t2 or new omega 8000

[pulltab]

Seen a used T2 for bout $600 but new omgea on the bay for $490
Trying to figure the. better deal
Never used either thinking of getting something different
Would be using it as a possible replacement for my XLT. Kind of tired the weight.
So it would be the typical hunting coins, parks, houses
But something like the Xlt that could do it all without the weight

Yes i posed this some where else bout thought you guys on the Teknetiks site would have more input
Thnx

 

[space_weaseal]

I am in the same boat as you.
I cant decide between the T2, Omega, or the F75. Or should i hold out for a T2LTD or 75LTD??
I have a F70 and want one of the ones listed above but i just don't know which one to get. I know the coils and the sun ray probe are interchangeable between the F70 and F75 but i already have the 11" for the 70 and don't know if just the 75 will be much of a improvement..

 

[lafatlife]

Well I have both the t2 and the omega. Both are very similar in what they can find. The t2 weighs a little more than the omega but it is so well balanced that you don't notice it.

I would be hard pressed to choose which one I would want if I had to buy them again but.....since I mostly coin hunt and if it's money you are stuck at, go with the omega but get the 11 inch and 5 inch coils. It is a very different machine with those coils. It rivals the t2 except with the omega you can notch out items if you desire. The difference in depth between the two with both using an 11 inch coil is negligible.

As mentioned numerous times in several threads, you have to learn your machine and listen to what it is telling you no matter what machine you choose to use.

 

[pulltab]

The ltd's are out of my price range. So is the T2, but used I could justify
$500 is a good round number for me.

I love my xlt. but weight is getting to be an issue at times I've gotten use
to swinging a couple of tesoros (vaquero and golden) a d when I go
back to the X I can feel it so I wanted a machine that aS as capeable
as the the Xlt without the weight

 

[earthmansurfer]

I have a T2 and it ground balances at around 50 to 60 around here in Nuernberg Germany. I don't usually find things too deep. (Usually around 4"). The higher frequency makes it pretty sensitive on smaller coins which is what seems to be mostly what is in Germany. I think if you are deciding between two detectors with different frequencies, depending on your soil, that should weigh heavily into your decision.

I think the lower frequency Omega 8000 might do really well in the clay containing ground here. I don't think the higher T2 frequency would be as good in this ground as the Omega 8000, but I don't know. I guess a multi frequency detector would be ideal, like an Etrac.

Anyway, what I'm getting at is that you can't just look at features, look at your ground and how you hunt to help you decide. The T2 and Omega 8000 seem awfully similar considering the dissimilar price. I can't remember seeing so many people (including me) asking the same question about which detector to buy when the detectors are hundreds of dollars different in price.

Both detectors are fast response detectors and should do well in iron, which we have lots of here. The T2 has to be a bit deeper considering the price disparity, but that would be in good soil, I wonder if in my ground the Omega 8000 is actually better.

Others, feel free to chime in here (to help me too!). And those of you who have used both it would be really nice to hear more about your findings...

 

[Monte]

As with any detector you get, you need to put in the time to learn and master it. Never let a detector get to you and leave you thinking that it's inferior of just not up to the task. Instead, remember that YOU are the one in command and the detector is only going to do as well as possible based upon how the operator knows it, sets it up, choose the best coil for the task at hand, and then works the detector at the best sweep speed to get the most out of it.

I have a T2 and it's a great relic hunting detector. It can handle a lot of coin hunting tasks, too, but my primary-use detector is the Teknetics Omega 8000. For many day-to-day searches in typical urban applications I make use of the stock 10" elliptical concentric coil, but i have to tell you I am almost splitting the time between the 10" and the 5" DD coil. With summer arriving and more renovation work showing up, as well as trips planned to favorite densely-trashed ghost towns, the 5" will be working overtime for me.

Seen a used T2 for bout $600 but new omgea on the bay for $490
Trying to figure the. better deal.

Depending upon your budget, a NEW Omega isn't going to set you back all that much, either. As was mentioned, consider a 3-coil package and you'll be fully outfitted.

Would be using it as a possible replacement for my XLT.

Never used either thinking of getting something different.

I've gotten use to swinging a couple of tesoros (vaquero and golden)

There are good and bad points to what I just read. It's good that you've got experience with a variety of detector types and both TID and non-display models. The bad is that some people can develop some poor technique if going from a moderate-to-fast sweep design, like the XLT, to dedicated slow-sweep Tesoro's. Two-filter types, like the Tesoro's mentioned, can suffer with a loss of performance if they are swept too quickly especially if over more mineralized ground. This has, however, given you the opportunity to feel the difference in balance and weight. To be honest, the XLT isn't all that bad, if you're using a smaller-than-stock coil, but I find the XLT class of detectors to be a bit fatiguing with the stock 950 coil.

If you have only borrowed the two Tesoro's to use then you only have the XLT to decide is you want to part with a detector. If, however, you own all three then you might want to reconsider and sell off a Tesoro or two as well. You didn't clarify what features you do or don't like about the XLT that you would want to be replacing, other than weight. I can guarantee you that weight is NOT an issue with either the T2 or Omega regardless of which factory coil you have mounted.

Kind of tired the weight.

Honestly, an XLT with a 6

 

[Monte]

Even comparing them side-by-side in some hunting applications, I see very little difference in depth, with the 'edge' sometimes going to one or the other. The T2 does provide the operator with a Threshold control in All metal, and separate Sensitivity control, over each operating mode. That's something usually found just on some top-end models, such as White's XLT, DFX and Spectra V3. Currently, there are only 11" and 5" coils available from the factory for the T2 while the Omega comes with a 10" elliptical concentric, and you can order a 5' DD, 11" DD or even a round 8" concentric as used on the Gamma, etc.

As for benefits of different operating frequencies, I have never been one to put total faith i he claim of how one frequency range is superior to another for all types of hunting. An example would be the Omega, operating at 7.8 kHz. Popularly quoted "theory" suggests that this frequency range would be better for higher-conductive targets than lower when compared to something like the T2 @ 13 kHz. This would be much like saying the White's Classic series at 6.59 kHz would not be so great for the US 5

 

[Monte]

n/t

 

[earthmansurfer]

Just to add a snippet more of information. While looking over on Dankowski's forum it seems a few very knowledgeable people say the T2 has a clear advantage over the Omega 8000 in iron (unmasking) - At least with the same size coil. Another interesting thing about the T2 (not sure about the Omega 8000) is that it, along with the similar fisher units, you can turn up the sensitivity in Iron and unlike almost all other detectors, it actually helps to unmask in iron. That is a very very big feature.

 

[D&P-OR]

I believe that if you check Toms forum--he states that this is true of the F-75, T2 AND Omega (unlike other detectors).-------Del

 

[Jackpine Savage]

in my experience that would only be when using PF single tone process at disc 21 or when using the hyper sensitivity settings. Not many people can tolerate the amount of iron signals broken or otherwise that occurs when using those settings for any length of time before becoming audibly worn out! I see many postings on the various forums by died in the wool relic hunters, some of the most serious guys around, stating that not even they can tolerate it and preferring to use 2 tone the biggest share of the time.

Dave J summed it up well in one of this posts where he stated that even though the Omega may give up a bit to the T[sup]2[/sup] or F75 performance wise in the hands someone well versed in using them, it is by far the easist to get maximum performance out of the Omega for the casual user.

In a nut shell, the Omega is an excellent detector. One of the few that I can honestly say makes 'hunted out sites' worth rehunting.

HH Tom

 

[BuckeyeBrad]

n/t

 

[Monte]

On the T2 I prefer 2+, and on the Omega I generally opt for d2, and sometimes go for d4, but that's usually in tot lots and similar places where I figure there's a good chance for easy recovery of 5

 

[earthmansurfer]

in my experience that would only be when using PF single tone process at disc 21 or when using the hyper sensitivity settings. Not many people can tolerate the amount of iron signals broken or otherwise that occurs when using those settings for any length of time before becoming audibly worn out! I see many postings on the various forums by died in the wool relic hunters, some of the most serious guys around, stating that not even they can tolerate it and preferring to use 2 tone the biggest share of the time.

Dave J summed it up well in one of this posts where he stated that even though the Omega may give up a bit to the T[sup]2[/sup] or F75 performance wise in the hands someone well versed in using them, it is by far the easist to get maximum performance out of the Omega for the casual user.

In a nut shell, the Omega is an excellent detector. One of the few that I can honestly say makes 'hunted out sites' worth rehunting.

HH Tom

Yes, thanks for the information. I am really shocked that these two detectors are so similar in performance yet so different in price. I'm good for now with my T2 but if I pick up another detector (perhaps when I visit America!) then I'll bring me back an Omega. I really can't handle the audio fatique of the T2 in heavy iron though... Wouldn't you think they could digitally filter out all that extra audio, somehow though? For those curious, here is what Tom Dankowski and Keith said on Toms forum:

I have yet to find a scenario of where a lower Sens setting will acquire a target with better resolution on the F-series units. This is contradictory to expectations (a paradox); yet, has been confirmed time-n-time again. I have reported this numerous times in other threads. Yes, the audio fatigue factor does come into play fairly heavily.....if you are running the unit deep into the 'chatter' mode via high Sens settings. In iron infested sites..... a higher Sens setting is unsuspectingly the better choice. This does NOT hold true with other units.

You can practice this on (especially) the F75 by hunting a site with a very moderate Sens setting......and you will be surprised as to the units performance (and stability). ......... THEN.... increase the Sens a bunch,,,to the point of where you are acquiring 'some' chatter....and hunt the exact same parcel of land again. You'll be in for a good surprise!

In the last week or so I have been running my T-2 (standard) in 99 sens while in think blankets of nails and I can honestly say that the 99 sens and zero disc 2+ tone will unmask targets that the lower sens setting's will not see...

It's not like you just set it at 99 and start digging great sounding targets ... But it does give you some more Audio ( High tone buzzy type hits) that would normally be just a low iron grunt...

Why it does it???? (Still believe It's the Coil!!!) but it does... I started doing it because I was running my Omega at 99 sens in the iron and never thought to try the T-2 wide open and to my amazement it started opening up some targets...And at the same time proved to me while the Omega is a nice machine at a great price it will not do what the T-2 will coil for coil...Close but no quite!

If you are serious about relic hunting( Civil war is my passion especially the house sites of the era) or even looking for centuries old coins in old habitat sites where iron is a constant "machine gun" sound do your self a favor on the First Texas T-2 F-75 detectors and open them up... If you can take the noise that is!!

It will open your eyes..


One other thing I also noticed in my area is the 99 sens actually cuts down on the Iron false signal's ( Might be getting a better look at them?)

 

[Jackpine Savage]

and almost from day one I realized its potential at finding those iron co-located targets.

I am really shocked that these two detectors are so similar in performance yet so different in price. I'm good for now with my T2 but if I pick up another detector (perhaps when I visit America!) then I'll bring me back an Omega. I really can't handle the audio fatique of the T2 in heavy iron though... Wouldn't you think they could digitally filter out all that extra audio, somehow though?

Rather than filter out the iron signals or increase the iron disc setting, I would much prefer an option for reducing the audio volume of the iron signals while leaving the good tone alone. Headphones with clipper circuits are available that offer something similar but doing it in the detector itself is the better way. The T[sup]2[/sup] PF process at disc 21 gets stuff the 2 tone mode misses, on this there is little debate. Lowering the the fatigue factor would allow more users to get the best these machines have to offer IMO.

psycho-acoustics SPL (volume)

Yes Dave, I know I'm on my soap box again.

 

[Jackpine Savage]

Always start out with the volume level set to minimum and gradually increase until you reach a comfortable level. I have always preached this and the following statement in the link I posted above seems to prove me correct.

About the connection between sound level and loudness, there are various theories. Far spread is still the theory of psycho-acoustic pioneer Stanley Smith Stevens, indicating that the doubling or halving the sensation of loudness corresponds to a level difference of 10 dB.
Recent research by Richard M.Warren,on the other hand leads to a level difference of only 6 dB. *) This means that a double sound pressure corresponds to a double loudness.
The psychologist John G. Neuhoff found out that for the rising level our hearing is more sensitive than for the declining level. For the same sound level difference the change of loudness from quiet to loud is stronger than from loud to quiet.

Happy (iron) Hunting!

Tom

 

[earthmansurfer]

A couple of things Jack, first when you said "The T2 PF process at disc 21 gets stuff the 2 tone mode misses", what is the PF process? It's not a mode on the regular T2. I've seen others mention "PF" and thought it might be for the T2 ltd...

Second, regarding headphone volume. I always have my headphones all the way up (Grey Ghosts) and use my detector volume as my main volume. It barely crossed my mind what the difference might mean. So, you are saying to turn up my detector volume to ???? and then use my headphone volume as a secondary volume control?

Thanks again

 

[jmaryt]

plowed field mode found on the f-75.

(h.h!)
j.t/

 

[fayt]

I hear better things about the Omega 8000

 

[Jackpine Savage]

is the single tone setting intended for use in uneven (lumpy) ground conditions that have a fast changing ground signal. The difference is in the number and speed of the 'filters' used compared to the other tones/processes. Many have found it to unmask iron co-located targets missed by the other processes albeit with more iron falses coming thru as good tones which require double checking. However it works, the unmasking ability is actually a by-product of the intended function, ie: handling uneven or 'ploughed' for you English, ground..

Regarding detector volume setting vs headphone settings, it's probably best to ask the specific manufacturer which to adjust and which to set to max. My point which I obviously did a poor job of explaining is how to best set a comfortable non tiring to the ears audio volume level. Simply put if you start with a low audio level and increase it graually to a comfortable level while detecting over target rich ground you will end up with a lower setting than using the reverse technique of starting high and reducing it to a perceived comfortable sound pressure level. Which do you think is best for your ears, a low setting that gives good target response or a high setting?

Just like our eyes that catch slight movement or ears given a chance can perceive low level audio changes if given that chance. We would not have survived as a species if not for our senses of sight and hearing. The same senses that now serve us for a multi-tude of other uses.

Tom