![]() |
12Re: Safari vs Etrac Posted by: Bryannagirl Date: May 31, 2012 07:00PM | Registered: 2 years ago Posts: 150 |
Quote
Coyote65
I made the switch from an E-Trac to the Safari and love the simpler lighter Safari. With the E-Trac which I did love I found I babied it due to the cost and also found it to be a bit heavy to swing especially after a few days of hunting. I also feel I didn't fully take advantage of the extra settings and features of the E-Trac as I like to turn on my detector and go and enjoy only doing minimal adjustments while detecting. I also find I hunt more by ear than visually so the Safari fits my particular hunting style and I love the tones of both the Safari and E-Trac. The E-Trac is a great detector and I have many friends who use it and would use nothing else and they swayed me into my E-Trac purchase but for me and my hunting style the Safari is the detector for me and the E-Trac is great for those that use them and fits their hunting styles.
Re: Safari vs Etrac Posted by: Coyote65 Date: May 31, 2012 08:36PM | Registered: 3 years ago Posts: 79 |
They both are deep and pretty equal depth wise IMO the E-trac does have the better/finer discrimination, the E-Trac may identify a tad better but for me as I mentioned I hunt mainly by ear rather than visual ID. I listen for the subtle tone changes and only use the target ID to verify what I'm hearing but usually dig regardless of the ID if the tones sound right to me. I more than likely do dig a little more trash than others do but have found several surprises especially on the iffy ID's that sound good. I'm sure you will be happy if you upgrade as the E-trac is an awesome detector and as I mentioned I really liked it but just felt I didn't use it to it's fullest extent due to my hunting style and found the simpler lighter Safari suit myself and hunting style better.Quote
Bryannagirl
Like I said it is hard to tell what you gain by going to the Etrac. FBS is FBS when it comes to depth but the Etrac should give you more information about if it is good or bad but not sure how much so. My Safari is deep and I am starting to go 100% tone. Still an thinking about upgrading though.
Bryanna
Re: Safari vs Etrac Posted by: john4840 Date: June 01, 2012 06:49AM | Registered: 5 years ago Posts: 374 |
Quote
Bryannagirl
Like I said it is hard to tell what you gain by going to the Etrac. FBS is FBS when it comes to depth but the Etrac should give you more information about if it is good or bad but not sure how much so. My Safari is deep and I am starting to go 100% tone. Still an thinking about upgrading though.
BryannaQuote
Coyote65
I made the switch from an E-Trac to the Safari and love the simpler lighter Safari. With the E-Trac which I did love I found I babied it due to the cost and also found it to be a bit heavy to swing especially after a few days of hunting. I also feel I didn't fully take advantage of the extra settings and features of the E-Trac as I like to turn on my detector and go and enjoy only doing minimal adjustments while detecting. I also find I hunt more by ear than visually so the Safari fits my particular hunting style and I love the tones of both the Safari and E-Trac. The E-Trac is a great detector and I have many friends who use it and would use nothing else and they swayed me into my E-Trac purchase but for me and my hunting style the Safari is the detector for me and the E-Trac is great for those that use them and fits their hunting styles.
Re: Safari vs Etrac Posted by: Prep1957 Date: June 01, 2012 09:24PM | Registered: 3 years ago Posts: 590 |
Re: Safari vs Etrac Posted by: croakersmoker78 Date: June 18, 2012 10:39AM | Registered: 3 years ago Posts: 561 |
12

