Any reason NOT to Equx800 over an AT-Max?

[TnShooter]

Years ago I stared with an ACE-250.
Then I was blessed with the opportunity to hunt with some off the best relic hunters I the U.S.
One of which was Carl Mathius. He was at a time a Representative for Garrett Detectors. Very nice guy.
But as time went on, I bought an MXT as it seemed best for me and relic hunting at the time.
Now I've come to want and need a machine capable of going in the water.

I started with a Garrett and the people at garret always treated me nice.
My problem is, I want a Garrett but think the Eqox800 maybe the better choice for my detecting.

I am a relic hunter.
Never been into jewelry or coins that much.

Other than price, is there any reason not to choose the 800 over the AT-Max?
I'd love to own the Garrett, but can't afford both.
So, I'll need to buy the one that is better for relic hunting.

I mostly hunt the South Eastern U.S.

 

[Southwind]

Personally I'd go 800. But then I traded my AT MAX back to an AT Pro because I just didn't care for the MAX. My 800 I like far better due to a more stable target ID, very important to me, and weight, light as a feather, and easy to navigate the menus.

 

[Druid]

I would take the Equinox 800 over the AT Max in a heartbeat, better ergonomics, and depth and the Multi IQ is currently on the cutting edge of VLF technology.
Just a suggestion, you may want to look into the waterproof Nokta Makro units as well, Multi Kruzer and Anfibio are both killer machines, simple menu to navigate so less learning curve that the Nox, good coil selection, and they do go deep.
Cheers,
Drew.

 

[u2robert]

Druid, Multi- Frequency Detectors have been around sense the early 90's Fisher CZ Series, Minelab BBS FBS units and White's DFX unit. so not so much cutting edge technology. Just saying

 

[Druid]

True that Robert,
I have had all the detectors you listed. I guess what is new on Equinox is the algorithms used and the effects thereof on depth and target ID.
It does perform in the real world in a wide variety of hunting situations. Did it obsolete all other single frequency VLF detectors? I would say that is just marketing hyperbole.
Definitely believe the EQ 800 will beat any of the Garrett AT units in most or all hunting condition/situations.
JMHO.
Cheers,
Drew.

 

[Mark kus]

the nox is way better with lots of iron watch calabashes video

 

[doc holiday232]

Go with the new Anfibio.

 

[Druid]

Guess we should also ask how is your soil?

 

[Big Treble]

While I've never used either of the two I've had an Atpro and several minelab. If your hung up on the Garrett, that's great i was too, my first 3 detectors came from Garrett.

With the heavier coils and the batteries and control box on top of your hands I believe the Garrett is a poor choice with the other options available today, especially if you are in with all day hunts.

As a addendum, I chose the Anfibio, over the equinox, and much of that were little bits of info I gathered, more based build quality and durability. Not saying it's better machine as I still have not touched one, but I felt too many concerns for a company like Minelab

 

[Mark kus]

Equinox over AT any day multi frequency over one fixed frequency?

 

[therover]

Can run in a single frequency mode or multi. Wireless option. Better ergonomics. More internal options to choose from. Will probably handle ground conditions better.

May have a few more coil choices in the future too.

If you can swing it, I would say the Nox 800 is the better bet at this stage of the game.

 

[Ozleif]

I'll stick with my AT-Max, never had to ask on how to use it or what setting is best, also like the replaceable battery setup so spares can carried on week/month long

outings and the fact that all my CSI Pro and NEL coils can be used.

In short, it serves My needs and I like to K I S.

 

[Mark kus]

I have friends that I hunt with and I literally run circles around their AT pros I had at one site 7 silvers to my friends none and the place was loaded with coins!

 

[Philber]

Druid, Multi- Frequency Detectors have been around sense the early 90's Fisher CZ Series, Minelab BBS FBS units and White's DFX unit. so not so much cutting edge technology. Just saying

Your statement is true as far as a concept, multi frequency is nothing new, so not cutting edge. But the current form of Multi frequency is among the best of what is technologically available today, thus the cutting edge. The fact that "multi frequency has been around since the 90's" doesn't negate it's uniqueness. To draw a parallel, it would be like saying "electric cars have been around for over 100 years, therfore todays electric cars are not cutting edge technology because that concept has been around for a century". Its what's new that has been added to prior technology or what's totally different than before that makes something cutting edge.