Some musings about HOW GOOD the Equinox might be...

[GroundHug]

I'm not sure how "sitting on technology" is even possible. First why would you develop something superior only to sit around and wait on the competition? Why would you invest time and effort and work and money into something not to get a return on it? Do you think the shareholders would even ALLOW that? Can you imagine the reaction in the boardroom when it's announced we have a killer technology that will destroy the competition, but let's wait and see what they have to offer before we roll it out? Do you think that would fly? I've worked in capitalist businesses for many years and I never worked at a single one where that would happen. No one is in it out of the goodness of their hearts.

Makes no sense at all to me but maybe I am missing something.

 

[GroundHug]

Having said that, I'm very interested in the new machine, but I'm not selling anything or buying anything until it's released and I get some non-hype idea of its capabilities. Even then I'm not selling anything until I have it in my hands and some time with it. I confess to being a bit surprised that some people are dumping machines they are comfortable with that serve them very well for what is currently not even a production product that we know what it will do in the field.

 

[Southwind]

I see the tactic as logical and working. They seem to have put a whole lot of people who were getting ready to invest in the AT MAX on hold with little more than a small release of information.

I do think they may have jumped the gun if they are not ready to release it until next year. I am already rethinking my decision to hold off on the AT MAX. If the new NOX is not going to be released until next year I'll go forward with the ATM.

 

[sprchng]

I'm not sure how "sitting on technology" is even possible. First why would you develop something superior only to sit around and wait on the competition? Why would you invest time and effort and work and money into something not to get a return on it? Do you think the shareholders would even ALLOW that? Can you imagine the reaction in the boardroom when it's announced we have a killer technology that will destroy the competition, but let's wait and see what they have to offer before we roll it out? Do you think that would fly? I've worked in capitalist businesses for many years and I never worked at a single one where that would happen. No one is in it out of the goodness of their hearts.

Makes no sense at all to me but maybe I am missing something.

Study the Japanese electronics and music reproduction industry from the 80s on to judge the value of the "planned obsolescence" business model if you want to see it's effectiveness in capturing an entire industry and driving out the competition. Labor costs are not the only reason America's one time dominance in those industries was destroyed , not by the product , but by the business model. I have no doubt Minelab has already conceptualized advanced models incorporating Multi-IQ technology with introductions in the next decade once the "obsolescence of all of other VLF machines" has a chance to take hold. Might just be bells and whistles or speedier processing but new models translates into continuing sales.

 

[ky digger]

I started out with the Sovereign back in the 90's. A great machine that was head and shoulders above the rest. Then I switched to an Explorer. Another great machine that eclipsed the competition. Then I got the E Trac. Once again Minelab delivered a machine with terrific features that set them apart from the rest. At no time over a 20 year period did I ever order a new MInelab that disapointed. I was forced to go to an extremely light weight machine due to a shoulder joint problem, and realized I would have to settle for less than I was used to. Now Minelab has presented me with another new machine that I can swing all day. Why in the world would hesitate to go back? I ordered mine yesterday.

 

[Jason in Enid]

......... but I'm not selling anything or buying anything until it's released and I get some non-hype idea of its capabilities........

You will need to wait about year after its released for sale for that. A lot of these same people who are currently selling detectors in order to purchase the latest and greatest model, also dont hold detectors long enough to REALLY become good with them and learn the tips, tricks and techniques to get the most out of them. They will be selling the EQ and buying something else soon enough. Because a lot of those people are looking for it to be "the best" (as with everything they buy), their initial reviews are going to be glowing tributes of praise, and they have no other detector which to compare finds in the ground.

 

[AustinEd]

I researched everything I could find very thoroughly. This gave me the confidence to pre-order a Equinox. I do not know if it will go deeper than a CTX, but I think it will be close. What my research says is that it will be superior in iron and trash to anything out there. Depth is one thing, finding goodies in trash is another. Give me great ID capability and trash capability and I will let the depth fall where it may. I just hope to have mine by Christmas.

 

[Southwind]

Well I don't know where the idea come from that we are just jumping on the newest machine out expecting it to be the next best thing, but I think most are like myself.

This isn't my first rodeo are far as looking to buy a new detector. I do very throughout research before I even put one in the look a little closer box. I don't base any of my decisions to look closer on tester's reviews. I put more weight in reading the response users post after they have read the reviews. I watch every video I can find and I base my opinion ONLY on what I see with my own eyes and hear with my own ears. I know what I'm seeing and hearing without the person opinions of those making the videos. No offense, I appreciate the time spent making the videos, but I only go by what I see and hear. That being said, what I see and hear of the NOX so far is enough for me to put it in the closer look box, and I have actually already put it in my buy to try box.

It's passed all my prerequisite tests.

 

[Jason in Enid]

Well I don't know where the idea come from that we are just jumping on the newest machine out expecting it to be the next best thing, but I think most are like myself.

.

Why do you assume I was talking about you?

If you watch a lot of the forums, there are LOT of people (and they are often the most vocal) who jump from machine to machine. They always have to have the latest "whatever". They are also typically the same people giving EVERY detector glowing reports and it is obviously the best thing ever invented, yet months later they will have sold it and bought something else.

This is why I said to wait a year for the "real" results. In a year, the dedicated user will still be swinging it and they will have hundreds if not thousands of hours on it. They will be talking about its good point AND its bad points. You will also have a chance to see the finds being made. There have been a lot of new detectors released over the last 10 years, yet the E-Trac and CTX (and a few others) are the ones still showing consistant good results. Many others that were hyped as the greatest new detector have become mostly forgotten by now.

 

[Jason in Enid]

I researched everything I could find very thoroughly. This gave me the confidence to pre-order a Equinox. I do not know if it will go deeper than a CTX, but I think it will be close. What my research says is that it will be superior in iron and trash to anything out there. Depth is one thing, finding goodies in trash is another. Give me great ID capability and trash capability and I will let the depth fall where it may. I just hope to have mine by Christmas.

Yep, there are times when max depth is needed but most of the time you will need to find the (silver) needle in the (iron) haystack. the sad fact of life is that 99% of the places we hunt have been hunted before. The easy targets are gone and now we have to work harder to recover the ones still hiding.

 

[pacer]

Well said Jason in Enid.

 

[Southwind]

Why do you assume I was talking about you?

LOL and why do you assume I was talking about you?

My reference was to the many posts by those who seem to think many of us have made the decision to give one a try with no justification other than thinking it's the next best thing. I was just making the point I think a lot are like me and have actually done some very in-depth research.

 

[Jason in Enid]

Why do you assume I was talking about you?

LOL and why do you assume I was talking about you?

My reference was to the many posts by those who seem to think many of us have made the decision to give one a try with no justification other than thinking it's the next best thing. I was just making the point I think a lot are like me and have actually done some very in-depth research.

LOL, touche!

 

[sgoss66]

Well said Jason in Enid.

seconded

 

[mtwolf2270]

Having said that, I'm very interested in the new machine, but I'm not selling anything or buying anything until it's released and I get some non-hype idea of its capabilities. Even then I'm not selling anything until I have it in my hands and some time with it. I confess to being a bit surprised that some people are dumping machines they are comfortable with that serve them very well for what is currently not even a production product that we know what it will do in the field.

Well I must ask this question if everybody sat back and was not willing to try this machine based on minelabs reputation and history then whos reviews would you read to make your decision? Selling a detector to try a new one doesn't appeal to everyone but shouldn't be a suprise. I sold my se pro for the ctx never looked back. As for me 5 years plus the ctx is getting old in todays tech market. While depth is great the new machines have better recover speed and that alone could mean better results. So I for one am willing to bank on how well minelab does what the do.

 

[Southwind]

As far as my decision to give the Equinox a try is based on mainly two things. First is Minelab reputation and my personal experience. <-- A big factor. And second, what I have seen personally on videos. People reviews, personally, I don't put much weight behind. Bias opinions influence review outcomes. You know my view of the same testers over and over and over and over. Worthless in my opinion.

First a new detector must draw my attention. By this I mean manufacturer, class, and the few posters I trust that give their honest opinion. At that point I start my own research. Every video I can find. I ignore pretty much everything being said and concentrate only on what I see and hear. When I see a tester/review I feel is being manipulated by the presenter its put that person on my wasted space list.

My need are specific to me. Depth is a very important factor and the ability to ignore nails very low. Not a problem in my soil. Being able to hit the super deep coins in our city park is probably top billing for me with a close second in the ability to hit hard and deep on small odd shaped gold such as earrings and chains. And very accurate Target ID with a high resolution. None of that 30 tatrget ID segment stuff. Give me a minimum of 50 if not at least in the hundreds.

And save Internet space with those dig a hole and throw in a coin crap or the nail board BS.

 

[sgoss66]

As far as my decision to give the Equinox a try is based on mainly two things. First is Minelab reputation and my personal experience. <-- A big factor. And second, what I have seen personally on videos. People reviews, personally, I don't put much weight behind. Bias opinions influence review outcomes. You know my view of the same testers over and over and over and over. Worthless in my opinion.

First a new detector must draw my attention. By this I mean manufacturer, class, and the few posters I trust that give their honest opinion. At that point I start my own research. Every video I can find. I ignore pretty much everything being said and concentrate only on what I see and hear. When I see a tester/review I feel is being manipulated by the presenter its put that person on my wasted space list.

My need are specific to me. Depth is a very important factor and the ability to ignore nails very low. Not a problem in my soil. Being able to hit the super deep coins in our city park is probably top billing for me with a close second in the ability to hit hard and deep on small odd shaped gold such as earrings and chains. And very accurate Target ID with a high resolution. None of that 30 tatrget ID segment stuff. Give me a minimum of 50 if not at least in the hundreds.

And save Internet space with those dig a hole and throw in a coin crap or the nail board BS.

VERY good post, Southwind. Agree strongly with a vast majority of it. First, indeed, as you said, is Minelab's reputation and my personal experience that push me to at least put the Equinox into the "I need to check this out more deeply" category. Few machines make it into that category for me, given my comfort and trust in my current machines.

Also agree with you on depth, and highly accurate ID with depth, being HUGELY important.

The only place I differ is that I DO want the ability to work skillfully amongst the nails.

I see it this way -- at most sites that have been heavily hunted, there are two categories that most of the good targets that are left in the ground will fall into -- too DEEP to have been easily located by others, and too HIDDEN (i.e. partially "masked" by iron or "partly hidden under" some other type of trash). Obviously some are SO deep, or SO masked/hidden, that they simply can't be detected. But some are at the fringes -- and these "fringe" targets are the ones where advances in detector technology can help to turn them into much more readily detectable targets. SO -- to me, a machine that offers maximum depth and maximum ID accuracy with depth, AND a machine that is highly skilled in working within trash -- great separation, and great ability to "handle" nearby iron without falsing -- would be an absolute WINNER of a machine, for me.

I DO think there is SOME value in videos where coins are buried, and in a nail-board type test. NOT really in that they accurately mimic the real world necessarily, but they DO help you to see how a machine reacts as compared to other machines. And, MORE importantly, it helps you to hear how the machine SOUNDS, and see a bit of how it behaves, tonally.

Anyway, very good post, Southwind.

Steve

 

[Southwind]

We all have those places where we know there are goods to be recovered if only the right detector were used. I have many. All I'd like to see is when a new detector comes, out the tester takes it to that special place a few times and puts it to the test. You either come to the boards and if you found nothing you say it is a nice detector but doesn't seem to have anything special. If you come home with some goods you can say this detector is special or hit it out of the park. That's what people want to read. Not the "This detector has the potential to be like the 500 other models out there".

 

[sgoss66]

Southwind --

Agreed. That site I described above, is one of those sites. My friend who hunts it (it's a few hours from me) is one of the best, most experienced detectorists I know. The ONLY machine in his arsenal with which he can find targets there, is the CTX -- and usually only with the 17" coil (he has hit a few he could barely get with the stock 11", early on, but usually it requires the extra 1-2" afforded by the 17"). No target there is shallower than 10" deep. He and a buddy who also runs a CTX/17" have hammered it hard, but he still finds like 1-3 coins, on average, when he puts in 3-4 hours of hunting time. This is an absolute PERFECT "test pit" for him to experiment with new detectors on (with some of those deep targets ALSO having "masking/iron proximity" issues as well). There is no doubt whatsoever that there are lots of coins there JUUUUUST out of the reach of the CTX...

I cannot wait to have him put an Equinox on that site (hopefully, he will get one and learn it well, and then try it there; he's thinking about it...)

Steve