EQUINOX technologies.......

[amberjack]

its fun to read all this on what others think, but I believe minelab on this not what others want to see in the blog post , and yep if your a detectorist who wants one detector that does it all pretty well then from what I read this is a great all rounder, but have read nothing that would make me sell ctx, etrac, deus to buy this detector that would be a step backwards.. if I just want a light do it all pretty well to take on a road trip or what ever then the IQ would be a great addition.

so not an in place of but another detector which is great if you need another one

AJ

 

[Southwind]

I basically just need two detector at this time. One, my E-Trac, for the super deep hard hit coin sites. I've tried the Deus and all the "they go just as deep" detectors but none was as a reliable consistent producer like the E-Trac/CTX. My second need is for the best tot lot detector I can get my hands on. Again, I've tried them all. The Deus is my top pick, but the price difference compared to the advantage over the AT Pro just wasn't worth it. The AT Pro easily hit every piece of gold the Deus did but the Deus was a tad deeper. Along cam the Racer 2. I find the R2 to be slightly deeper than the AT Pro or at least very close, but it does a better job relic hunting. I don't do a lot of relic hunting but I do now and then. So right now I still have both the AT Pro and the Racer 2.

From what I see in the videos, I don't trust any testers so called "reviews" I want to see and hear it for myself. What I see and hear I like. It seems to have the same tones as the E-Trac, which in my opinion are one of the E-Tracs strongest assets, we know its light and wireless. My thoughts are with a single 40 kHz (800 model) it SHOULD do well as a tot lot detector. Only my testing will tell.

 

[amberjack]

that's it we all have different hunting needs and 100% agree I am the best tester of any detector as I am the one who will be using it and the signals last processing happens in my cranium not someone else's

so knowing what I need and what I need it for is what this is all about.. and well I cant find a place going on minelabs honest report so far that I have a need for the IQ want sure need no.

I will wait and see if that becomes a need but not as yet.. more minelab part 2 etc needed for final confirmation

AJ

 

[sgoss66]

Thanks for the link...

A quote from the link >>> "however BBS/FBS still have an advantage for finding high conductive silver coins in all conditions." The Etrac and CTX still will rule the old silver coin world. I love my Etrac and CTX. I will buy the 800 for my grandson to use when he is here in Oregon.

A quote from another detector manufacturer said common sense tells you that fbs/bbs wont be any deeper than the lowest probing single frequency VLF detector, not sure if it went to court this was about 17 years ago and they said it was false advertising after Minelab were showing a diagram of their Explorer detectors probing much deeper than their competitors,

Hello,

What you were told by that other detector manufacturer ONE -- misses the point, and TWO -- I dare say is false.

FALSE, because if one machine is transmitting with greater power than a second machine of the same frequency, there COULD be a depth gain, but more importantly, if one detector does a better job dealing with the ground matrix than a second machine running the same frequency, the one dealing with the ground better would detect targets deeper. CLEARLY, some machines are deeper than others. Period. FALSE statement, whoever said it.

But, second, it MISSES THE POINT because, as others have alluded to in previous posts, multi-frequency can (and in the case of FBS, DOES) give you better target ID with depth. What good is a machine that can detect an 8" dime, but IDs it solidly as iron, versus a second machine that detects the same 8" dime, but IDs it as a dime? This is EXACTLY the scenario I have dealt with, with single-frequency machines versus FBS. I had an F70 that would detect ANY "deep" coin with a "15" ID -- in other words, IRON. Anything whatsoever beyond 7-8" gave a solid "IRON" ID number. Meanwhile, my Explorer can ID a coin with relatively good accuracy to the very limits of its depth capability. In terms of raw depth, the F70 was deeper -- ESPECIALLY in all-metal mode. By a few inches even. But accurate ID with depth, FBS is more accurate in my dirt by a good 3-4"...

Steve

 

[bugg]

Plus the military probably paid thru the nose for the engineering of this stuff.
Just a guess on my part

 

[Southwind]

What good is a machine that can detect an 8" dime, but IDs it solidly as iron, versus a second machine that detects the same 8" dime, but IDs it as a dime?

Exactly what I've tried to explain to those who are always saying "My detector goes just as deep as the E-Trac/CTX" sgoss66. Yes many detectors will make a sound on those deep coins but what makes the FBS's special is the ability to accurately ID those sounds at greater depths.

 

[Charles (Upstate NY)]

Agree, and then there is the fact that Minelab uses expensive Litz wire in the transmit winding of the coil. One loop of common magnet wire is a single strand, one loop of litz wire may be 50 strands. But this is taking the red pill and diving deep down the rabbit hole.

because if one machine is transmitting with greater power than a second machine of the same frequency, there COULD be a depth gain, but more importantly, if one detector does a better job dealing with the ground matrix than a second machine running the same frequency, the one dealing with the ground better would detect targets deeper. CLEARLY, some machines are deeper than others. Period. Steve

 

[Charles (Upstate NY)]

For those lamenting the NOX not going as deep on high conductive silver (and other copper, bronze) coins here's my gift to you...on your sites pounded to nothing with the FBS machines take the NOX in there with its higher frequencies and dig the coins on edge because it sounds like the NOX with its shift to higher frequencies will have the advantage on coins on edge, presenting the coil with a much smaller surface area facing the coil.

 

[chipper97]

Charles, thanks for that bit of insight, re coins on edge response to higher frequencies. Another box checked for the Equinox.

 

[Charles (Upstate NY)]

Tip of the iceberg really. Minelabs statement on silver what was that in an air test? I get they are trying to be truthful and set expectations, or not kill off the CTX. But EQX and silver vs FBS and silver there's so many variations of that. Are there more coins that are simply deep vs hiding from FBS in the shadow of iron and trash? My money is on coins hiding from FBS so the EQX with its tighter target separation may produce on worn out sites. Silver coins just peeking out from under iron and trash, small bit of the coin to get a hit on, again higher frequency advantage. Small silver coins like 3 cent silvers and half dimes.

Now lets talk about the big one, mineralization because mineralization is a depth killer. Minelab is saying EQX will ID more accurately at depth vs FBS. The only way to pull that off is to better deal with mineralization at depth. Even in moderately mineralized soil, say the soil I typically hunted in Upstate NY the deeper the target, the more the signal was swamped by mineralization knocking the ID out of whack, cursor jumping around, until at FBS limits the target is completely swamped by the mineralization e.g. no target. So if the EQX handles this mineralization better than FBS does that equal more depth in mineralized soil? Likely. The mineralization here in the Pacific NW where I'm at now, its horrid, magnetic volcanic black sand trying to punch through this stuff to get depth is really annoying for an FBS machine.

So we'll see but there's no reason to get a boo boo face about the EQX and depth on silver vs FBS imo. Just my 2 cents worth.

 

[D&P-OR]

Very, very true!-----It can be summed up in three words--BETTER USABLE DEPTH!--------BTW, I want to hunt behind some of those people!

What good is a machine that can detect an 8" dime, but IDs it solidly as iron, versus a second machine that detects the same 8" dime, but IDs it as a dime?

Exactly what I've tried to explain to those who are always saying "My detector goes just as deep as the E-Trac/CTX" sgoss66. Yes many detectors will make a sound on those deep coins but what makes the FBS's special is the ability to accurately ID those sounds at greater depths.

 

[Cal_Cobra]

I've used VLF machines that were as deep, or got me coin targets that were even deeper then my Etrac (F75 LTD2 for example, BUT the silver HAD to be larger then dimes), BUT that said, it was an uncommon occurrence, whereas the Etrac consistently produced a fairly reliable TID and picked out deeper silver, especially dimes.

I know the soil conditions pretty well at the places I like to detect, and at some sites, my friends that have ML FBS machines have no issues handling mineralization that my VLF machines struggle with. If the ground is tame and I need every last bit of power, perhaps the Nox VLF mode will work better, maybe not, BUT you have options to select the right tool for the job.

Until we get these machines out in the field, everything's conjecture at best, but it's interesting to see the developments as ML teases us with tidbits of info.

 

[Jason in Enid]

For those lamenting the NOX not going as deep on high conductive silver (and other copper, bronze) coins here's my gift to you...on your sites pounded to nothing with the FBS machines take the NOX in there with its higher frequencies and dig the coins on edge because it sounds like the NOX with its shift to higher frequencies will have the advantage on coins on edge, presenting the coil with a much smaller surface area facing the coil.

A coin has the same inductance ability regardless of its position. The only difference position plays is the amount of the RF signal that can make it back to the coil. Thats not the same as comparing a gold ring to a silver ring.

 

[Ksdirt]

Southwind,

I could be wrong, but I still think it is possible -- and possibly somewhat accurate -- to read their statement "BBS/FBS still have an advantage for finding high-conductive silver coins" as "please don't stop buying the CTX, even though we are releasing new/improved technology and being forced to do so at a lower price, due to the price point of the machines offered by our competitors..."

I think that could very well be it also ..had to sneak that line in somewhere ...I mean look ..Brandon's not going to put his rep. On the line for a waterproof xterra ..this is his number one machine now..atlleast you wouldn't think so....even if the price was right..

 

[sube]

"however BBS/FBS still have an advantage for finding high conductive silver coins in all conditions

(ALL CONDITIONS) This doesn't set well with me I hunt trash more speed from target to target will see more and hear more less masking , as to depth in trash I think speed would give good depth more time for the detector to ID targets at normal sweep speeds . Ctx would miss some signals because of other targets that are just to close to the target you want .

What I see is a low conductor multi - frequency machine by running higher frequency making it more sensitive to low conductors where as the ctx runs lower frequency making it more sensitive to high conductors . As far as silver I think it well do very well .

As far as silver masked by iron and heavy trash density I would say the nox is the clear winner . sube

 

[Architex]

FBS 2 goes as high as 100khz. So where is the gain with the EQ going to 40 khz coming from? Just an honest question.

 

[Dan(NM)]

FBS 2 goes as high as 100khz. So where is the gain with the EQ going to 40 khz coming from? Just an honest question.

No way FBS 2 is hitting 100khz, otherwise it'd be killer on small gold, it actually sucks in that dept, but, that's just my opinion.

 

[sube]

FBS 2 goes as high as 100khz. So where is the gain with the EQ going to 40 khz coming from? Just an honest question.

I know what your saying but in reality it is a low multi frequency detector deadly on deep silver by running lower frequency's if it ran higher frequency's it would be deadly on lower conductors .Maybe the next top detector well run high and low at the same time if that's possible . sube

 

[sgoss66]

I have said this before, here, and on other forums, but at the sake of becoming annoyingly repetitive, I'll say it again.

I do not believe that Minelab's engineers were instructed to create a new, breakthrough multifrequency technology, one that we can jump out of an airplane at a huge detecting festival and announce to the world will obsolete all other single-frequency VLF units but...

...while you are designing this cutting-edge technology, MAKE SURE that whatever "breakthrough" you engineer -- though it needs to be obsoleting single-frequency units from other companies -- it at the same time needs not to be SO MUCH of a breakthrough that it out-performs our OWN top-end machines...

No way.

IF the Equinox, and its Multi-IQ, is really so good that it will be shown to out-class high-end units from other companies, then it is going to -- BY DEFAULT -- be a serious threat to existing MINELAB units as well. OTHERWISE, if the Equinox and Multi-IQ are sub-standard performers to FBS and BBS and V-Flex, then the unit will almost certainly not be good enough to substantially outperform the best that the other companies have to offer, and thus Minelab will CONTINUE to lose market share. And further, in that case, Minelab would need to seriously consider firing some engineers!

However, I have little concern that this will be the case. I believe the marketing department HAS to suggest that the Equinox will fall "beneath" their best technology (they have too many E-Tracs and CTXs and Excals they need to continue to sell), but I doubt their engineering department is ready to agree that their best efforts resulted in a new technology that in some important ways is sub-standard to technology that the same engineering department brought to market 15 years ago (BBS and FBS)...

In my case, I am simply going to give them the benefit of the doubt. My Explorer is -- even being 15-plus year old technology -- the best machine I've ever used for the type of hunting I do. That's remarkable. I will trust the same people that engineered that unit that if they are going to jump out of an airplane and tell me they have a breakthrough in technology that will make single-frequency VLF obsolete, that it is likely to be an extremely capable machine. I'll buy it, try it, and see if that's not the case, for my style of hunting. If it's not, I'll sell it to someone else, whose style of hunting it may be more suited for.

Steve

 

[Charles (Upstate NY)]

For those lamenting the NOX not going as deep on high conductive silver (and other copper, bronze) coins here's my gift to you...on your sites pounded to nothing with the FBS machines take the NOX in there with its higher frequencies and dig the coins on edge because it sounds like the NOX with its shift to higher frequencies will have the advantage on coins on edge, presenting the coil with a much smaller surface area facing the coil.

A coin has the same inductance ability regardless of its position. The only difference position plays is the amount of the RF signal that can make it back to the coil. Thats not the same as comparing a gold ring to a silver ring.

Sorry no, I think you need to go study magnetic field lines a coil produces.