A
Anonymous
Guest
n/t
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.
clondike clad
Member
The XL PRO use SMD(surface mounted electronics)very low noise and use less power. the XL PRO will go a little deeper because of the low noise parts.
But the 6000 DI PRO is as close to a XL PRO as you can get.
But the 6000 DI PRO is as close to a XL PRO as you can get.
Wayfarer
Member
I was just about to ask the same thing, having just upgraded from a 6000/Di Pro SL (circa 1992) to an XL Pro myself. The reason for the upgrade is that I loved my old Di so much I wanted a new one that was lighter and could share the batteries with my XLT. After using the XL Pro for the last few days, I don't know why I ever bothered to go from the Di to the XLT (but that's a topic for a different post). The Di and the XL seem to operate identically as far as I can tell. Yes, I'd heard that the XL has a totally redesigned board using surface mount components, suposedly making it quieter, but honestly I can't tell the difference. Since there was a near total redesign, evidently, I'm surprised there isn't a perceptible difference in operation. They both operate just wonderfully. The XL Pro is in my mind the ideal detector for the coinshooting I do, but mainly just because it combines the wonderful oeration of the Di with the modern ergonomics and batteries of the XLT/DFX/etc.. Now the question is what to do with my old SL; sell it or keep it as a backup to my backup (my XLT has now been relegated to backup status to my XL Pro). ...gotta say, I just love these analog machines.
I upgraded to the XL Pro also but I still kept my old Pro SL. It found alot of relics and silver coins ( 2 gold coins )thru the years for me and still works like a champ. I really don't need it for backup as I have other machines but I just don't have the heart to send the ole gal out to pasture.
Wayfarer
Member
I agree with your sentiments exactly. For what I can get for it if I sell it compared to how great it has been for me, I just can't bear to sell it.
Also, I realized that there is one distinct difference between the two units. The SL has a volume control that adjusts maximum target volume, the XL Pro does not. Instead it has its target volume fixed at max and you have to use sound-adjustable headphones to adjust the volume. Since I frequently hunt without headphones, that is a minor complaint I have about the XL. So that settles it...I'm keeping the SL!
I was out again with both my XL and my old XLT going over my backyard test-bed. Using the exact same loop, the XL Pro performs noticeably better than the XLT, even with a "hot" program programmed into the XLT. The main difference is on deep targets; the XL pro has better trash seperation and audio response. One of these days I'll do a more comprehensive comparison and postr the results.
Also, I realized that there is one distinct difference between the two units. The SL has a volume control that adjusts maximum target volume, the XL Pro does not. Instead it has its target volume fixed at max and you have to use sound-adjustable headphones to adjust the volume. Since I frequently hunt without headphones, that is a minor complaint I have about the XL. So that settles it...I'm keeping the SL!
I was out again with both my XL and my old XLT going over my backyard test-bed. Using the exact same loop, the XL Pro performs noticeably better than the XLT, even with a "hot" program programmed into the XLT. The main difference is on deep targets; the XL pro has better trash seperation and audio response. One of these days I'll do a more comprehensive comparison and postr the results.
Wayfarer
Member
Thanks, Crazyman. I know I'll be spending time on this forum especially now that I "upgraded" to an XL Pro from my old XLT. It's great that there are enough enthusiasts out there to support an analog forum. Despite the gee-whiz features like notch discrimination, signagraph, audio ID, etc., of the newer computerized detectors, the old top-of-the-line analog units like the 6000/Di Pro SL and XL Pro have every bit as good actual performance, if not even a little better without the computer interjecting itself constantly to tell you what "it" thinks is a good signal ;-).