A
Anonymous
Guest
Get a Fisher lightweight rod [complete] and hip mount the CZ-20. What would really be nice is a metering circuit and a meter.
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.
What's Happened to the ID Edge?
- Thread starter Relic
- Start date
then. I love how you hid your comments way down the string long after the discussion was over. But everyone has a right to blow off steam I guess. Or is there some kind of agenda? You favor another brand? My "listening to their customers" comment you took out of context was directed towards the Edge and some of the tweaks that were done to what you call "clumsy notches".
What new chip for the C$? This was never advertised by the factory. This was a rumor started online by who knows who.
8 years behind w. target ID? Actually, Fisher was still selling the CZ series which was deeper than the ID competition, has a meter & tone ID, & will go down in history as an all time classic. Period.
No clue your beef with compressing the scale on EDGe/Excel?? If you ever used a Coinstrike you would know that +40 & up is mostly an un-used area that only favors an annoying +51 hot rock. The Edge/Excel going to +36 eliminates this, a great thing (not a cheap thing) in my area. 72 total numbers is more than enough, so I guess you'll really hate the new minelab & 18 numbers. This "cheap route" has produced perhaps the 3 fastest ID detectors ever using "real time" response w. no delays. Name a faster detector. They are the 3 best out there in iron trash, & cover 3 different price points, but I take it you don't hunt iron trash...
What new chip for the C$? This was never advertised by the factory. This was a rumor started online by who knows who.
8 years behind w. target ID? Actually, Fisher was still selling the CZ series which was deeper than the ID competition, has a meter & tone ID, & will go down in history as an all time classic. Period.
No clue your beef with compressing the scale on EDGe/Excel?? If you ever used a Coinstrike you would know that +40 & up is mostly an un-used area that only favors an annoying +51 hot rock. The Edge/Excel going to +36 eliminates this, a great thing (not a cheap thing) in my area. 72 total numbers is more than enough, so I guess you'll really hate the new minelab & 18 numbers. This "cheap route" has produced perhaps the 3 fastest ID detectors ever using "real time" response w. no delays. Name a faster detector. They are the 3 best out there in iron trash, & cover 3 different price points, but I take it you don't hunt iron trash...
You should really get your facts strait before you post. 
The Fisher dealers have received notices about CZ's being phased out. The big 3 with DSP (like the C$) are not going anywhere, & this is the direction they are taking with their new engineer. The Coinstrike happens to work great in the UK, wanna see some finds? It's also favored all over a web site outta Colchester as well.....
The Fisher dealers have received notices about CZ's being phased out. The big 3 with DSP (like the C$) are not going anywhere, & this is the direction they are taking with their new engineer. The Coinstrike happens to work great in the UK, wanna see some finds? It's also favored all over a web site outta Colchester as well.....
A
Anonymous
Guest
I did not hide anything, just addressed them where they were posted. No brand preference, and my agenda is trying to get the makers to make changes more rapidly to improve ergonomics and detector capabilities.
Examples of Fisher not listening: when the 1260 came out everyone wanted a pinpoint but Fisher said its not needed as the circuit is slow enough. Nevermind that the pinpoint was needed, as it could also help in discing out iron that had turned mostly to rust, and help in separating targets in the midst of multiple signals. When they came out with the 1266 they said it was at least 25% more sensitive than the 1265. Only problem was that it was so unstable people could not use them, and either returned the 1266, or stuck it in a closet and got their 1265 out. Only after distributors and dealers complained they could not sell them did Fisher revamp the detector. And those clumsy notches were a cheap way to deal with trash, as opposed to individual notch numbers. What do you think they did with the 3D but move some biases around, so that certain good targets near a notch edge would read good.
A FISHER FACTORY TECHNICIAN told me before I bought a Coinstrike it would be updatable with new chips.
And Fisher was at least 8 years behind [making their first TID unit]every other detector maker who were all producing TID units. They fact that Fisher did not change the CZ is not a plus; look at the evolutions other makers did to IMPROVE their line, from top-of-the-line, down to inexpensive over that same time period. [when I address Minelab it will be at their forum]
Compressing the scale should be obvious to anyone. The more numbers, the more degrees between target numbers, and the more finesse. If you have used a unit with an expanded scale it just gives you more information, as per the DFX about whether to dig. And when you consider that half of those 72 numbers you mention are in the iron range, that dog just won't hunt.
As to naming a faster detector in "real time" try the Tecknetics Mk-1,
Treasure Baron Cointrax module and the MXT.
As to hunting iron, that is the main trash target I have to deal with, and I get better depth and as good iron separation with my CZ-70Pro as with my Coinstrike. I still have it because I do not want to take such a loss with selling it, and still hope that Fisher honors their word and updates the unit.
Let their be no doubt, I have no ties with any factory, and have no financial axe to grind. I'd like Fisher for once, to listen to the users and make THE DETECTOR that is as good and as versatile as they are capable of. AND I don't know a better place to bring things up than at Fisher's Forum, and I'm only saying what a large number of people have said over the years, but I'm putting in the public record. Writing to Fisher about changing things does ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.
Examples of Fisher not listening: when the 1260 came out everyone wanted a pinpoint but Fisher said its not needed as the circuit is slow enough. Nevermind that the pinpoint was needed, as it could also help in discing out iron that had turned mostly to rust, and help in separating targets in the midst of multiple signals. When they came out with the 1266 they said it was at least 25% more sensitive than the 1265. Only problem was that it was so unstable people could not use them, and either returned the 1266, or stuck it in a closet and got their 1265 out. Only after distributors and dealers complained they could not sell them did Fisher revamp the detector. And those clumsy notches were a cheap way to deal with trash, as opposed to individual notch numbers. What do you think they did with the 3D but move some biases around, so that certain good targets near a notch edge would read good.
A FISHER FACTORY TECHNICIAN told me before I bought a Coinstrike it would be updatable with new chips.
And Fisher was at least 8 years behind [making their first TID unit]every other detector maker who were all producing TID units. They fact that Fisher did not change the CZ is not a plus; look at the evolutions other makers did to IMPROVE their line, from top-of-the-line, down to inexpensive over that same time period. [when I address Minelab it will be at their forum]
Compressing the scale should be obvious to anyone. The more numbers, the more degrees between target numbers, and the more finesse. If you have used a unit with an expanded scale it just gives you more information, as per the DFX about whether to dig. And when you consider that half of those 72 numbers you mention are in the iron range, that dog just won't hunt.
As to naming a faster detector in "real time" try the Tecknetics Mk-1,
Treasure Baron Cointrax module and the MXT.
As to hunting iron, that is the main trash target I have to deal with, and I get better depth and as good iron separation with my CZ-70Pro as with my Coinstrike. I still have it because I do not want to take such a loss with selling it, and still hope that Fisher honors their word and updates the unit.
Let their be no doubt, I have no ties with any factory, and have no financial axe to grind. I'd like Fisher for once, to listen to the users and make THE DETECTOR that is as good and as versatile as they are capable of. AND I don't know a better place to bring things up than at Fisher's Forum, and I'm only saying what a large number of people have said over the years, but I'm putting in the public record. Writing to Fisher about changing things does ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.
A
Anonymous
Guest
Dealers there are starting to price them almost the same as a CZ70Pro. And anyone can get lucky and stumble onto something, as farmers and gardeners who do not use detectors are wont to do in the UK.
Gonna "address minelab" next huh? That's funny. So rather than getting out and just metal detecting, your mission is to hop from forum to forum to let every company know what "Vlad" dislikes? One persons opinion online is not going to instantly change the hobby unfortunately. You seem to hold a grudge that Fisher has not made the ultimate detector that Vlad wants. I would relax and pick a unit you like that works well for your area & just go metal detecting. You keep mentioning the DFX, so that's great, if that is the unit you feel got it all right, have fun, go dig holes. Most all good brands will find stuff. For me it's a fun hobby, & heck if you really live in England I know of no better place in the world to hunt. You should be thrilled not bitter. Sure, there are some things I'd love to see different on a Coinstrike for example (I already listed one). My ultimate Fisher would be a waterproof C$ in a tiny box with GPS, a trigger PP, mini-onboard probe, 3", 5" 15" coils, & way to silence +51 rocks, etc. But, rather than blow off steam online to whomever may listen, I go out and have fun with it as is. For my type of hunting it works well as is. Bottom line is everyone wants something different and you can't please everyone.
But, anyhow we've gut a nice debate going. That's what a forum is, and we can agree to disagree on some things. Saying the 1266 was not even usable was a real surprise. Again, for you, the less powerful 1265 was better..that's great. But for me, and many thousands of others, the 1266x was, & perhaps still is the deepest relic detector of all time. That 25% more power was welcomed here for stuff like Civil War relics. In the 80's the 1266 was the unit to own for relics. So it depends on what your using it for. For coinshooting or trash, thats not what it was made for.
Calling the Excel a "dog that won't hunt" is just wrong. 36 negative numbers make it a dog? You gutta come to the table with something better than that. Again, since I actually use one, I don't want to see a +51 hot rock. So, the Excel works well for me & others in this area, especially in fields & thick iron. You must not get over to the Excel forum much to see all the finds posted (such as the recent Oak Tree coin). This is the best bargain in the hobby.
You must be one a them "try them all" guys by listing all kinds of different units you claim as faster. How can something be faster than real time? As fast maybe, but I doubt it. I'd take the less costly Excel into thick iron against any of those....
I'm glad you use a CZ-70, but saying it has better iron separation than a C$ is incorrect. Your the first one to even claim that. I have used CZ's for years & own both, I actually have countless hours on both in heavy iron, & it's really no contest. Do you fail to see the digital delay on the 70? The C$ is the clear winner, once learned...But there's the kicker: ONCE LEARNED. You strike me as someone who just never took the time to really learn what a C$ can do and I'm sorry to hear that if that's the case. But I know this happens alot when you gutta try unit after unit after unit...
Cheers, Bill
But, anyhow we've gut a nice debate going. That's what a forum is, and we can agree to disagree on some things. Saying the 1266 was not even usable was a real surprise. Again, for you, the less powerful 1265 was better..that's great. But for me, and many thousands of others, the 1266x was, & perhaps still is the deepest relic detector of all time. That 25% more power was welcomed here for stuff like Civil War relics. In the 80's the 1266 was the unit to own for relics. So it depends on what your using it for. For coinshooting or trash, thats not what it was made for.
Calling the Excel a "dog that won't hunt" is just wrong. 36 negative numbers make it a dog? You gutta come to the table with something better than that. Again, since I actually use one, I don't want to see a +51 hot rock. So, the Excel works well for me & others in this area, especially in fields & thick iron. You must not get over to the Excel forum much to see all the finds posted (such as the recent Oak Tree coin). This is the best bargain in the hobby.
You must be one a them "try them all" guys by listing all kinds of different units you claim as faster. How can something be faster than real time? As fast maybe, but I doubt it. I'd take the less costly Excel into thick iron against any of those....
I'm glad you use a CZ-70, but saying it has better iron separation than a C$ is incorrect. Your the first one to even claim that. I have used CZ's for years & own both, I actually have countless hours on both in heavy iron, & it's really no contest. Do you fail to see the digital delay on the 70? The C$ is the clear winner, once learned...But there's the kicker: ONCE LEARNED. You strike me as someone who just never took the time to really learn what a C$ can do and I'm sorry to hear that if that's the case. But I know this happens alot when you gutta try unit after unit after unit...
Cheers, Bill
Bugar In. USA
Active member
Shucks i even had a lotta fun with a $40.00, garage sale bounty hunter, but i guess talkin is easier than huntin
But I'm at "work" & have nothing better to do 
In fact, I sorta enjoy the volley back & forth especially since I have had great success with the 2 units he called dogs, the 1266x & Excel. Different strokes for different folks....
But now I'm headed out to take my own advice & go metal detecting
In fact, I sorta enjoy the volley back & forth especially since I have had great success with the 2 units he called dogs, the 1266x & Excel. Different strokes for different folks....But now I'm headed out to take my own advice & go metal detecting
A
Anonymous
Guest
My training is as an I.E., and that means an efficency expert who basically tries to find a better way of doing things. My first use of a detector was back when I was carrying a rifle for a living during Vietnam with the Army. I figured that if I could find mines, there are lots of goodies to be found also. After I retired, medically unfit for duty in' 75, I really got into detectors. VLFs, BFOs, TRs, and PRGs, Flux-Gate Mags, Proton, Cesium or Differential Mags, or Pipe Locators, Underwater, any and all. I was dealing detectors back when Fisher was making the 400 Series of straight VLFs. Then in 1979 I met Eric Foster and bought one of his P.I.machines; we stayed in touch enough that when the Goldscan 1 prototype came out, I got one of the two to test. You could say that I've been around. I quit the dealing in 1983, but continue to use every detector I can get my hand on.
The 1266 absolutely did have a problem, as the relic hunters in Civil War areas stopped buying them, and Fisher had to do some improvements on the unit. The marketplace at: work-laissez-faire.
As to Minelab, you are the one who mentioned them, and no I don't go from forum to forum as you stated. There is no bitterness, just an urge to keep pushing the envelope. If no one spoke up we would still be using BFOs and High Frequency TRs. Read my lips on the newer Fisher units; when one-half of your 64 number spectrum is negative, that in no way enhances coin hunting[ that STATEMENT of yours is the dog about 64 numbers-not the detectors]; may be helpful in prospecting, to a point. I want to see a dollar read at 95, and the rest of the range appropriately spread out instead of compressed to where its hard to tell a silver dime from a copper penny.
As to expertise over a wide range of detectors, that I do have. Learning the pros and cons of what individual detectors will do, or not cannot but help in the use of metal detectors.If you don't take that approach, you will never determine which detectors work best for a given task under differing conditions. I never said any detector was "faster than real time," but some were as fast as the detectors you mentioned. I have read numerous posts and talked with people, and I'm way back in the pack when it comes to saying the CZ is as good in iron as a C$. But then again, I have no financial stake in selling detectors, so my judgement is not impuned by promoting detectors for a profit.
And quit trying to put words in my mouth that I did not say. You seem to be one who is very judgemental of other individuals without knowing anything about them and making attacks on a personal level. As to getting out and hunting, I do when I am able, but being partially paralyzed from a brain/spinal cord injury makes it more difficult than not, at times. You are the first person I've seen to imply that having knowledge of many detectors is somehow....detrimental; and the first with your statement that the 1266 was not made for coins [what other Fisher was there to use than a 1200 circuit if you hunted with Fishers, because the 500 series was no longer made, and the CZ was not out yet].
So I will continue to use any and all detectors, and try to get the various factories to get out a better product to the consumer. Companies that did not do so, like C&G Electronics, A&H Electronics, D-Tex, and Gold Mountain among others are not in business because that is a lesson they did not learn.
The 1266 absolutely did have a problem, as the relic hunters in Civil War areas stopped buying them, and Fisher had to do some improvements on the unit. The marketplace at: work-laissez-faire.
As to Minelab, you are the one who mentioned them, and no I don't go from forum to forum as you stated. There is no bitterness, just an urge to keep pushing the envelope. If no one spoke up we would still be using BFOs and High Frequency TRs. Read my lips on the newer Fisher units; when one-half of your 64 number spectrum is negative, that in no way enhances coin hunting[ that STATEMENT of yours is the dog about 64 numbers-not the detectors]; may be helpful in prospecting, to a point. I want to see a dollar read at 95, and the rest of the range appropriately spread out instead of compressed to where its hard to tell a silver dime from a copper penny.
As to expertise over a wide range of detectors, that I do have. Learning the pros and cons of what individual detectors will do, or not cannot but help in the use of metal detectors.If you don't take that approach, you will never determine which detectors work best for a given task under differing conditions. I never said any detector was "faster than real time," but some were as fast as the detectors you mentioned. I have read numerous posts and talked with people, and I'm way back in the pack when it comes to saying the CZ is as good in iron as a C$. But then again, I have no financial stake in selling detectors, so my judgement is not impuned by promoting detectors for a profit.
And quit trying to put words in my mouth that I did not say. You seem to be one who is very judgemental of other individuals without knowing anything about them and making attacks on a personal level. As to getting out and hunting, I do when I am able, but being partially paralyzed from a brain/spinal cord injury makes it more difficult than not, at times. You are the first person I've seen to imply that having knowledge of many detectors is somehow....detrimental; and the first with your statement that the 1266 was not made for coins [what other Fisher was there to use than a 1200 circuit if you hunted with Fishers, because the 500 series was no longer made, and the CZ was not out yet].
So I will continue to use any and all detectors, and try to get the various factories to get out a better product to the consumer. Companies that did not do so, like C&G Electronics, A&H Electronics, D-Tex, and Gold Mountain among others are not in business because that is a lesson they did not learn.
mtdoramike
Well-known member
Fisher has finally come out with a detector with the same or equal features as the C$ but less then $250.00 of the cost of the C$. I will agree, I hated to see them do away with the CZ70 & CZ5, but thats progress I reckon & progress sometimes won't benefit everyone. But I will disagree with you on the iron seperation with the CZ70 being as good as the C$, I own both and the CZ70 isn't as good in iron as the C$. Try hunting around railroad tracks sometime, I bet you won't get within 25 feet of them. But I can hunt almost next to the tracks with the C$.
mtdoramike
Well-known member
I would definately not call it a dog that won't hunt. I'll bet it will hold its own with the best of them in the hands of someone who knows how to use it and learns the machine.
mtdoramike
Well-known member
over more then the C$ has found.
A
Anonymous
Guest
Read what I SAID [emphasis]-not what someone told you I said.
A
Anonymous
Guest
I know these sites in England where these kind of things happen, and the landowners involved. Its a matter of having connections through someone.
One guy in Norfolk can walk 10 minutes from his home and find Roman & Celtic coins literally on top of the ground , in places. When I go over I carry about 6 detectors, and give clinics to the local clubs on using them. It does help.
Its the same here. If I want to hunt Shiloh, Brice's Crossroads, or Port Hudson, I know the landowners. I have found minies and buttons sitting atop dirt mounds under barbed wire fences, and exposed by rain. There is luck involved. You can have a good machine, do everything right, and it comes down to chance-you just happen to be in the right spot, FIRST.
One guy in Norfolk can walk 10 minutes from his home and find Roman & Celtic coins literally on top of the ground , in places. When I go over I carry about 6 detectors, and give clinics to the local clubs on using them. It does help.
Its the same here. If I want to hunt Shiloh, Brice's Crossroads, or Port Hudson, I know the landowners. I have found minies and buttons sitting atop dirt mounds under barbed wire fences, and exposed by rain. There is luck involved. You can have a good machine, do everything right, and it comes down to chance-you just happen to be in the right spot, FIRST.
A
Anonymous
Guest
I dont need a detector to find RR Tracks[in jest]. Boy would you love the Confederate RR Tracks way back in the Reservation at Ft Polk. We got misplaced one night on a FTX, because our LT was trying to navigate by reading ground features in heavy fog. Sgt Rock finally had enough, and said we will stop here. And it was a good place, with all these wide round holes that were perfect for pitching a shelter half. The next morning when someone found an unexploded mortar shell we realized we were in an impact area. Headed out North, found the Confederate RR, and followed it out. I'd like to go back and pull some spikes and cut rails up in small sections one day.
A
Anonymous
Guest
I can put you in touch with a guy in Roman/Celtic Coin Heaven.
mtdoramike
Well-known member
but if luck is'nt on your side then your not going to find much. I really believe that. Once upon a time when I was a might younger & in better health, I would have jumped at the chance to go over to England and do some huntin, but those days are long gone I'm afraid.