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

9” X35 or 11” X35 which one is more useful overall?

relicmeister

Well-known member
Presently I have both. I had the 9” hf and 9” X35 but when I got a
Large area permission, I got the 11” For more efficient coverage.
So the 9” is ideal in heavy iron and trashy areas, and is better
in maneuvering in tight places or in the stubble of fields, but in large
fields it can be tedious.
If you could only choose one, which would it be?
 
I have all 3 x35 coils. I always grab the 9 inch as it is as deep as the others and I dont worry about ground coverage as I do about separation.

Also, pinpointing is more accurate. So I would choose the 9 inch
 
9"
 
- - If it's the slender one ... the 5X9½ HF, not the round-shaped versions.

But if it came to it, I'd prefer the 9" X35 to the 11" X35. Not a fan of the clumsier-size 11" coils for most of the places I hunt.

Monte
 
My understanding is for coin-sized targets there is very little difference in depth. Some say the 11" picks up more interference and ground mineralization, and if you have to de-tune it you haven't gained much depth. Not pinpoint as good either. But more coverage. So if you have a big field with low trash and low EMI and low mineralization, the 11" is better.
 
Definitely Few, and Far Between as well. Maybe a nice Florida coastal beach, but definitely very few sites like that in the many places I hunt in most western US states.

And I agree with you, too, about the smaller-size coil Pinpointing better, and for smaller coin-size targets there could be very little, if any, benefit in detection depth with the 11". Coverage is an arguable topic, as well, because the coverage is only a wee bit and that diminishes quickly after about 3" depth. Bigger-size coils are better choices for bigger-size targets.

I only need the 5X9½ HF elliptical DD for the main uses I have for the ORX, but I will be getting the 9" X35 next week. Then I'll take the two and do some side-by-side comparisons between them, and also sport the 9" X35 against a competitor's 9" just to see what the outcome is. Who knows? Maybe I'll find a practical use for it in the types of sites I hunt and become one of the 'regular' X35 fans.:shrug:

Monte
 
Monte said:
Definitely Few, and Far Between as well. Maybe a nice Florida coastal beach, but definitely very few sites like that in the many places I hunt in most western US states.

And I agree with you, too, about the smaller-size coil Pinpointing better, and for smaller coin-size targets there could be very little, if any, benefit in detection depth with the 11". Coverage is an arguable topic, as well, because the coverage is only a wee bit and that diminishes quickly after about 3" depth. Bigger-size coils are better choices for bigger-size targets.

I only need the 5X9½ HF elliptical DD for the main uses I have for the ORX, but I will be getting the 9" X35 next week. Then I'll take the two and do some side-by-side comparisons between them, and also sport the 9" X35 against a competitor's 9" just to see what the outcome is. Who knows? Maybe I'll find a practical use for it in the types of sites I hunt and become one of the 'regular' X35 fans.:shrug:

Monte
I'm thinking of getting the 5x9 just because a very old park here still raises hell with the x35 9 inch, it's that much iron. Maybe a x35 1 inch?:rofl:
 
Well ,two out of three ain't bad. I know some people really like the 11" so there must be times when it shines.
 
I agree. But after using a 6 inch coil on my etrac and explorer in these heavy iron areas for years, then taking the x35 9 inch and finding what I missed is interesting. I have used the 11 inch x35 in the same area and wasn't getting the same amount of signals iron or otherwise.
 
There are times, and I have experienced it often over the many years in a variety of sites, where we might have a workable detector in-hand, but not the best coil for the environment ... or ... We might have a very good search coil size and type, but not a functional detector to attach it to when needed.

Then there are the times when, unfortunately, neither the detector or the search coil are going to be the best fit for the challenge that confronts us, and that is why I learned long, long ago to "Be Prepared" and that means have a detector assortment of models that complement each other. They can provide something just a bit different that will work better at a site. I like to be ready when I get to a site so I can grab what is best to tackle the conditions that confront me.

There is no 'perfect' all-purpose detector out there that can "do-it-all" and at the same time "do-it-well." Quite a few that can come pretty close, but I haven't found one yet that I would call the best and narrow my Detector Outfit to only one, all-time-use detector. I could come close in 1971 with what was offered back then, but by late '71 and going into '72 I had at-least a 2-Detector Outfit, and since then it has usually been 3 to 4 different models, and that was before we had the more rapid advances of visual Target ID in '83, then Tone ID, and over the past 20 years more of a move to digitally designed circuitry, along with more adjustment functions. Many more adjustments in some cases, and more-often-than-not I notice that the multiple adjustments can bring about conflicting performance behavior in many makes and models. We can't forget modern 'updates' and ???


Xdigger said:
[size=medium]I'm thinking of getting the 5x9 just because a very old park here still raises hell with the x35 9 inch, it's that much iron. Maybe a x35 1 inch?[/size]
It took me about two weeks of continuous, frequent hunting with the ORX w/5X9½ HF coil to decide I liked this model.

Not for everything, but for some specific applications. I hunt very iron contaminated sites the bulk of the time, and since '68 I have mostly relied on smaller-than the typical stock search coils to better handle the very brushy and confined places I hunt where I might also have to work around old building rubble and go after the good targets that were hidden in amongst the closely-spaced iron debris. Smaller coils can be very handy, and good-target masking sites are really tough to hunt through. The smaller the coil, the more in your favor. It didn't take all 54½ years to learn that, either. The XP ORX has a lot of performance potential. The 5X9½ elliptical DD coil can provide a decent level of performance. What's missing from the folks at XP is a smaller-than-stock search coil to help take on dense iron contamination and/or confined spaces.

The elliptical HF coil does work well and I've used it exclusively on my ORX. It handles a lot of iron junk reasonably well, but when conditions get really ugly when it comes to ferrous debris, I grab something different that has proven to handle iron quite well, and also sports a smaller-size search coil. In a clean area it works fine, and in a modest amount of iron it does reasonably well, but too much? Not my better choice. I will have a 9" X35 coil by next weekend, I hope, and will put the ORX w/9" X35 coil to work in a few challenged iron plagued sites and see if it, for some strange reason, can match or better the performance of the 5X9½ coil. I don't think it will, but I'll give it a try. That coil will let me consider some frequency performance differences.

Monte
 
Top