I have both and have been using both since they were introduced. I have to admit that I have more hours on the X-TERRAs than I do the ETRAC due to having field tested the X-TERRAs and the fact there are places I would rather use the X-TERRA 705. (I hunt a lot of rough farm ground) But I feel that I understand both well enough to operate them effectively. I've gone back to places I've beat to death with the X-TERRA and found additional coins with the ETRAC. But I've also taken the X-TERRA back to places I've beat to death with the ETRAC, and found additional coins. As someone who has detected for nearly 39 years, I'm convinced you never get them all.
Pros and cons........I like the fact that the ETRAC offers the ability to hunt without the need to ground balance. But the X-TERRA 705 offers tracking ground balance and even has the ability to offset that ground balance in the tracking mode, either with a positive gb or negative gb values. I like the Auto Sensitivity capability of the ETRAC, with the capability of tweaking it + or - by up to 3 clicks. But when you run in manual Sensitivity, it is very similar to the X-TERRA's manual Sensitivity setup. I like the multiple frequency aspect of the ETRAC. But again, the ability to use 3 different frequencies of coils with my X-TERRA accomplishes most everything I need as someone who hunts for old coins in old sites. The separation characteristics of either (when using a small DD coil) is tough to beat. ETRAC users know that it is a deep seeking detector. But when equipped with a comparibly sized coil, the X-TERRA will hold it's own. With the redesigned rod / grip angle, the ETRAC is far easier to manuever than the earlier Explorer series. But the weight and balance of the X-TERRA allows me to hunt for longer periods of time than even the ETRAC. I find that the X-TERRA will "out hunt" the ETRAC in rough, open field terrain simply due to being able to use an increased sweep speed, compared to the ETRAC. A greater sweep speed allows me to cover more ground in a given period of time with far fewer pauses to recheck the false signals. However, for smooth, undisturbed surfaces, the E-TRAC's ability to provide either ferrous or conductive tones increases my ability to "hunt by ear" and ignore much of the deeply buried iron. I have a technique that I use to help identify deeply buried iron with the X-TERRA. But it takes a few seconds to accomplish it, compared to simply using ferrous tones on the ETRAC. I typically hunt with minimal rejection on both models. For those times when I need to add some discrimination, the ETRAC allows me to reject specific targets based on either their ferrous properties or their conductive properties. But as you've witnessed in some of the recent videos, rejecting targets based on their ferrous values can result in missing some keepers. The X-TERRA's notch system is based solely on conductive properties. As such, it will allow for similar rejection capabilities as the ETRAC conductive mode. However, the ETRAC has a wider range of notch segments than the X-TERRA. And since it can accept or reject targets based on either conductive or ferrous properties, the ETRAC allows for more precise "accept / reject" programming. I could go on and on comparing functionality. But those who have used a variety of makes and models know that there are more similarities than differences with these two models. "In the field" results? I find that in the sites I hunt, detection depth, target separation, sensitivity, target ID accuracy and operational stability are very similar. So much so that in my opinion, for 90% of my hunting, I could use either and be totally satisfied with the results. For that other 10%, the ability to have ferrous tone mode on the ETRAC has helped me isolate adjacent trash targets and maintain my sanity on iron infested sites.
With that said, I believe that when you buy most any new detector, you will find more coins. I think that has more to do with it being "new" than it does the performance factor. Granted, there are some detectors that are much better than others. But the two you've asked about are both excellent detectors. I think the reason we find more goodies with a new detector is because we are all creatures of habit. When we've had a detector for a period of time, we tend to get a bit lazy in our technique. As such, we sweep too fast, don't overlap our swaths properly and tend to ignore some signals that we've found to not be productive in past hunts. But when we get a new detector, we want to prove how smart we were in making that purchase! So we take it out to a site we've hunted in the past, we sweep slower, overlap the swaths to a greater degree and dig about everything that beeps. As such, we'll likely find more goodies with that new detector. I've seen that happen over and over and over again. However, after a period of time, we will become once again become complacent in our technique and wish we had kept the old one. Or worse yet, start shopping for another of the "latest and greatest". Eventually, we all come to realize that much of our success depends on how and where we hunt. Not solely in what detector we are using. Don't get me wrong. Technology is important. But technique and undertanding the functionality are even more important. And I guess that is why I appreciate being able to have both the X-TERRA and the ETRAC. They are both outstanding detectors. I understand what makes each of them "tick". And I use them both enough that I still pay attention to the details and try to not become lazy in my technique. JMHO HH Randy
