Findmall.com
 
 






Minelab EQUINOX Forum


Welcome! Log In Register
Re: EQUINOX Technologies (Part 2)
Posted by: Ksdirt
Date: November 01, 2017 01:38PM
Quote
Charles (Upstate NY)
Quote
Jason in Enid
Quote
IDXMonster

Of course,the only way to know what it will really do is for many FBS users to take the Equinox to their sites that are "dead" and see if they wake up again. If they start producing good targets once again and it happens in VOLUME and IMMEDIATELY,then it's clear that the new tech has trumped about everything out there.

I have to disagree a bit here. I am currently re-working an old "dead" site and its producing like crazy! several years ago, and friend an I pounded this site every week for months. We pulled dozens of silver, over 100 wheats and a handful of indian head cents. We worked it over and over until it stopped producing. I went back the next year a few times but it never would produce enough to justify the drive out.

Fast forward a couple years to a couple weeks ago. I hunted it again just because I had to be there for business. 4 silver dimes, 8 wheats, 2 tokens, V and buff nickels and a big gold ring. Last weekend I went back and pulled another 5 dimes, sterling earings, and more wheats.

This is hunting with my CTX, the same CTX I used on it a few years ago. I have no idea why its suddenly producing again but I'm not complaining! LOL . Now, if I had waited until I had the 800 to go re-try that old honey hole, I would have sworn it was just the machine finding everything that the CTX couldnt.

The real test will be to take to an old producing site and hunt it back to back with other detectors while flagging targets before digging. What can one hit that that the other cant? Hunt old deep sites, old fields, trashy parks, put both detector through their paces and compare them, but the only true comparison is real targets still in the dirt

Does your soil freeze in the winter? If so the soil heaves, expands, this slowly flips coins end over end and move stuff around. Its not unusual to come back to a hunted out site and find lots more coins after those that were on edge flip over flat and are detectable. After a few seasons of this they do eventually play out.

I might be lucky in having several spots to test out the EQ if it's for real..because myself and a buddy of mine are both NUTS because for the last 5 plus years we keep pounding the same old parks and old schools etc..where we have found several silver , wheats, etc with our etracs and now hardly ever get anything.. But we still keep goin there...almost weekly ....we still find the new clad that was dropped but rarely anything good ...but you never no....just can't seem to stop...So can't wait to get my EQ...:detecting:

avatar
Re: EQUINOX Technologies (Part 2)
Posted by: sgoss66
Date: November 01, 2017 02:04PM
Carolina,

Just to expound a bit more on my "largely marketing" comment.

I have talked about this here before, regarding Minelab's implication that the Equinox "won't be as sensitive to deep silver" as FBS. I have said that I think those statements may be more "marketing" than what the truth might prove to be. And then, as you and stephenscool were discussing, we also have Minelab's implications that the Equinox will be only "almost as good as FBS and BBS" on wet sand thing. Just like with the "a little less sensitive to silver" caveats Minelab has mentioned, I am simply having a hard time seeing how it's not at least "possible," if not LIKELY, that this, too, is nothing but "marketing"...

The way I see it is, something just doesn't add up here. EITHER you have created a "breakthrough" in the technology that allows you to better deal with ground minerals -- and thus greatly improve target ID, or you haven't. If you HAVEN'T, but are claiming you have, then users are going to find out real quick that you are selling snake oil. (And I don't think this will be the case, with the Equinox). On the OTHER hand, if you really HAVE created this breakthrough technology -- I have to believe that while your engineers were so busy creating this breakthrough so as to "one-up" your competition, it's highly likely that the engineers also, somewhat inadvertently, "one-upped" your OWN product offerings, as well.

Do you REALLY believe that the Equinox is going to be SO GOOD that Minelab draws away customers from XP and Nokta and Garrett and all the others, and yet AT THE SAME TIME, the Equinox's performance will fall short of 15- to 20-year old technology (BBS/FBS)? How can you take multi-frequency technology, IMPROVE upon it (which is what Multi-IQ claims to do), and then end up with WORSE performance than your prior generation of multi-frequency technology? I really think Multi-IQ will either prove to be an IMPROVEMENT, or it will prove NOT to be. But if it IS, then it just doesn't make sense to say it's only an improvement over NON-Minelab machines, but NOT an improvement over Minelab machines. Isn't that essentially what the marketing department is telling us here? They are walking a tightrope, in my opinion, and they know it. They on one hand need to talk about how much of a breakthrough in performance it will be, outperforming all THE OTHER manufacturer's machines, but they also need to find "caveats" so that they don't make it "obvious" to their customer base that it just may outperform THEIR OWN machines...

I think what will most likely be the case, when the dust settles, is one of two things -- EITHER the Equinox is THAT GOOD (in which case FBS and BBS will likely be out-performed as well), or NOT that good. I just don't see a middle ground in there where the Equinox will be a "better performer" than the others, but yet NOT a better performer than FBS/BBS.

Steve



Minelab CTX 3030
Minelab Explorer SE Pro
Garrett ProPointer AT
Lesche hand digger
Lesche 38D "King of Spades"

Norman, OK

avatar
Re: EQUINOX Technologies (Part 2)
Posted by: sgoss66
Date: November 01, 2017 02:07PM
Quote
Ksdirt
I might be lucky in having several spots to test out the EQ if it's for real..because myself and a buddy of mine are both NUTS because for the last 5 plus years we keep pounding the same old parks and old schools etc..where we have found several silver , wheats, etc with our etracs and now hardly ever get anything.. But we still keep goin there...almost weekly ....we still find the new clad that was dropped but rarely anything good ...but you never no....just can't seem to stop...So can't wait to get my EQ...:detecting:

Ha ha! I have one of those spots, too! I think many of us do. The nearby, public, easy-to-hunt-when-you-don't-have-a-lot-of-time type of spot. While nearly dead, due to how hard we, and others, have hammered it, we continue to do so due to familiarity and proximity, and a success in this spot -- at this point -- has now been reduced to pulling a wheat cent every once in awhile!

You can bet I will be visiting that spot many times, with the Equinox. It will be a really good "proving ground," in that regard...

Steve



Minelab CTX 3030
Minelab Explorer SE Pro
Garrett ProPointer AT
Lesche hand digger
Lesche 38D "King of Spades"

Norman, OK



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/01/2017 02:09PM by sgoss66.

Re: EQUINOX Technologies (Part 2)
Posted by: IDXMonster
Date: November 01, 2017 05:42PM
It'll be an eye opener Steve if it's SO good it outperforms EVERYTHING,but like you said...where exactly DOES it fit in if that's not the case?? After so long of running the SE you also have a HUGE leg up on a newbie to the Equinox,so that's a little lopsided to begin with!
I can't wait to see what it will do.

avatar
Re: EQUINOX Technologies (Part 2)
Posted by: sgoss66
Date: November 01, 2017 06:28PM
I can't wait either, IDX. I am really hoping that those of us familiar with FBS machines will have a "shorter learning curve" with respect to the Equinox. Hopefully there are some "similarities" there, in terms of feel, that it's a somewhat "intuitive" move, from FBS to Equinox. I have run (and am currently) a friend's borrowed E-Trac a number of times over the years, and I find the move from the SE Pro to the E-Trac pretty seamless. If you can hunt one, you can hunt the other. Sure, there are nuances there, slight differences, the numbers are different, etc. But if you know what is a "diggable target" on an SE Pro, I can hand you an E-Trac and you will know what a "diggable target" is on it. I don't expect the Equinox to be THAT "intuitive" to an FBS/FBS2 user, but hopefully there is SOME experience that can be translated over...

In any case, yes...all of this speculation is fun and all, but where exactly the Equinox will "fit in" is entirely unclear, at this point. I'm looking forward to it, though!

Steve



Minelab CTX 3030
Minelab Explorer SE Pro
Garrett ProPointer AT
Lesche hand digger
Lesche 38D "King of Spades"

Norman, OK

Re: EQUINOX Technologies (Part 2)
Posted by: newguy
Date: November 01, 2017 06:56PM
Quote
sgoss66
Carolina,

Just to expound a bit more on my "largely marketing" comment.

I have talked about this here before, regarding Minelab's implication that the Equinox "won't be as sensitive to deep silver" as FBS. I have said that I think those statements may be more "marketing" than what the truth might prove to be. And then, as you and stephenscool were discussing, we also have Minelab's implications that the Equinox will be only "almost as good as FBS and BBS" on wet sand thing. Just like with the "a little less sensitive to silver" caveats Minelab has mentioned, I am simply having a hard time seeing how it's not at least "possible," if not LIKELY, that this, too, is nothing but "marketing"...

The way I see it is, something just doesn't add up here. EITHER you have created a "breakthrough" in the technology that allows you to better deal with ground minerals -- and thus greatly improve target ID, or you haven't. If you HAVEN'T, but are claiming you have, then users are going to find out real quick that you are selling snake oil. (And I don't think this will be the case, with the Equinox). On the OTHER hand, if you really HAVE created this breakthrough technology -- I have to believe that while your engineers were so busy creating this breakthrough so as to "one-up" your competition, it's highly likely that the engineers also, somewhat inadvertently, "one-upped" your OWN product offerings, as well.

Do you REALLY believe that the Equinox is going to be SO GOOD that Minelab draws away customers from XP and Nokta and Garrett and all the others, and yet AT THE SAME TIME, the Equinox's performance will fall short of 15- to 20-year old technology (BBS/FBS)? How can you take multi-frequency technology, IMPROVE upon it (which is what Multi-IQ claims to do), and then end up with WORSE performance than your prior generation of multi-frequency technology? I really think Multi-IQ will either prove to be an IMPROVEMENT, or it will prove NOT to be. But if it IS, then it just doesn't make sense to say it's only an improvement over NON-Minelab machines, but NOT an improvement over Minelab machines. Isn't that essentially what the marketing department is telling us here? They are walking a tightrope, in my opinion, and they know it. They on one hand need to talk about how much of a breakthrough in performance it will be, outperforming all THE OTHER manufacturer's machines, but they also need to find "caveats" so that they don't make it "obvious" to their customer base that it just may outperform THEIR OWN machines...

I think what will most likely be the case, when the dust settles, is one of two things -- EITHER the Equinox is THAT GOOD (in which case FBS and BBS will likely be out-performed as well), or NOT that good. I just don't see a middle ground in there where the Equinox will be a "better performer" than the others, but yet NOT a better performer than FBS/BBS.

Steve
Steve, I don't know anything about metal detector electronics but when I was a mainframe computer programmer 40 years ago, I could easily write a program that could test the output of some event and then decide what to do next. As a hypothetical example you could: do something like this:
- If output of event(s) indicated silver was detected, then write a message to user that a "penny" was found or that a "pull tab" was found or "its time to go fishing" or anything you can imagine. I'm not suggested that they are manipulating data to "dummy down" the capability, but its technically very easy to do. It could be that the equinox has all the "guts" to be their next flagship and its just SMOP (simple mater of programming) to enable it..

avatar
Re: EQUINOX Technologies (Part 2)
Posted by: Jason in Enid
Date: November 01, 2017 06:58PM
Steve, I was just thinking about the learning curve too. When I switched from a White's 6000 proXL to the E-Trac, it was a horrible experience. I wanted to wrap it around a tree the first few times. I felt completely lost. Switching from the E-Trac to the CTX only required that I stop trying to be strict with my silver coin numbers, otherwise it was mostly seamless.

I feel that wont be the case with the EQ. The Multi mode may be similar but the response and display are likely to be very different. Learning how to make all the adjustments on the fly is going to take a while. Flipping back and forth from single to multi, changing freqs, changing reactivity, and other things along with how every change alters target responses. I feel its going to be a lot to take in at first. Hopefully it will be easier than I'm imagining.

Re: EQUINOX Technologies (Part 2)
Posted by: "Carolina"
Date: November 01, 2017 06:58PM
Steve: Thank you for your response. My take on this is, Minelab said the new detector would OBSOLETE ALL SINGLE FREQUENCY DETECTORS. That is what the Equinox does. You have a option to run multi frequencies ( different frequencies depending on the mode ) or single frequency 20kHz or 40kHz. For me, that is the break through technology.

Carolina



MINELAB CTX 3030
MINELAB Excalibur II
MINELAB Excalibur 1000
MINELAB Excalibur Gold Sword
VALLON VMH3CS
WHITES Dual Field

avatar
Re: EQUINOX Technologies (Part 2)
Posted by: sgoss66
Date: November 01, 2017 07:22PM
Quote
newguy
Steve, I don't know anything about metal detector electronics but when I was a mainframe computer programmer 40 years ago, I could easily write a program that could test the output of some event and then decide what to do next. As a hypothetical example you could: do something like this:
- If output of event(s) indicated silver was detected, then write a message to user that a "penny" was found or that a "pull tab" was found or "its time to go fishing" or anything you can imagine. I'm not suggested that they are manipulating data to "dummy down" the capability, but its technically very easy to do. It could be that the equinox has all the "guts" to be their next flagship and its just SMOP (simple mater of programming) to enable it..

newguy -- I totally get what you are saying, and yes, you are right...Minelab COULD "dumb down" the performance of the Equinox in the software, with the intent to release a new Multi-IQ-based flagship in the future with full performance "turned on." Here's the problem I see with that, though, as I've thought it through over the past month or so.

There have been a LOT of very, very good machines -- some from established companies, and some from new companies -- come onto the market in the past 5 years or so. Fors units, Nokta units, AKA units, Rutus units, Garrett units, and of course XP units...among many others. And many of these, while not quite a "CTX" in terms of ID accuracy on deep coins, etc., are nonetheless are VERY respectable performers -- and some even exceed the CTX's abilities in some areas (unmasking, etc.) Let's just look at the Deus, as one example. Minelab has lost a lot of market share to XP; especially in Europe, as I have heard it said, most guys hunting plowed fields are swinging a Deus, not a Minelab. Minelab wants that market share back, right? I think we can see that they are aiming directly at XP/the Deus, (among others), with the Equinox.

SO, if you agree with all of this, then I think what follows, is this:

I don't think Minelab can be playing around trying to "dumb down" their new, cutting-edge technology IF THEY REALLY WANT TO GRAB BACK MARKET SHARE. And the reason being, I think the "space" there, the little "gap" in performance, between the Deus' performance (or other top units) and that of the CTX is pretty razor-thin. I do not think there is much ROOM there for Minelab to "shoot the gap," so to speak; in other words, for them to make a machine good ENOUGH to out-perform everyone else, and grab back market share, and yet still slide in JUST BELOW their own units. That's a risky move, at best, and likely a near impossible feat, at worst. The gap there is just not big enough to "shoot," in my opinion.

For those reasons, I can't possibly imagine Minelab inventing this great new technology, and then "handicapping it" on purpose, just so they can sell a more expensive unit, later. They are trying to grab market share NOW, and can't RISK, in my opinion, putting out something that is not CLEARLY as good as or better than the competition. And since the other manufacturers have narrowed the gap so effectively, anything Minelab produces that will challenge/rival their competition, will almost by definition HAVE to, as a "side effect," rival their OWN machines, as well.

I simply do not believe there is enough performance room between say a Deus, and a CTX, that Minelab can be playing games like "purposely hamstringing" their technology trying to "shoot that gap"...

Just my thoughts.

Steve



Minelab CTX 3030
Minelab Explorer SE Pro
Garrett ProPointer AT
Lesche hand digger
Lesche 38D "King of Spades"

Norman, OK

avatar
Re: EQUINOX Technologies (Part 2)
Posted by: Wayfarer
Date: November 01, 2017 07:26PM
Quote
sgoss66
Carolina,

Just to expound a bit more on my "largely marketing" comment.

I have talked about this here before, regarding Minelab's implication that the Equinox "won't be as sensitive to deep silver" as FBS. I have said that I think those statements may be more "marketing" than what the truth might prove to be. And then, as you and stephenscool were discussing, we also have Minelab's implications that the Equinox will be only "almost as good as FBS and BBS" on wet sand thing. Just like with the "a little less sensitive to silver" caveats Minelab has mentioned, I am simply having a hard time seeing how it's not at least "possible," if not LIKELY, that this, too, is nothing but "marketing"...

The way I see it is, something just doesn't add up here. EITHER you have created a "breakthrough" in the technology that allows you to better deal with ground minerals -- and thus greatly improve target ID, or you haven't. If you HAVEN'T, but are claiming you have, then users are going to find out real quick that you are selling snake oil. (And I don't think this will be the case, with the Equinox). On the OTHER hand, if you really HAVE created this breakthrough technology -- I have to believe that while your engineers were so busy creating this breakthrough so as to "one-up" your competition, it's highly likely that the engineers also, somewhat inadvertently, "one-upped" your OWN product offerings, as well.

Do you REALLY believe that the Equinox is going to be SO GOOD that Minelab draws away customers from XP and Nokta and Garrett and all the others, and yet AT THE SAME TIME, the Equinox's performance will fall short of 15- to 20-year old technology (BBS/FBS)? How can you take multi-frequency technology, IMPROVE upon it (which is what Multi-IQ claims to do), and then end up with WORSE performance than your prior generation of multi-frequency technology? I really think Multi-IQ will either prove to be an IMPROVEMENT, or it will prove NOT to be. But if it IS, then it just doesn't make sense to say it's only an improvement over NON-Minelab machines, but NOT an improvement over Minelab machines. Isn't that essentially what the marketing department is telling us here? They are walking a tightrope, in my opinion, and they know it. They on one hand need to talk about how much of a breakthrough in performance it will be, outperforming all THE OTHER manufacturer's machines, but they also need to find "caveats" so that they don't make it "obvious" to their customer base that it just may outperform THEIR OWN machines...

I think what will most likely be the case, when the dust settles, is one of two things -- EITHER the Equinox is THAT GOOD (in which case FBS and BBS will likely be out-performed as well), or NOT that good. I just don't see a middle ground in there where the Equinox will be a "better performer" than the others, but yet NOT a better performer than FBS/BBS.

Steve

Steve, I get what you are saying, and I think you pretty well summed it up with your "walking a tightrope" analogy. Let me add just a couple thoughts. For one, I don't think Minelab would purposely "dumb down" the Equinox to ensure that it performs worse than the CTX. If they truly have a breakthough technology here with the Equinox, then they would be best served by letting it loose on the market in its full glory, and capture about 75% of the entire detector market in a matter of months, which is what it would do if its better than the CTX at a third of the price. Why protect the sale of maybe 200 CTX at the expense of 50,000 Equinox sales. Produce the best product they can and let the chips fall as they may. Besides, if this technology is breakthrough, then I predict Minelab will soon come out with a machine based on Multi-IQ, or maybe a Multi-IQ/FBS technology, that has *all* the bells and whistles, like a color screen, target trace, all sorts of advanced adjustments, PC-programmable, and so forth. Then they will almost totally capture the high end market as well.

An analogy I can draw, is the White's MXT. When it came out, it was a mid range detector but it actually outperformed their high-end machine at the time, the XLT. Some would say it actually outperformed the subsequent White's high-end machine, the DFX. The MXT was just *that* good. I know, because I owned all those machines at the time. White's touted the adjustability and features of the XLT/DFX, but those of us who actually used them all, knew that the MXT outperformed them in actual field use (most of the time....saltwater beach was one area the DFX did better however). The MXT was so good, that it sold like hotcakes, and in fact is still selling 17 years after its release because it was *that* good. White's must have made a huge bundle off the MXT. I see the Equinox in a similar light. It is a new mid range machine that could very well have better performance than their top end machines, and if so , so be it, Minelab will make a mint selling Equinoxes and far more than make up for any loss in CTX sales.

So that's my two cents. Maybe I'm just trying to convince myself that the Equinox will turn out to be all that we hope it will be and be an awesome breakthrough machine. The possibility is certainly there. We'll find out here soon enough. Fingers crossed...



Current detectors: White's V3i, MXT, XL Pro
Past: White's XLT, 6000D Series 3, Coinmaster 2DB, Minelab CTX 3030, Fisher Gold Bug Pro
Location: Western Idaho

avatar
Re: EQUINOX Technologies (Part 2)
Posted by: sgoss66
Date: November 01, 2017 07:29PM
Quote
Jason in Enid
Steve, I was just thinking about the learning curve too. When I switched from a White's 6000 proXL to the E-Trac, it was a horrible experience. I wanted to wrap it around a tree the first few times. I felt completely lost. Switching from the E-Trac to the CTX only required that I stop trying to be strict with my silver coin numbers, otherwise it was mostly seamless.

I feel that wont be the case with the EQ. The Multi mode may be similar but the response and display are likely to be very different. Learning how to make all the adjustments on the fly is going to take a while. Flipping back and forth from single to multi, changing freqs, changing reactivity, and other things along with how every change alters target responses. I feel its going to be a lot to take in at first. Hopefully it will be easier than I'm imagining.

Jason, very good points, and you may well be right. There will be a lot of adjustments/frequencies/modes to run in, and with it being a much faster machine, etc., it's likely to feel quite different. HOPEFULLY, the multi mode has some semblance of "feel" of FBS, but even there, it may not. Time will tell. HOPEFULLY, it's not like switching from your White's unit to an E-Trac was for you, or me switching from a Fisher F70 to the SE Pro was, for me.

One last thing, can you elaborate on what you mean by saying the switch from the E-Trac to the CTX was really easy for you "once you stopped trying to be strict with your silver coin numbers?" I was of the understanding that FBS2 (CTX) is even BETTER with ID accuracy, versus FBS1...

I'd like to hear your thoughts here. The ONE reason (besides the biggie -- price) that I did not consider a switch to the CTX was that I felt it might be too much of an adjustment; that I'd be starting from scratch, especially since the tones are (as I heard, anyway) SO MUCH different from the E-Trac/Explorer. So what you are saying here is somewhat surprising...you are saying the switch was NOT very hard, BUT, that what was the hardest adjustment was not the TONES (as I had thought it might be), but the "ID numbers..." This intrigues me, and I'd like to hear more...maybe in a PM? If you PM me, I'll give you my email address, so as to not derail this thread, perhaps?

Steve



Minelab CTX 3030
Minelab Explorer SE Pro
Garrett ProPointer AT
Lesche hand digger
Lesche 38D "King of Spades"

Norman, OK

avatar
Re: EQUINOX Technologies (Part 2)
Posted by: sgoss66
Date: November 01, 2017 07:36PM
Quote
"Carolina"
Steve: Thank you for your response. My take on this is, Minelab said the new detector would OBSOLETE ALL SINGLE FREQUENCY DETECTORS. That is what the Equinox does. You have a option to run multi frequencies ( different frequencies depending on the mode ) or single frequency 20kHz or 40kHz. For me, that is the break through technology.

Carolina

Carolina,

You might be right, that the only reason Minelab said "obsolete single frequency units" is because here is a single frequency unit that CAN ALSO run multi. SO for that reason alone, I could see how it could "obsolete" any single freq. unit that CAN'T run multi also.

It's a good point.

But reading that material that Minelab is releasing, I really, really believe that they have come up with something on the multi-frequency side of things that is an improvement in the multi-freq. arena as well...which has implications with respect to FBS/BBS...

Steve



Minelab CTX 3030
Minelab Explorer SE Pro
Garrett ProPointer AT
Lesche hand digger
Lesche 38D "King of Spades"

Norman, OK

Re: EQUINOX Technologies (Part 2)
Posted by: woody
Date: November 01, 2017 08:57PM
Like my cousin Bill S. said "to be or not to be"....

avatar
Re: EQUINOX Technologies (Part 2)
Posted by: sgoss66
Date: November 01, 2017 09:00PM
Very interesting, Wayfarer.

Your experiences with Whites, and how a similar thing happened when the MXT was released, was something I was not aware of. Very interesting, as it seems there's another "actual" case of a situation occurring that we are only speculating about, here.

Very interesting, thanks.

Steve

Quote
Wayfarer
Quote
sgoss66
Carolina,

Just to expound a bit more on my "largely marketing" comment.

I have talked about this here before, regarding Minelab's implication that the Equinox "won't be as sensitive to deep silver" as FBS. I have said that I think those statements may be more "marketing" than what the truth might prove to be. And then, as you and stephenscool were discussing, we also have Minelab's implications that the Equinox will be only "almost as good as FBS and BBS" on wet sand thing. Just like with the "a little less sensitive to silver" caveats Minelab has mentioned, I am simply having a hard time seeing how it's not at least "possible," if not LIKELY, that this, too, is nothing but "marketing"...

The way I see it is, something just doesn't add up here. EITHER you have created a "breakthrough" in the technology that allows you to better deal with ground minerals -- and thus greatly improve target ID, or you haven't. If you HAVEN'T, but are claiming you have, then users are going to find out real quick that you are selling snake oil. (And I don't think this will be the case, with the Equinox). On the OTHER hand, if you really HAVE created this breakthrough technology -- I have to believe that while your engineers were so busy creating this breakthrough so as to "one-up" your competition, it's highly likely that the engineers also, somewhat inadvertently, "one-upped" your OWN product offerings, as well.

Do you REALLY believe that the Equinox is going to be SO GOOD that Minelab draws away customers from XP and Nokta and Garrett and all the others, and yet AT THE SAME TIME, the Equinox's performance will fall short of 15- to 20-year old technology (BBS/FBS)? How can you take multi-frequency technology, IMPROVE upon it (which is what Multi-IQ claims to do), and then end up with WORSE performance than your prior generation of multi-frequency technology? I really think Multi-IQ will either prove to be an IMPROVEMENT, or it will prove NOT to be. But if it IS, then it just doesn't make sense to say it's only an improvement over NON-Minelab machines, but NOT an improvement over Minelab machines. Isn't that essentially what the marketing department is telling us here? They are walking a tightrope, in my opinion, and they know it. They on one hand need to talk about how much of a breakthrough in performance it will be, outperforming all THE OTHER manufacturer's machines, but they also need to find "caveats" so that they don't make it "obvious" to their customer base that it just may outperform THEIR OWN machines...

I think what will most likely be the case, when the dust settles, is one of two things -- EITHER the Equinox is THAT GOOD (in which case FBS and BBS will likely be out-performed as well), or NOT that good. I just don't see a middle ground in there where the Equinox will be a "better performer" than the others, but yet NOT a better performer than FBS/BBS.

Steve

Steve, I get what you are saying, and I think you pretty well summed it up with your "walking a tightrope" analogy. Let me add just a couple thoughts. For one, I don't think Minelab would purposely "dumb down" the Equinox to ensure that it performs worse than the CTX. If they truly have a breakthough technology here with the Equinox, then they would be best served by letting it loose on the market in its full glory, and capture about 75% of the entire detector market in a matter of months, which is what it would do if its better than the CTX at a third of the price. Why protect the sale of maybe 200 CTX at the expense of 50,000 Equinox sales. Produce the best product they can and let the chips fall as they may. Besides, if this technology is breakthrough, then I predict Minelab will soon come out with a machine based on Multi-IQ, or maybe a Multi-IQ/FBS technology, that has *all* the bells and whistles, like a color screen, target trace, all sorts of advanced adjustments, PC-programmable, and so forth. Then they will almost totally capture the high end market as well.

An analogy I can draw, is the White's MXT. When it came out, it was a mid range detector but it actually outperformed their high-end machine at the time, the XLT. Some would say it actually outperformed the subsequent White's high-end machine, the DFX. The MXT was just *that* good. I know, because I owned all those machines at the time. White's touted the adjustability and features of the XLT/DFX, but those of us who actually used them all, knew that the MXT outperformed them in actual field use (most of the time....saltwater beach was one area the DFX did better however). The MXT was so good, that it sold like hotcakes, and in fact is still selling 17 years after its release because it was *that* good. White's must have made a huge bundle off the MXT. I see the Equinox in a similar light. It is a new mid range machine that could very well have better performance than their top end machines, and if so , so be it, Minelab will make a mint selling Equinoxes and far more than make up for any loss in CTX sales.

So that's my two cents. Maybe I'm just trying to convince myself that the Equinox will turn out to be all that we hope it will be and be an awesome breakthrough machine. The possibility is certainly there. We'll find out here soon enough. Fingers crossed...



Minelab CTX 3030
Minelab Explorer SE Pro
Garrett ProPointer AT
Lesche hand digger
Lesche 38D "King of Spades"

Norman, OK

avatar
Re: EQUINOX Technologies (Part 2)
Posted by: sgoss66
Date: November 01, 2017 09:01PM
Quote
woody
Like my cousin Bill S. said "to be or not to be"....

LOL -- your cousin "Bill" sounds like he was a wise man... ;)

Steve



Minelab CTX 3030
Minelab Explorer SE Pro
Garrett ProPointer AT
Lesche hand digger
Lesche 38D "King of Spades"

Norman, OK

Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login