A
Anonymous
Guest
I like 'em both. Confused? Sorry, but for my .02, there just isn't a cut and dry winner. Here's my thoughts on both:
The Explorer (I have a Exp-II) is one deep machine, arguably second to none when used by a seasoned veteran or at <EM>least</EM> someone who has learned to use it to it's potential. But it's <span style="background-color:#ffff00;">heavy</span>, not easily hip mounted, the screen can be hard to read, and it lacks some customizing options I love on the DFX. Also, it nulls WAY too much when you run any kind of pattern in bad soil or trashy area and I hate that! Even at lower sensitivity it's a problem <img src="/metal/html/frown.gif" border=0 width=15 height=15 alt="
"> Result: I've learned to run IM -15 and have gotten used to discriminating by ear, though I mostly use the digital screen for confirmation.
I know I'm in the minority here, but my opinion of the crosshairs is they are for leaving an element of mystery to the target - for those that don't really want to know what they're digging, and I'm over that. In the digital mode, the two are very accurate and similar, but the Explorer IDs deeper, no question in my mind. If I encounter a 9-7 digital, 99.9% of the time, it's a pulltab. And I can ID a stinkin zinc (7-25) every single time, up to at least 8-9 inches. Saves a lot of unnecessary digging.
The DFX <span style="background-color:#ffff00;">when properly programmed</span> (despite propaganda to the contrary), can also be very deep AND user friendly. You change the settings to the way you want them and save it, period. Tweaks if needed, are usually only sensitivity and very rarely (for me) filters. If that's complicated, then call me a genius cause I figured it out pretty easily <img src="/metal/html/lol.gif" border=0 width=15 height=15 alt=":lol"> . The depth is such that my first tests with the Exp-II, I couldn't hear my test garden coins I use with the DFX! (I've since figured that out, so simmer down Exp. owners). You can swing a DFX all day long and not get tired, in fact I've used it several times in competitions and it works great. The numerous options available make it almost seem like you have two or three detectors in one. Strong downside - I dislike the fact that after 2 years, I still can't get a 12" (or larger) DD coil for the DFX. DDs other than the 10x6, which isn't as deep as the stock coil, should be available by now.
Other points:
Both are great on the beach, Exp-II isn't quite as smooth around the water.
Both are built well. QC on the Exp-II on par with DFX.
Both have very programmable discrimination. I find the DFX is easier to program and save.
The DFX can be swung like a madman if you adjust the sweep speed. The Minelab is not going to be rushed. <img src="/metal/html/wink.gif" border=0 width=15 height=15 alt="">
Both can be chattery and noisy, and sometimes it can't be stopped. Noise cancel has rarely worked for me. Sunspots, radio freq, spy satellites, UFOs, whatever, I don't know. Chalk it up to a price you pay for multi-frequency detectors.
There are NO <img src="/metal/html/nono.gif" border=0 width=22 height=19 alt=":nono"> larger DDs or X-1 coils for the DFX, so the Explorer wins here (if you prefer DD as I do). It has many aftermarket coil options, especially DDs. I'm not overly fond of overlapping my sweeps by half or better, which is recommended with the Concentric style coils.
That's about all that comes to mind Jim, hope it helps. If you're still awake after reading all this and you want info on a particular feature I forgot, let me know.
HH.
The Explorer (I have a Exp-II) is one deep machine, arguably second to none when used by a seasoned veteran or at <EM>least</EM> someone who has learned to use it to it's potential. But it's <span style="background-color:#ffff00;">heavy</span>, not easily hip mounted, the screen can be hard to read, and it lacks some customizing options I love on the DFX. Also, it nulls WAY too much when you run any kind of pattern in bad soil or trashy area and I hate that! Even at lower sensitivity it's a problem <img src="/metal/html/frown.gif" border=0 width=15 height=15 alt="
"> Result: I've learned to run IM -15 and have gotten used to discriminating by ear, though I mostly use the digital screen for confirmation.I know I'm in the minority here, but my opinion of the crosshairs is they are for leaving an element of mystery to the target - for those that don't really want to know what they're digging, and I'm over that. In the digital mode, the two are very accurate and similar, but the Explorer IDs deeper, no question in my mind. If I encounter a 9-7 digital, 99.9% of the time, it's a pulltab. And I can ID a stinkin zinc (7-25) every single time, up to at least 8-9 inches. Saves a lot of unnecessary digging.
The DFX <span style="background-color:#ffff00;">when properly programmed</span> (despite propaganda to the contrary), can also be very deep AND user friendly. You change the settings to the way you want them and save it, period. Tweaks if needed, are usually only sensitivity and very rarely (for me) filters. If that's complicated, then call me a genius cause I figured it out pretty easily <img src="/metal/html/lol.gif" border=0 width=15 height=15 alt=":lol"> . The depth is such that my first tests with the Exp-II, I couldn't hear my test garden coins I use with the DFX! (I've since figured that out, so simmer down Exp. owners). You can swing a DFX all day long and not get tired, in fact I've used it several times in competitions and it works great. The numerous options available make it almost seem like you have two or three detectors in one. Strong downside - I dislike the fact that after 2 years, I still can't get a 12" (or larger) DD coil for the DFX. DDs other than the 10x6, which isn't as deep as the stock coil, should be available by now.
Other points:
Both are great on the beach, Exp-II isn't quite as smooth around the water.
Both are built well. QC on the Exp-II on par with DFX.
Both have very programmable discrimination. I find the DFX is easier to program and save.
The DFX can be swung like a madman if you adjust the sweep speed. The Minelab is not going to be rushed. <img src="/metal/html/wink.gif" border=0 width=15 height=15 alt="
">Both can be chattery and noisy, and sometimes it can't be stopped. Noise cancel has rarely worked for me. Sunspots, radio freq, spy satellites, UFOs, whatever, I don't know. Chalk it up to a price you pay for multi-frequency detectors.
There are NO <img src="/metal/html/nono.gif" border=0 width=22 height=19 alt=":nono"> larger DDs or X-1 coils for the DFX, so the Explorer wins here (if you prefer DD as I do). It has many aftermarket coil options, especially DDs. I'm not overly fond of overlapping my sweeps by half or better, which is recommended with the Concentric style coils.
That's about all that comes to mind Jim, hope it helps. If you're still awake after reading all this and you want info on a particular feature I forgot, let me know.
HH.