CZ-3d vs X-70

[jspeedy]

Which would you rather have for depth and accuracy?

 

[Jackpine Savage]

In MY ground the CZ's can read deep targets as iron while the X70 tends to read them upscale. ie: a deep copper penny with the X70 may read 48 which is the same reading as iron that wraps around. Obviously I prefer the X70's way of doing things. The bad thing is that old rings pulls can read as coins too. When it comes to deep and ID no matter what detector ... ya gotta take the good with the bad and be resigned to digging more trash.

Tom

 

[Dan-Pa.]

For depth a CZ hands down is a much deeper detector, while the XT at normal depths gives a much more accurate numerical readout not a block that emcompasses a group of numbers however even at superior depth the CZ block will read the same block while the X-T tends to read lower. As Tom relates to no perfect detector and a CZ is more prone to masking but either unit works for many. Just a matter of getting to know your unit and taking the good with the bad...

 

[Bill_S]

I have owned both and I would take the 3D over the 70 for sure.

 

[Jackpine Savage]

even at superior depth the CZ block will read the same block while the X-T tends to read lower.

This is exactly where things get confusing. As I posted, in my ground multi-freq detectors have no advantage over single freq machines. Dan in your ground the X70 TID reads lower on deep targets, in my ground they read upscale.

Tom

 

[Dan-Pa.]

Perhaps I should have ended my post in my neck of the woods as indeed from State to State units do vary depending on ground conditions and mineralization