Getting about that time of year again. Getting antsy about the thought of purchasing a new detector. First off 95% of my detecting is freshwater beach and water hunting. Looking to get more depth on both land and ind the water. I don't dive, just wade up to chest deep. Wondering if I should purchase both an Excal and a Sov. GT. Or just an Excal and run it on the land also. Or get a Sov. GT and waterproof it....?? Is there any advantages to owning one of each...are they not basically the same machine?
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
Changed email? Forgot to update your account with new email address? Need assistance with something else?, click here to go to Find's Support Form and fill out the form.
Should I buy an Excal AND a Sov.GT
- Thread starter Diggin-it
- Start date
OldBeechnut
Well-known member
You will have to balance out where you hunt the most, and which will give you the best returns. Either detector is a fine choice but each has it own limit.
Critterhunter
New member
Either machine is excellent on land or in the water and as good as it gets, for both old coins at "dead" land sites, and gold rings on the beach or in the water. The converse overlap of them depends on perspectives.
The Excal is more at home in the water, while it's a heavy beast on land. On the other hand, the GT can be high chest mounted real easy for fast conversion to water hunting, by just using a small bag for water hunting, and although I've done that successfully, I never trusted it beyond about belly button deep.
Good reason why these BBS units have extra long coil cables with even aftermarket coils, for hip or chest mounting both on land and in the water. The Sovereign is an amphibious machine right out of the box.
The Excalibur can do the same, for either water or to lighten the load on land, and by an easy building of a light weight straight shaft for it, can be made rather comfortable for land use even if you keep the POD on the shaft. You'll never be able to use a meter though, while you can ditch that on the GT when water hunting.
I have used an Excalibur on land (with the old heavy BBS800 coil) and made some great finds with it, but at least with the stock shaft it was a boat anchor to swing. The GT, despite claims of it's stock shaft being well balanced, I also found to be too heavy for a long day of hunting on land for me, so I built a light weight land rig for that, and kept the stock shaft (ditching the never comfortable stock hand grip) as my water shaft.
My solution? Rather than buying an Excal, as the premier water machine on the market, just to water hunt, I have decided that I wanted more than just the depths I could wade with my GT when I'd do my water excursions, so I'm doing a cheap/easy water conversion, that still allows me to take out the GT control box and fastly throw back on my light weight land shaft rig, which details of which can be found in this thread...
http://www.findmall.com/read.php?22,1893351
And while I could easily use waterproof headphones, never saw much need, because if I'm neck deep and the waves are smacking into my head then I figure I wouldn't want to do that anyway for comfort reasons. My Excalibur friends won't go that deep when waves are that bad. Bangs you around too much.
And, not sure why, but I tested a new Excalibur with 10" Tornado against my GT using the same coil, both at max sensitivity in a low EMI environment, and at least in an air test, which Minelabs will get more depth in some soils and sands than in the air due to the unique way they handle and need a ground signal, I found the GT was about a half inch deeper on a clad dime. That test pictorial video can be found here...
http://youtu.be/p8bFaoxrdbc
Why is that? Not sure, but from what I gather the older and newer Excalibur renditions have been based on two older Sovereign models, and some say the GT is a bit hotter/deeper/more sensitive to smaller target as well, than prior Sovereign models. I also did a test of Iron Mask ON versus OFF on my GT, and found that ON was about a half inch deeper with same settings/same site/same day, precisely measured.
I'm wondering if perhaps the half inch more depth is due to Excaliburs maybe having Iron Mask turned OFF in order to smooth the ride in mineralized beaches and salt water environments, but I never felt the need to turn Iron Mask OFF on my GT despite the worst of land or sand sites. It's a very stable/smooth machine for me in my soils/sands compared to all prior detectors I ever owned.
Might be though that the difference is in the headphones of what the Excalibur comes with versus what I'm using on my GT, but I can say that in my tests the GT shows me no change in depth with volume lowest or highest in disc, while for sure the Excalibur shows a distinct depth change if volume is lowered.
I have read in the past that Minelab recommends blasting the volume to full on the Sovereign and then adjusting it on the headphones to insure comfortable levels while achieving max depth. Perhaps, if the Excalibur is based on one or two prior Sovereign models, then this would be an issue that also might reason out why the GT appears to get more depth than the new Excalibur I tested it against, if the Excalibur is based on a prior Sovereign model(s), because in precise measurements my GT shows no change in depth in disc with lowest or highest volume, while Minelab in the past said this was very important for max depth in disc.
The only difference with highest/lowest volume I can see with my GT is in pin point mode, which for sure highest volume seems to increase depth on. Maybe a large part of this equation though is the type of headphones being used, but I can say that the Exclibur (a new one) showed me no response on a target at lowest volume at all when I played around with that.
The Excal is more at home in the water, while it's a heavy beast on land. On the other hand, the GT can be high chest mounted real easy for fast conversion to water hunting, by just using a small bag for water hunting, and although I've done that successfully, I never trusted it beyond about belly button deep.
Good reason why these BBS units have extra long coil cables with even aftermarket coils, for hip or chest mounting both on land and in the water. The Sovereign is an amphibious machine right out of the box.
The Excalibur can do the same, for either water or to lighten the load on land, and by an easy building of a light weight straight shaft for it, can be made rather comfortable for land use even if you keep the POD on the shaft. You'll never be able to use a meter though, while you can ditch that on the GT when water hunting.
I have used an Excalibur on land (with the old heavy BBS800 coil) and made some great finds with it, but at least with the stock shaft it was a boat anchor to swing. The GT, despite claims of it's stock shaft being well balanced, I also found to be too heavy for a long day of hunting on land for me, so I built a light weight land rig for that, and kept the stock shaft (ditching the never comfortable stock hand grip) as my water shaft.
My solution? Rather than buying an Excal, as the premier water machine on the market, just to water hunt, I have decided that I wanted more than just the depths I could wade with my GT when I'd do my water excursions, so I'm doing a cheap/easy water conversion, that still allows me to take out the GT control box and fastly throw back on my light weight land shaft rig, which details of which can be found in this thread...
http://www.findmall.com/read.php?22,1893351
And while I could easily use waterproof headphones, never saw much need, because if I'm neck deep and the waves are smacking into my head then I figure I wouldn't want to do that anyway for comfort reasons. My Excalibur friends won't go that deep when waves are that bad. Bangs you around too much.
And, not sure why, but I tested a new Excalibur with 10" Tornado against my GT using the same coil, both at max sensitivity in a low EMI environment, and at least in an air test, which Minelabs will get more depth in some soils and sands than in the air due to the unique way they handle and need a ground signal, I found the GT was about a half inch deeper on a clad dime. That test pictorial video can be found here...
http://youtu.be/p8bFaoxrdbc
Why is that? Not sure, but from what I gather the older and newer Excalibur renditions have been based on two older Sovereign models, and some say the GT is a bit hotter/deeper/more sensitive to smaller target as well, than prior Sovereign models. I also did a test of Iron Mask ON versus OFF on my GT, and found that ON was about a half inch deeper with same settings/same site/same day, precisely measured.
I'm wondering if perhaps the half inch more depth is due to Excaliburs maybe having Iron Mask turned OFF in order to smooth the ride in mineralized beaches and salt water environments, but I never felt the need to turn Iron Mask OFF on my GT despite the worst of land or sand sites. It's a very stable/smooth machine for me in my soils/sands compared to all prior detectors I ever owned.
Might be though that the difference is in the headphones of what the Excalibur comes with versus what I'm using on my GT, but I can say that in my tests the GT shows me no change in depth with volume lowest or highest in disc, while for sure the Excalibur shows a distinct depth change if volume is lowered.
I have read in the past that Minelab recommends blasting the volume to full on the Sovereign and then adjusting it on the headphones to insure comfortable levels while achieving max depth. Perhaps, if the Excalibur is based on one or two prior Sovereign models, then this would be an issue that also might reason out why the GT appears to get more depth than the new Excalibur I tested it against, if the Excalibur is based on a prior Sovereign model(s), because in precise measurements my GT shows no change in depth in disc with lowest or highest volume, while Minelab in the past said this was very important for max depth in disc.
The only difference with highest/lowest volume I can see with my GT is in pin point mode, which for sure highest volume seems to increase depth on. Maybe a large part of this equation though is the type of headphones being used, but I can say that the Exclibur (a new one) showed me no response on a target at lowest volume at all when I played around with that.
I think you just answered your question,you search in the water.The Excalibur would be my choice because one spill in the water with the GT and you are done.On the beach and dry land the Sovereign would work better.They are both great detectors,but each one has specific uses.Good Luck HH Ron
deepdiger60
New member
If you dont have any idea how to completly water proof a GT 100% then go with a Excal that machine is made for it best all around land beach and water machine . GL Jim
bootyhoundpa
Well-known member
i have 1 of each.... if 95% of your hunting is in the water then like ron said the excal is the obvious choice.... i use the excal for all my water hunting and use my gt for farm field hunting-... if i didnt farm field hunt i probably wouldnt even have the gt,but since i do field hunt i cant imagine being with out it as it does a great job and does not miss too much...
dewcon4414
Well-known member
Dont discount other SINGLE freq machines there are some more sensitive to gold since you are hunting fresh water. Lets face you arent looking for pennies if you are beach hunting. Depth is relivent to what you are looking for. Even the TS by Tesoro isnt a bad choice.
Dew
Dew
Diggin-it said:
If I'm reading your post correctly, you're asking if you should buy BOTH. If you can afford it the answer is definitely YES. I have both and use the Excalibur in the water and the GT in wet/dry sand....I wouldn't sell either.
I also have the DFPI and MXT Pro. A mechanic can't work with just a wrench in his chest or a carpenter with just a hammer, different tools for different jobs.It all depends on what you're planning on doing. imho
Critterhunter
New member
Yea, there are machines more sensitive to fine gold like tiny earrings or thin chains, but in terms of even the smallest/thinnest of gold rings, being an intact loop, I've owned machines known for "fine gold" sensitivity and they couldn't come anywhere near my GT on deep rings, and that includes even super thin/small/plain ones.
It's all about the intact loop of the object that presents a strong coin-like signal to the Minelab, where as a thin chain's individual loops or a tiny earring that doesn't have say a dime sized loop or bigger on it are what Minelabs have issues with. In terms of tiny objects in general though, I've dug a ton at extreme depths with the GT, and that includes even using the stock 10" Tornado, although the 12x10 seems to improve that ability.
Prior Sovereign models are said to have less small target ability that the GT. If you do a search for threads talking about first field hunts with the GT back when it first came out, you'll find a lot of threads from prior Sovereign model owners who noticed this. Might also have relations to the coils being used, because the Tornados didn't come out until the advent of the Elite.
Also, I've tested low conductor sensitivity on the GT and it'll bang on even super low foil hits as deep as a coin, so long as they have an intact make up for the eddy currents to flow over to provide a "solid" image to the machine. The multi frequency of these BBS units makes them plenty good at hitting just about any conductive metal at extreme depths, so that's not an issue.
One of the things that I didn't care for with mine prior "fine gold" able machines, was that they made for a rather bumpy ride on land when hunting, having me chase tiny flakes of coil and such that sounded so good I couldn't pass them up, and also seemed to chatter over fine bits of junk in the ground and be rather "chatty', as I'm prone not to use any discrimination and instead allow my ears to do the discriminated, which for me also means tone alerts is a must.
Only place I'd care to use a fine gold unit is on the beach after I've cleaned a patch of ground of all the rings with a GT, and even then way I look at it most gold lost is in the form of rings, but still it'd be nice to go after any fine gold chains or tiny earrings after that in that patch of ground. Rarely am I in the mood to do that though after gridding the snot out of a beach site or in the water for the rings.
One friend had a certain well known machine for fine gold to hunt the water, which I also had at one time. Last summer he was constantly struggling to find a fine balance in discrimination to knock out the iron while still picking up low conductors like foil hits that might turn out to be a ring. We'd take breaks and he's pull gobs and gobs of rusted old iron out of his pouch, while my two Excal friends and me with my GT wading didn't have as heavy of pouches due to all that iron junk he was turning up.
While taking his breaks he'd tune his discrimination dial on a glob of foil or can shard or such to try to reach that perfect setting where he'd ignore the iron, but never could find a happy medium, and wasn't long before he had a Excalibur after that.
It's all about the intact loop of the object that presents a strong coin-like signal to the Minelab, where as a thin chain's individual loops or a tiny earring that doesn't have say a dime sized loop or bigger on it are what Minelabs have issues with. In terms of tiny objects in general though, I've dug a ton at extreme depths with the GT, and that includes even using the stock 10" Tornado, although the 12x10 seems to improve that ability.
Prior Sovereign models are said to have less small target ability that the GT. If you do a search for threads talking about first field hunts with the GT back when it first came out, you'll find a lot of threads from prior Sovereign model owners who noticed this. Might also have relations to the coils being used, because the Tornados didn't come out until the advent of the Elite.
Also, I've tested low conductor sensitivity on the GT and it'll bang on even super low foil hits as deep as a coin, so long as they have an intact make up for the eddy currents to flow over to provide a "solid" image to the machine. The multi frequency of these BBS units makes them plenty good at hitting just about any conductive metal at extreme depths, so that's not an issue.
One of the things that I didn't care for with mine prior "fine gold" able machines, was that they made for a rather bumpy ride on land when hunting, having me chase tiny flakes of coil and such that sounded so good I couldn't pass them up, and also seemed to chatter over fine bits of junk in the ground and be rather "chatty', as I'm prone not to use any discrimination and instead allow my ears to do the discriminated, which for me also means tone alerts is a must.
Only place I'd care to use a fine gold unit is on the beach after I've cleaned a patch of ground of all the rings with a GT, and even then way I look at it most gold lost is in the form of rings, but still it'd be nice to go after any fine gold chains or tiny earrings after that in that patch of ground. Rarely am I in the mood to do that though after gridding the snot out of a beach site or in the water for the rings.
One friend had a certain well known machine for fine gold to hunt the water, which I also had at one time. Last summer he was constantly struggling to find a fine balance in discrimination to knock out the iron while still picking up low conductors like foil hits that might turn out to be a ring. We'd take breaks and he's pull gobs and gobs of rusted old iron out of his pouch, while my two Excal friends and me with my GT wading didn't have as heavy of pouches due to all that iron junk he was turning up.
While taking his breaks he'd tune his discrimination dial on a glob of foil or can shard or such to try to reach that perfect setting where he'd ignore the iron, but never could find a happy medium, and wasn't long before he had a Excalibur after that.
dewcon4414
Well-known member
ONce again Critter you are smoking something. I like the Sov..... but on thin gold targets there ARE better high freq machines that hit just as deep. We arent talking bottle caps here we are talking gold. Now i have to ask .... WHAT machines have you owned?? I know you do a LOT of reading and repeating what OTHERS say and tell you my friend but the Sov is no match for some single freq machines on small gold...... lets say .3 grams. Which i doubt the Sov would even notice was there with much depth. Thin rings are a challenge for the Sov dont let anyone tell you differently especially if you add a few inches of mineralized sand. I love my MLs ..... but im not going to mislead anyone as to their capability. Ive used a couple of machines myself.... so dont try blowing smoke up my .... rrssss. Im not one of you fans on here just because of these kind of statements.
Dew
Dew
deepdiger60
New member
Tomorrow ill be going to the south shore beaches here on LI at my sisters house for 4 or 5 days the ocean is just a 10 minute drive away from her home and have my Sov GT and a few coils ill be using the new 12x10 in wet sand and maybe the stock 10" also wet and dry sand , all my other hunts Ive never found small gold chains or rings round square or flat with the Sov.small is small medium to large no problem , when i was using my DFX with a 12x10 coil then i hit small gold with a custom made program on beaches if you can put up with all the chatter . Using the 12x10 this week with the GT will be a good test for it . ill post my finds Sunday i have a large pouch for all the lead sinkers ill be finding LOL . Jim
dewcon4414
Well-known member
I used the DFX several years it wasnt as deep as the Explorers on the beach..... but id say it hit on smaller gold with its 15khz better and thats what we are after. Hope you clean up tomorrow. Ill be out there tomorrow. Me and my hunting buddy will be trying something different by getting into a couple of areas by boat. GL out there.....
Dew
Dew
Critterhunter
New member
Dewcon, you and a few others who don't see eye to eye with me like to imply I never hunt or lack experience. That's an easy way to smear people and dismiss opinions you don't agree with. I won't take that tactic with you or others about detecting, so why do you feel the need to take that tactic with me? Seems like reasoning for a weak argument IMO. Research and reading is just one aspect of this hobby that I enjoy.
Doing that doesn't make my knowledge less, it adds to what I've experienced in the field so I can contrast things. I'm the kind of person who doesn't like to close their eyes to other opinions or just swallow blindly "rules of thumb" beliefs, as I've found that old sayings are often based on old machines and outdated experiences from about the 80's and older for one thing.
But rather, I welcome diverse opinions not as a personal insult (when they aren't done as personal insults), to see how they compare to my own field experiences myself. Only way to learn more is to ask questions and explore other possibilities. That is one small aspect of what this great hobby is all about to me. I enjoy that deeply, while others seem to take offense to any break from common lockstep views of protocol and opinions that always were, and so should assume to always be...
Yea, the only thing I'm "smoking" is about 20 years of experience owning much of what is out there and going head to head or using others I haven't owned with extensive year to year comparisons in the field on undug targets. Your experiences may differ of course, but I can only relate what I've experienced in mine and it is what it is for me.
Hey, if your happy with what you've found, more power to you but don't expect not to get a retort in a BBS forum, and just have people blindly shaking their head "yes" to why such and such X brand machine is better in certain respects.. Seen a few particular people who visit this forum do that often over the last several years, and then when somebody offers a differing view they tend to get real personal like about things. Needless provocation IMO. I just try to stick to the facts as I've seen them with my own eyes and ears and offer them, leaving it at that for others to confirm or deny in their own experiences.
Let others sort out the opinions for themselves in their soils and sands. I don't need to try to snub people to try to get my message across, take it or leave it. I feel my opinion and experiences need no further weight by way of frivolous remarks that have zero to do with detecting, so that's where I leave it for others to prove or disprove for themselves in their soils or sand, with their coils and settings of choice, and with their particular things they pay attention to in what a detector is trying to tell them.
Many of these concepts can be highly subjective and vague to relate in words, so by no means should anybody feel they know the final word on a detector. I don't assume that, but only assume to relate what I see for myself, and won't get my nose out of joint if somebody else disagrees in a non-personal way, which IMO adds more weight to their views since they didn't seem to feel to need to resort to that to support their opinion. Whenever somebody gets personal, I tend to just ignore what they have to say as it doesn't seem to be constructive in getting their point across, and I begin to wonder why that is.
I've owned a great deal of what's out there, spanning pretty much every brand and various models, with even 3 other Minelabs from time to time, so I know where I speak. I've posted videos disproving the concept that Minelabs won't hit on low conductors super deep just like old coins, so rather than using the words, just look at the videos. They speak volumes. This one is on a very low foil hit in contrast to a clad dime...
http://youtu.be/PrnsIGqY7P0
And here's this one, which wasn't specifically testing this, but it does show that a somewhat thin gold ring hits at great depths than a clad dime in another test...
http://youtu.be/G817__EOC8A
Read the video description below it concerning the implications of this gold ring being deeper than a clad dime using the same coil/same settings. It's really a rather easy concept to understand...
A ring, even a thin/plain one, is an intact metal loop, which it's outer diameter is what is important and not it being a low conductor, as the above first link also illustrates using a very low conductor. That's one of the beauties of multifreqency. Yes, A Minelab won't hold it's own against some other machines known for fine gold, but in terms of rings, even thin/small ones, at least in my soils and sands I see no need to look for potential deeper pastures. Haven't found those yet in all my years of wandering and "sampling the wine" of what is out there.
Yes, these may only be air tests, but they do confirm for me what I've found in the field. That's the bottom line for me, and precise measurements in a more "visual" way only shore up those impressions I've experienced "in ground".
I'm also working on a few more videos/pictorials to illustrate this further, to finally put the rest the idea that somehow a "fine gold" machine is automatically assumed tol hit gold rings deeper than a Minelab. I'm doing various intact and broken loop tests to illustrate just this concept that some can't seem to get a handle on in how detection fields work, and how that aspect of their eddy current flow greatly changes the cards when it comes to rings and Minelabs. Where as some other machines might have a great "gold sensitivity" reputation, there is a big difference in how people term "fine gold" and also just what those machines will do in contrast to a Minelab.
Maybe in their soils they've got different results, but I can say in my soil these BBS units are the deepest/most stable and hardest hitting I've found for me, on gold rings or old coins. Might also have to do with coil choice, or prior Sovereign models, because the GT is said to be more sensitive to small items than prior models. Search for threads when the GT first came out and read on how people who owned prior Sovereign models were shocked by it's small target sensitivity, at least with things like small shoe rivets, BBS, and such. Now, whether that's all to do with the GT's electronics, or has some part to do with prior coils versus the Tornado, I'm not going to argue that.
All I am going to argue is that I've owned several machines know for "fine" gold sensitivity, and at least with their higher single frequencies in my soils or sands, and also with more than one frequency on a few other models I've used or went head to head with, let's just say I sold the ones I owned, and my friends who owned a few others sold theirs as well. This is in *our soil and sands* of course here.
They might have banged on fine gold better (IE: Not rings), but their depth and stability was terrible for us, often requiring such low sensitivity settings that their reported depths were bordering on myth to us. Without naming brands, at least two come to mind right off the back, and at least 3 models within one brand and 2 models within the other, one of which was a water machine I also owned and so did at least one other friend in our local circle of hunters.
In summary, I've owned several machines well known for fine gold sensitivity, and I can tell you that while they'll hit thin gold chains or tiny earrings better than a Minelab, they won't touch even the thinnest/plainest of gold rings at the depth of this GT.
Let's put it this way. You think I'm such a GT fan boy? Not at all. Brands and models mean zero to me. What matters to me is what I see with my own eyes and ears in the field. If I thought the Sovereign lacked on old coins in depth or unmasking, or if I thought it lacked on even the smallest/thinnest of gold rings at the beach, believe me I'd own something else to take up the slack on that to sit along side it in my line up.
I'm looking at one such brand right now, new on the market, but right now I see the GT in PP mode will probably match it on old coins or rings, and the fine gold thing to me isn't a major selling point to make the leap. When I'm after gold, by my way of thinking I'm after rings as the most common form of it lost, so I only want that ability, because the machines I owned with fine gold sensitivity had me chasing tiny flakes of junk or iron, and when forced out of frustration to use the discrimination dial just to smooth the ride, I still found myself digging a lot of small junk or iron and the ride was still like a bad city street.
No need to use remarks like "your smoking something" or so on. If you got evidence to the contrary based on experience, then by all means share it with all to enjoy. I don't make up my thoughts, nor do I spread baseless rumors with no founding in reality. What I go by is what I've owned, used, and went head to head with for many years, and then I contrast that and test further to what I've heard from others.
Yes, I have owned machines that will smoke a Minelab on *fine* gold, like those thin chains or tiny earrings, but one thing that people don't tell you is that they are like riding a car with a touchy steering wheel and bad shocks on a bad road. That ain't smoking something, and that ain't fan boy loyalty. And, while they could hit fine gold better, not at any kind of depth other than pretty much 5" or sub that in many of my soils/sands.
Also the reason why I haven't gone more "digital" in latest renditions of flagship machines, because I've compared undug targets head to head over several years here and not once was the GT lacking in depth or unmasking ability, and I'm talking coins so badly masked by iron or other junk that for both machines they were a complete null all around the target but one very tight angle of sweep. Now, much of those comparisons have been with me using the 12x10, but not all.
What I find funny, is that there is a few who visit this forum who I won't outright point out, who seem to be big fans of other machines, yet they seem to spend most of their time here trying to convince BBS users that they are some poor lost soils. You found what you want? Great, but I've been there, and so I'm not going to be convinced that some latest gadget and gismo that can shine a fancy screen in my face is the pathway to wonderland. Been there, done that, so don't be shocked when I offer a contrasting opinion, because I've found much of digital gadgets these days is more about bling and eye candy on the screen, than what really matters to me in performance...
Doing that doesn't make my knowledge less, it adds to what I've experienced in the field so I can contrast things. I'm the kind of person who doesn't like to close their eyes to other opinions or just swallow blindly "rules of thumb" beliefs, as I've found that old sayings are often based on old machines and outdated experiences from about the 80's and older for one thing.
But rather, I welcome diverse opinions not as a personal insult (when they aren't done as personal insults), to see how they compare to my own field experiences myself. Only way to learn more is to ask questions and explore other possibilities. That is one small aspect of what this great hobby is all about to me. I enjoy that deeply, while others seem to take offense to any break from common lockstep views of protocol and opinions that always were, and so should assume to always be...
Yea, the only thing I'm "smoking" is about 20 years of experience owning much of what is out there and going head to head or using others I haven't owned with extensive year to year comparisons in the field on undug targets. Your experiences may differ of course, but I can only relate what I've experienced in mine and it is what it is for me.
Hey, if your happy with what you've found, more power to you but don't expect not to get a retort in a BBS forum, and just have people blindly shaking their head "yes" to why such and such X brand machine is better in certain respects.. Seen a few particular people who visit this forum do that often over the last several years, and then when somebody offers a differing view they tend to get real personal like about things. Needless provocation IMO. I just try to stick to the facts as I've seen them with my own eyes and ears and offer them, leaving it at that for others to confirm or deny in their own experiences.
Let others sort out the opinions for themselves in their soils and sands. I don't need to try to snub people to try to get my message across, take it or leave it. I feel my opinion and experiences need no further weight by way of frivolous remarks that have zero to do with detecting, so that's where I leave it for others to prove or disprove for themselves in their soils or sand, with their coils and settings of choice, and with their particular things they pay attention to in what a detector is trying to tell them.
Many of these concepts can be highly subjective and vague to relate in words, so by no means should anybody feel they know the final word on a detector. I don't assume that, but only assume to relate what I see for myself, and won't get my nose out of joint if somebody else disagrees in a non-personal way, which IMO adds more weight to their views since they didn't seem to feel to need to resort to that to support their opinion. Whenever somebody gets personal, I tend to just ignore what they have to say as it doesn't seem to be constructive in getting their point across, and I begin to wonder why that is.
I've owned a great deal of what's out there, spanning pretty much every brand and various models, with even 3 other Minelabs from time to time, so I know where I speak. I've posted videos disproving the concept that Minelabs won't hit on low conductors super deep just like old coins, so rather than using the words, just look at the videos. They speak volumes. This one is on a very low foil hit in contrast to a clad dime...
http://youtu.be/PrnsIGqY7P0
And here's this one, which wasn't specifically testing this, but it does show that a somewhat thin gold ring hits at great depths than a clad dime in another test...
http://youtu.be/G817__EOC8A
Read the video description below it concerning the implications of this gold ring being deeper than a clad dime using the same coil/same settings. It's really a rather easy concept to understand...
A ring, even a thin/plain one, is an intact metal loop, which it's outer diameter is what is important and not it being a low conductor, as the above first link also illustrates using a very low conductor. That's one of the beauties of multifreqency. Yes, A Minelab won't hold it's own against some other machines known for fine gold, but in terms of rings, even thin/small ones, at least in my soils and sands I see no need to look for potential deeper pastures. Haven't found those yet in all my years of wandering and "sampling the wine" of what is out there.
Yes, these may only be air tests, but they do confirm for me what I've found in the field. That's the bottom line for me, and precise measurements in a more "visual" way only shore up those impressions I've experienced "in ground".
I'm also working on a few more videos/pictorials to illustrate this further, to finally put the rest the idea that somehow a "fine gold" machine is automatically assumed tol hit gold rings deeper than a Minelab. I'm doing various intact and broken loop tests to illustrate just this concept that some can't seem to get a handle on in how detection fields work, and how that aspect of their eddy current flow greatly changes the cards when it comes to rings and Minelabs. Where as some other machines might have a great "gold sensitivity" reputation, there is a big difference in how people term "fine gold" and also just what those machines will do in contrast to a Minelab.
Maybe in their soils they've got different results, but I can say in my soil these BBS units are the deepest/most stable and hardest hitting I've found for me, on gold rings or old coins. Might also have to do with coil choice, or prior Sovereign models, because the GT is said to be more sensitive to small items than prior models. Search for threads when the GT first came out and read on how people who owned prior Sovereign models were shocked by it's small target sensitivity, at least with things like small shoe rivets, BBS, and such. Now, whether that's all to do with the GT's electronics, or has some part to do with prior coils versus the Tornado, I'm not going to argue that.
All I am going to argue is that I've owned several machines know for "fine" gold sensitivity, and at least with their higher single frequencies in my soils or sands, and also with more than one frequency on a few other models I've used or went head to head with, let's just say I sold the ones I owned, and my friends who owned a few others sold theirs as well. This is in *our soil and sands* of course here.
They might have banged on fine gold better (IE: Not rings), but their depth and stability was terrible for us, often requiring such low sensitivity settings that their reported depths were bordering on myth to us. Without naming brands, at least two come to mind right off the back, and at least 3 models within one brand and 2 models within the other, one of which was a water machine I also owned and so did at least one other friend in our local circle of hunters.
In summary, I've owned several machines well known for fine gold sensitivity, and I can tell you that while they'll hit thin gold chains or tiny earrings better than a Minelab, they won't touch even the thinnest/plainest of gold rings at the depth of this GT.
Let's put it this way. You think I'm such a GT fan boy? Not at all. Brands and models mean zero to me. What matters to me is what I see with my own eyes and ears in the field. If I thought the Sovereign lacked on old coins in depth or unmasking, or if I thought it lacked on even the smallest/thinnest of gold rings at the beach, believe me I'd own something else to take up the slack on that to sit along side it in my line up.
I'm looking at one such brand right now, new on the market, but right now I see the GT in PP mode will probably match it on old coins or rings, and the fine gold thing to me isn't a major selling point to make the leap. When I'm after gold, by my way of thinking I'm after rings as the most common form of it lost, so I only want that ability, because the machines I owned with fine gold sensitivity had me chasing tiny flakes of junk or iron, and when forced out of frustration to use the discrimination dial just to smooth the ride, I still found myself digging a lot of small junk or iron and the ride was still like a bad city street.
No need to use remarks like "your smoking something" or so on. If you got evidence to the contrary based on experience, then by all means share it with all to enjoy. I don't make up my thoughts, nor do I spread baseless rumors with no founding in reality. What I go by is what I've owned, used, and went head to head with for many years, and then I contrast that and test further to what I've heard from others.
Yes, I have owned machines that will smoke a Minelab on *fine* gold, like those thin chains or tiny earrings, but one thing that people don't tell you is that they are like riding a car with a touchy steering wheel and bad shocks on a bad road. That ain't smoking something, and that ain't fan boy loyalty. And, while they could hit fine gold better, not at any kind of depth other than pretty much 5" or sub that in many of my soils/sands.
Also the reason why I haven't gone more "digital" in latest renditions of flagship machines, because I've compared undug targets head to head over several years here and not once was the GT lacking in depth or unmasking ability, and I'm talking coins so badly masked by iron or other junk that for both machines they were a complete null all around the target but one very tight angle of sweep. Now, much of those comparisons have been with me using the 12x10, but not all.
What I find funny, is that there is a few who visit this forum who I won't outright point out, who seem to be big fans of other machines, yet they seem to spend most of their time here trying to convince BBS users that they are some poor lost soils. You found what you want? Great, but I've been there, and so I'm not going to be convinced that some latest gadget and gismo that can shine a fancy screen in my face is the pathway to wonderland. Been there, done that, so don't be shocked when I offer a contrasting opinion, because I've found much of digital gadgets these days is more about bling and eye candy on the screen, than what really matters to me in performance...
Neil
Well-known member
critter you have made these claims before about the sov and smaller gold and its got nothing to do with location. Its what the sov does and doesnt do irregardless of your endless tests. Remember not a year ago your testing had you saying pinpoint mode on the sov was not as deep as disc" in your soil". Wow are you singing a different tune now. So much for your testing if you actually do any testing or hunting. Certainly your fingers are quite active.
Every detector Ive ever used has its limits in some form or another and indeed if the Sov was what you claimed it to be I would own nothing but the Sov.
The Sov is a great machine but small gold is not one of its strengths and actually its one of its weaknesses. All the words you write, all your testing and your very special location dont change that. I do wish you were right, but your not. And your deceiving people who come to this forum looking for honest opinions.
Do everyone a favor and just keep it honest, even if it means you dont post as much or often. Posting is a big part of your life, anyone can see that, but please keep it honest and all will benefit.
On some forums people get flamed for mentioning another detector, I was really hoping this forum was above that petty crap. We are all detectorists and most of us all use a variety of machines.
Maybe one day there will be one detector that does it all, but that is not the case today.
Every detector Ive ever used has its limits in some form or another and indeed if the Sov was what you claimed it to be I would own nothing but the Sov.
The Sov is a great machine but small gold is not one of its strengths and actually its one of its weaknesses. All the words you write, all your testing and your very special location dont change that. I do wish you were right, but your not. And your deceiving people who come to this forum looking for honest opinions.
Do everyone a favor and just keep it honest, even if it means you dont post as much or often. Posting is a big part of your life, anyone can see that, but please keep it honest and all will benefit.
On some forums people get flamed for mentioning another detector, I was really hoping this forum was above that petty crap. We are all detectorists and most of us all use a variety of machines.
Maybe one day there will be one detector that does it all, but that is not the case today.
Neil
Well-known member
deepdiger60 said:
Jim I find the Sov can get some smaller stuff, but its gotta be surface stuff or real close to the coil. Once you use a detector that hits the small stuff strongly you do start seeing how the sov is missing most of the smaller stuff. I never used a DFX, but have used several others and today have an AT gold. Ive not tried it at the ocean but its not supposed to work well there, however at freshwater locations Ive done well with it, and it runs really smooth there. Nice machine indeed.
Wow...lots of info here. Didn't want to stir up a heated debate. I should have listed what machines I currently have. I have 3 AT-Pro's, a Whites V3i, an XP Deus, and a Fisher F2. Right now I use the AT-Pro's for my water hunting. They are great and hit very nice on very tiny gold...they just are not a real deep seeing machine. I do plan on doing the waterproof mod on my XP Deus and trying it in the water. I tried one in the water last year...it is deeper seeing then the AT-Pro, has 4 different frequencies to chose from, has incredible target seperation and speed, and in the 18khz setting it nails tiny gold nicely. So I have a nice variety of machines, but just was hoping to get more depth. PI is out of the question up here. I like the fact the Sov. GT can easily change coils and headphones, and 3 year warranty compared to just one. I'm not afraid to put the GT in a makeshift waterproof enclosure, or just chest mount it and use it for my waist and shallower hunting. Man...there are some Incredible deals out there right now on the GT. I think they are just trying to get rid of remaining stock. The GT would cost me over $400 less.
robby4570
Member
I gotta tell y'all, the Sovereign ELITE I have is a GREAT machine. BUT, I have yet to find a gold chain with it. I have found some REALLLLLLLY small items with it at what I would consider a moderate depth - 6 to say 8 inches - items like earring backs and a link from a chain that was pretty fine. I hunt ultra slow (since that was the prevailing advice I'd read) and have heard some really faint whispers in all metal/pinpoint mode that went away when I switched to disc mode with disc and notch at 0 and sensitivity as high as it would go - still had threshold tone so, no, it didn't null - proving to me that you DO INDEED get more depth in all metal/pinpoint mode over disc mode, at least with MY machine. Granted this was on the beach, I've yet to try this in the dirt.
There are better machines out there for different tasks, that's just the nature of technology. But to answer the OP, if I had to choose ONE or the other I would get the Excalibur, but I would get BOTH if I had the funds....
There are better machines out there for different tasks, that's just the nature of technology. But to answer the OP, if I had to choose ONE or the other I would get the Excalibur, but I would get BOTH if I had the funds....