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
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
