Edge availability..

[BuckeyeBrad]

I was thinking the original availability was being stated about early to mid November but now I'm starting to see more like early December. Anyone shed some light on this?

 

[BuckeyeBrad]

n/t

 

[BarnacleBill]

n/t

 

[Bugar In. USA]

Most of the distributors had one they let their dealers and some of their customers mess around with, then it was sent back to the factory with feedback, i just missed trying one by 2 days

 

[Jackpine Savage]

n/t

 

[Bugar In. USA]

Yes , The General and the distributor were very impressed by it, said the deep ID qualities were fantastic, only thing they didn't like was the S type handle , rather than a pistol grip like the CZ5 or C$, and such

 

[Jackpine Savage]

for the info Bugar. Personally I prefer the S-rod setup. The 1236-X2, CZ-5 and the Excel fit me well. I converted the C$ I had to an old 2 piece S-rod from a 1235 and like it also.

Tom

 

[mtdoramike]

I know when I hunted with the CZ5 or CZ3d I had less fatigue then when I hunt with the CZ70 or the C$. Now when I hunted with the Excel, there was no fatigue at all, but at 2.2lbs how could there be.

 

[Jackpine Savage]

Unless its a machine like the 1270 with the trigger P/P switch I see no reason to use the pistol grip style, it just adds weight and doesn't neccessarily give better balance. The angle of the pistol grip should have been made adjustable too, but that would have added even more weight. The belt mounting plate is a better deal than the slide on the 1200's and CZ-5 but the tradeoff is that you are still left with a pistol grip with plate attached that does not balance as well as the S-rod with coil only.

Wading with the C$ the pistol grip rod assembly is horrid! The torque on the wrist and arm due to the death grip needed to keep the coil under control against the water resistance when changing directions at the end of a sweep was a killer!! With the S-rod all you have to do is guide it. Glad to see the Edge keep the S-rod and go to a removeable control box for a couple of reasons.

Tom

 

[BuckeyeBrad]

As most of you might be, I've been wondering where and why FRL is going in the direction they are with the apparent elimination of the CZ 70 etc. Not a bad thing... just wondering, yet confident that they surely have a plan that makes perfect sense looking at the big picture. Of course with Fisher, they produce detectors that tend to survive the test of time better than any of the other "big 6" manufacturers. The Sovereign is the only other TID detector that's been out over 10 years that really performs so well albeit with some ergo liabilities. In the Fisher TID arena I've had a C$ over two years, CZ's for a lot longer, (currently a 3-D and 70) and had an Excel since it was released until just recently but have an Edge on the way. I also have most of the other brands and use them all as I see fit. However, this weekend I hunted both days with just the Fisher TID's I have and the answers started to become much clearer if my thinking was straight. As quite a few of us know, the C$, being a unique design, just flat does some things better than anything else out there. It's speed is unequaled and it's depth in the real world is at the very least equal to any of the competitions' multi freq units. At least where I hunt, there is typically more good remaining targets that are masked than those that are just laying alone at unreal depths. This is where the C$ kicks a$$ and with a very forgiving sweep speed also! I trust it more than the Explorer II and DFX, not that those detectors don't make some good "technical" finds when I use them too. The 3-D is the best out there for areas where there is much lower trash levels that hold old coins at extreme depths. Instead of pretty much guessing about those deep "possibles", the 3-D usually tells you utilizing it's unique deep ID capabilities with a simple clear high coin tone, not a bunch of widely bouncing numbers with corresponding tones or floating cursors. Based on past experience, the Excel does the job when neither of these two scenarios are extreme and at a performance level that at least currently is the best in it's price range. True, easy, predictable, effective, single frequency performance and there's a definite place where this technology shines. I'm hoping and confident that the Edge will expand on this. I know all of this has been stated in the past, but just actually using all three as "a set of tools" side by side at a series of sites where they could each strut their stuff, really graphically confirmed the individual highly desirable strengths of these three detectors. Given all that, and the state of the detector market, I can see where it would make sense for FRL to do some "product consolidation" as well as expanding on recent newer technology. Again..... just my opinions that aren't bound by the constraints of brand loyalty.... "not that that's a bad thing"! (a little Sinefeld humor there) And for those that for whatever reason choose to own and use just one detector, well.... good luck, and I mean that.

 

[BuckeyeBrad]

n/t

 

[Jackpine Savage]

Actually a damn good post Brad that deserves its own thread.

tom

 

[Bill Ladd]

n/t