For utahshovelhead - Minelab versus the Vision

[steve herschbach]

Hi,

utahshovelhead has been asking why people do not compare detectors. Well, they do, and here is an example. And keep in mind I'm a big Minelab fan. My current "big gun" is a GPX-4500. So this is not a Minelab bash.

I am first and foremost a prospector. When I look at any detector I am always considering a lot of factors, but prospecting is always a part of that equation.

Comparing the Vision to the Minelab Explorer and E-Trac I am going Vision all the way. The reason is simple. While all are multi-frequency units, only the Vision can be set to a single frequency. 22.5 kHz will do well on gold. Or, if run in multi-frequency mode, it can tell me which frequency is hitting hardest, and my eye is on 22.5 kHz. I can also put the Vision into manually adjusted ground balance mode. The auto ground balance rate is adjustable. Finally, the Vision has TX Boost.

All are extremely useful for what I expect of a detector, which is everything, but especially gold capability. I've tried to get myself excited about the Explorer models several times, but just never really took to the unit as I just could never see myself using one to chase gold nuggets. I'm sure somebody has found some nuggets someplace with an Explorer, but I doubt anyone is going to make much of a case for it as a prospecting detector.

Prospecting is not the main goal of the Vision, but it is clearly superior in my opinion to the DFX and the Explorers/E-Trac for this purpose. You can read my review of the DFX (and some others) here. The machines the Vision tends to butt heads with for my purposes are the MXT and X-Terra 70. Both are great do-it-all detectors strong on gold. I like and have used both and prefer either over the DFX or Explorers for prospecting applications. So far from what I'm seeing the Vision is right there in the mix while providing a host of additional features I've been wanting for a long time. I've wanted a top end feature set that is also strong on prospecting and unfortunately for me the DFX and Explorer/E-Trac have not fit the bill for me in that department. It looks like the Vision will and I'll probably be adding it to my Nugget Detector Review soon.

I predict that by the end of June I will have easily paid for my Vision in gold nuggets. But it will primarily serve as my gold jewelry machine going forward.The DFX has been serving that purpose and I've retired mine.

Comparisons are about what a person wants or needs. My main gold killer is a GPX-4500. No dispute about that machine in my mind. It's main weakness is tiny gold, and lack of good iron disc. For that I have a GMT. I prefer the TDI for in-town PI use as a person in town harnessed up to a GPX is overkill. I also want a detector I can hunt coins and jewelry and beach hunt, in other words pretty much do it all. But both the MXT and X-Terra 70 come up short. I want more tones on the MXT and notch capability. The X-Terra 70 offers those features. But it requires me to change coils to change frequencies, and neither the MXT or X-Terra have a multi-frequency mode making them weak on saltwater beaches. The Fisher F-75 is another unit I've tried that sort of fits the bill but again I've been craving more. The Vision is delivering.

So there you go. A comparison. Is it useful to you? The point I'm trying to make in this post is probably not all that useful to most people. They want to know about deep silver in turf. But for me, that is a "yeah, whatever" side use that I enjoy but at the end of the day I'm not all that concerned about. Deep silver is just something I do not have much of, and it is not that old anyway. So while people may be all lathered up to find out if the Vision is the new top dog in the turf, I really don't care.

So now someone will go out and say I've said the Vision is better than the Explorer. But that statement taken out of context is not true. The Vision is not better than the Explorer. It is that for my particular needs it works better for me. For a guy hunting deep silver in California, jury is out. For the guy hunting relics in Georgia, who knows? Best is in the eye of the beholder, and while the internet can help, at the end of the day we all need to figure out what works best for us. For me it looks right now like that is going to be GPX-4500, TDI, GMT, and a Vision. Still can't settle on a water unit though. I keep bouncing around on those.

Steve Herschbach
Steve's Mining Journal

 

[Andy Sabisch]

Well stated and exactly the post that was needed. The comment that there are comparision reports on a myriad of consumer products is quite irrelevant when it comes to detectors. Anyone can put together a spreadhseet of features from the various company websites or literature but what all of us are realy concerned about is how well it works in OUR area, for OUR style of hunting and for the SPECIFIC targets we hunt for. What I search for on a daily basis is far different from what Steve looks for in Alaska (although I'd be happy to switch places ) and what friends hunt for in different parts of the country are also different - relics, beaches, flour gold, coins . . . . as well as the ground conditions.

We will start seeing reports from different parts of the country on how the new Vision works and what would make the reports meaningful is a few details on the area they are used and ground conditions. Then you can see if it is close to what you have in your areas . . . . if someone reports getting super depth in the sandy soil of Florida, not sure how relevant that would be in red clay.

But Steve did a great job on this post . . . . he is one of those "vaults of knowledge" that can share a great deal of information gained from countless hours in the field and when it comes to prospecting with the Vision, I will be following his posts closely.

Andy Sabisch

 

[aliensr]

thanks steve, very well put...
just reading about the vision and seeing 'wheresthegoodstuff's' photo's makes me want one...
I'm a turf hunter for the same reason you're a gold hunter, cause that's what I've got in my area.
Hopefully Minelab will step up (or unleash some R&D work in progress) because of White's moving the bar up. I use an etrac and compared to vision user information
provided the etrac provides a very bland, flat user experience (the SE provides nice fluety tones for silver. sold mine for the etrac, sigh). I am only an average md'er,
only a couple years experience but if minelab would add things like real-time
'best-response' frequency it would move it to a new level. I've never dug any gold item in my two years (I have tried) and it's disappointing
given that's the first question everyone asks (and they give me this pitying 'you fool' look when I say nope).
I will watch how the vision plays out in real terms, ie what's the 'real' depth capability and how it does for california turf hunters.
If only the vision added ferrous VDI along with the conductive, my order would already be in!
For this hunter the more info provided to make an intelligent decision whether to dig or not is what I want.
Companies like Minelab, unfortunately are similar to Apple, they have the means to provide killer innovation but will always hold back simply cause they can, as
folks will buy regardless. BTW, I'm a retired EE and worked at Apple for 6.5 years, a very good company with great folks, many with their hands tied.......
cheers...

 

[steve herschbach]

Hi,

Thanks Andy, that means a lot coming from you. I've learned a lot from you and appreciate that you share what you know with us all.

Probably time for me to head for a foxhole!!

Steve Herschbach

 

[bfodnes]

Thanks for the View.

Very good write up Steve.

Everything i have seen so far points to the Vision as a very good detector in Europe for those hammered coins.

Not as hard to get as nuggets but the detector definitivly holds the qualities we are looking for, and now also with top id quality.

Bjorn

 

[BudP]

I do believe, this is the first common sense, real world comparison I have seen in years.......a great take!

 

[utahshovelhead]

Hi Steve,
Thank you for taking the time to write a great reply to my post. That was a dang good comparison of the machines you use and describe as well as there purposes for you. Even though you think it may not matter I find that kind of information coming from you very informative. I am certain you know exactly what I mean when I say I am leary of every new top of the line machine or salesman saying "Faster processor, More stable, Deeper than ever" and not giving credible evidence as to what that means. And as you previously stated not all buyers n sellers of high end machines tell the facts. Having the ability to use all those machines and address there good and bads (positives and negatives) is great for any prospective buyer and all us users. Personally I still think an outside, unbiased source would do well to write critical comparisons of machines. (Not for free mind you as I find it hard to accept that it wouldn't generate income.) Please don't think I am asking you personally to do that or spend any more time on the subject than you already have. ( although a person as knowledgeable as yourself would be perfect) This is not about the Vision even though found in this thread.. it is about all the top dogs.

This Finds forums totally Rocks and I really enjoy reading your posts and all the great information shared here. Thank you as well to Andy Sabisch for kickin in on so many subjects. I like pickin the brains of guys like that. hope I'm not agrivatin the hell outya guys.

Thanks again and good luck on the Gold hunt! I am trying to boost my 100+ gold ring count.

 

[steve herschbach]

Hi,

You are welcome. I like the theory of a Consumer Reports of metal detectors, but it would be pretty tough. Anyone can compile comparative feature lists. But once you get past that things get pretty subjective. Things like I like how the detector looks, how it feels, what it sounds like. Everyone talks about depth, but if that is all you care about, get a GPX-4500. We all know why that does not work. What most people are looking for is a unit that can get the most depth with accurate discrimination. And again ,that is where ground conditions and operator expertise play in. As depth increases the signal degrades and so running for absolute max depth requires considerable skill at tweaking a detector and knowing just which whisper faint signals "sound right". At the highest level operator and detector become one. The detector becomes an extension of your senses. Getting there takes a lot of time, and so if a person that has used an Explorer for 1000 hours picks up a Vision and does a comparison it is pretty hard to call that a valid test. The person would have to put that 1000 hours in with the Vision first.

Anyway, I apologize for being testy on the other thread. A friend of 35 years passed away and I had to deliver a eulogy yesterday. Been a bad week.

Steve Herschbach