Simplex deeper than t2 classic?

[Liberal Snowflake]

Those of you that have both what has been you experience? Thanks everyone

 

[IowaRelic]

If depth is your only concern, then each machine with their stock coils is pretty even in their deepest disc modes. All metal- T2 by a country mile. So much more to consider in a machine though besides that depth. Both are deep.

 

[Liberal Snowflake]

If depth is your only concern, then each machine with their stock coils is pretty even in their deepest disc modes. All metal- T2 by a country mile. So much more to consider in a machine though besides that depth. Both are deep.

Thank you. I know, just probably never gonna own a 3030 so my machines average 500 in price. And yes experience and tried and true speak loudly. My t2 works. The makro just seems to good to be true.

 

[IowaRelic]

Thank you. I know, just probably never gonna own a 3030 so my machines average 500 in price. And yes experience and tried and true speak loudly. My t2 works. The makro just seems to good to be true.

The T2 and F75 are always safe money spent in this hobby in my book. The simplex seemed to good to be true to me also. So I got one. The the truth to me is that it is stout competition to a T2 with slightly less and more features, if that makes sense...it’s got the better modern stuff going for it but lacks some basic tone options that the T2 has. Which really is minimal on both machines. The simplex has all the meat to get it done for an “enjoyable hunt”. For a more specialized hunt you may grab something else. Like the T2, it’s a good purchase and I don’t feel like I need to get rid of one since I have the other.
Now this is just my opinion, but if a guy is on a budget(like me), then the Simplex and the Time Ranger Pro are the two most appealing options for me and my preference. I understand the Vanquish is in that range as well, no doubt it’s a good performer too.

 

[Liberal Snowflake]

The time ranger pro? I will have to look at that one. You know my biggest problem is not depth. I worry about it too much. I just dont make time to detect anymore. Been watching that British show called detectorists. Reminds me of real life. Damm I'm getting old.

 

[IowaRelic]

The time ranger pro? I will have to look at that one. You know my biggest problem is not depth. I worry about it too much. I just dont make time to detect anymore. Been watching that British show called detectorists. Reminds me of real life. Damm I'm getting old.

Time ranger pro definitely leaning towards the gold/relic side of things.

 

[7centsworth]

Thank you. I know, just probably never gonna own a 3030 so my machines average 500 in price. And yes experience and tried and true speak loudly. My t2 works. The makro just seems to good to be true.

I have hunted with Nate several times with his simplex and it does really well. He found a shield and v n nickel on his first hunt with me. We compared several signals with my nox 800 Andy it was hitting some pretty deep targets. The simplex is impressive.

 

[Monte]

My observations regarding the few detectors mentioned:

1st: My main-use Simplex + w/5X9½ DD provides me very decent in-the-field performance and functional depth. I get as-good or better depth with the 5X9½ DD or stock 11" DD than the T2 or T2 Classic with its 11" BiAxial coil.

2nd: The T2+, which also features the 'bP' or Boost Process 'mode' can get a little better depth than my Simplex + in wide-open / sparse-target environments when it can be worked with a slower and more methodical sweep speed. Note that I said "a little better".

3rd: As for 'other detector considerations', I am also a fan of decent-performing mid-priced detectors. Someone mentioned the Time Ranger Pro. I'd pass. One of the better and more useful and 'affordable' detectors today is the Fisher F5. Very adjustable, on-the-fly, and what is nice is the Ground Balance is functional in the motion-based Discriminate mode whereas a lot of other detectors, such as the T2 series and such, have a fixed or controlled GB for the Disc. mode. The have Fast Grab and manual GB, but that's only a function of the All Metal and Pinpoint modes, since the Disc. mode is fixed. The Fisher F5 is one of the better, controllable, budget-priced detectors in the industry today, and still being manufactured, too.

Monte

 

[Liberal Snowflake]

My observations regarding the few detectors mentioned:

1st: My main-use Simplex + w/5X9½ DD provides me very decent in-the-field performance and functional depth. I get as-good or better depth with the 5X9½ DD or stock 11" DD than the T2 or T2 Classic with its 11" BiAxial coil.

2nd: The T2+, which also features the 'bP' or Boost Process 'mode' can get a little better depth than my Simplex + in wide-open / sparse-target environments when it can be worked with a slower and more methodical sweep speed. Note that I said "a little better".

3rd: As for 'other detector considerations', I am also a fan of decent-performing mid-priced detectors. Someone mentioned the Time Ranger Pro. I'd pass. One of the better and more useful and 'affordable' detectors today is the Fisher F5. Very adjustable, on-the-fly, and what is nice is the Ground Balance is functional in the motion-based Discriminate mode whereas a lot of other detectors, such as the T2 series and such, have a fixed or controlled GB for the Disc. mode. The have Fast Grab and manual GB, but that's only a function of the All Metal and Pinpoint modes, since the Disc. mode is fixed. The Fisher F5 is one of the better, controllable, budget-priced detectors in the industry today, and still being manufactured, too.

Monte

Wow, that kinda blows the t2 out of water for me. I thought the ground balance effected the discriminate modes. What about the simplex?

 

[IowaRelic]

My observations regarding the few detectors mentioned:

1st: My main-use Simplex + w/5X9½ DD provides me very decent in-the-field performance and functional depth. I get as-good or better depth with the 5X9½ DD or stock 11" DD than the T2 or T2 Classic with its 11" BiAxial coil.

2nd: The T2+, which also features the 'bP' or Boost Process 'mode' can get a little better depth than my Simplex + in wide-open / sparse-target environments when it can be worked with a slower and more methodical sweep speed. Note that I said "a little better".

3rd: As for 'other detector considerations', I am also a fan of decent-performing mid-priced detectors. Someone mentioned the Time Ranger Pro. I'd pass. One of the better and more useful and 'affordable' detectors today is the Fisher F5. Very adjustable, on-the-fly, and what is nice is the Ground Balance is functional in the motion-based Discriminate mode whereas a lot of other detectors, such as the T2 series and such, have a fixed or controlled GB for the Disc. mode. The have Fast Grab and manual GB, but that's only a function of the All Metal and Pinpoint modes, since the Disc. mode is fixed. The Fisher F5 is one of the better, controllable, budget-priced detectors in the industry today, and still being manufactured, too.

Monte

I have to disagree with point number 1. The simplex using the sp24 will not hit any of the targets in my test garden at any setting. The shallowest being a 8” silver dime. The t2 can hit 3 of the 5 targets- the 8” silver dime, a 9” wheat penny and a 9” eagle coat button, using any of the modes besides FA and DP and stock coil. I have not tested the 10x5DD as I don’t use it much anymore. I prefer the 5” round which will whisper on the 8” and 9” targets using 1+, 2+, and BP. Regarding Field Mode and BP, yes the simplex is very close in depth to BP. What’s the differences that I notice? The first is stability- on a 12” mini ball the simplex must be maxed out in Field Mode. If there’s any EMI it will be a tough target. The t2 hasn’t had an 11” round DD available until now. The Superfly. With its stock coil the T2 will hit that same 12” mini ball at 60 sensitivity. Leaving it stable with a ton of room to increase as needed. I hunt the T2 ALOT, while the Simplex is a surprising machine it’s not a T2 in a few key ways. I will video the Superfly vs the Simplex in the test garden. You will see the T2 is a deeper seeker with same size coils.
I’m also the one that mentioned the time ranger pro. I do agree the F5 is a good deal and a good machine. The omega 8500 is right down there in price too. Why did I say TRP? Because it handles dense iron much better from my experience than any of the low frequency machines. The omegas with tiny 4 and 5” coils cannot separate from iron the way a 19khz will, even with a stock or 10x5DD. So I will refine my reasoning. If you are a relic/old site hunter- Time Ranger Pro will frustrate less in the square nails. If you hunt aluminum then the F5 or the Omega is better given the feature sets. JMO from experience. Thanks.

 

[Monte]

I have to disagree with point number 1. The simplex using the sp24 will not hit any of the targets in my test garden at any setting. The shallowest being a 8” silver dime. The t2 can hit 3 of the 5 targets- the 8” silver dime, a 9” wheat penny and a 9” eagle coat button, using any of the modes besides FA and DP and stock coil. I have not tested the 10x5DD as I don’t use it much anymore. I prefer the 5” round which will whisper on the 8” and 9” targets using 1+, 2+, and BP. Regarding Field Mode and BP, yes the simplex is very close in depth to BP. What’s the differences that I notice? The first is stability- on a 12” mini ball the simplex must be maxed out in Field Mode. If there’s any EMI it will be a tough target. The t2 hasn’t had an 11” round DD available until now. The Superfly. With its stock coil the T2 will hit that same 12” mini ball at 60 sensitivity. Leaving it stable with a ton of room to increase as needed. I hunt the T2 ALOT, while the Simplex is a surprising machine it’s not a T2 in a few key ways. I will video the Superfly vs the Simplex in the test garden. You will see the T2 is a deeper seeker with same size coils.
I’m also the one that mentioned the time ranger pro. I do agree the F5 is a good deal and a good machine. The omega 8500 is right down there in price too. Why did I say TRP? Because it handles dense iron much better from my experience than any of the low frequency machines. The omegas with tiny 4 and 5” coils cannot separate from iron the way a 19khz will, even with a stock or 10x5DD. So I will refine my reasoning. If you are a relic/old site hunter- Time Ranger Pro will frustrate less in the square nails. If you hunt aluminum then the F5 or the Omega is better given the feature sets. JMO from experience. Thanks.

Iowa Relic, I sort of agree wit lot of why you said. But to clarify, I have made some significant changes i my Regular-Use Detector Team, and for me and most of my Simplex + uses. The 5X9½ DD works the best, gives very satisfying depth-of-detection, but is also mainly used in trashier places where trying to achieve 'depth' isn't a factor. In 'Field' or in 'Beach' modes, where I do work more open areas with '0' Disc. segments in either mode, I'm well pleased with the Simplex +. 'Field' can get a little better depth, but there are times I prefer the NON-VCO 'Beach' mode to the 'Field' mode.

Correct, the Omega series, and several other model offerings, to not provide very good response-and-recover when trying to take on Iron Nails or other ferrous debris. They are very good Coin & Jewelry Hunting devices, but not great for get-serious Relic Hunting. The F5, at the lower 7.8 kHz, isn't the best for handling Iron , either. However, the F5's adjustable versatility makes it quite a useful general=purpose detecting tool. Once wintry weather vanishes, in maybe 4-6 weeks, I'll be out doing more comparisons as I continue to thin-out quite a few detectors I use. I'll-likely sell one of my two Vanquish 540 Pro Packs, along with maybe 5-8 other brand-new models. Naturally, site-selection is the key to success these days and I'm making use of cabin-fever time to locate a few places to hunt or get permission, then make use of the main models and coils that have been working well before the cold arrived and snow fell. Oh, I'll also add that most of the locations I hunt where I encounter older bullets and older coins and trade-token, very seldom are they deeper than 6'-7".

Monte

 

[IowaRelic]

Iowa Relic, I sort of agree wit lot of why you said. But to clarify, I have made some significant changes i my Regular-Use Detector Team, and for me and most of my Simplex + uses. The 5X9½ DD works the best, gives very satisfying depth-of-detection, but is also mainly used in trashier places where trying to achieve 'depth' isn't a factor. In 'Field' or in 'Beach' modes, where I do work more open areas with '0' Disc. segments in either mode, I'm well pleased with the Simplex +. 'Field' can get a little better depth, but there are times I prefer the NON-VCO 'Beach' mode to the 'Field' mode.

Correct, the Omega series, and several other model offerings, to not provide very good response-and-recover when trying to take on Iron Nails or other ferrous debris. They are very good Coin & Jewelry Hunting devices, but not great for get-serious Relic Hunting. The F5, at the lower 7.8 kHz, isn't the best for handling Iron , either. However, the F5's adjustable versatility makes it quite a useful general=purpose detecting tool. Once wintry weather vanishes, in maybe 4-6 weeks, I'll be out doing more comparisons as I continue to thin-out quite a few detectors I use. I'll-likely sell one of my two Vanquish 540 Pro Packs, along with maybe 5-8 other brand-new models. Naturally, site-selection is the key to success these days and I'm making use of cabin-fever time to locate a few places to hunt or get permission, then make use of the main models and coils that have been working well before the cold arrived and snow fell. Oh, I'll also add that most of the locations I hunt where I encounter older bullets and older coins and trade-token, very seldom are they deeper than 6'-7".

Monte

that cracked me up! Hey, it’s all good, right!?