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.

Today's in-the-field comparisons between the Equinox and CTX...

sgoss66

Well-known member
A real-world hunting report, from earlier today, at a local public park.

I was hunting with my CTX and 17" coil; sensitivity manual 25, ferrous discrimination only, 50 tones, Ferrous-coin separation, deep off, fast off. My buddy was hunting his Equinox, Park 1, 23 sensitivity, recovery 5, iron bias 2, 50 tones, no disc.

I was moving along slowly, and "hunting deep," and I hit a soft, repeatable high-tone that I figured was a coin -- around 12-39 to 12-41, so I figured wheat cent. Depth meter showed about 9"-10". I dug, and it was indeed an 8" to 8 1/2" deep 1920 wheat cent. I filled the hole, and started swinging again.

A foot away, I hit a very similar signal, but this one just a bit less repeatable. There were a couple of angles where it was hard to get an audio signal on, maybe one out of every 3 or 4 passes I'd get a tone; most angles though, it was fairly repeatable, giving a good, soft high tone on 3 out every 4 sweeps. I could tell this one was nearer the depth limits of the CTX (at least in my dirt, for my skill level), and the depth meter was showing 10" to 11". Again, 12-39, 12-40 type reading. So, pretty sure I had another deep coin, as part of a "pocket spill," this time I called my buddy over to give a listen with his Equinox. He got a soft, entirely repeatable high tone as he rotated and "Minelab wiggled" the target, average ID readings in the mid 20s, right around 25. He guessed copper/wheat cent. So, I handed him the CTX to listen (he knew how to interpret the CTX, as his "other machine" that he's used for nearly 10 years is an E-Trac), and he felt the CTX signal was similar to, or maybe not quite as good as, the Equinox. So, next, I listened to the target on the Equinox, and concurred. The signal was indeed a bit more consistent/repeatable on the Equinox as I worked the target. I dug it, and it was a 9" deep 1928 wheat cent. So, I filled the hole, and started sweeping again.

Less than a foot away, I got a repeatable-from-all-directions but inconsistent-sounding signal. I would NOT have dug this signal normally, as it would not have caught my attention if I were just "moving along, hunting normally." It was all over the place, audio-wise, ID numbers teens to mid 20s, more 20s than teens. BUT -- being less than a foot away from the two wheats I just dug, I was listening carefully for ANY repeatable tone, to see if there were any more coins -- and so I gave this one way more attention than I normally would have. That plus the fact that it was showing 8" to 10" on the depth meter, had me interested. Again, moving along hunting "regularly," and not scrutinizing every sound because of working a "pocket spill," the predominantly high teens and 20s ID numbers, and audio "all over the place," would NOT have caught my attention enough in this trashy park for me to stop to investigate. One final reason I was interested, was that I knew this is how a fringe-deep nickel behaves in my test garden. Nowhere near nickel ID, generally upper teens and 20s. So, I called my buddy back over with his Equinox. I was almost sure he was going to get a very solid-reading, 12-13 IDing target, as I was almost sure it was going to be a deep nickel at this point, and I knew that lots of 12s, and a few 13s, is generally how my Equinox behaves on deep nickels. And that's exactly what he got. A solid, repeatable-from-all-directions 12-13 signal, with an occasional blip of 11, or 14. Mostly 12's. I let him listen on the CTX, and he said "wow, those tones are all over the place." I told him that that is why I dig few deep nickels with the CTX. He let me listen on the Equinox -- a perfectly diggable, easy-to-call nickel-type signal. So I dug it, and it was about an 8" deep Buffalo.

Finally, about 5 minutes later, about 10 feet away from the other 3 coins, I got another deep, repeatable high tone. This one showed 8" to 10" deep, with mainly upper 30s to around 40 CO numbers. I called over my buddy, and it was the same as on the first wheat he listened to -- low to mid 20s, with an occasional higher ID, soft but solid and repeatable. I popped the plug on this one, and the numbers for me were now showing a bit lower -- 12-37s in the plug. At that point, reading a bit lower "in the plug" than it did in the ground, we both guessed Indian instead of wheatie. Sure enough, about an 8" deep 1898 Indian Head penny.

My long-winded point in all of this, is to share a direct, in the field, head-to-head comparison of the Equinox to the CTX on three different, un-dug targets. This perfectly mirrors the results in my test garden, with the Equinox being just as deep, if not a tad bit more solid on each of the targets I have buried, pennies, nickels, dimes, and quarters (with the largest advantage in the Equinox's favor showing up on the nickels, but still a small advantage on all the coins). This also mirrors most of the comments on this thread. It's for real, guys. While there are still things the CTX does better (such as providing better "dig decision" information, visually, in a much more thorough way, AND allowing you to avoid more trash, more easily), the Equinox is a very, very impressive performer. Just as deep if not a tad deeper, and a better hunter in trash/iron...

[attachment 357984 5-4-18Findsrotcrop.JPG]

Steve
 
Agreed + one here Steve, I can't wait to do the real head to head 17 inch to 17 inch comparison. It might be a significant game changer, only time will tell.
Laplander
 
laplander said:
Agreed + one here Steve, I can't wait to do the real head to head 17 inch to 17 inch comparison. It might be a significant game changer, only time will tell.
Laplander

wont that be 15 inch to 17 inch comparison ?
 
Thanks for the report, glad to see others having the same results as I am.
 
Similar to my own experiences. I hunt behind myself with the CTX or in front, and the only real noticeable difference I see is I get a few more 'better' audio signals at depth with the 800. I rarely look at the numbers on the CTX, just see where it is painting the target, so I cannot confirm numbers. I am very much looking forward to getting the 6" coil. I have the CTX 17 but have only used it at the beach.
 
Great write up, Steve!
Your observations are the same as ours. The Nox gives better audio on those fringe targets. I feel the two are equal in the depth department but the Nox alerts better, especially on the lower conductors. We have not cross checked on deep silver...yet. The opportunity just has not presented itself yet. Whenever one or the other of us gets a nice sliver sounding target the other guy is no where near.

Dean
 
Steve-----That was a pretty impressive hunt report, especially considering it was a 17" coil versus a 11".------Question----How would you classify the mineralization at this hunt location---mild, medium or heavy?-----------Del
 
Excellent report Steve! I'm finding pretty much the same results contrasted to the 11" Deus with the Equinox not only hitting but also identifying the deeper coins. Beavertails will also jump around 11-14 range especially if they're folded (my favorite!)

Nickels at 8" and deeper are much easier to call with the Equinox - and this is without even attempting to pinpoint. It's good to see consistent results with this machine from the 8-10" level in good and bad ground! :thumbup:
 
Very good information Steve, thanks for taking the time to do the comparison.

Randy
 
Thanks all. I was impressed with the Equinox on those targets; I am used to how FBS behaves on those deeper coins, but hadn't seen the Equinox compared side-by-side on an in-ground (not test garden) target. I was impressed, but at the same time it just verified test garden results, and those many others have already posted. I agree, it will be very, very interesting to see the results to be had using the larger coil. If it is even an inch deeper, WOW.

Del, I'd say the ground was medium; maybe slightly on the mild side of medium. It varied -- some was classic Oklahoma red clay, which is usually more "medium-ish" as the iron oxides in that clay really give single-freq VLF machines trouble, in terms of ID beyond about 6" to 7". But in some spots, there was some sand and a bit more organic soil mixed in. The CTX was running suggested sensitivity in the mid to upper teens (and not due to EMI), if that helps any.

Jason -- yep, I'm having the same results you are...

Dean -- agreed with all you said. And, like you, I haven't had the chance to cross-check a deep silver coin in the field, yet. It just hasn't worked out right, as you said, but he and I will do this again. Most times recently when my buddy and I hunted together, we have both been hunting Equinoxes, trying to learn them. Yesterday, though, I wanted to swing the CTX at this park, and he opted for the Equinox -- and in the end it worked out well. He hadn't dug any deep coins yet with his Equinox, so he gained a lot of confidence that it WILL, and got to hear how it behaves over a deep coin. Meanwhile, I got an education as well; hearing how a "known" machine reacts to a target, and then running another, less "known" machine over the same target, is a really, really good "education." We will do this again -- and I'll report results.

Steve
 
I think that the CTX still has an advantage on deep silver with the FBS. And the target trace makes digging decisions easier. But the NOX is fast and will unmask better than the CTX. I have both the CTX and NOX 800 but both machines are fairly new to me and I have a lot to learn on both. My wife has the NOX 800 also and does very well with it. I like the tones better on the CTX but the NOX tones are pretty good.
 
Halfstep -- I pretty much agree with you. I have both, as well, and both are fairly new to me (though I am not new to FBS, as I hunted an Explorer for years, so I do feel more "comfortable" with the CTX at this point). Yes, the CTX gives a lot more information that makes dig decisions easier, and helps you avoid trash. I agree on the tones, too. I like the CTX tones better, but the Equinox tones, I agree, are pretty good as well.
 
Nice write up
 
A buddy and I hunted with the my E-TRAC and Equinox yesterday at two Homesite permissions. He had been wanting to try the Nox so I swung the E-TRAC. To summarize, after swinging the Nox almost exclusively now for 150+ hours... the E-TRAC felt like a dinosaur. Both sites were very trashy so I had the 8x6" SEF coil attached and had to do the "E-TRAC Crawl" in 2TF. To be fair, these sites were not E-TRAC sites. In the past I would have taken two detectors with me and then chosen one based on the conditions. No need to do that anymore with the Nox. Anyway, after yesterday's hunt...he's buying a Nox!

Dean
 
There are usually trade-offs with detectors, and they are there for the Nox, too. The Nox is fast and good at unmasking in high-iron trash sites and in those finds things my Etrac can't see; but for most other places, at least for hunting coins, I prefer my Etrac for its much better ID and depth info. After all, if you just wanted a beep-and-dig machine, you should save money and buy a Vaquero--it's probably better than both the Nox and the Etrac for that, and is a fraction of the price. (And, yes, I know the Vaquero is more than just a beep-and-dig machine.)
 
Very nice report. Thank you for all the details provided. Curious to see the same kind of report with the Equinox vs "other" brand mid to top of the line detectors on natural finds.
 
Thanks all!

Dean, that's an interesting report! Swinging the E-Trac and 6x8 -- while a great combination -- felt so much more difficult hunting in that irony homesite, after getting used to the Equinox! While that was obviously the type of hunting that favors the Equinox over the E-Trac, it's definitely a testimony to what the Equinox can do (as your buddy obviously agreed, enough that he's now buying one!)

Always Curious, I generally agree with you; I still prefer FBS for deep coin hunting, over the Equinox. But, while I agree that FBS gives more accurate depth, and better ID information, I think it's a "bit" of a mischaracterization to equate the Equinox to a "beep and dig" machine. Still, I get the gist of what you are saying...

Steve
 
The only thing really lacking on the EQX is accurate depth reading. One hunting method I used with the CTX was to check the depth on each target and dig every over 6 or 7 inches regardless of Fe-Co number. Can't really do that as easily or quickly with this one. I have to hunt those public spot based first on TID. The upside is that I'm digging a LOT more clad, LOL
 
ason --

LOL! I hear you, on the clad. For me, the toughest ones are those 5-6" coins. At some sites, some of those would be silver -- and when running the CTX it's accurate enough that you can, say, ignore a 4" coin but dig any that read 6". With the Equinox, that's the range I have a hard time with. To me, a 3" coin sounds too much like a 5" coin, and the depth meter at that range is not good. The one thing I can say, though, is when they get deep "enough," I can tell the difference in sound -- definitely a quieter sound, so I have been able to listen for the REAL deep coins by ear, without needing to even look at the depth meter; when I do, the depth meter is pegged at 5 bars. I'll note that for me, when the depth meter says 5 full bars, it's a deep coin; otherwise, it's not real accurate. Those mid-range-depth coins though, are the issue; not enough "modulation" in the audio, IMO, at those depths. One other thing -- if its not too trashy and you can use the pinpoint mode, pinpoint mode's VCO audio is pretty good, for depth info and sizing info.

Anyway, I'd love to see Minelab fix the accuracy of that depth meter...

Steve
 
Top