Depth comparison question

[Anonymous]

Would like to know how depth of different detectors compares, if you have used them the way I have. I only dig if visual ID, tone ID, or disc thumbing drop out point indicates better than 50% chance of a coin. So, if you eliminate air tests, planted coin tests of beeps but no consistent ID or field tests of beeps but no consistent ID, how deep can you go with various detectors if you dig only probable coins? My results: Minelab Explorer, 7" quarter & 6" penny; White's MXT 7" penny, 6" dime; White's XLT, 5" penny, 4.5" dime; White's Coinmaster 4 disc 1976 model 7" penny, nickel, dime; Bounty Hunter Rustler 1979 model 5" dime, 5.5" quarter; Fisher CZ-7 5" penny. My soil is moderately mineralized. How's your soil, & what are comparative depths digging only probable coins? Thanks! George (MN)

 

[Anonymous]

Hey George, I like your idea of testing different machines in the same soil. But it would be even better if you used the same coins for each model. If rain lets up, I'll try to test my 3 Garretts according to your standards. Wish I had different models to compare like you. I hope everyone realizes that different tests with the same machine will give varying results according to the soil. HB

 

[Anonymous]

In the lab you try to keep everything except one or two variables constant so you can say things like this detector does beter than this other one here. It is very hard to do in the real world where we actually use detectors.
My XLT can be set many different ways under different conditions. The settings that one day make it unstable the next may work just fine.
After it is used for a while I start to get false positives and I need to let it cool off or sit awhile before I use it again.
Underphone lines the amount of traffic varies by the hour of the day and sometimes I can hunt under them and others cannot even get close.
Anectdotal reports are valid. Say someone who has owned and used both machines usually recommends the DFX over the XLT by a great margin.
I wish there was an easy way to measure them and also to maximize the performance of any machine I had.
joe.

 

[zeb]

[quote George (MN)]Would like to know how depth of different detectors compares, if you have used them the way I have. I only dig if visual ID, tone ID, or disc thumbing drop out point indicates better than 50% chance of a coin. So, if you eliminate air tests, planted coin tests of beeps but no consistent ID or field tests of beeps but no consistent ID, how deep can you go with various detectors if you dig only probable coins? My results: Minelab Explorer, 7" quarter & 6" penny; White's MXT 7" penny, 6" dime; White's XLT, 5" penny, 4.5" dime; White's Coinmaster 4 disc 1976 model 7" penny, nickel, dime; Bounty Hunter Rustler 1979 model 5" dime, 5.5" quarter; Fisher CZ-7 5" penny. My soil is moderately mineralized. How's your soil, & what are comparative depths digging only probable coins? Thanks! George (MN)[/quote]



Hi, I just found your depth comparison test you posted back in 2004.

I loved this and hope you have done more of these tests. I've often wondered what depth the various brands really get? Personally, I don't buy all the claims I've read.

You were very brave making this post!

Please PM me if you're still out there.

Thanks much!

Zeb

 

[Dan-Pa.]

Variables such as coil size, swing speed, unit settings to name some all come into play..Have 3 detectorists do the testing in the same area and would imagine results would differ..I find your depths to be rather low at least on machines I have owned..Surely the Explorer and CZ top the list and 8-10 inch silver dimes should be no problem and have foud them at a foot..XLT is surely an 8 inch unit and have found silvers dimes with one even several inches deeper...I am talking about in the field finds where it really counts..Imagine severe mineralization would lower depths while mild mineralization would increase them. I usually hunt in moderate mineralization myself...