Question for Mike Hillis

[JoeR]

I read your post on another forum that you are not only going back to the Coinstrike but intend to sell off all the others.That is a very formidable array of detectors which includes the DFX,EX II,T2,X70 and the Cortes.Tell us Mike,what made you pick the Strike over all these worthies?What were the individual drawbacks of the rest?

 

[Mike Hillis]

Hi Joe,

Detector choices are highly personal. Here is what

 

[JoeR]

This is the sort of comparison I like to see.I had the same objections to the Cortes plus the fact that it does not ground balance in the discriminate mode.Great machine in some ways but has too many limitations.The T-2 seems to have improved on Dave Johnson`s earlier design-the MXT- in some ways only to add a new set of shortfalls.Thank you again for taking the time and trouble.Happy hunting Mike.

 

[mtdoramike]

with the Explorer, I tried one, and found it not for me, to much to learn and the weight was just unrealistic along with the price. I felt the Xterras were very cheaply made, but not like a Garrett, which I found to be built like a tank. I also couldn't see having to swicth coils all the time to change frequencies.

T2 in my opinion is heads above the Xterra as far as better built, depth and comfort, but can be a might to hot for some areas due to interference, even more so then the Coinstrike.

The Cortes is one of my favorite coin machines, but they need to make it with a bigger display, pinpoint button & multi-tone in hunt mode.

Now the C$ likes are about the same as yours, except that I can hunt highly mineralized ground with it as well as beach hunting and I really like the ground balance setup on it also.

 

[Mike T]

How would you rate the Coinstrike against the CZ70? especially if you were to use them in above average mineralized ground? Mike T

 

[Mike Hillis]

speaking with folks like Nasa Tom, here is how I have been told it falls out:

In light moderate to no mineralization the CZ will out perform the CS on basic depth by a very small amount. Once you move into moderate to extreme mineralization the CS will outperform the CZ.

In my mind the additional pluses of the CS would outweigh the slight performance loss in that type of ground.

I rate my ground as being above moderately high to extremely mineralization. It was easy to find ground that would wrap quarter signals into the -95/-94 readings on the DFX using the 15khz freq. Ground phase seemed to always run around 93 to 95.3. The T2 read most of my hunting areas in the mid to high 80's up into the low 90's (I think 93 was the highest ground cancel number I got)with a FE3O4 reading .01 to a .3 on a regular basis. The Xterra 70 balanced out around 8 most of the time.

The CS does excellent in my ground and like I said above, it is easy to identify the iron. The higher mineralization skews the numbers some but that is also a product of some settings, too. When 'I' looked at the CZ70 vs CS, I had to chose the CS. I believe the CS to be one of the more capable machine made when you take it all as a whole.

Maybe those that have actually used both in mineralized ground would be willing to chime in here.

HH

 

[Mike Hillis]

Minelab was using for the Xterras. Garrett has always been king of the multi-notch detectors. When I looked at the Xterra I just saw Garrett in a different package. It still had stuff I liked about it. All the detectors had things I liked. Just not enough to make it THE machine I'd be willing to spend years with.

HH

 

[Hawkeye Jim]

wholeheartedly with your keen observations Mike - I have used the C$ exclusively for the last two years and you couldn't wrestle it away from me!!! HH - Hawkeye Jim.