and not wanting to get into a flaming or slanging match with
ANYONE BUT for me it was the 10X14" Excellerator coil that I received just recently, that had it's ear-lug holes in the wrong location. I had to re bore these holes which was the only way I could get to use it. Easy enough to do BUT a real silly oversight by the manufacturer. I was also thinking at the time I was having to re-bore these holes in the 10X14" Excellerator what - #$%^&*^^%%- piece of junk this is.
I overcame what I consider a minor problem of the Platypus coil cover not fitting too snugly onto the coil by using a very limited amount off silicone sealant in place of the white tape around in and around the edges of where it sits on the coil proper. It works absolutely perfect as a long term fix. I agree that this to, is an oversight by this coil manufacturer. If they ever want to redeem themselves on this front , you'd think by now they would have issued a replacement. I use the Platypus for underwater detecting and land detecting. The bolt hole problem I over came with using a
NON magnetic stainless wing nut and washer assembly. Thinnest and appropriate length screw or hex head possible will do.
NON magnetic/nonferrous and non detectable stainless steel does not cause ANY problems with Explorers performance. It can' be detected so how can it cause any problems?
Grant you that this solution is a little difficult to accept and maybe a BETTER solution should have been shipped to us in the first place.
I get by and it's a great coil.
Like you mentioned the Platypus is better balance BUT also , I think, performs better. In my opinion and as an owner of a the 10X14" Excellerator, though it MAY have it's advantages( none of which I have yet found). There seems to be very little difference between the performance of these two coils when used with any of the Explorers lines I have. I might have a little bias as I purchased and have used the Platypus for a lot longer than the 10X14" Excellerator. I did expect some level of difference in depth but have not seen any. I do absolutely get a depth difference and stability with the 15 inch WOT ALL other coils but nothing from the 10X14" Excellerator over the Platypus.
For me the Platypus is a very good choice OVER the 10X14" Excellerator.
If I ever decide to sell the 10X14" Excellerator coil it will be with the modified elongated ear-lug holes. These parts could never be replaced by a retrofit. Sure the cover fits better in this coil, BUT it to is required to be removed once every often to be cleaned out unless one silicones it in as well. It's cover will still let water and dirt in regardless of it's tight and snug fit. This could lead to a false sense of security when it comes to remove the dirt and moisture as it could be misconstrued that this cover does not need to be removed....as often as a loose fitting one. I would actually silicone seal 10X14" Excellerator as well if my amount and type of detecting required it.
If I ever sell the Platypus it'll be as a water proofed coil that required the coil cover to be replaced IF it ever gets worn out and there would not to be a worry about water or dirt between the coil and it's sacrificial protecting cover. It can be replaced with alteration to the coil and the silicone seal is very easy break/cut and to replace. It would be sold with the stainless or 1/4 nylon/plastic bolt assembly.
I feel out of what you or I or anyone have said, it certainly looks like both coil manufacturers have made and are maybe still making mistakes in the manufacturing of some of their products, but I don't feel too comfortable about putting them down so openly unless they have refused to help out with a remedy that addresses problems in their products.
David Di
