Interesting and tragic test.

[Xdigger]

Last week I went to a favorite local park loaded with trash with my Explorer and ORX. I picked a spot about 20x20 and worked it with the explorer for an hour going North, South, East, and West. Found several clad, a Maxfactor compact and some random odds and ends. Then I did exactly the same thing in the same area with my ORX. I dug more trash because I heard more trash and dug a toy jack, a bullet, 2 buttons, a junk ring and this 1863 quarter with a crap load of iron grunts around it. After I dug the Quarter I dug the other signals in a 6 inch area and got a rusty bolt, 4 nails, and a rusty car part.

Here is the tragedy. I have used the Explorer for 20 years and swore by it. When I saw what it missed I went back in my mind to all the places I have found great things with the Explorer and wondered if I will ever be able to remember where they were and if I will be able to get back to them with the ORX. I didn't do this to knock the explorer, I did it to see what detector would do what I needed it to do. Now before you say E-trac this and E-trac that I have had 2 E-tracs and know several users in the area and they wont go into this park because they think either it's worked out, or it's too trashy. As far as I'm concerned, the E-trac is no different than the Explorer other than the extra set of numbers which I don't understand because most users go by the second set anyway.

Bottom line is, I wanted to prove unscientifically as it may be, What I have been seeing with the ORX. This won't be the last time I do this test but will keep records and do some videos next spring and post to you-tube and my website.

[attachment 370220 1863_5-800x400.jpg]

 

[jmaclen]

What you reported makes sense to me. The Explorer and Etrac are great detectors for depth and for accurate target ID (especially the Etrac) in moderately mineralized areas and saltwater beaches.
They are by no means the fastest at target recovery or above average at target separation. When compared to the ORX or Deus they are just plain slow and are going to miss masked targets. The Deus, Orx and to a bit lesser degree the Equinox are excellent to outstanding at target recovery, unmasking and target separation. Visual target ID on the Deus and Orx are practically crude compared to the Etrac and even the Equinox. Audio ID is amazing on the ORX/Deus. Depth in moderate to high mineralization is average at best.

So, for an awesome detector team, an adjustable frequency, lightning fast ORX or Deus paired up with a simultaneous multi frequency Explorer, Etrac or Equinox is hard to beat for a VLF combo. They make up for each others weaknesses very well.

Jeff

 

[Xdigger]

As far as depth goes, I think they are equal in most conditions. Remembering I use the 9 on the ORX and 11 on the explorer

 

[jmaclen]

Totally depends on amount of mineralization. Here in Colorado, Deus and Orx will detect a target with a tone down 9" max with the 9" coils and might give a 99 numerical target ID down to 6". Equinox will correctly give tone and target iD on the 9" and deeper targets even in default settings.

In mild soil like in Calabash Digger's videos there is very little difference in depth but the Nox will correctly target ID while the Deus/Orx again shows 99 for target ID. Got to do some comparisons in SE Georgia mild dirt a month ago and had the same results as Calabash.

Jeff

 

[calabash digger]

Deus/ORX and Equinox are a knockout combo...jmaclen hit the nail on the head.

 

[mascard1]

No way....If you go by sounds...The Deus..don't stand a chance on depth....It is Quicker...And I think it would find more stuff in trash..

 

[Monte]

ORX.

No way....If you go by sounds...The Deus..don't stand a chance on depth....It is Quicker...And I think it would find more stuff in trash..

I own two of these devices now since I like to keep units on-hand with a preferred-use search coil to just grab a detector & coil combination rather than mess around with coil changes afield.

My grassy yard has some of the more mellow mineralized soil around and I can GB various detectors that report a ground mineral read-out of '67' to about '78 in different places around my place. But the bulk of the old sites where I do my Relic Hunting I have to deal with ground that reads from a lot of about '81' up to most of the area that is '85' to '87.' With my first ORX and 5X9½ HF DD coil, and working some of the worst ground up around a few gold mining area ghost town sites, I was operating at 14.[size=small]4[/size] kHz and was impressed with the detection depth when compared against some friends running their detectors, to include a ±14 kHz MXT Pro and MX-7, 14 kHz Racer, 13.[size=small]6[/size] kHz AT MAX, an Equinox 800 working in multi-frequency and another at a fixed frequency [size=small](but I'm not certain what he had chosen)[/size] and two other brands. We were comparing audio and visual target responses on quite a few naturally-located targets and the ORX modulated audio was very good, and very informative as well.

Naturally on those in-the-field comparisons some would make a change or two in their settings to see what the differences might be, so it really can make a difference in results based upon the Frequency used, Discrimination used, Reactivity or Recovery Speed used, search coil used, and we can't forget the sweep speed and coil presentation as that can also vary from one make/model to the next.

And yes, the Deus and ORX can have a very quick response, just like some competitive models such as the T2+ and others. However, while that can help them perform better in some trash environments, just having a 'quick response' doesn't mean you're going to have really good recovery in a dense iron contaminated site. I own several detectors, knowing none of them are 'perfect' so I grab the detector / coil combination that works the best for the site challenges at-hand. For example, in a very dense iron nail littered site, I have two models that excel over any others I have compared using two of my 'Test Samples', especially one that included one brass button front w/o the back piece and one iron nail. The button front is almost exactly the diameter of a US small cent and I lay the nail dead-center on top of the button front.

It is swept crosswise from each direction and lengthwise each direction with the search coils centered. A possible 4-out-of-4 hits, but only two units in my Regular-Use Detector Outfit will give solid 4-out-of-4 responses. Nothing else I have tried or have let others try will do more than 2-out-of-2, and if they adjust for a lower operating frequency they might only get 0-out-of-4 responses. I have those two devices for Relic hunting in the most challenging iron contaminated places. And they also can get very good depth. But I find the ORX to provide me with much better overall performance and comfort in the less trashy and more open areas, and against many other detectors the depth-of-detection is very good. Again, it depends on the coil used and adjustable feature settings as well.

That's one of the reasons I own two ORX's, due to their in-the-field performance potential. The main reason, other than being very light weight and having a simple yet functional design, is that one unit wears the 5X9½ DD HF coil full-time and the other sports the round 9" X35 DD coil.

Monte

 

[D&P-OR]

Monte-----I'm just curious---why did you get rid of the first ORX you had & then turn around & get two more of them?------BTW, the 9" round h.f. coil will get you better depth than the 9.5X5" h.f..-----------Del

ORX.

No way....If you go by sounds...The Deus..don't stand a chance on depth....It is Quicker...And I think it would find more stuff in trash..

I own two of these devices now since I like to keep units on-hand with a preferred-use search coil to just grab a detector & coil combination rather than mess around with coil changes afield.

My grassy yard has some of the more mellow mineralized soil around and I can GB various detectors that report a ground mineral read-out of '67' to about '78 in different places around my place. But the bulk of the old sites where I do my Relic Hunting I have to deal with ground that reads from a lot of about '81' up to most of the area that is '85' to '87.' With my first ORX and 5X9½ HF DD coil, and working some of the worst ground up around a few gold mining area ghost town sites, I was operating at 14.[size=small]4[/size] kHz and was impressed with the detection depth when compared against some friends running their detectors, to include a ±14 kHz MXT Pro and MX-7, 14 kHz Racer, 13.[size=small]6[/size] kHz AT MAX, an Equinox 800 working in multi-frequency and another at a fixed frequency [size=small](but I'm not certain what he had chosen)[/size] and two other brands. We were comparing audio and visual target responses on quite a few naturally-located targets and the ORX modulated audio was very good, and very informative as well.

Naturally on those in-the-field comparisons some would make a change or two in their settings to see what the differences might be, so it really can make a difference in results based upon the Frequency used, Discrimination used, Reactivity or Recovery Speed used, search coil used, and we can't forget the sweep speed and coil presentation as that can also vary from one make/model to the next.

And yes, the Deus and ORX can have a very quick response, just like some competitive models such as the T2+ and others. However, while that can help them perform better in some trash environments, just having a 'quick response' doesn't mean you're going to have really good recovery in a dense iron contaminated site. I own several detectors, knowing none of them are 'perfect' so I grab the detector / coil combination that works the best for the site challenges at-hand. For example, in a very dense iron nail littered site, I have two models that excel over any others I have compared using two of my 'Test Samples', especially one that included one brass button front w/o the back piece and one iron nail. The button front is almost exactly the diameter of a US small cent and I lay the nail dead-center on top of the button front.

It is swept crosswise from each direction and lengthwise each direction with the search coils centered. A possible 4-out-of-4 hits, but only two units in my Regular-Use Detector Outfit will give solid 4-out-of-4 responses. Nothing else I have tried or have let others try will do more than 2-out-of-2, and if they adjust for a lower operating frequency they might only get 0-out-of-4 responses. I have those two devices for Relic hunting in the most challenging iron contaminated places. And they also can get very good depth. But I find the ORX to provide me with much better overall performance and comfort in the less trashy and more open areas, and against many other detectors the depth-of-detection is very good. Again, it depends on the coil used and adjustable feature settings as well.

That's one of the reasons I own two ORX's, due to their in-the-field performance potential. The main reason, other than being very light weight and having a simple yet functional design, is that one unit wears the 5X9½ DD HF coil full-time and the other sports the round 9" X35 DD coil.

Monte

 

[mascard1]

I guess Depth depends on what a person calls Depth....in California..My Minelab out does all the Deus(That I have been around) in Depth...They do find a lot more Jewelry ... I like the Machine ..I have two...But if ,I hunt for Silver..always grab the Minelab. .

 

[cosmic hillbilly]

Totally depends on amount of mineralization. Here in Colorado, Deus and Orx will detect a target with a tone down 9" max with the 9" coils and might give a 99 numerical target ID down to 6". Equinox will correctly give tone and target iD on the 9" and deeper targets even in default settings.

In mild soil like in Calabash Digger's videos there is very little difference in depth but the Nox will correctly target ID while the Deus/Orx again shows 99 for target ID. Got to do some comparisons in SE Georgia mild dirt a month ago and had the same results as Calabash.

Jeff

9" coil on the Equinox? Is there a 9" coil for the Equinox?

 

[jmaclen]

9" and deeper TARGETS. Not referring to an Equinox 9" coil. I wish there was one however!

Jeff

 

[Xdigger]

No way....If you go by sounds...The Deus..don't stand a chance on depth....It is Quicker...And I think it would find more stuff in trash..

Explain.

 

[cosmic hillbilly]

Sorry about that, thank you for the clarification.

 

[Monte]

QUESTION: Why did I get rid of my first ORX?

Well, as many know, I have been trimming a LOT of detectors [size=small](single, duplicates, back-ups, etc.)[/size] from my arsenal for over a year now. I've added a choice model or two now-and-then, either a newer unit to check it out [size=small](or check it out again)[/size] or an older device I was familiar with, and that left a lot of different makes and models hanging around, on my den wall, or cluttering up the table I opened in my living room to keep them out from under foot.

I had enough health and mobility issues to deal with, but after the fall on the driveway in April of last year and the resultant cervical spine surgery in August of last year, that resulted in even more limiting mobility and weight restrictions. Not to lift more than about a gallon of milk [size=small](8 pounds)[/size] and it took a full year plus a little to gain the expected 70% to 80% of mobility and strength in my right arm and shoulder. I have to admit, I really enjoy the light weight and excellent balance of the XP ORX with the elliptical 5X9½ DD HF coil. I also appreciate the simplicity of the ORX while retaining excellent audio quality and detection depth with few, but ample, adjustment functions.

One thing I do not care for is the requirement to charge the various parts of the device. So, when trimming my Outfit, I liked this model with that coil size which I consider to be a 'mid-sized' coil, just as I do a round 7" Concentric I have on a couple of other models. Well, I had another model that is 'as new' as it's hardly used at all, and it fills a gap for Coin & Jewelry Hunting, and also has an available factory DD coil of about 5X10, so I figured if I got that coil, and if it felt as balanced and comfortable as the ORX w/5X9½, it could fill that ticket as a versatile detector with a "mid-sized' coil. So, I sold/traded the ORX package I had to Joel [size=small](Kickindirt)[/size].

I ordered the 5X10 DD from the other manufacturer and it arrived but I don't care for the balance and feel. It's not like the ORX so I set out to get another ORX w/5X9½ DD HF coil.

QUESTION: "...& then turn around & get two more of them?"

Well, technically I only bought one more NEW ORX. Joel had sold my 5X9½ HF coil and lower rod as well as MI-6 Pinpointer to some fellow, and had planned to use my ORX to check out an X35 9" coil and offered it as a 'package' with a new MI-6 Pinpointer. Well, I wanted the 5X9½ HF coil and had a trade offer but that didn't work out, ... Soooo I just ordered up a brand new ORX package from him with the 5X9½ HF coil, new Pinpointer, and also ordered a new set of Gray Ghost XP headphones that take the XP 'puck.' I then had the set-up I started out with, all fresh and new, plus a great headphone for this XP model.

As most know, almost every detector I keep in my Regular-Use Outfit has a smaller-size search coil mounted, like an 'OOR' DD on my Nokta CoRe and 5" DD on the Relic, or a 6" Concentric on each of my Tesoro's, a Bandido II µMAX and Silver Sabre µMAX. I keep a mid-size round 7" Concentric on my Makro Racer 2, and now the mid-size elliptical on the ORX I had wanted to try th round 9" X35 coil, but knew how well the 5X9½ HF coil performed for me so I bought that new XP unit.

Joel had considered hanging onto my original ORX to use the X35 coil he had purchased, but extra work and the cold of the season crept up on him so he listed my 'original' ORX which I used through June, July and August but was in blemish-free / 'as-new' condition with the 9" X35 coil and an MI-6 pointed on AHRPS. It still had the protective weather cover on the control housing, and since I had a little $$$ from selling off some of my detectors, I contacted Joel and bought by original back. So, now I have my first ORX in my Outfit with the X35 coil as well. Each to serve a certain purpose, if I like the round 9" X35 coil enough, but I know the HF elliptical coil is going nowhere.

STATEMENT of OPINION: BTW, the 9" round h.f. coil will get you better depth than the 9.5X5" h.f.

Slightly, perhaps, in some search environments, but for the types of sites I hunt the most, I just need to get adequate depth out of any detector based on the unit's circuitry and the search coil in use. For example, the 'OOR' or 5" DD coils on the Core and relic, respectively, usually provide better depth-of-detection that a 5" DD coil on most competitor's models. Well, the ORX w/5X9½ DD HF coil also provided better-than-average 'depth' where I usually hunt because dense trash inhibits depth capabilities. I hope we get the warm-up to seasonal average next week, since it is very cold and unseasonal right now, and then I'll head to Rippville or some other old site and compare the elliptical coil to the 9" X35 coil just to see how much 'edge' one might have over the other.

Besides, I'm not big on the 'depth' topic since over 5 decades of avid detecting has shown the bulk of the desired finds are going to be in the shallow surface to maybe 6" range.

Monte

 

[mascard1]

Besides, I'm not big on the 'depth' topic since over 5 decades of avid detecting has shown the bulk of the desired finds are going to be in the shallow surface to maybe 6" range.

Monte

Not around Sacramento parks.........Maybe Jewlery

 

[Xdigger]

Hear, hear. Great point, that's my thought after 40 years.

 

[floodplaindetector]

Randy,
That is a super nice old quarter you sniffed out of a pre-selected small area in that junky park.
Simply amazing you were able to pull that.
Looks like you are really meshing with the ORX.
Congrats on the old silver!

Dave

Last week I went to a favorite local park loaded with trash with my Explorer and ORX. I picked a spot about 20x20 and worked it with the explorer for an hour going North, South, East, and West. Found several clad, a Maxfactor compact and some random odds and ends. Then I did exactly the same thing in the same area with my ORX. I dug more trash because I heard more trash and dug a toy jack, a bullet, 2 buttons, a junk ring and this 1863 quarter with a crap load of iron grunts around it. After I dug the Quarter I dug the other signals in a 6 inch area and got a rusty bolt, 4 nails, and a rusty car part.

Here is the tragedy. I have used the Explorer for 20 years and swore by it. When I saw what it missed I went back in my mind to all the places I have found great things with the Explorer and wondered if I will ever be able to remember where they were and if I will be able to get back to them with the ORX. I didn't do this to knock the explorer, I did it to see what detector would do what I needed it to do. Now before you say E-trac this and E-trac that I have had 2 E-tracs and know several users in the area and they wont go into this park because they think either it's worked out, or it's too trashy. As far as I'm concerned, the E-trac is no different than the Explorer other than the extra set of numbers which I don't understand because most users go by the second set anyway.

Bottom line is, I wanted to prove unscientifically as it may be, What I have been seeing with the ORX. This won't be the last time I do this test but will keep records and do some videos next spring and post to you-tube and my website.

[attachment 370220 1863_5-800x400.jpg]

 

[CZconnoisseur]

I've encountered very similar results between the Equinox and Deus - also in Colorado. I owned an EQ800 last year and it was able to sniff out some deep coins in areas that I've murdered with the Deus with both 9" and 11" coils. Hands-down, the EQ identified the deeper targets more accurately, while I've learned with the Deus to dig by audio only.

Whoever makes the detector that combines the two strengths of the aforementioned detectors...that will be worth buying!

 

[Xdigger]

Randy,
That is a super nice old quarter you sniffed out of a pre-selected small area in that junky park.
Simply amazing you were able to pull that.
Looks like you are really meshing with the ORX.
Congrats on the old silver!

Dave

Last week I went to a favorite local park loaded with trash with my Explorer and ORX. I picked a spot about 20x20 and worked it with the explorer for an hour going North, South, East, and West. Found several clad, a Maxfactor compact and some random odds and ends. Then I did exactly the same thing in the same area with my ORX. I dug more trash because I heard more trash and dug a toy jack, a bullet, 2 buttons, a junk ring and this 1863 quarter with a crap load of iron grunts around it. After I dug the Quarter I dug the other signals in a 6 inch area and got a rusty bolt, 4 nails, and a rusty car part.

Here is the tragedy. I have used the Explorer for 20 years and swore by it. When I saw what it missed I went back in my mind to all the places I have found great things with the Explorer and wondered if I will ever be able to remember where they were and if I will be able to get back to them with the ORX. I didn't do this to knock the explorer, I did it to see what detector would do what I needed it to do. Now before you say E-trac this and E-trac that I have had 2 E-tracs and know several users in the area and they wont go into this park because they think either it's worked out, or it's too trashy. As far as I'm concerned, the E-trac is no different than the Explorer other than the extra set of numbers which I don't understand because most users go by the second set anyway.

Bottom line is, I wanted to prove unscientifically as it may be, What I have been seeing with the ORX. This won't be the last time I do this test but will keep records and do some videos next spring and post to you-tube and my website.

[attachment 370220 1863_5-800x400.jpg]

Yeah, I was shocked. The more I work that place the more surprised I get. Last year I pulled a large cent from about the same area. A lot of pretty old stuff come from that general area. That's why I chose the spot.