My first impression with the new Coiltek and Anderson shaft...

[trojdor]

Took the plunge, and purchased a Coiltek 14x9 coil for the CTX...(and in the process also ended up purchasing an Anderson lower rod)

Now keep in mind, this is what I observed with this one coil (serial number 160), and may not/probably doesn't represent the performance levels of the coils the beta testers got.

First impressions;
1. It's ungodly heavy. Which is OK, since I've got the harness. (If it really improved the depth over the stock coil, like some say, it would have been worth the hassles.)

2. The holes drilled in the mounting flange/ears are off by over 1/8". They're too low. You simply cant get either rod mounted with the (included) minelab hardware.
(The only way to install, is to either get out a drill and open up the holes, or switch to the smaller diameter 1/4" white nylon bolts you can get at most any ACE hardware store.)

3. The flange/ears have a design flaw when used with the stock lower rod. If/when the rod lies flat against the coil, it forces the flange/ears to flex apart a considerable amount.
This will eventually cause the plastic flange/ears to break. How this got past anyone is beyond me. The solution is to purchase an Anderson lower shaft, which has a much narrower mounting profile, and use it instead of the stock rod.

4. The coil cover bows out away from the coil over 3/8" in the middle. Yes, it's only 3/8" but it's sloppy, and of the 40 or so other detectors and perhaps 100+ coils I have, none exhibit this flaw.

5. ...And here's the 'death blow'...I could tolerate all the above if the coil were more sensitive than the 11" stock coil...but is most certainly is NOT.
My stock coil beat coiltek S/N 160 in every test I gave it...air, ground, different modes, settings, manual sens...everything.
The stock coil was consistently 3/4" to 1" deeper in every test.

I'm not sure what else to say, other than it's going back. And I'm not happy about having wasted my time with it.
Once again, I wish to re-iterate; This is just one coil. It could very well be that it's just a matter of poor quality control and the next one in line (serial number 161) might have been an awesome example.
But that's not the one I got/tested. If Coiltek would like to send me a hand picked one to test and review, I'd be glad to update these results.

Next up: Anderson LR for CTX

My experience with the Anderson rod was exactly the opposite to that of the Coiltek...
It arrived well boxed, but USPS managed to crush and mangle the box beyond belief! I was sure the shaft would be damaged...how could it not be?

To my surprise, the shaft was in absolutely perfect condition.
First impressions:

1. Its beautiful. Their carbon fiber work is flawless, as is overall workmanship and attention to detail.

2. It's strong. Very strong, with a caveat later...

3. It's about 1-1/2" longer than the stock rod.

4. As stated above...the more 'traditional' lower mount allows the rod to lay flat against the Coiltek 14x9 coil without flexing (and potentially damaging) the coil ears.

5. It comes with shims to allow you to fine tune your coil fit/tension. (The shims fit under the rubber grommets.) This is a really nice touch, and more manufacturers should do this.

6. The coil wire is flexed considerably less in the Anderson configuration. This 'should' help make the coil/wire last longer.

7. The caveat/drawback...you pay a slight weight penalty for the extra strength. Stock rod w/hardware = 5.7oz. Anderson rod w/hardware = 7.5oz. (Not quite 2 ounces heavier.)

My conclusion:
Even though I no longer need the rod for the Coiltek coil, it's of such high quality, that I'm keeping it as a spare, or 'just in case'.

Hope all this rambling is of some value to someone else.
HH,

mike

 

[Dan(NM)]

Thanks for your honest evaluation of the Coiltek, I was an inch away from buying one, but, the weight alone turned me off. I'm glad I went with my gut on that one.

 

[Jason in Enid]

thanks for that great report. I also have the Anderson spare lower rod and I agree they are great quality.

 

[sprchng]

Interesting report on the coil.
Many of the same issues with the first run of Coiltek's 5x10s in terms of the coil ears being designed incorrectly.
My $6 homemade PVC lower rods continue to perform flawlessly

 

[tcornel]

Next up: Anderson LR for CTX


My conclusion:
Even though I no longer need the rod for the Coiltek coil, it's of such high quality, that I'm keeping it as a spare, or 'just in case'.

Hope all this rambling is of some value to someone else.
HH,

mike

Mike,

I would consider using the CTX rod for your back and the Anderson rod as primary. There are many threads when the ctx rod caused the shaft wire insulation to break down near the coil due to the severe angle of bend. My 17" coil broke apart in only 7 months.

Tom

 

[ML]

Certainly not a very positive report on the Coiltek, and I was thinking of getting one, regardless of the weight. Appreciate the honest review. Might this be the reason that we haven't heard any follow up from Andy Sabisch? If I'm not mistaken, I thought a few months back he was gonna provide some more details, including some side by side comparisons with the stock 17" coil after more testing with it. His initial impressions sounded very good at the time.

 

[PhilNDirt]

Thanks for the detailed report. Where did you purchase the Anderson Rod ?


Thanks,

Philip
Virginia

 

[CT Todd]

Thanks for the information. I had considered one but on the phone with coilteck the guy wouldn't answer my direct question about the weight compared to the stock coil. That ended it for me. Your test was good.

 

[trojdor]

Thanks for the detailed report. Where did you purchase the Anderson Rod ?
Thanks, Philip
Virginia

Phil,
I got it from Colonial Metal Detectors. I believe the full Anderson description/part number is:
AS-CTXLR Zero Flex Lower Rod - CTX 3030

(Thanks for reading...)

 

[trojdor]

Thanks for the information. I had considered one but on the phone with coilteck the guy wouldn't answer my direct question about the weight compared to the stock coil. That ended it for me. Your test was good.

Todd,
Thanks for the comments.

Not only is the coiltek heavier than the stock coil, it's heavier than the 17" coil.

I can swing the 17" (without a harness) all day long...and it feels balanced, but I couldn't swing the coiltek without the harness for more than a few minutes.
(Balance is all wrong, and it hurt my arm.)

 

[CT Todd]

Thanks for the information. I had considered one but on the phone with coilteck the guy wouldn't answer my direct question about the weight compared to the stock coil. That ended it for me. Your test was good.

Todd,
Thanks for the comments.

Not only is the coiltek heavier than the stock coil, it's heavier than the 17" coil.

I can swing the 17" (without a harness) all day long...and it feels balanced, but I couldn't swing the coiltek without the harness for more than a few minutes.
(Balance is all wrong, and it hurt my arm.)

Geez think of all the work they put into that to then come up so short.

 

[ML]

Thanks for the information. I had considered one but on the phone with coilteck the guy wouldn't answer my direct question about the weight compared to the stock coil. That ended it for me. Your test was good.

Todd,
Thanks for the comments.

Not only is the coiltek heavier than the stock coil, it's heavier than the 17" coil.

I can swing the 17" (without a harness) all day long...and it feels balanced, but I couldn't swing the coiltek without the harness for more than a few minutes.
(Balance is all wrong, and it hurt my arm.)

Geez think of all the work they put into that to then come up so short.

Kinda seems like they came up short on their first attempt (the 5' x 10" Coiltek) as well. Lots of time/money spent to develop these coils. I was hoping to add one but guess not.

 

[jtalley007]

Saw Gary Drayton using one on a video in the water, anyone else seen or heard of how they work in the water?

It amazes me how companies can have genius engineers and probably multi-million dollar operations and turn out products that just don't work.

All they would need to do is get a few old timers that use machines in the field and ask for honest feedback, then just listen to them, make corrections until they got it right, then and only then manufacture it.

Every product would be an instant hit, and money maker since it would already be tried and true.

The problem is they get testers that are afraid to be straight up since they're afraid of getting cut out in the future, rightfully so.

Plus we keep buying products that are just not right, for example the Excalibur should only be made with the straight shaft, and we should all but demand it or just quit buying their stuff

I've owned 15 of them myself over the years and have to buy straight rods for them all, but those days are over for me, no more!

Bought the 3030 when it came out and it was worthless on salt, lost 2 days of Virginia Beach hunting and 2 days that were already planned in New Jersey, the detector was worthless until the did the Patch (not an update) to fix their blunder.

JMHO

Hope I don't ruffle any feathers?

 

[sube]

I was wondering if other forum members recived the coil and the holes didn't line up . trojdor I hope they send you another coil to try out see if the depth changes any .Don't these guys have access to a minelab shaft how could the holes be in the wrong place wonder what else is messed up with that coil . I hope you get a better one . sube

 

[Coiltek]

Hi All and thanks for the honest feedback and comments.

As you can appreciate (like any company manufacturing products) we do not want a product not to perform or 'live-up' to expectations.

I am not piping in here to counter any comments but maybe say they are noted. However, we have a lot of customers who are enjoying the performance and getting out there using the coil.

You know the one thing that i knew people would say first is that it is heavy but i like to think it as Robust and able to take the hard work many put it through. One thing i have learnt over the years is that operators dislike touch sensitivity and instability from a thin coil far more than a slight weight issue. This coil, by way of its design, has a very robust feel and less touch sensitivity. The weight of a coil usually comes behind performance. I thickened up the epoxy filled area to help with the stability of the coil.

Of course we would want everyone loving our products but know that this coil will perform well for those who use it for what it is - another tool in the tool box for finding treasure. Not everyone will want or use this coil type and that is OK.

In regards to the bolt hole location - thanks for the heads up. I will check this straight away. Certainly not what we set out to do! All i can say is that if a user has a coil like this please contact me direct on ctmenquiry@coiltek.com.au so i can discuss it further.

Thanks all.
Trevor @ Coiltek.

 

[jerseyjim]

Get it, it is a really good coil. I love it for getting under brush and between rows in corn fields,