Find's Treasure Forums
Welcome to Find's Treasure Forums, Guests!
You are viewing this forums as a guest which limits you to read only status.
Only registered members may post stories, questions, classifieds, reply to other posts, contact other members using built in messaging and use many other features found on these forums.
Why not register and join us today? It's free! (We don't share your email addresses with anyone.) We keep email addresses of our users to protect them and others from bad people posting things they shouldn't.
Click here to register!
Need Support Help?
Cannot log in?, click here to have new password emailed to you
Changed email? Forgot to update your account with new email address? Need assistance with something else?, click here to go to Find's Support Form and fill out the form.
Minelab Explorer II vs Whites DFX 300
- Thread starter ironman05
- Start date
Good question. My Explorer II goes toe to toe with a highly skilled DFX user at least once a week. We often compare signals and make predictions based on what our machines tell us before we dig. The majority of the time we reach the same conclusion. I wouldn't put one machine leaps and bounds ahead of the other. It's just a matter of how you want information presented to you before you dig. Usually it's just a matter of which coil passes over the target first makes the find. That's my very honest 2 cents. JJ
To answer the rest of your question: I don't personally know anyone who is going to take an Explorer or DFX into the water. Anybody serious enough to own either machine will not hesitate to buy a dedicated water machine for water hunting. As far as your 8" dime goes, I can't remember a single instance when the DFX could hit a dime that the Explorer II couldn't regardless of depth. JJ
Larry (IL)
Well-known member
Being a Minelab and White's man myself, I think your 2 cents worth is right on JJ.
All of the top of the line VLF detectors on the market are just about the same on depth regardless what the brand loyalists tell you. Depth is seldom limited by the machine, but the ground you are hunting in.
All of the top of the line VLF detectors on the market are just about the same on depth regardless what the brand loyalists tell you. Depth is seldom limited by the machine, but the ground you are hunting in.
I have used the explorers but not the DFX. However, I have hunted next to one. Both work well from what I can tell. I only hunted one place next to the DFX where I saw the DFX start to suffer. It was on some muddy salt flats where the concentration of salt was much greater than what you would find at the ocean. The DFX became very noisy and lost depth when making it stable enough to hunt. In other locations, they were well matched.
Critterhunter
New member
My vote is for the Minelab. The top end Whites these days have an endless amount of controls that must be tweaked to get the best performance out of them. I used to be a Whites fan but they lost me when they started offering endless programming controls. The Etrac or Explorer do have controls, but not nearly as many. FBS technology does the work for you in handling ground conditions and such, so it's less complicated to get the best performance out of the machine for a specific site.
Personaly I've owned three Explorers but I prefer my Sovereign GT. Just as deep as an Explorer or Etrac and even less controls to bother me with. I'm not opposed to computer controls, but there comes a point where they can do more harm than good. That's where Whites lost me as a fan. Also, I don't care for the higher frequency MXT/M6 detectors they have these days. They are less complicated but they don't handle my minerals as well as the older low frequency Whites like the QXT Pro.
What would bring me back to Whites would be a low frequency machine that gets Minelab depth, and only has just enough computer control to get the job done. I don't want to have to take ground readings and tweak this and that to get the best performance out of it. The machine needs to do those kinds of things on it's own.
All that being said, Whites have a MUCH more user friendly setup in terms of hardware. Minelabs are heavy and not as well balanced. I had to build a custom lightweight shaft for my GT and run a lipo battery in it to make it as light and well balanced as a Whites. I also had to mode my GT to use a remote PP switch so that it's in the hand grip like a normal detector (Whites, etc). Still, it's worth putting up with some hardware issues when you get the kind of performance out of a machine that a Minelab does.
Personaly I've owned three Explorers but I prefer my Sovereign GT. Just as deep as an Explorer or Etrac and even less controls to bother me with. I'm not opposed to computer controls, but there comes a point where they can do more harm than good. That's where Whites lost me as a fan. Also, I don't care for the higher frequency MXT/M6 detectors they have these days. They are less complicated but they don't handle my minerals as well as the older low frequency Whites like the QXT Pro.
What would bring me back to Whites would be a low frequency machine that gets Minelab depth, and only has just enough computer control to get the job done. I don't want to have to take ground readings and tweak this and that to get the best performance out of it. The machine needs to do those kinds of things on it's own.
All that being said, Whites have a MUCH more user friendly setup in terms of hardware. Minelabs are heavy and not as well balanced. I had to build a custom lightweight shaft for my GT and run a lipo battery in it to make it as light and well balanced as a Whites. I also had to mode my GT to use a remote PP switch so that it's in the hand grip like a normal detector (Whites, etc). Still, it's worth putting up with some hardware issues when you get the kind of performance out of a machine that a Minelab does.
Nauti
Well-known member
.............but some machines cope with difficult ground better than others giving them greater depth over a wider variety of conditions.I've owned a lot of different machines over the years and have never been loyal to a certain brand but i do have a favourite that i believe has proven itself to me to be better overall than anything else i have ever owned both in stability and depth.I have used both whites and minelab machines and if i had to make a choice i would choose the minelab as an overall detector.......multi frequency technology still has a lot to offer over a wide range of detecting conditions.Larry (IL) said:
Ralph in Albany NY
New member
I've owned both..Prefer the Minelab 2. DFX way too much tweeking..
High,
Problem with the Minelabs is the very limited choice of smaller coils to choose from, especially, if you want a "snooper" coil for use in high-trash areas.
And with a big coil, the only way to get rid of the multiple, thus confusing sounds in trashy areas is to discriminate/notch them out.
Doing this, you MAY also delete other valuable signals.
I can state this for a fact, becuase my hunting bud has a Minelab Explorer. I find my Whites Classic III Plus or my 1270, even though they have no target ID, more enjoyable to work with/easier to accurately pinpoint - and we have traded each others detectors back and forth - just to compare different units under similar, real live conditions.
I can also definitely say this for sure : the Minelab multiple frequency technology will not by any means find more stuff than any good single frequency detector. This is just plain Minelab sales hype.
At last, not to mention the price of a Minelab Explorer.
I do not mean to knock down any detector company, but some of the high priced digital-display units made nowadays by various factories definitely do not produce more bang for your buck as compared to older, good analog models.
This is just my 2 Cents worth and I also have to add that I have used a DFX 300, which I could have bought but did not do so.
Greetings
skookum
Problem with the Minelabs is the very limited choice of smaller coils to choose from, especially, if you want a "snooper" coil for use in high-trash areas.
And with a big coil, the only way to get rid of the multiple, thus confusing sounds in trashy areas is to discriminate/notch them out.
Doing this, you MAY also delete other valuable signals.
I can state this for a fact, becuase my hunting bud has a Minelab Explorer. I find my Whites Classic III Plus or my 1270, even though they have no target ID, more enjoyable to work with/easier to accurately pinpoint - and we have traded each others detectors back and forth - just to compare different units under similar, real live conditions.
I can also definitely say this for sure : the Minelab multiple frequency technology will not by any means find more stuff than any good single frequency detector. This is just plain Minelab sales hype.
At last, not to mention the price of a Minelab Explorer.
I do not mean to knock down any detector company, but some of the high priced digital-display units made nowadays by various factories definitely do not produce more bang for your buck as compared to older, good analog models.
This is just my 2 Cents worth and I also have to add that I have used a DFX 300, which I could have bought but did not do so.
Greetings
skookum
Nauti
Well-known member
Hi skookum,the little joey coil,detech 5" coil,sunray 5.5"coil and the sef 8x6 coil are all avalable for minelab machines.....all these are designed for trashier areas.As for multi frequency technology not having any advantages....it is a proven fact that it works better than any single frequency unit on saltwater wet sand.It is also widely accepted that multi frequency can be more efficient in highly mineralised soil conditions.Minelab themselves advertise this as what you call hype but if there were no truth in it they would not be able to say it due to advertising laws would they??
Hello Neil,
The coils that you mentioned are all aftermarket products, or am I mistaken ?
The Sunray coil runs about 200$. I find that price quite steep. Used units in good shape are very hard to come by.
I am not sure as to exact wording of American advertising law, but as far as I know, you can make almost any claim as long as you do not put down a competitor and explicitly name him in your ad.
You read any ad from any detector manufacturer and every one of them say that their unit has got to be the cat
The coils that you mentioned are all aftermarket products, or am I mistaken ?
The Sunray coil runs about 200$. I find that price quite steep. Used units in good shape are very hard to come by.
I am not sure as to exact wording of American advertising law, but as far as I know, you can make almost any claim as long as you do not put down a competitor and explicitly name him in your ad.
You read any ad from any detector manufacturer and every one of them say that their unit has got to be the cat
Critterhunter
New member
First, there are MANY small coils available for the Minelabs. Second, having owned many single frequency VLF machines over the years, 3 Explorers, and now a Sovereign GT, I can say that multifrequency wins hands down. BBS and FBS technology handle ground conditions better and don't use a ground balance. They use a very different way to see through the ground matrix which equals more depth and more accurate target IDs at depth. Also, multifrequency means you have good sensitivity to all types of target metals, big or small. Higher frequencies hit harder on low conductor targets and small stuff, while the low frequencies penetrate ground minerals better and hit harder on silver and copper. The limited "pick your frequency" of the DFX or V3 doesn't offer the same advantages, either. IMO 2 or 3 frequencies is a poor attempt at offering what Minelab has.
FBS and BBS technology is so far ahead of the times that the Sovereign, introduced a number of years ago, and it's "older" BBS technology, it still light years ahead of the competition when it comes to handling ground conditions and getting you the most depth. Look at the Excalibur (a waterproof Sovereign). It's "old" as well but is still favored by more serious water hunters than any other detector on the market. There is a reason for that.
The flagship Whites units these days require too much tweaking in order to get the best performance out of them. Many of these functions are automaticly handled by BBS and FBS technology, so they don't require user input to achieve best depth and performance at any given site.
FBS and BBS technology is so far ahead of the times that the Sovereign, introduced a number of years ago, and it's "older" BBS technology, it still light years ahead of the competition when it comes to handling ground conditions and getting you the most depth. Look at the Excalibur (a waterproof Sovereign). It's "old" as well but is still favored by more serious water hunters than any other detector on the market. There is a reason for that.
The flagship Whites units these days require too much tweaking in order to get the best performance out of them. Many of these functions are automaticly handled by BBS and FBS technology, so they don't require user input to achieve best depth and performance at any given site.
Nauti
Well-known member
I suppose it would be nice to see minelab themselves offer a greater selection of coils for their machines but as there are so many good aftermarket coils these days you still have a wide choice.Going back to performance i am in complete agreement with critter based on my own personal experiences.Like CH i have owned many of the top single frequency machines including whites M6 and MXT,Teknetics T2,XP goldmax power,Tesoro cibola,lobo and Tejon,NautiluS DMC2B and even minelabs musketeer.These are all excellent machines in their own right......i have even sold my minelabs in the past to raise money so that i could try these different single frequency machines.However,i have always returned to minelab multi frequency machines because i have (in my own experience) had better results with these detectors.I'll never get rid of my minelab again in favour of a single frequency machine because (my results) suggest to me that multi frequency does give me an advantage.
Regards and good hunting whatever you use,Neil.
Regards and good hunting whatever you use,Neil.
The problem is that we too often try to make this comparison broadly. FBS/BBS is better than Single/Dual Frequency or the opposite type claims are too broad to be helpful. What truly matters is what type of items you are most interested in finding and in what conditions. Finding a metal detector that best matches a persons individual hunting style should be the goal.
Going back to the multi-frequency versus single frequency topic, my single frequency gold bug 2 and gold bug pro smash the sovereigns, explorers and etracs when looking for small gold jewelry at totlots and volleyball courts. They detect smaller gold and can get much closer to the poles. would I take the gold bug 2 into the grass? No. Would it do a better job than the minelabs in wet salt sand? No way. The minelabs do handle wet salt sands extremely well compared to many other detectors. If a person is only searching for shallow recent drops then the minelabs may be overkill as many other detectors would perform well. For deeper silver coins and such, the minelabs do well.
I have used both types and my two main go to metal detectors that I use 90% of the time are single frequency detectors as I hunt for small inland gold jewelry. To me, coins and silver jewelry are nice but not my goal, so I use higher frequency detectors. I live in the desert so water hunting does not happen as much as I would like. I personally like the minelabs for the beach when I get the chance. When working in shallow water I am happy they are not too sensitive to the smallest pieces of gold and foil. It would frustrate me to chase a ton of items too small to get caught in a scoop.
Getting back to the question from the OP, your question really is too broad to get any good recommendations as you reference both water and land detecting. Will you spend more time in or out of the water? How do you personally like to hunt? What kind of mineralization do you have? ... The more detail you provide, the more helpful opinions you will likely receive.
Going back to the multi-frequency versus single frequency topic, my single frequency gold bug 2 and gold bug pro smash the sovereigns, explorers and etracs when looking for small gold jewelry at totlots and volleyball courts. They detect smaller gold and can get much closer to the poles. would I take the gold bug 2 into the grass? No. Would it do a better job than the minelabs in wet salt sand? No way. The minelabs do handle wet salt sands extremely well compared to many other detectors. If a person is only searching for shallow recent drops then the minelabs may be overkill as many other detectors would perform well. For deeper silver coins and such, the minelabs do well.
I have used both types and my two main go to metal detectors that I use 90% of the time are single frequency detectors as I hunt for small inland gold jewelry. To me, coins and silver jewelry are nice but not my goal, so I use higher frequency detectors. I live in the desert so water hunting does not happen as much as I would like. I personally like the minelabs for the beach when I get the chance. When working in shallow water I am happy they are not too sensitive to the smallest pieces of gold and foil. It would frustrate me to chase a ton of items too small to get caught in a scoop.
Getting back to the question from the OP, your question really is too broad to get any good recommendations as you reference both water and land detecting. Will you spend more time in or out of the water? How do you personally like to hunt? What kind of mineralization do you have? ... The more detail you provide, the more helpful opinions you will likely receive.