DFX or MXT ? Convince Me........

[Ralph Bryant]

I'm in the middle of deciding between these two excellent machines as my next project, and for the sake of drumming up some discussion and to get a feel for different user's ideas and preferrences, thought I would throw this question out for discussion........

[attachment 13607 DFXMXT.jpg]


<u><h4>Which do you prefer, and why ? ...... The MXT or the DFX ?</h4></u>


Primary use will be a little bit of everything in a wide range of ground conditions, price is not an issue. I'm especially interested in comments from those who use or have used both, but all input is more than welcome. Thanks, and I appreciate the feedback.

Ralph

 

[Richard@BackwoodsDetectors]

For my detecting needs, I prefer the MXT... I relic hunt and dig all non-ferrous targets...when I do occasionally coin hunt, I do the same... The mixed-audio in the relic mod...especially since the audio tracks the discrimation is great.. Too, I like more of a turn-on-and-go machine...If I solely were a coin hunter, I would use the DFX. Programmable, ID Methods, Notching,etc.... Best to you, RichardnTn

 

[BuckeyeBrad]

n/t

 

[Ralph Bryant]

Yes, owned the DFX but didn't keep it very long, but after digesting Jeff Foster's book, think it might be time to give it another try. Also have used the MXT some (belonging to a friend) but not extensively. I guess I'm hoping to read others opinions to pick out a few things that perhaps I haven't considered.

Ralph

 

[BuckeyeBrad]

I'd recommend and personally prefer the DFX. That's not to say I'm real happy with the DFX, but just prefer it compared to the MXT. The difference in adjustability pretty much sums it up. Basically, the DFX has more adjustability than critically necessary while the MXT doesn't have enough. The MXT may seem very attractive at first, but it left me wanting the more flexibility that the DFX offers. As you know, one really needs to invest an inordinate amount of book and field time to utilize the DFX up to full potential but from what I think I know about you, you'd thrive on the challenge. Jeff's book is easily the best written source of info to date. Good luck with whichever you choose.

 

[Roy(GA)]

I've owned almost all Whites since 1976 and worked my way up to the DFX from an XLT. Did not care for the DFX. Too many adjustments, too many decisions to make. I found I was spending too much time adjusting the computer instead of hunting. Great for engineers and computer geeks. I really like the depth of the MXT for relic hunting here in Georgia, however it was so noisy it became a chore to hunt with. Quacked like a duck in the relic mode. Went back to a new 6000 XL Pro and I am happy now. I like turning a knob ot two for a quick adjustment. Great depth, very good target ID and a pleasure to hunt with.

 

[Ralph Bryant]

<h1>......The Challenge !......</h1>

Ahhhhh, you know me well Grass-Hoppa !

Ralph

 

[Richard@BackwoodsDetectors]

Jeff has written a great book that is a must if a person is to reach the full potential of the DFX... The default programs that White's uses is okay to just familiarize yourself with the machine... but in laymen's terms "they just don't cut it." Cause and Effect is one the best reasons to really get to know the machine... just doing this or that in the menu may have ramifications that could put you running a program that falls into the default category, definitely not what your expecting. The Explorer II, like the DFX, is another excellent machine,that also takes time and understanding, to reach it's full potential...Anyway,sorry to ramble... Richardntn

 

[Ralph Bryant]

Thanks Richard,

When I first tried the DFX, Jeff's book was not yet in print. This time I've loaded up on everything I could find on the DFX before hand, including Clive's, Jimmy's, and Jeff's books along with Matt's booklet and a large notebook full of forum post print-outs from a myriad of different users. This may be one of the most written about detectors ever on the market. In any case, the old adage of "buy the book before the product" is good advice. I learned that from Jbird when buying my first Nautilus IIb, and felt like I knew the machine pretty well before I ever actually held one in my hands. Great way to get a "jump" on the learning curve. I feel much the same way now with the DFX after reading so much about it, and putting all of the puzzle pieces together. I think that is the main stumbling block of so many who never give the DFX its full due, just not taking the time and effort needed to learn what it is really capable of and giving up too early out of frustration. In any event, I think it's worth another shot. I know this is one of Cody's favorites too, and I respect his opinion on the capabilities of different machines, inside and out.

Ralph

 

[Richard@BackwoodsDetectors]

"I think that is the main stumbling block of so many who never give the DFX its full due, just not taking the time and effort needed to learn what it is really capable of and giving up too early out of frustration."
Ralph, You are "on the money".... The DFX, to get the full potential, has to have a commitment from the user...All too many people have gotten the DFX and were going to get the ones every body left behind just to find out they were getting mediocre performance and then blame the machine...This machine demands "tinkering" RichardnTn

 

[Ralph Bryant]

As one eMail I got from a long-time "dedicated" DFX user stated:

>>"Thinking you're gunna get the best out of the DFX by using it like a turn-on-and-go machine is like climbing into the space shuttle and pushing the "GO" button, expecting to get there and back while you do nothing but enjoy the ride.......ain't gonna happen !"<<

Couldn't have said it better myself !

 

[nate-wi]

I personally like the XLT the best of all whites models. I really like the DFX because is virtually the same as the XLT besides for a few modes. The DFX shows great rebound and can find coins and relics in the most trashy or mineralized areas with a great LCD screen.