I used to own a Fisher CZ 5 years ago...............I liked the depth but it was not very good in trashy parks. Ran targets together.....and I didn't like the idea of hunting sports fields with a 5" coil. Now I have the Omega 8000...........really liking it. But I wonder , what is the depth capability of the Omega compared .....to the CZ's??? One fellow I spoke with thinks that the CZ's run an all metal frequency and attach a disc to it to give the great depth. The disc falls short of the all metal hence.... all the deep nails. He says that the old Compass Relic Magnum 7 was the precursor to the CZ's....electronically speaking. Found this interesting.......what do you guys think? Maybe Monte or some of the other old hands would know...........I never had the chance to use a Relic Magnum 7. That aside what about the Omega depth in relation to CZ's..............????
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
Might be a dumb question.......but I'll give it a try.(be kind)
- Thread starter Ivan
- Start date
MarkCZ
Well-known member
I had a CZ7a-Pro and I liked it okay, in a move of detectors I ended up replacing the CZ with a Coinstrike, and to this day I don't feel that was a bad move. Now I have a Omega and I would say that its NO less as deep as the CZ was! and I don't think I would give up my Omega for another CZ.
Mark
Mark
Silverbackbob
Active member
Depth vs useable depth in a trashy park is very comparable IMHO. I've found 8 inch IH pennies with my 5 inch coil on the Omega. Scratchy, but repeatable signal(sound and vdi#) made me want to dig it in an old yard. CZ might win out on a beach, but in an old yard,park etc...., the Omega works better for me. And like Monte says, it isn't all about depth anyway. But it IS a factor I think. At least I think about it in the back of my mind once in awhile. Hope this helps. Good luck and HH. Bob.
I think it depends a LOT on your soil.
In my Northern California mineralized soil, a multifrequency machine, like a Minelab or CZ will almost always trump a VLF machine on depth. I have the CZ70 and had an Omega for a few years, and found that the CZ70 was far deeper then the Omega, but the Omega was far better in trashy sites, and iron infested areas were target masking and seperation are needs more then depth, so the Omega was able to pluck silver out of iron trashed sites that I'd never even consider using the CZ.
Both are great machines, just depends on your soil and hunting environment IMHO.
HH,
Brian
In my Northern California mineralized soil, a multifrequency machine, like a Minelab or CZ will almost always trump a VLF machine on depth. I have the CZ70 and had an Omega for a few years, and found that the CZ70 was far deeper then the Omega, but the Omega was far better in trashy sites, and iron infested areas were target masking and seperation are needs more then depth, so the Omega was able to pluck silver out of iron trashed sites that I'd never even consider using the CZ.
Both are great machines, just depends on your soil and hunting environment IMHO.
HH,
Brian