I've had a xlt for about 14 years and have used it with good results in a nearby park I ve found many silver 5 cent canadian coins which are very small and thin I've searched the park many many times and now find very few deep items ( coins or jewelery} anymore i wonder if there is a metal detector out there that is significantly deeper then the xlt The ground is not very mineralized I wouldn't mind spending over 1000 dollars for a deeper unit if it is significantly deeper Do you have any suggestions are the upper end minelabs that much deeper then the xlt or are there other suggestions thanks
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.
deeper then xlt
- Thread starter dkantor
- Start date
teleman2525
New member
i went from xlt to the minelab explorer se pro took a while to get used to the change but well worth every penny i spent deeper and more sensetive fun to use not knocking the xlt great detector just not explorer se look also at the etrac more money but i hear quicker to learn good luck merry xmas have a good year
[size=large]as usual there's those that praise the se and that don't care for it.
darn near all machines can get deeper than the xlt. unless you've found some bigger coils you are limited to the 9.5 coil. haven't heard much about the bigfoot.
the limited coil selection has been the biggest drawback to the xlt. these days the explorer and the e-trac and the safarie all come with larger coils thus deeper signals. and they are dd style. i for one don't know enough about the v3i to say if it can compete with the e-trac. i haven't heard one bad peep about anyone getting rid of or using the e-trac.i do hear alot of folks wishing they could have afforded the e-trac. along with alot of others settled on the poorer mans version, the exployer se pro. there's alot of happy x xlt users here. we all still love our xlts but most have learned to find more with the se. you're not comparing apples here. the xlt can't do as well as the dfx, mxt, e-trac, exployer or v3i who all enjoy larger coils and differant stye coils. you go to the fisher site and they have the best deepest machines. whites think they do. minelab is no differant. who do you finally believe? jmho
HH[/size]
darn near all machines can get deeper than the xlt. unless you've found some bigger coils you are limited to the 9.5 coil. haven't heard much about the bigfoot.
the limited coil selection has been the biggest drawback to the xlt. these days the explorer and the e-trac and the safarie all come with larger coils thus deeper signals. and they are dd style. i for one don't know enough about the v3i to say if it can compete with the e-trac. i haven't heard one bad peep about anyone getting rid of or using the e-trac.i do hear alot of folks wishing they could have afforded the e-trac. along with alot of others settled on the poorer mans version, the exployer se pro. there's alot of happy x xlt users here. we all still love our xlts but most have learned to find more with the se. you're not comparing apples here. the xlt can't do as well as the dfx, mxt, e-trac, exployer or v3i who all enjoy larger coils and differant stye coils. you go to the fisher site and they have the best deepest machines. whites think they do. minelab is no differant. who do you finally believe? jmho
HH[/size]
I do a lot of archeology where I am in the field going over the same areas with my explorer that other folks have just gone over with different brands and I can say the explorer does have an edge, it may not be a huge one but every little bit counts. I too used to have an xlt and I loved that machine at the time but it has definately been outdated. If you are gonna drop a grand on a machine id say minelab is definitely on top for the moment and not just for depth but for separation and I.d. Provided you swing slow lol. But then how many targets are you really gonna dig at more than ten inches?
teleman2525
New member
yes from fast sweep xlt to slow relaxing slow thight to the ground explorers slow is truly the only way to hunt im 58 and slowing down a bit any way heck im a grand pa lol
[size=large]one final thing, from me anyway. shop around. explore ebay for what goodies come with the machine from minelab and what dealers are willing to throw into sweeten the deal. then contact a dealer from the forum here and make a good deal. my personal fav is new england detectors. go to the e-trac forum and click any thread. n.e.'s banner link shows up. there are a lot of dealer/sponsors on this forum. just be sure to get yourself the best deal. shop shop shop.
HH[/size]
HH[/size]
Big Fang Coin Biter
New member
I dug a measured 11" wheat cent on my first hunt with the Explorer. That was a long time ago and I was using the Explorer XS. I used the XLT for one year and it seemed like I was constantly fiddling with it to "get more depth". The Explorer series detectors punch down there in factory preset settings! I did use a Fisher CZ7a Pro for a year or so after the XLT. The CZ really punched down too, compared to the XLT. IMHO the Explorer ID's better at depth than what the Fisher did.
To be fair to the XLT, It was my first machine, so I was learning. After hunting most of that first season, I had not found hardly anything over 4-5 inches in depth. I decided to bury some coins in the garden to see what it could really do. That was the end of my confidence in the XLT - it could hardly pick up a quarter at 6" (I know about the fact that better depth is gained if a target is left in the ground for years).
You will be digging stuff the XLT can not touch.
HH - BF
To be fair to the XLT, It was my first machine, so I was learning. After hunting most of that first season, I had not found hardly anything over 4-5 inches in depth. I decided to bury some coins in the garden to see what it could really do. That was the end of my confidence in the XLT - it could hardly pick up a quarter at 6" (I know about the fact that better depth is gained if a target is left in the ground for years).
You will be digging stuff the XLT can not touch.
HH - BF
dewcon4414
Well-known member
Well i wont go into the ... depends on the person using it since you certainly have enough time on the XLT, But you do spend a little more time playing with your machine, its just the nature of the machine since a good many of the settings are not factory set. You also deal with a little more EMI than we do. In trashy areas thou... unless you know how to wiggle and listen the average person isnt going to see significant depth difference from an experience hunter like yourself. HOWEVER, once you learn the slow method and tones for picking thru that trash i think the explorer has an advantage. You didnt say how deep you were digging targets. For me i found a couple more inches from the DFX. I say that because there are people like LarryIL that kick butt with these machines. I think the Explorers like the CZs are always used as a comparison when new machine come onto the market for a reason. There are just that good. Those using the Etac like it, especially the newbees because they dont have this learning curve we went thru and obviously believe its the best thing since sliced bread. Most of the honest experienced Explorer user who now use the Etrac i think like it for reasons other than depth. Garrett just came out with the AT Pro, they are just now starting to get reviews out about it. If you can hold off until spring.... who knows what may be available..... but i like the CZ and Explorers. Id talk to some of the people in your area that use the various machines... because location does have some affect on your choice. Good luck on a choice.
Dew
Dew
vtcivilwar
New member
After I moved up to an XLT I thought there wasn't anything better. I went to a DFX and thought the same thing. New Technology keeps coming along and improves processor speed, separation, depth.. etc. I have heard that the XLT is analog where all the new machines are digital.? I think it has to do with the software inside, but not sure. If you want to stay with Whites, DFX and an after market book to get the most out of the system. You can tweak it and won't believe the difference from the stock programs.
and it does not even compare to the Explorers for depth...at least for me. Nor does it compare when ID'ing at depth for me
Exactly like Fang...I went from the XLT to the Fisher CZ and instantly started hitting silver coins a good 1" to 2" deeper than the XLT could even dream of for me...and this was back in the "day" when silver was plentiful and it was no big feat to come home with 5 to 10 silver and 25 to 30 wheaties every hunt.
Eventually all my sites I hunted with the XLT and then the Fisher CZ...finally dried up.
Well I am now hunting those exact same 10 to 15 sites I hunted with BOTH those machines back in the 80's that went dry...and in the last 4 years alone I have pulled over 700 silver coins and nearly 400 Injuns' from those same sites I pounded with the xlt and cz.
To this day I still truthfully feel my Fisher CZ can match the depth of the explorer...but NOT when the coin is in iron or trash...because the CZ can't "see" through the iron and ID the coin at depth like the Explorers can.
Also to this day I STILL have both the XLT and a CZ in my stable...always will. The XLT is in my opinion one of the top 5 detectors of ALL TIME...and the Fisher CZ is in the top 5 for me too.
The XLT is just plain FUN...goes deep enough to find some 8"+ silver and Injuns...will hammer gold items...can be swung lightning fast and cover a lot of ground.;..is light as a flyswatter...has an awesome display screen...is a 100% turn on and go machine...and is just a smooth operating, pleasure to use.
All this being said...again...The explorers IMHO will definitely go deeper than I could ever get my XLT to go...and I feel I knew it well...and got the best depth with it that I possibly could in my IL soil. NO brand bashing here...because I LOVE the XLT. The poster's original question was strictly about depth though...and it is what it is for me.
Exactly like Fang...I went from the XLT to the Fisher CZ and instantly started hitting silver coins a good 1" to 2" deeper than the XLT could even dream of for me...and this was back in the "day" when silver was plentiful and it was no big feat to come home with 5 to 10 silver and 25 to 30 wheaties every hunt.
Eventually all my sites I hunted with the XLT and then the Fisher CZ...finally dried up.
Well I am now hunting those exact same 10 to 15 sites I hunted with BOTH those machines back in the 80's that went dry...and in the last 4 years alone I have pulled over 700 silver coins and nearly 400 Injuns' from those same sites I pounded with the xlt and cz.
To this day I still truthfully feel my Fisher CZ can match the depth of the explorer...but NOT when the coin is in iron or trash...because the CZ can't "see" through the iron and ID the coin at depth like the Explorers can.
Also to this day I STILL have both the XLT and a CZ in my stable...always will. The XLT is in my opinion one of the top 5 detectors of ALL TIME...and the Fisher CZ is in the top 5 for me too.
The XLT is just plain FUN...goes deep enough to find some 8"+ silver and Injuns...will hammer gold items...can be swung lightning fast and cover a lot of ground.;..is light as a flyswatter...has an awesome display screen...is a 100% turn on and go machine...and is just a smooth operating, pleasure to use.
All this being said...again...The explorers IMHO will definitely go deeper than I could ever get my XLT to go...and I feel I knew it well...and got the best depth with it that I possibly could in my IL soil. NO brand bashing here...because I LOVE the XLT. The poster's original question was strictly about depth though...and it is what it is for me.
As a former whites user, I'll chime in. I used XLTs, Spectrums, and my favorite (for fast response time in relicky & urban demolition sites) was the Eagle SLII 90. They all get about the same depth, IMHO. But when Explorers first hit "the scene" here in CA, in turfed parks, word trickled back amongst the rumor grapevine, of guys getting silver in certain parks, that were known to have been extremely pounded. I knew for a fact, having hunted them since the 1970s, and having seen the diminishing returns as the years went on, .......... that something was up. I finally got to meet up with one of the early proficient explorer users here, to hunt in a park where silver can be deeeeep. As we traded off flagged signals to compare, he could consistently "call" the deep ones, time after time. And truth be told, even when they were pointed out to me with my various Whites, and even trying multiple settings, re-balancing, etc.. etc... I had to admit, I wouldn't have heard several of them. His oldie count was triple mine! I rushed out to buy an explorer, and have never looked back. 8 or 9" on silver dimes is not un-heard of, once you know what you're listening for.
A few other notes: Since you're used to a fast-swing XLT, it's going to take a LOT of getting used to an Explorer. The sounds and swing speeds are often-time exact opposite of what you are used to searching for. Your best bet is to hook up with someone who is proficient (not just a sand-box hunter, but someone who routinely brings in the old coins). Trade off flagged signals of very deep coins. Get a head-phone splitter, and watch/listen to the sounds he's trying to isolate, how he swings/wiggles his coil, etc...... Eventually, the "lights will go on" and you'll be hooked.
Lastly, I would say that the CZ6 (especially with a 10" coil) is every bit as deep as the Explorer, for coins. However, they get weak on TID's beyond about 7". Nails, etc... start to all sound the same, for the deeper targets, IMHO.
A few other notes: Since you're used to a fast-swing XLT, it's going to take a LOT of getting used to an Explorer. The sounds and swing speeds are often-time exact opposite of what you are used to searching for. Your best bet is to hook up with someone who is proficient (not just a sand-box hunter, but someone who routinely brings in the old coins). Trade off flagged signals of very deep coins. Get a head-phone splitter, and watch/listen to the sounds he's trying to isolate, how he swings/wiggles his coil, etc...... Eventually, the "lights will go on" and you'll be hooked.
Lastly, I would say that the CZ6 (especially with a 10" coil) is every bit as deep as the Explorer, for coins. However, they get weak on TID's beyond about 7". Nails, etc... start to all sound the same, for the deeper targets, IMHO.
Critterhunter
New member
For me being a former Whites guy I've owned or compared them all and the QXT Pro was the deepest on silver and copper coins in my soil. That being said, in my soil even my QXT bottomed out at about 7.5 to 8" on a silver dime. The 6000 Pro XL was very close but a hair behind it in depth for me. I never cared for the XLT due to it's slugish response in trash where as with less software slowing it down the QXT was very fast at seperating targets.
I headed off to own three Explorers over the years and none of them would get any deeper than my QXT *IN MY SOIL* (which tends to be medium to high in minerals) on silver or copper coins. Sure, it was deeper on lower conductivity targets thanks to the extra higher frequencies, but in my soil a low frequency machine like the QXT seemed to punch through the minerals better. It for sure had a more stable ID on coins at depth than I could ever achieve with my Explorers, and I tried setting them up, reading tips, and hunting various sites every which way I could...digging by audio only, etc, and so on. I feel there is something about FBS machines with all those extra high frequencies that reflect off my ground minerals or something and don't give them as good of depth as others have reported in their soils, high mineral or not. Maybe I've just got the perfect blend of minerals that don't like certain frequencies an FBS machine is generating.
Down the road I came to a point where, lacking something larger like a 12x10 coil for the QXT (man I wish they made one for low frequency Whites!), I was forced to look around again for something new that might get better depth in my soil. Owned many of them in the past and there were only a few I didn't try or compare to yet. CZ6a? Nope, plenty of head to head field tests on undug targets and it didn't ID at depth as good as the QXT. Garretts? Please, I've been there. 'Nuff said. Tesoros? Same deal, and I can't stand not having a good VDI along with tone ID. DFX? Again, seen it in action and wasn't impressed. In fact, using the same size coil I'd put my money on a QXT regardless of how well (and hours you spent) tweaking out a DFX. V3? Surf those forums. I'm not seeing any evidence to support a true performance increase, and again it's tweak city for marginal results. MXT or M6? Also seen in action and, while great machines, they are still getting the depth of Whites from the 90's. T2 or F75LTD? Those interest me, as I've heard some good depth reports from even former Minelab owners.
What I was left with, besides those two machines to try, was either an Etrac or a Sovereign GT. Always wanted to try a Sovereign and I couldn't afford an Etrac at the time, so I thought I could buy a used GT, prove to myself that it wasn't any deeper than my prior Explorers, and then sell it off for an Etrac. Well, low and behold it's been over a year now and I'm real happy with my GT. I can honestly say it's the deepest machine I've owned *IN MY SOIL* on silver and copper coins. With the stock 10" Tornado (much better than the 10" Explorer coils to me) I've dug a V-nickle and an Indian at about 11" deep at a spot I gridded the tar out of with my Explorers and could never achieve more than about 7 to 8" of depth with them there. Threw a 12x10 on the GT and it looks like I'm getting even deeper based on some deeper wheats I've plain out missed before.
Point is that having owned, used, and compared most of the machines out there through the years I was always a Whites guy. The audio and VDI was great, and the machines were built user friendly. I've now built a custom shaft for my GT and am running a lipo battery to drop about a pound and a half off the unit so that's no longer an issue. It has good long drawn out telling audio like I liked on some Whites, a great VDI resolution on gold versus tabs and other junk, and I can even chest mount it right out of the box for some water hunting. Regardless of which Minelab you own (Etrac, Explorer, Sovereign), you can rest assured that no Whites can compare depth and performance wise, regardless of how long you figure out a custom program for a specific site. And by the time you do, you'll look around and realize it's dark and all your buddies with Minelabs have hunted it out and went home for the night.
Whites has gone off the deep in with software engineers instead of electrical engineers. You want to impress me? Then make the machine go DEEPER even in rough ground than prior Whites models. Progress is based on that, not how many more worthless or confusing parameters you can set in some computer program. When they figure that out I'll consider a Whites again.
I headed off to own three Explorers over the years and none of them would get any deeper than my QXT *IN MY SOIL* (which tends to be medium to high in minerals) on silver or copper coins. Sure, it was deeper on lower conductivity targets thanks to the extra higher frequencies, but in my soil a low frequency machine like the QXT seemed to punch through the minerals better. It for sure had a more stable ID on coins at depth than I could ever achieve with my Explorers, and I tried setting them up, reading tips, and hunting various sites every which way I could...digging by audio only, etc, and so on. I feel there is something about FBS machines with all those extra high frequencies that reflect off my ground minerals or something and don't give them as good of depth as others have reported in their soils, high mineral or not. Maybe I've just got the perfect blend of minerals that don't like certain frequencies an FBS machine is generating.
Down the road I came to a point where, lacking something larger like a 12x10 coil for the QXT (man I wish they made one for low frequency Whites!), I was forced to look around again for something new that might get better depth in my soil. Owned many of them in the past and there were only a few I didn't try or compare to yet. CZ6a? Nope, plenty of head to head field tests on undug targets and it didn't ID at depth as good as the QXT. Garretts? Please, I've been there. 'Nuff said. Tesoros? Same deal, and I can't stand not having a good VDI along with tone ID. DFX? Again, seen it in action and wasn't impressed. In fact, using the same size coil I'd put my money on a QXT regardless of how well (and hours you spent) tweaking out a DFX. V3? Surf those forums. I'm not seeing any evidence to support a true performance increase, and again it's tweak city for marginal results. MXT or M6? Also seen in action and, while great machines, they are still getting the depth of Whites from the 90's. T2 or F75LTD? Those interest me, as I've heard some good depth reports from even former Minelab owners.
What I was left with, besides those two machines to try, was either an Etrac or a Sovereign GT. Always wanted to try a Sovereign and I couldn't afford an Etrac at the time, so I thought I could buy a used GT, prove to myself that it wasn't any deeper than my prior Explorers, and then sell it off for an Etrac. Well, low and behold it's been over a year now and I'm real happy with my GT. I can honestly say it's the deepest machine I've owned *IN MY SOIL* on silver and copper coins. With the stock 10" Tornado (much better than the 10" Explorer coils to me) I've dug a V-nickle and an Indian at about 11" deep at a spot I gridded the tar out of with my Explorers and could never achieve more than about 7 to 8" of depth with them there. Threw a 12x10 on the GT and it looks like I'm getting even deeper based on some deeper wheats I've plain out missed before.
Point is that having owned, used, and compared most of the machines out there through the years I was always a Whites guy. The audio and VDI was great, and the machines were built user friendly. I've now built a custom shaft for my GT and am running a lipo battery to drop about a pound and a half off the unit so that's no longer an issue. It has good long drawn out telling audio like I liked on some Whites, a great VDI resolution on gold versus tabs and other junk, and I can even chest mount it right out of the box for some water hunting. Regardless of which Minelab you own (Etrac, Explorer, Sovereign), you can rest assured that no Whites can compare depth and performance wise, regardless of how long you figure out a custom program for a specific site. And by the time you do, you'll look around and realize it's dark and all your buddies with Minelabs have hunted it out and went home for the night.
Whites has gone off the deep in with software engineers instead of electrical engineers. You want to impress me? Then make the machine go DEEPER even in rough ground than prior Whites models. Progress is based on that, not how many more worthless or confusing parameters you can set in some computer program. When they figure that out I'll consider a Whites again.
dewcon4414
Well-known member
I hope Whites is reading these posts.... there are a lot of us old Whites user just waiting. They need to impress us with more than another setting. I was about to purchase a Sov myself when the dealer offered me a sweet deal on the SE. The Sov have so much flexibility to reduce weight.... and hip mounting, now why cant they do that with the Explorer? They could make the weight that everyone complains about a NON issue and would bring back a lot of those people that HAD to leave just because of the weight. Not only are you getting better depth.... but with FBS the Explorer and Sov transitions great on the beach and gets you as close as there is to a machine that will hunt anywhere. This was some honest information without brand bashing from some very experienced hunters telling it like it is. Man.... thanks for all the good info.
Dew
Dew
banditicey
New member
I recently went to the e trac but had the explorer se for a short time and during that time I found a Barber 1907 half digging past my elbow or about 16 inches.
Prior to the explorer I had the DFX for two years but switched to Minelab after being convinced that the depth of the minelab detectors was far deeper than the DFX.
I had enjoyed and found some great coins with the DFX including an 1810 large cent and a 1876 seated liberty dime but certainly not at the depth of the minelab detectors. I recently switched to the e trac because it was easier for me to read the moniter since I now needed reading glasses and everyone in my group of buddies for detecting had the e trac. It made life easier.
Prior to the explorer I had the DFX for two years but switched to Minelab after being convinced that the depth of the minelab detectors was far deeper than the DFX.
I had enjoyed and found some great coins with the DFX including an 1810 large cent and a 1876 seated liberty dime but certainly not at the depth of the minelab detectors. I recently switched to the e trac because it was easier for me to read the moniter since I now needed reading glasses and everyone in my group of buddies for detecting had the e trac. It made life easier.
[/size]Critterhunter
New member
Yea, you buy/throw the meter on seperately. There are several models and even an analog unit that can be bought used that were made by Sunray and others. Currently Minelab sells the DigiSearch meter for it. Most of these meters go from negative numbers (iron) all the way up to 180 (COIN). The resolution in the low and mid range (below coin) is expanded, making splitting hairs on things like pull tabs and rings a real possibility. It's a higher ranger than the M6/MXT, which are also known for their ring sniffing ability.
I found on my Explorers that I could develop no pattern for things like tabs versus rings due to how closely the FBS machines look at the target. Two seemingly identical pull tabs could vary widely in number ranges, where as on the Sovereign I have developed a distinct pattern. I scanned in well over 100 gold rings (found randomly by digging everthing above iron by a friend using an Excal water hunting) and a large test pool of round and square tabs also found in an unbiased (non-selective) fashion. The results are I can reject 84% of all tabs with the proper notch setting on my GT and still recover well over 75% (or so) of the gold rings present. When you think about all the round/square tabs laying in some old parks that's a LOT less digging trash while still recovering the vast majority of the rings. I've tried to devolope such programs on other machines in the past but they either suffered from too low of resolution or too high. Combine all that with the excellent full body audio of the Sovereign, giving you the ability to hear differences in rings and trash on many occasions, and I think it's the best gold ring machine on the market. Throw in the depth this thing gets for old coins and no old park is hunted out.
I found on my Explorers that I could develop no pattern for things like tabs versus rings due to how closely the FBS machines look at the target. Two seemingly identical pull tabs could vary widely in number ranges, where as on the Sovereign I have developed a distinct pattern. I scanned in well over 100 gold rings (found randomly by digging everthing above iron by a friend using an Excal water hunting) and a large test pool of round and square tabs also found in an unbiased (non-selective) fashion. The results are I can reject 84% of all tabs with the proper notch setting on my GT and still recover well over 75% (or so) of the gold rings present. When you think about all the round/square tabs laying in some old parks that's a LOT less digging trash while still recovering the vast majority of the rings. I've tried to devolope such programs on other machines in the past but they either suffered from too low of resolution or too high. Combine all that with the excellent full body audio of the Sovereign, giving you the ability to hear differences in rings and trash on many occasions, and I think it's the best gold ring machine on the market. Throw in the depth this thing gets for old coins and no old park is hunted out.