sgoss66
Well-known member
Everyone --
As most of you know, I've been using my SE Pro now for about 8 months. In this time, I have become pretty used to what the machine is telling me (of course, there's still ALOT more to learn, but...)
However, I've been nagged in my mind from the day I purchased the SE Pro as to whether I'm giving up anything hunting with an Explorer instead of an E-Trac. Well, I now have an opportunity to hunt for awhile with an E-Trac -- as a friend of mine is "out of commission" for awhile and is letting me borrow his unit. I am hoping, through this opportunity, to once and for all settle the issue in my mind as to which machine might be more capable.
Well, I have hunted with the E-Trac for a couple of hours now (not very long, obviously), and in this amount of time, I have felt like a fish out of water!! I didn't realize how much I've gotten used to the subtleties and quirks and peculiarities of my Explorer. I guess I have learned to read the subtle hints that the machine gives, and have in a way "become one" with my SE Pro. I would not have known this necessarily, but I found it out by swinging the E-Trac -- because although it is quite similar on the surface, in terms of tones and general operation, I quickly learned that it is quite a different machine. For shallow coins, no problem. If I just want to dig solid, "textbook" perfect hits, I do just fine with it. In that type of hunting (shallow, easy coins) it is quite similar to the Explorer, to me. However, I have spent these first couple of hours with the E-Trac in a hammered, "hunted-out" park -- trying to listen for subtle, deep coins that may have been missed, and also trying to hit a few partially masked targets that may reveal themselves to the E-Trac but didn't to my Explorer. And in searching for these more sublte targets, I quickly found that my assumption that an "iffy" coin will behave the same on the E-Trac as they do on the Explorer was a very incorrect assumption. I chased several "iffy" deep hits; a few I could not find at all (which NEVER happens with my Explorer), and a few were VERY DEEP chunks of metal -- which I also am almost never fooled by on my Explorer. A few were nails and such. NONE were good targets. It's clear that even beyond the different ID numbers, the E-Trac is a different beast (despite all the "familiarities" and "similarities").
I do intend to spend more time with the E-Trac, but my ability to find good targets is definitely suffering at this point. I know many have said that it's normal for your finds to temporarily decrease when using a new machine, and I'm seeing this. Also, from what I've seen folks say, the E-Trac is most advantageous to NON-Explorer users -- and I can see why. I think there is more of a potential for the "wow" factor for someone acquiring an E-Trac for the first time, and who has NOT used an Explorer before; still, I am going to continue to give the E-Trac a chance to "wow" me.
For now, my very preliminary thoughts are that it's going to be tough for me to want to give up the Explorer -- which I am now so familiar with. While curious, I was not convinced before I used the E-Trac that it would be a big improvement over an Explorer; though two hours is in NO WAY a fair comparison, I remain unconvinced at this point that it is a drastically superior unit. While my mind may change in time, this is where I'm at for now. I know that I DO NOT like the pinpoint function as well (though I know there are two different pinpoint modes and I have only tried one), I do NOT like the lack of digital ID in pinpoint mode, but I DO like the ergonomics; FAR superior to the Explorer. One other thing is, it's hard for me to "grasp" at this point the way to understand the machine in terms of target ID. With the Explorer, it's easy to understand the "logic" of the FE and CO numbers; however, with "good" targets "normalized" to FE number 12 on the E-Trac, it becomes difficult for me to visualize and grasp, for instance, the implications of hunting in "quick mask." Some of this is simply experience, I'm sure, but for me being used to the Explorer, I find the FE and CO numbers much more confusing, instead of simpler (which is what I think the E-Trac was supposed to do -- make it simpler). Anyway, I'm rambling...but thought some of this might help someone else who has at least considered an "upgrade." I'll continue to post my thoughts as I get more used to the E-Trac. I know Bryce has used both, and went "back" to his Explorer -- preferring it to the E-Trac. Based on my first impressions, I can see why, and at least at this point (though I may prove myself wrong) I can see me arriving at the same conclusion.
A question...how long (for those of you who started with Explorers, and then got familiar with the E-Trac) did it take you to get used to the E-Trac, and learn what it was telling you with respect to the "iffy" targets?
Steve
As most of you know, I've been using my SE Pro now for about 8 months. In this time, I have become pretty used to what the machine is telling me (of course, there's still ALOT more to learn, but...)
However, I've been nagged in my mind from the day I purchased the SE Pro as to whether I'm giving up anything hunting with an Explorer instead of an E-Trac. Well, I now have an opportunity to hunt for awhile with an E-Trac -- as a friend of mine is "out of commission" for awhile and is letting me borrow his unit. I am hoping, through this opportunity, to once and for all settle the issue in my mind as to which machine might be more capable.
Well, I have hunted with the E-Trac for a couple of hours now (not very long, obviously), and in this amount of time, I have felt like a fish out of water!! I didn't realize how much I've gotten used to the subtleties and quirks and peculiarities of my Explorer. I guess I have learned to read the subtle hints that the machine gives, and have in a way "become one" with my SE Pro. I would not have known this necessarily, but I found it out by swinging the E-Trac -- because although it is quite similar on the surface, in terms of tones and general operation, I quickly learned that it is quite a different machine. For shallow coins, no problem. If I just want to dig solid, "textbook" perfect hits, I do just fine with it. In that type of hunting (shallow, easy coins) it is quite similar to the Explorer, to me. However, I have spent these first couple of hours with the E-Trac in a hammered, "hunted-out" park -- trying to listen for subtle, deep coins that may have been missed, and also trying to hit a few partially masked targets that may reveal themselves to the E-Trac but didn't to my Explorer. And in searching for these more sublte targets, I quickly found that my assumption that an "iffy" coin will behave the same on the E-Trac as they do on the Explorer was a very incorrect assumption. I chased several "iffy" deep hits; a few I could not find at all (which NEVER happens with my Explorer), and a few were VERY DEEP chunks of metal -- which I also am almost never fooled by on my Explorer. A few were nails and such. NONE were good targets. It's clear that even beyond the different ID numbers, the E-Trac is a different beast (despite all the "familiarities" and "similarities").
I do intend to spend more time with the E-Trac, but my ability to find good targets is definitely suffering at this point. I know many have said that it's normal for your finds to temporarily decrease when using a new machine, and I'm seeing this. Also, from what I've seen folks say, the E-Trac is most advantageous to NON-Explorer users -- and I can see why. I think there is more of a potential for the "wow" factor for someone acquiring an E-Trac for the first time, and who has NOT used an Explorer before; still, I am going to continue to give the E-Trac a chance to "wow" me.
For now, my very preliminary thoughts are that it's going to be tough for me to want to give up the Explorer -- which I am now so familiar with. While curious, I was not convinced before I used the E-Trac that it would be a big improvement over an Explorer; though two hours is in NO WAY a fair comparison, I remain unconvinced at this point that it is a drastically superior unit. While my mind may change in time, this is where I'm at for now. I know that I DO NOT like the pinpoint function as well (though I know there are two different pinpoint modes and I have only tried one), I do NOT like the lack of digital ID in pinpoint mode, but I DO like the ergonomics; FAR superior to the Explorer. One other thing is, it's hard for me to "grasp" at this point the way to understand the machine in terms of target ID. With the Explorer, it's easy to understand the "logic" of the FE and CO numbers; however, with "good" targets "normalized" to FE number 12 on the E-Trac, it becomes difficult for me to visualize and grasp, for instance, the implications of hunting in "quick mask." Some of this is simply experience, I'm sure, but for me being used to the Explorer, I find the FE and CO numbers much more confusing, instead of simpler (which is what I think the E-Trac was supposed to do -- make it simpler). Anyway, I'm rambling...but thought some of this might help someone else who has at least considered an "upgrade." I'll continue to post my thoughts as I get more used to the E-Trac. I know Bryce has used both, and went "back" to his Explorer -- preferring it to the E-Trac. Based on my first impressions, I can see why, and at least at this point (though I may prove myself wrong) I can see me arriving at the same conclusion.
A question...how long (for those of you who started with Explorers, and then got familiar with the E-Trac) did it take you to get used to the E-Trac, and learn what it was telling you with respect to the "iffy" targets?
Steve