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
IDX Pro (Mr. bill mods) VS XLT
- Thread starter TH MEX
- Start date
audio 'hits' on deeper coins and TID 'lock-ons' on deeper coins with a Classic ID (unmodified) and my modified Classic III SL's and IDX Pro's than from the XLT's I have owned more often than I have had the XLT best them. The XLT is a fun detector to use, but when I wanted depth and accuracy with a moderate to fast sweep detector, I always chose the XL Pro. It has a slight edge.
I would rather have a good working IDX Pro (modified) than I would an XLT if I was doing some 'serious' detecting, while the XLT is just more 'fun' to use. great for rounding up clad quarters, etc.
Monte
I would rather have a good working IDX Pro (modified) than I would an XLT if I was doing some 'serious' detecting, while the XLT is just more 'fun' to use. great for rounding up clad quarters, etc.
Monte
If all your looking for is ultimate depth the Modified IDX Pro has more chance to hit a deeper target with a better lock on ID. If your looking for production the XLT is excellent and can out hunt the IDX Pro 2 to 1 when speed and depth is the criteria.
I hunted a large site that never saw or rarely saw a detector and used an XLT for a few months before trying another detector and the XLT found 80% of all the items i found.
After 2 years of hunting and spending countless hrs with a Modified IDX Pro,6000 Di Pro SL,Minelab Musky, Whites M6 and a Fisher 1236x2 i found an additional 20% maybe deeper or mixed in with trash but the XLT did a great job finding most of what i've dug and used the 950 coil first,the 800 second and the 5.3 last.
The XLT is capable of much more and with the many variable options the only advantage i've found with an IDX Pro is where targets are very close together or mixed with iron.
Every detector has it's advantages and if ultimate depth is your main criteria i'd go with a Modified IDX Pro.HH Bill
I hunted a large site that never saw or rarely saw a detector and used an XLT for a few months before trying another detector and the XLT found 80% of all the items i found.
After 2 years of hunting and spending countless hrs with a Modified IDX Pro,6000 Di Pro SL,Minelab Musky, Whites M6 and a Fisher 1236x2 i found an additional 20% maybe deeper or mixed in with trash but the XLT did a great job finding most of what i've dug and used the 950 coil first,the 800 second and the 5.3 last.
The XLT is capable of much more and with the many variable options the only advantage i've found with an IDX Pro is where targets are very close together or mixed with iron.
Every detector has it's advantages and if ultimate depth is your main criteria i'd go with a Modified IDX Pro.HH Bill
While I agree with Bill in his post, except his last line. The XLT offers a very unique all metal/discriminate mode called Mixed mode, that in my opinion, if ultimate depth was your criteria the XLT wins hands down. Mixed mode should be considered maximum discriminate mode.
Cruising for clad quarters ? Wow !...what an insult to White's best, top of the line unit. Don't know about the 14 you've owned Monte, but the ones I've owned reaches the depths of early Jamestown and coins dating in the 1600 & 1700's...that ain't clad. Knowing you've owned 14 over the many years you have in the field, and still have one in your arsenal says something.
Just joining in the fun,
Dave
Cruising for clad quarters ? Wow !...what an insult to White's best, top of the line unit. Don't know about the 14 you've owned Monte, but the ones I've owned reaches the depths of early Jamestown and coins dating in the 1600 & 1700's...that ain't clad. Knowing you've owned 14 over the many years you have in the field, and still have one in your arsenal says something.
Just joining in the fun,
Dave
modified by Bill Crabtree of Surfscanner Detectors.
Nobody I know of does this on a regular basis like Bill, and the job is clean and professional. I've NEVER had a problem with the modifications!
There is a little enhancement to the upper-end of the Sensitivity, which from the factory falls way below potential . I always operate at maximum Sensitivity, and with the modifications done, a setting of about 3-o-clock is similar to the stock sensitivity level at maximum. The added 'boost' comes when set above that point.
The other two modifications include an external Threshold control and external Ground Balance control. Generally this is a 1-turn adjustment, but it is vastly sufficient due to the excellent Classic design there is to start with. (Can you tell I am a bit biased towards the Classic III SL & IDX Pro?
)
I use the GB control to basically "preset" the GB for ME and MY hunting sites for the COIL IN USE, and then forget about it unless there is a radical change in ground conditions. It's one of the nice features of these two models.
The ONLY time I usually need to readjust the GB setting is when I am near other detectors or offending sources causing interference. In those cases I use the Frequency Shift (which should always be set at the factory ▼ preset mark) and shifting the operating frequency also alters the GB setting. With the modification you can very quickly make the necessary adjustment and then when you move away from the problem, re-set the Frequency Shift control and quickly readjust the GB setting.
I prefer to use a small 4" Snooper coil (Blue Max 350) when in the dense iron trash, but for most day-to-day searches the 6
Nobody I know of does this on a regular basis like Bill, and the job is clean and professional. I've NEVER had a problem with the modifications!
There is a little enhancement to the upper-end of the Sensitivity, which from the factory falls way below potential . I always operate at maximum Sensitivity, and with the modifications done, a setting of about 3-o-clock is similar to the stock sensitivity level at maximum. The added 'boost' comes when set above that point.
The other two modifications include an external Threshold control and external Ground Balance control. Generally this is a 1-turn adjustment, but it is vastly sufficient due to the excellent Classic design there is to start with. (Can you tell I am a bit biased towards the Classic III SL & IDX Pro?
)I use the GB control to basically "preset" the GB for ME and MY hunting sites for the COIL IN USE, and then forget about it unless there is a radical change in ground conditions. It's one of the nice features of these two models.
The ONLY time I usually need to readjust the GB setting is when I am near other detectors or offending sources causing interference. In those cases I use the Frequency Shift (which should always be set at the factory ▼ preset mark) and shifting the operating frequency also alters the GB setting. With the modification you can very quickly make the necessary adjustment and then when you move away from the problem, re-set the Frequency Shift control and quickly readjust the GB setting.
I prefer to use a small 4" Snooper coil (Blue Max 350) when in the dense iron trash, but for most day-to-day searches the 6
Much better than the DFX is overall field performance.
The initial question was about operation in the motion Discriminate mode so my reply addressed that comparison.
Like you, however, I love the Mixed Mode Audio of the XLT and agree that when able to hunt in that mode there is a lot of great audio and depth performance. Most people, and I think you might agree with me here, don't seem to have the patience or understanding of the XLT to handle it and get the most out of both modes.
I agree that the XLT IS the best of White's current top-of-the-line models and I will hate to see in discontinued (it's overdue), but I also have to say that the XL Pro, already gone, darn it, can usually match or better the XLT in depth and TID accuracy ... again, if one masters it.
As for cruising for clad quarters, that is what most typical coin hunters are doing .... "cruising" for the common-depth, easy-to-find lost change and with Tone ID turned 'On', the XLT has no match. Nobody has a model with the excellent audio tones of the XLT. However, they are only good to a certain depth of detection, like the Target ID, and most people errantly rely on visual TID to make a dig/no-dig decision.
I know what the XLT can do, I I would encourage anyone who wants to be serious about hunting to consider getting a clean and decent (New!) XLT before they are gone, and also try to locate a spiffy clean XL Pro.
Those two models offer a lot of potential, as well as versatility, but we all know there is no single "perfect" detector. From my own ample time afield, however, I fee there are some which come close. One such critter is the IDX Pro, especially when modified by Bill Crabtree and here's why.
Mind you, this is based upon the types of sites I prefer to hunt and the conditions I usually encounter. I am not a big-time park hunter. Instead, I have favored hunting ghost towns since May 4th, 1969 and quickly added military & pioneer encampments; homesteads; old resort/recreation sites from the mid-1800s to the Depression Era; mining, logging and railroad camps; renovation sites; and similar places when my #1 type of trash is iron nails and other smaller, iron-based trash. Also where I know I am likely to encounter brush, building rubble or other constraints that limit search coil movement.
In short, I prefer to use a model that allows slow-motion sweep and a quick response and recovery. At the same time they have to give me ample depth of detection and I can accomplish this with the modified Classic III SL but also prefer the same basic circuitry with the added ID circuity of the IDX Pro.
Most of my friends who have been avid fans of the XLT and took the time to master it have also added a Classic ID, Classic III SL or IDX Pro to their arsenal because they know one detector can't do it all. One of these, especially the IDX Pro, makes an excellent compliment to the XLT.
From my experience and from others, even when hunting sites when we were using a mixture of these models to check a located target, we've found that the majority of the time the modified IDX Pro, and even the Classic ID, will provide an accurate TID AT DEPTH than we get from the XLT. Am I saying inches and inches? Of course not, but overall, they do a little bit better.
I wasn't slapping the XLT in the face. I can't because it has it's strengths, but the question was about performance in the Disc. mode. There wasn't much else to go on such as environment, etc.
Happy Hunting, Dave, and rest assured I am an XLT Fan , not a basher!
Monte
The initial question was about operation in the motion Discriminate mode so my reply addressed that comparison.
Like you, however, I love the Mixed Mode Audio of the XLT and agree that when able to hunt in that mode there is a lot of great audio and depth performance. Most people, and I think you might agree with me here, don't seem to have the patience or understanding of the XLT to handle it and get the most out of both modes.
I agree that the XLT IS the best of White's current top-of-the-line models and I will hate to see in discontinued (it's overdue), but I also have to say that the XL Pro, already gone, darn it, can usually match or better the XLT in depth and TID accuracy ... again, if one masters it.
As for cruising for clad quarters, that is what most typical coin hunters are doing .... "cruising" for the common-depth, easy-to-find lost change and with Tone ID turned 'On', the XLT has no match. Nobody has a model with the excellent audio tones of the XLT. However, they are only good to a certain depth of detection, like the Target ID, and most people errantly rely on visual TID to make a dig/no-dig decision.
I know what the XLT can do, I I would encourage anyone who wants to be serious about hunting to consider getting a clean and decent (New!) XLT before they are gone, and also try to locate a spiffy clean XL Pro.
Those two models offer a lot of potential, as well as versatility, but we all know there is no single "perfect" detector. From my own ample time afield, however, I fee there are some which come close. One such critter is the IDX Pro, especially when modified by Bill Crabtree and here's why.
Mind you, this is based upon the types of sites I prefer to hunt and the conditions I usually encounter. I am not a big-time park hunter. Instead, I have favored hunting ghost towns since May 4th, 1969 and quickly added military & pioneer encampments; homesteads; old resort/recreation sites from the mid-1800s to the Depression Era; mining, logging and railroad camps; renovation sites; and similar places when my #1 type of trash is iron nails and other smaller, iron-based trash. Also where I know I am likely to encounter brush, building rubble or other constraints that limit search coil movement.
In short, I prefer to use a model that allows slow-motion sweep and a quick response and recovery. At the same time they have to give me ample depth of detection and I can accomplish this with the modified Classic III SL but also prefer the same basic circuitry with the added ID circuity of the IDX Pro.
Most of my friends who have been avid fans of the XLT and took the time to master it have also added a Classic ID, Classic III SL or IDX Pro to their arsenal because they know one detector can't do it all. One of these, especially the IDX Pro, makes an excellent compliment to the XLT.
From my experience and from others, even when hunting sites when we were using a mixture of these models to check a located target, we've found that the majority of the time the modified IDX Pro, and even the Classic ID, will provide an accurate TID AT DEPTH than we get from the XLT. Am I saying inches and inches? Of course not, but overall, they do a little bit better.
I wasn't slapping the XLT in the face. I can't because it has it's strengths, but the question was about performance in the Disc. mode. There wasn't much else to go on such as environment, etc.
Happy Hunting, Dave, and rest assured I am an XLT Fan
, not a basher! Monte
Thanks. I will consider the mods. Does he still do them and do you have contact info? I just bought this used classic 3 with the 950 coil and got out for a few more hours today. I will say it did very well on an old church field I've hunted with other detectors. I'm still on the first set of batteries but I know I'll be keeping it. I think with a sensitivity boost it'll be wicked.