Friendly Metal Detecting Forums   Myers Depot Metal Detectors
List all sponsors

Go Back   Friendly Metal Detecting Forums > Detectors and Gear > All About Detectors

Reply
  
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 08-01-2020, 09:36 AM
Trashfinder's Avatar
Trashfinder Trashfinder is offline
Supporter
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Ardmore, OK
Posts: 1,120
Default Equinox Depth Bug

Updated my machine to new version and took it out for a hour hunt. One thing i noticed after digging 10 plus targets was the depth indicator showed everything as 3 plus bars. All were modern clad some as shallow as an inch, and nothing deeper than 2.5 inches. I found a few targets where the machine showed max bars and the targets were maybe 4 inches. I was by the end of the hunt able to somewhat tell how deep the targets were based on the strength of the pinpoint sounds.

I hope they get this resolved soon. I was very hesitant to update and now wishing i had not. On version 1.7.5, my machine was very accurate on depth and it was one of my factors on deciding to dig or not as i am really only after the very deep older coins.
Reply With Quote


  #2  
Old 08-01-2020, 10:14 AM
Stiffwrists Stiffwrists is online now
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Utah
Posts: 2,912
Default

Originally Posted by Trashfinder View post
Updated my machine to new version and took it out for a hour hunt. One thing i noticed after digging 10 plus targets was the depth indicator showed everything as 3 plus bars. All were modern clad some as shallow as an inch, and nothing deeper than 2.5 inches. I found a few targets where the machine showed max bars and the targets were maybe 4 inches. I was by the end of the hunt able to somewhat tell how deep the targets were based on the strength of the pinpoint sounds.

I hope they get this resolved soon. I was very hesitant to update and now wishing i had not. On version 1.7.5, my machine was very accurate on depth and it was one of my factors on deciding to dig or not as i am really only after the very deep older coins.
My 800 has never been very good at judging depth of targets regardless of the software version. I wish it was better after the upgrade. I have gotten better at judging depth by the signal sound volume, but it is different depending on the sensitivity I decide to run.

__________________
Equinox 800, AT MAX, ACE 350, Garrett Carrot, Lesche Excalibur Shovels
Totals Since June 2017:
Silver Coins: 247, Ag Rings/etc: 88
IH: 23, Buff/V/Shield: 40, Gold: 8

Reply With Quote


  #3  
Old 08-01-2020, 11:26 AM
DIGGER27's Avatar
DIGGER27 DIGGER27 is online now
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Alabama, by way of Detroit, Tampa Bay, Alabama and Kansas
Posts: 15,372
Default

I rarely care much about the depth bars, never been really accurate for me.
If you don't like the update you can easily go back and reload the version you like better at any time...no wishing necessary.

__________________
If attacked by a pack of clowns...go for the juggler! "
I currently use a Nox, an F70, and a Mojave...plus a retired F2 and Compadre still stand at the ready for guests.

Reply With Quote


  #4  
Old 08-01-2020, 12:08 PM
Detector's Avatar
Detector Detector is offline
Supporter
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Dodge City KS
Posts: 10,081
Default

I've always used the tone/volume to get an idea of depth.

__________________
The real treasure is in the hunt....

Reply With Quote


1 members found this post helpful.
  #5  
Old 08-01-2020, 01:02 PM
AirmetTango's Avatar
AirmetTango AirmetTango is offline
Supporter
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: NW Ohio
Posts: 2,150
Default

Originally Posted by Trashfinder View post
Updated my machine to new version and took it out for a hour hunt. One thing i noticed after digging 10 plus targets was the depth indicator showed everything as 3 plus bars. All were modern clad some as shallow as an inch, and nothing deeper than 2.5 inches. I found a few targets where the machine showed max bars and the targets were maybe 4 inches. I was by the end of the hunt able to somewhat tell how deep the targets were based on the strength of the pinpoint sounds.
I've never found any depth indicator to be particularly accurate on any of my machines, and the Equinox is no exception. That said, I've put about 6 hours on version 3 in field hunts with dozens of targets so far, and I've not noticed a difference in the accuracy (or lack thereof) between version 2 and 3.

Originally Posted by Trashfinder View post
...I was very hesitant to update and now wishing i had not....
Originally Posted by DIGGER27 View post
...If you don't like the update you can easily go back and reload the version you like better at any time...no wishing necessary.
Digger27 is absolutely right - no need to suffer updater's remorse. You can go back to any previous software version on the Equinox using the same installer program you used to upgrade.

__________________

Oldest coin: 1834 Matron Head Large Cent (Honorable Mention: 1857 Flying Eagle Cent)
Oldest silver: 1854 Seated Liberty Quarter
Oldest foreign coin: 1844 Province of Canada Half Penny

Equinox 800 w/Steveís Detector Rods Complete Shaft & Herke Cuff; Pro Pointer II
Detecting Since 4/2017 - Addicted Since 5/2017
Reply With Quote


  #6  
Old 08-01-2020, 01:43 PM
Trashfinder's Avatar
Trashfinder Trashfinder is offline
Supporter
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Ardmore, OK
Posts: 1,120
Default

After i posted i found i can go back, and i will. My version 1.7.5 was very accurate and invaluable for my sites. The old turn of the century town i have been hunting when i got 3 bars you better dig, and it was never off, targets were always 5-7 inches and when i got full depth bars it was always 10 plus inches. The way the machine works now, i would have one hell of a guessing game at the site. Switching back and will give an update as to whether the machine is as accurate as it once was.

I have always seen posts where people complained about the depth indicator so i know a lot of you do have issues with it and i do believe you, but believe me as well when i tell you mine was dead on! Will update soon.
Reply With Quote


  #7  
Old 08-01-2020, 03:00 PM
DIGGER27's Avatar
DIGGER27 DIGGER27 is online now
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Alabama, by way of Detroit, Tampa Bay, Alabama and Kansas
Posts: 15,372
Default

Originally Posted by Trashfinder View post
After i posted i found i can go back, and i will. My version 1.7.5 was very accurate and invaluable for my sites. The old turn of the century town i have been hunting when i got 3 bars you better dig, and it was never off, targets were always 5-7 inches and when i got full depth bars it was always 10 plus inches. The way the machine works now, i would have one hell of a guessing game at the site. Switching back and will give an update as to whether the machine is as accurate as it once was.

I have always seen posts where people complained about the depth indicator so i know a lot of you do have issues with it and i do believe you, but believe me as well when i tell you mine was dead on! Will update soon.
Sometimes you get a good one.
I always believed not every detector that comes out of any factory is exactly the same in every respect because even though I assume machines have a big part in some calibration processes humans are also involved so mileage can vary.
My F2 hit specific numbers on many targets consistently but others reported slight differences compared to mine including a few I saw being used in person.
Might only be one number off but there was always that slight difference.
On my F70 I was always happy that my depth bars were usually pretty accurate and the the numbers in pinpoint even more so...always.
Many others running the F70/F75 platform reported way different results so I was lucky.

You got used to the way yours worked in version one and had confidence in it so nobody will blame you for returning to it at all.

__________________
If attacked by a pack of clowns...go for the juggler! "
I currently use a Nox, an F70, and a Mojave...plus a retired F2 and Compadre still stand at the ready for guests.

Reply With Quote


  #8  
Old 08-01-2020, 05:06 PM
Trashfinder's Avatar
Trashfinder Trashfinder is offline
Supporter
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Ardmore, OK
Posts: 1,120
Default

Rolled back and went to test garden, everything is spot on again!!! For example 3.5 inch pull tab showing 2 bars again not 5! Very pleased to have my old NOX back!

Digger i agree, i have owned several different detectors all same make and model and yes some have just performed better. I had an Etrac that i still kick myself for selling, i still have one, but the one in question just for some reason was the best etrac i have ever owned and i have have probably had 6 or more. I am on my 5th or 6th CTX as well. Until a person owns several different machines of the same model, they might not understand what you were saying but i do from experience.

I am associated with the electronics field and an engineer explained it to me this way. He said electronic components are considered good if they fall into a certain range, and he showed me how this range can vary. So the combination of electronics in your machine might have better tolerances than whats in another machine, but all of it is still in tolerance and specs. I honestly cannot remember what the tolerances were but if i recall right it can be as much as 10 percent, and still be considered in tolerance.

And we can use the Fisher cz models for example ,, some can hit dimes at 11 or 12 inches and some only 8 or 9.
Reply With Quote


  #9  
Old 08-02-2020, 09:49 PM
longbow62's Avatar
longbow62 longbow62 is offline
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Jonesboro, AR
Posts: 671
Default

Originally Posted by Trashfinder View post
Rolled back and went to test garden, everything is spot on again!!! For example 3.5 inch pull tab showing 2 bars again not 5! Very pleased to have my old NOX back!

Digger i agree, i have owned several different detectors all same make and model and yes some have just performed better. I had an Etrac that i still kick myself for selling, i still have one, but the one in question just for some reason was the best etrac i have ever owned and i have have probably had 6 or more. I am on my 5th or 6th CTX as well. Until a person owns several different machines of the same model, they might not understand what you were saying but i do from experience.

I am associated with the electronics field and an engineer explained it to me this way. He said electronic components are considered good if they fall into a certain range, and he showed me how this range can vary. So the combination of electronics in your machine might have better tolerances than whats in another machine, but all of it is still in tolerance and specs. I honestly cannot remember what the tolerances were but if i recall right it can be as much as 10 percent, and still be considered in tolerance.

And we can use the Fisher cz models for example ,, some can hit dimes at 11 or 12 inches and some only 8 or 9.
I ain't no expert, but the tolerances you speak of in electronic components generally applies to analog not digital. The way your explaining it one computer might be better than the one made a week ago due to the parts used. Or one digital radio might be better than the one made a month ago because the source of parts changed.

I think component tolerance issue mainly goes back to the analog days when you like changed the brand of op amp or switched resistors or capacitors to a type where the tolerances were different. Autophiles are notorious for this type of gear affliction along with vintage electric guitar amp aficionados. This really applies to FX pedals like a vintage Tube Screamer vs. one made last year.

I can fully agree one Tesoro might be better performance wise than the next due to a components change, but I don't buy it with an Etrac or Equinox or any other that operate digitally.

__________________
Years detecting: (3) Equinox 800, Etrac, Nokta Impact, Tesoro Mojave, Garrett Carrot, Grey Ghost headphones. Oldest coins: 1851 Seated Dime, 1863 IHP, 1867 2 Cent Piece. Total silver coins found: 84, 2020 silver coins: 23

Reply With Quote


  #10  
Old 08-03-2020, 12:55 AM
Trashfinder's Avatar
Trashfinder Trashfinder is offline
Supporter
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Ardmore, OK
Posts: 1,120
Default

Originally Posted by longbow62 View post
I ain't no expert, but the tolerances you speak of in electronic components generally applies to analog not digital. The way your explaining it one computer might be better than the one made a week ago due to the parts used. Or one digital radio might be better than the one made a month ago because the source of parts changed.

I think component tolerance issue mainly goes back to the analog days when you like changed the brand of op amp or switched resistors or capacitors to a type where the tolerances were different. Autophiles are notorious for this type of gear affliction along with vintage electric guitar amp aficionados. This really applies to FX pedals like a vintage Tube Screamer vs. one made last year.

I can fully agree one Tesoro might be better performance wise than the next due to a components change, but I don't buy it with an Etrac or Equinox or any other that operate digitally.
I have owned several of the same models at the same time and for whatever reason they sometimes were not equal in performance in my test garden. I have not owned 2 nox 800's at the same time but when they first came out, i was hunting with a buddy who also had one. Very first ones released, same software version as there was only 1 at that time, i was doing substantially better than him. He asked me to set his up exactly like mine. So i did. We then stayed close together and he wanted to check my targets before i dug them. We both had ground at 0, his machine just was not picking them up as well as mine. We then both noise cancelled at the same spot thinking maybe that was it. I honestly cannot remember if his came up same as mine, but at least it was in the same spot. For whatever reason that day his just did not perform as well as mine. He ended up selling that one, and not much later bought another one. Coils? Other components? No idea, i just know for whatever reason they are not always equal digital or analog.
Reply With Quote


  #11  
Old 08-03-2020, 01:25 AM
tnsharpshooter tnsharpshooter is offline
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Middle TN
Posts: 9,476
Default

Iíll check mine tomorrow. I havenít updated yet.
Will check before and after update.
I know the last update before this latest depth meter worked better than what was in detector at initial release.

Thanks for sharing.

__________________
Minelab Equinox 800, Minelab Etrac, Xp Deus,
Pinpointers -- Garrett Propointer, White's TRX, Makro, , remote travels use Can am Defender Hd10Xt side by side

Reply With Quote


  #12  
Old 08-03-2020, 06:50 AM
randy's Avatar
randy randy is online now
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Chester County, PA
Posts: 1,100
Default

On a related note, I owned 2 Garrett propointers (the old green ones) bought at about the same time, so that I would have a backup.

One had a range of 1.75 inches on a nickel, and the other one had a range of 1 inch on the same coin. Don't know anything about electronics, but that variance on 2 of the exact same device was as clear as day.

__________________
Oldest US: 1793 chain cent; 1800 half dime | 1830 bust half | 1842 seated half | 1857 & 1876CC seated quarter | 516 silver coins in 2011!

Reply With Quote


  #13  
Old 08-03-2020, 01:16 PM
waltr waltr is offline
Elite Member
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: SE Pennsylvania USA
Posts: 1,698
Default

Originally Posted by longbow62 View post
I ain't no expert, but the tolerances you speak of in electronic components generally applies to analog not digital. The way your explaining it one computer might be better than the one made a week ago due to the parts used. Or one digital radio might be better than the one made a month ago because the source of parts changed.

I think component tolerance issue mainly goes back to the analog days when you like changed the brand of op amp or switched resistors or capacitors to a type where the tolerances were different. Autophiles are notorious for this type of gear affliction along with vintage electric guitar amp aficionados. This really applies to FX pedals like a vintage Tube Screamer vs. one made last year.

I can fully agree one Tesoro might be better performance wise than the next due to a components change, but I don't buy it with an Etrac or Equinox or any other that operate digitally.
The NOX still has a good bit of Analog circuits.
For one there is a complex Pre-amp build into the Coil. Then there are the TX Current Sensing and RX amps in the main board.
Look through this for more of those internal details:
https://md-hunter.com/opening-the-mi...ne/#more-11657
https://md-hunter.com/minelab-equino...lf-of-machine/

Schematic of coil circuit:
Attached Images
 
Reply With Quote


  #14  
Old 08-03-2020, 01:50 PM
Martin_V3i's Avatar
Martin_V3i Martin_V3i is offline
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: North DFW, TX
Posts: 3,671
Default

Originally Posted by waltr View post
The NOX still has a good bit of Analog circuits.
For one there is a complex Pre-amp build into the Coil. Then there are the TX Current Sensing and RX amps in the main board.
Look through this for more of those internal details:
https://md-hunter.com/opening-the-mi...ne/#more-11657
https://md-hunter.com/minelab-equino...lf-of-machine/

Schematic of coil circuit:
"Then there are the TX Current Sensing and RX amps in the main board."

Coming from a 25yr career in electronics before retiring, those two features are very impacting to tolerance limits. Everything integrates.
Reply With Quote


  #15  
Old 08-04-2020, 10:26 AM
davedude davedude is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Location: Garland, Texas
Posts: 260
Default

Originally Posted by Trashfinder View post
Updated my machine to new version and took it out for a hour hunt. One thing i noticed after digging 10 plus targets was the depth indicator showed everything as 3 plus bars. All were modern clad some as shallow as an inch, and nothing deeper than 2.5 inches. I found a few targets where the machine showed max bars and the targets were maybe 4 inches. I was by the end of the hunt able to somewhat tell how deep the targets were based on the strength of the pinpoint sounds.

I hope they get this resolved soon. I was very hesitant to update and now wishing i had not. On version 1.7.5, my machine was very accurate on depth and it was one of my factors on deciding to dig or not as i am really only after the very deep older coins.
I have noticed this also. But I can't remember now if 1.75 was good at depth indication. I know 2.0 was not and 3.0 looks worse. On my 3.0 test hunt I was getting max bars on some that were no where near that depth. My ATPRO works more reliably as far as depth indication. I might try the rollback to 1.75.

__________________
NOX 800, AT PRO, GTI 2500

Reply With Quote


  #16  
Old 08-04-2020, 11:09 AM
MuddyMo MuddyMo is offline
Supporter
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: NW Missouri unfortunately
Posts: 1,002
Default

Originally Posted by longbow62 View post
,............ applies to analog not digital. .........
I think component tolerance issue mainly goes back to the analog days.......

I can fully agree one Tesoro might be better performance wise than the next due to a components change, but I don't buy it with an Etrac or Equinox or any other that operate digitally.
I asked Rusty at Tesoro about the this a few years ago. He said it was more of an issue in the past as compared with now.
I've owned 5 or 6 all digital X-terras and testing them they always had identical performance. I'm not saying other people are wrong or their detectors weren't different.
Reply With Quote


  #17  
Old 08-04-2020, 02:23 PM
longbow62's Avatar
longbow62 longbow62 is offline
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Jonesboro, AR
Posts: 671
Default

My comment was a general statement about the differences in vintage analog builds and digital builds of today. I have never worked in the electronics field. I was just comparing say vintage analog devices where there were bins of parts that might be sourced from different companies year to year based on availability and price.

The difference between a worker at a their station soldering parts to a pre-printed circuit board versus a machine soldered part then tested and inspected under a microscope by quality control techs . Also it's my understanding that digital circuits have a working range that is more narrow tolerance wise than analog circuits. I have always assumed the historical progression from tubes to transistors to integrated circuits was also a progression in reliability and lesser performance variation device to device of the same model.

Again I just logically thought that these days it was a given performance differences detector to detector of the same model was not an issue outside of a obviously defective unit.

__________________
Years detecting: (3) Equinox 800, Etrac, Nokta Impact, Tesoro Mojave, Garrett Carrot, Grey Ghost headphones. Oldest coins: 1851 Seated Dime, 1863 IHP, 1867 2 Cent Piece. Total silver coins found: 84, 2020 silver coins: 23

Reply With Quote


  #18  
Old 08-04-2020, 03:23 PM
waltr waltr is offline
Elite Member
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: SE Pennsylvania USA
Posts: 1,698
Default

longbow62,
Yes, all of what you just stated is true and variance should be much less. But, if there is enough sensitive analog circuits, high gains etc, then there can be a good bit of variance among units. I work designing Instruments for electro-chemistry and am always surprised when production starts having problems testing units to specs. Many times it is due to a new batch of analog parts that are not working the same as an earlier batch or there is a change in the PCB assembly process.

Another variable is the coil.

I wonder what the result would have been if Trashfinder and his buddy swapped coils between their Nox's.
Reply With Quote


  #19  
Old 08-04-2020, 04:31 PM
TNTGross's Avatar
TNTGross TNTGross is offline
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Jacksonville, Fl
Posts: 582
Default

All the analog/digital stuff aside, the new 3.0 version of the Nox is way off on depth. I am getting Max bars on coin targets that may be 5 inches deep. I also did a test silver dime at 8 inches and it did not read it with any Freq or Multi Freq. Stock settings bumped up to 25 power. Park 1 and 2. Not even a whisper. Kind of ticking me off.
Reply With Quote


  #20  
Old 08-04-2020, 05:46 PM
Donut Donut is offline
Full Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Coloma, SW Michigan, Equinox 800
Posts: 191
Default

I would not go back.
IMO Itís not an all the time frequency.
I run my detector in multi and when I get a high signal I switch to 4khz if I get a VDI I dig.
4 khz is a stand alone frequency.
It is not in multi or in gold mode.
The Equinox is more sensitive than other detectors and that is why it is finding more stuff.
Size and angle and minerals have an effect on depth and the processor is doing its best.
We just have to live with that.
Doug

__________________
Coloma, SW Michigan
Equinox 800

Reply With Quote


Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:01 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.