has any Minelab owner/operator, compared their detector to the Tek T2? Thanks for your reviews in advance.

[KCK]

Let's go detecting! I appreciate your opinions.

 

[Scott in Idaho]

I was over on the T2 forum and there was a guy talking about a target he found and he said another guy was there and couldnt hit the target with an explorer before he dug it....He was obviously saying the T2 was a deeper detecting machine on that particular target.....I wonder?

 

[John LA]

I have tried both in my test garden but not in the field. My testing probably wasn't precise enough to post but they both seemed near the same in all metal depth. Both seemed to loose depth as discrimination was added. I decided to continue using the Explorer because I was familiar and comfortable with it. If others have found different results take their answer as my tests were only meant for me.

 

[RingProfessional]

I personally dont think any detector can beat ans explorer 2 on depth with the standars coil on. ITS the deepest coin seeker known to man.

 

[John LA]

n/t

 

[Bill W.]

I really don't agree with you on the Explorer being the deepest machine out. Reason being I've seen my CZ-3D (8 inch coil) beat MY buddy's Explorer (10.5 inch coil) first hand on deep coins several times in MILD ground. I've had targets that his Explorer wouldn't give a peep on. Period, end of story. Before you say I had this adjusted wrong or that... I should say I also own an Explorer and have used it heavily for 5 years. The first time I witnessed it first hand I even took my buddy's Explorer because I thought he might have something set wrong. I even went as far as to go back to my truck and grab my Explorer just incase his coil or machine had an issue. My Explorer wouldn't give a peep either. I usually have iron mask at -12 to -14. I moved iron mask from -16 to -6 and even tried DISC to see if it would do something. I also tried different sensitivity settings in manual and auto. That got my attention and I have come to realize as a 'general' rule around my area that my 3D is deeper than my Explorer when I GB above 5. If I GB below 5 on my 3D my Explorer is the deeper of the two machines. But, even with that said depth is not everything. I use the Explorer alot in tamer ground because the Explorer is alot better in iron that my 3D. I just bought a T2 but I have only used it for about 20 hours. I really don't pass judgement on any machine (good or bad) in such a short period of time. The T2 might very well be deeper than an Explorer in some areas. My point being don't approach metal detecting with a 'closed' mind on this machine is deeper than that machine. You might be surprised come the end of day sometime. HH!

-Bill

 

[WessThompson]

Hey Bill, while I wasn't there to witness this at the time...I am sure what you are saying is true in regards to having some targets you picked up with the CZ that the Explorer couldn't hit.

I also agree detectorists should keep an open mind about detecting and detectors in general.

That being said...I am quite confident your scenario goes the other way at times...when your CZ-3d couldn't pick up a deep coin that the Explorer does. I often hear people trying to say this machine or that machine is deeper than the Explorer, and they give examples such as yours...but they never mention an example of an explorer hitting a target their machine can't. There are many more variables to consider when it comes to detecting as I am sure you are aware.

Although I have not personally used a CZ-3D, you certainly don't hear too many people laying claims the 3D is deeper than the Explorer.

Wess

 

[Bill W.]

Wess,

It does go the 'other way' at times. I think I pretty much said that in my post when I said... when my 3D GB below 5 the Explorer is the deeper machine. I am definitely not a brand biased person. There are plenty of targets that my 3D has missed that my Explorer picked up especially in nastier ground or iron ridden areas. I didn't intend my post to come across as a one-sided post that this detector beat that detector. Only that the Explorer is not the deepest machine in ALL areas. But, some of those 'variables' are squashed when you go head-to-head comparing machines on the same target on the same day. It's not like I was saying the Explorer missed the target one day and I dug it the next with my 3D. These were comparison signals that the Explorer would NOT even give a signal on.

>Although I have not personally used a CZ-3D, you certainly don't >hear too many people laying claims the 3D is deeper than the >Explorer.

Well, I can guarantee you I've seen the 3D outdo the Explorer on numerous occasions in depth and ID at depth. Think about it. I have NOTHING to gain by making any claim. I am NOT brand loyal in any respect. I own both machines so it not a my machine is better than your machine. It's something I have witness on numerous occasions out in the field on the same day. I use what works in my area.

-Bill

 

[KCK]

ThanksI really enjoy reading your forum!

 

[James N.D.]

n/t