tabs and canslaw. I need a detector that can not ONLY see a coin at 10" but tell the difference between a probable coin and a piece of junk with a fair degree of accuracy.
I'll try my hand at making a video out of it. I'm sure my 11 year old son can help me with that!
It will be Compadre vs. Vaquero vs. Tejon.
Anyone in the Windsor/Detroit area is welcome to bring their machine over and try it. Could prove really interesting, and we'll keep it as fair as possible.
Dan
It will be Compadre vs. Vaquero vs. Tejon.
Anyone in the Windsor/Detroit area is welcome to bring their machine over and try it. Could prove really interesting, and we'll keep it as fair as possible.
Dan
Thanks for all of the feedback. I'm sorry to see that some of you think the tests were slanted or don't mean anything. My intention was not to fool anyone or waste my time on meaningless tests..
Regarding the halo effect, this has been a topic since I started detecting back in 1973. The halo effect would help improve the signals on all targets for all machines tested. Going through undisturbed dirt is the next best thing. In other words, we are comparing apples to apples.
My favorite all around machine is my CTX3030. That being said, it is not my machine of choice for all scenarios. In an iron infested cellar hole site, I would use any of my high frequency machines after searching it with my CTX and its amazing what can be found in and around iron that a multi frequency machine (BBS) would not hear. Different machines for different scenarios is not bashing other machines.
I would welcome any of you that own a Teknetics T2, Whites V3i, Fisher F75 LTD, or any machine for that matter, to come and visit the "Test Trench". I am in upstate NY about an hour north of NYC along the Hudson river. I would enjoy comparing settings and techniques to get the most out of all of our machines.
Carter
Regarding the halo effect, this has been a topic since I started detecting back in 1973. The halo effect would help improve the signals on all targets for all machines tested. Going through undisturbed dirt is the next best thing. In other words, we are comparing apples to apples.
My favorite all around machine is my CTX3030. That being said, it is not my machine of choice for all scenarios. In an iron infested cellar hole site, I would use any of my high frequency machines after searching it with my CTX and its amazing what can be found in and around iron that a multi frequency machine (BBS) would not hear. Different machines for different scenarios is not bashing other machines.
I would welcome any of you that own a Teknetics T2, Whites V3i, Fisher F75 LTD, or any machine for that matter, to come and visit the "Test Trench". I am in upstate NY about an hour north of NYC along the Hudson river. I would enjoy comparing settings and techniques to get the most out of all of our machines.
Carter
I'm not saying the tests were slanted. It is possible that some machines may need the targets to be set firmly in the soil? Or others are more sensitive to halos? I would like to have seen some type of marker directly above the targets as some coil sweeps seemed off center? Plus a more in depth look at the settings for each machine.
As long as the conditions are the same with each detector being used, its a level playing field. Whether you're air testing, burying targets in disturbed dirt or drilling in the side of a trench so you're detecting through undisturbed dirt, the conditions are the same for all detectors tested. Keeping it "apples to apples" is the focus.
Obviously stock coil sizes will have a major impact (e.g. AT Gold vs AT Pro) on depth. I used the coils that came standard with the machines. Also certain settings will enhance performance but each machine was set to go deep. There was room for tweaking but as shown, sensitivity was up on all machines.
The DeepTech is a specialty machine that is not designed for all purpose use. It only tells you if it is iron or not iron. No tone ID, no depth reading, no target ID, zero bells n whistles.... I advise anyone that asks about the machine, if you're not relic hunting, gold nugget hunting or on dry sand a the beach, don't buy the DeepTech because you will dig EVERYTHING. Take the DeepTech to a city park and you would end up wrapping it around a tree after an hour...... I have the DeepTech as part of my arsenal and I love it for iron infested foundations because I found it very fast in iron and it has good depth. Running with boost on is normal for this machine. Only turn the boost off if your hear chatter from outside interference.
I would like to do the next TEST TRENCH video where we have more machines in the mix such as the V3i, F75, Deus. It would be ideal to get some volunteers that would be willing to demonstrate their machine and we could show settings while trying to get the most out of each machine. It would probably be a fun afternoon!
Obviously stock coil sizes will have a major impact (e.g. AT Gold vs AT Pro) on depth. I used the coils that came standard with the machines. Also certain settings will enhance performance but each machine was set to go deep. There was room for tweaking but as shown, sensitivity was up on all machines.
The DeepTech is a specialty machine that is not designed for all purpose use. It only tells you if it is iron or not iron. No tone ID, no depth reading, no target ID, zero bells n whistles.... I advise anyone that asks about the machine, if you're not relic hunting, gold nugget hunting or on dry sand a the beach, don't buy the DeepTech because you will dig EVERYTHING. Take the DeepTech to a city park and you would end up wrapping it around a tree after an hour...... I have the DeepTech as part of my arsenal and I love it for iron infested foundations because I found it very fast in iron and it has good depth. Running with boost on is normal for this machine. Only turn the boost off if your hear chatter from outside interference.
I would like to do the next TEST TRENCH video where we have more machines in the mix such as the V3i, F75, Deus. It would be ideal to get some volunteers that would be willing to demonstrate their machine and we could show settings while trying to get the most out of each machine. It would probably be a fun afternoon!
Southwind
Well-known member
Again I say I like the concept of the trench test, but I felt your testing was anything but fair or equal. Let's be honest here, anyone with any experience would see right through what is going on but it would be misleading to someone new to detecting and that is why I'm speaking up. Whether it was intentional or not I couldn't say but it most certainly would be misleading to a newbie.
For example, you purposely, and admittedly, have the AT Pro in beginner mode(least possible depth) and the Deeptech in hyper full boost mode. Apples to apples" OK. Then you take a detector with a 5x8 coil and compare it to a 11" and use the excuse "it came with the detector"? Apples to apples? OK. And your choice to use gold and nickles of all possible targets when everyone, with the exception of a newbie, knows the Minelab FBS technology doesn't do well with low conductors. Apples to apples? RIGHT!
For example, you purposely, and admittedly, have the AT Pro in beginner mode(least possible depth) and the Deeptech in hyper full boost mode. Apples to apples" OK. Then you take a detector with a 5x8 coil and compare it to a 11" and use the excuse "it came with the detector"? Apples to apples? OK. And your choice to use gold and nickles of all possible targets when everyone, with the exception of a newbie, knows the Minelab FBS technology doesn't do well with low conductors. Apples to apples? RIGHT!
BH_Landstar_
New member
I liked the test as a whole, but as others have said, it's not a fair test for each device. Each device has many different options / settings to obtain that 'extra' depth, and you really have to play with each device to get that extra depth and listen to the faint signals. Also, coil size plays a role on how a target is detected along with the depth and also the frequency of the device. Now we all know that the Minelab CTX 3030 will not see that gold chain, again that's due to being a FBS unit like the E-Trac and others before it.
Out of the other devices, all of them was in the 15 - 19kHz range (except the Gold Bug 2) with regards to it's operating frequency, again, these units will not get the depth greater than 8 - 10" in most conditions with the standard coil that they come with. Try a device with a lower kHz frequency like 7.5 and 3, as these tend to go deeper, but not by a lot, maybe 2 - 4" deeper at the most depending again on the settings and coil size.
I would liked to have seen if the CTX 3030 would have got those deeper targets with the 17" coil.
Out of the other devices, all of them was in the 15 - 19kHz range (except the Gold Bug 2) with regards to it's operating frequency, again, these units will not get the depth greater than 8 - 10" in most conditions with the standard coil that they come with. Try a device with a lower kHz frequency like 7.5 and 3, as these tend to go deeper, but not by a lot, maybe 2 - 4" deeper at the most depending again on the settings and coil size.
I would liked to have seen if the CTX 3030 would have got those deeper targets with the 17" coil.
TellYaWhut
Member
There are many ways to test a metal-detectors capability. Yes we know that the Vistas are good in iron...how many more tests do we need to verify this?? What about going on a real life hunt and comparing how many Good targets are found per hour with the metal detectors shown in the video? Depthwise what about the Blisstool or the TDI??
JimmyCT
Well-known member
Carter, I truly enjoy your informational /comparison videos. I do agree with TellYaWhat in his statement. Would you be willing to oblige your audience with an actual in-the-field hunt using the various detectors in your video? I for one would really enjoy the video production. Thank you - Jim
TellYaWhut said:
Jim,
What you are suggesting is an excellent idea. I have videos where I show live field hunts but this is with one machine at a time. It would be awkward to say the least, carting around 7 detectors while searching for a signal to compare. I'm still waiting for those volunteers to step up so we can all go make a real informative video out in the field
In my video, all machines are set to go deep. They all could be tweaked knowing you're right on the target. I will involve other machines in future Test Trench videos and make sure the settings are clearly explained.
There is one person in this string that thinks my choice of low conductive targets (gold & nickels) was purposely done so the CTX would not look good. I don't know about you guys, but my CTX is excellent on hearing low conductive targets especially in wet salt water sand. The high range frequencies on the CTX are designed to hear those low conductive targets.
I will be using silver dimes in my next Test Trench video where several machines will be compared. I hammered the dimes into the wall and did a quick test with my CTX and relic machine (DeepTech Smart). Both machines were set for going deep
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lkyyhdNo70I
Carter
What you are suggesting is an excellent idea. I have videos where I show live field hunts but this is with one machine at a time. It would be awkward to say the least, carting around 7 detectors while searching for a signal to compare. I'm still waiting for those volunteers to step up so we can all go make a real informative video out in the field
In my video, all machines are set to go deep. They all could be tweaked knowing you're right on the target. I will involve other machines in future Test Trench videos and make sure the settings are clearly explained.
There is one person in this string that thinks my choice of low conductive targets (gold & nickels) was purposely done so the CTX would not look good. I don't know about you guys, but my CTX is excellent on hearing low conductive targets especially in wet salt water sand. The high range frequencies on the CTX are designed to hear those low conductive targets.
I will be using silver dimes in my next Test Trench video where several machines will be compared. I hammered the dimes into the wall and did a quick test with my CTX and relic machine (DeepTech Smart). Both machines were set for going deep
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lkyyhdNo70I
Carter
Southwind
Well-known member
I'm sorry but that is just flat out false. You even show on the video the AT Pro is in STD mode. It might was well say beginner not deep mode. It has nothing to do with "tweaking" just plain starting in a default setup that isn't on the weakest setting would be a good start. Is the Deeptech in boost mode be default? No, you adjust it(tweaked) to get the deepest it can go.
I agree with the others in that I'd love to see a live in the field comparison. It isn't tough, I did it myself with various detectors to compare them all on live targets. Just look at my other videos.
I can't see if you posted a video or not on your last post because I'm at work and video is blocked. I'll watch when I get home.
So why did you choose to use gold and nickles instead of silvers and coppers like everyone else would do?
Thanks