• Forum server maintanace Friday night.(around 7PM Centeral time)
    Website will be off line for a short while.

    You may need to log out, log back in after we're back online.

comparing detectors

maxxkatt

Forum Supporter
Joined
Sep 20, 2015
Messages
3,485
Location
North Atlanta, GA
Comparing detectors observations:

Air test are the first thing someone often does (and of course post a youtube video of the test) when they get a new detector. But we hunt in the ground not the air, so these air test prove nothing.

going over old so called pounded sites is fun and can reveal new targets but not very accurate as a test because of too many variables that are different in the two searches...
a) ground conditions change with moisture content
b) hunter can use different settings on each hunt
c) unless both hunts were carefully criss/crossed previous targets could be missed by inches on the first hunt and square under the coil on second hunt.
d) time spent on each hunt can vary

So any claims that Brand A and Model A is better than Brand B and model B is misleading on searching a previously pounded site with a different detector.

The best test in my opinion is two hunters with two different models hunting the same ground and both swing over a target before it is dug and see which detectorist calls the right signal. Calabash proved this on a recent plantation hunt and his buddy swung over a old large silver 50 cent coin and called it junk and Calabash swung over it and called it right and dug it. (even this is a human variable because each detectorist has different abilities.) The best test would be the same detectorist using different models and calling a dig or no dig in each machine based on his knowledge.

Guess what we all miss good targets from time to time. Very good hunters have hundreds of hours on their detector and develop a sub-conscious level of listening to tones and making the best judgement on whether to did a target or not. Even those guys don't often bat over .500, but still do better than the rest of us who have fewer hours on our detectors.

The purpose of this post was NOT to be critical of tests comparing different detectors but rather to point out the fact that they are interesting to follow and do provide some anecdotal information. Just keep in mind that these test have their flaws and when stating model A detector is better or worse than model B detector based on these test can be incorrect.

For the record, Calabash Digger does the best comparisons of model A detector vs Model B detector.
 
Last edited:
how dare you!

Lol, I've said the same thing for years, essentially their is no constant in any of the comparisons. I really don't give credence to many unless they are over a seasoned test garden.

Also I've got blasted for showing some skepticism on the nail board test. While I do believe it has some credence, put those targets 6-8" deep and add some halo, and things will change dramatically.
 
Air tests teach you how to operate the controls and show the detector works. That is about all they are good for.


Testing a detector on a target vs this piece of trash vs the position of that trash vs the size of the target vs the size of the trash vs the mineralization of the dirt all turns to !!!! after a while.

Some times you just have to hunt with the darn thing.


Save the BS.
 
Comparing detectors observations:

Air test are the first thing someone often does (and of course post a youtube video of the test) when they get a new detector. But we hunt in the ground not the air, so these air test prove nothing.

going over old so called pounded sites is fun and can reveal new targets but not very accurate as a test because of too many variables that are different in the two searches...
a) ground conditions change with moisture content
b) hunter can use different settings on each hunt
c) unless both hunts were carefully criss/crossed previous targets could be missed by inches on the first hunt and square under the coil on second hunt.
d) time spent on each hunt can vary

So any claims that Brand A and Model A is better than Brand B and model B is misleading on searching a previously pounded site with a different detector.

The best test in my opinion is two hunters with two different models hunting the same ground and both swing over a target before it is dug and see which detectorist calls the right signal. Calabash proved this on a recent plantation hunt and his buddy swung over a old large silver 50 cent coin and called it junk and Calabash swung over it and called it right and dug it. (even this is a human variable because each detectorist has different abilities.) The best test would be the same detectorist using different models and calling a dig or no dig in each machine based on his knowledge.

Guess what we all miss good targets from time to time. Very good hunters have hundreds of hours on their detector and develop a sub-conscious level of listening to tones and making the best judgement on whether to did a target or not. Even those guys don't often bat over .500, but still do better than the rest of us who have fewer hours on our detectors.

The purpose of this post was NOT to be critical of tests comparing different detectors but rather to point out the fact that they are interesting to follow and do provide some anecdotal information. Just keep in mind that these test have their flaws and when stating model A detector is better or worse than model B detector based on these test can be incorrect.

For the record, Calabash Digger does the best comparisons of model A detector vs Model B detector.


I 100percent agree with you on your observations about detectors with the variables involved. There are even more variables that will affect detector finds, performance and the overall outcome of a hunt than what you mentioned. Its definitely not a controlled scientific environment.

As to calabash....I like him. Sadly I see him take alot of flack for his genuine honest efforts in portraying his understanding and attempting to share his knowledge of detector capabilities. Not only do I admire his enthusiasm....and the guy is downright entertaining. I used to do YouTube videos and know how much is involved in the making of them.

That being said his tests and conclusions are often skewed in my opinion. While I generally agree that multi frequency detectors are king he has not tested all of them. There are several other tested long in use very good multi frequency machines on the market that are very good as well and quite a few single frequency units that often fly under the radar and under rated.

The nox and deus are both amazing machines. I have owned and used both. Are they the best? For some people yes. Depends on what you are looking for. Many factors determine that outcome.....too many variables enter in just the same as if you rehunt a field with a different detector.

While I enjoy watching calabash and love how he delves into and shows you how to tweak settings. I think bill s (dirtfishing) on YouTube does a better job on comparison. He takes 2 units in the field and compares them on undug targets then digs to show what it is.

Thx, dave
 
Everyone wants to believe the detector they like and use is the very best one. I haven't made videos but i have tested almost every thing made and they are not equal. I have seen these posts before and there is merit to what was said, but I like Calabash have stated if it won't do it testing it won't do it in the wild either. Best thing any one can do is set up tests and find out what your detector can do in each circumstance and the best settings for where you plan to hunt. For instance i hunt a lot of empty lots and the iron is off the charts when buildings are torn down and non ferrous targets are very abundant as well like brass and copper etc. Certain machines i own are just useless and futile to hunt these places with.

Start with 2d tests where targets are in the same plane , then later move to 3d tests . When you get to 3d tests you will really start to understand the huge differences in the machines out there and what you are missing.

Notice i am not advocating any machine here as i get nothing for doing so . But i can tell you beyond a shadow of a doubt , that there are a few machines that stand high above most in their ability to unmask targets and still retain excellent depth.

But i will throw a bone, what does Calabash hunt with most of the time? There is a good reason for that.
 
Thanks guys for the comments. I will never really be doing comparison videos from the field. Heres WHY . I hunt with a few seasoned hunters and NORMALLY we are on very old sites . I just don't have time to run around with 2 detectors comparing signals WHILE they are sucking up the good targets at a high rate of speed.:no:

As for testing we do compare signals sometimes in the field .As you can see in the Deus and Nox video I did.

My detectors seem to pretty much perform in the field like they do in the test I do around my house.

I get that variables change how a machine performs . BUT
I don't believe a machine that does bad on a iron test nail board or 3D or depth test in my garden is gonna magically do better in the field.

That's like saying that a car that can do a 100 on the road is gonna do a 180 if you put it on a race track..;);)

BTW what other multi freq machine you speaking of?

Filming has become part of the hobby for me and it takes a lot of time to do so but I really enjoy it. As for machines im always evolving and learning. I don't think any of us have arrived yet.


Thanks again for the comments . Im getting amped up about detecting again as September is not to far away.
 
The only thing I would agree with is there are too many variables to give 100% accurate assessment, but the rest is lack of experience. IF you learn how to properly operate a detector you can achieve like results. Maybe not actually the same, but close enough to make another results valid.

Air tests may not have any value to you, but you seem to give yourself the Right to speak for all. You're wrong, at least in my case. Air tests can be very valuable, again, if you know how to use them and for what purpose.

Now this one is so so wrong. Going over old sites to see if another detector can pull coins missed by the others you have tried are very valuable. In fact, I'd say a majority of experienced detectorist use this test when grading/evaluating a detector

No doubt we all miss good targets when searching, but that doesn't mean brand A is just as good as brand B because of it by any means. There are plenty of videos to prove this.

You just sound like you need more time in the field and to have used a few more different detectors.
 
No doubt we all miss good targets when searching, but that doesn't mean brand A is just as good as brand B because of it by any means. There are plenty of videos to prove this.

You just sound like you need more time in the field and to have used a few more different detectors.

Here is why i have challenges with this. Even if your swing has a 20 degree varience on your angle of attack, that could likely mean There Are 18 different angles you could hit it from. If your in a clean area, the angle means nothing on a flat coin, but add trash or coin on edge and the angle means everything. I believe most the easy targets are gone leaving us with hunting in trash. Secondly the ground condition can change pretty dramaticly with moisture content from hunt to hunt. No way to guarantee you are hitting the exact same spot, the same angle with the same moisture content. Now some are speculating that moon phase has something to do with it much like the moon phase affects tidal conditions.

While I agree wild targets are best. Hitting it with two detectors prior to digging is about the most ideal test.
 
If two detectors are used in a test garden. One will hit a 12 inch silver dime and the other will not hit a 9 inch dime . Which detector is deeper? If a machine cant see a dime laying beside a nail and the other detector can and also the other the detector can see the SILVER DIME below the nails and the other cant.

Which one is more LIKELY to unmask in the field better?

Its not philosophical debate but more of a common sense issue for me.

What so called variables would make the other machine unmask in the field better than the others.

We hunt iron and test machines and I have never seen those variables that can make a machine that test poorly become a KILLER in the field. Just the opposite if its a dog on test its one in the field.
 
I’ve used a ton of machines in the field,don’t test much.I will say this,I’ve found silver and occasionally gold with them all.My biggest class ring was found with a ace 350,,and my second biggest gold was found with a F75..So,location and getting your coil over it is the biggest problem.
I hear a lot that it can’t find what it Cant see.If you assume every coin or ring is above or beside a nail then I guess your right.
They’re all good machines,and imo options is what it boils down to.Want a Backlight,notch ,smooth sounds or harsh sounds,,there’s a machine out there for everyone and better is only in perspective of the person using it.Like I said,I have had everything from the Etrac to the ace 250and in between ,,and have made silver ,gold and relic finds with them all.
 
Comparing detectors observations:

Air test are the first thing someone often does (and of course post a youtube video of the test) when they get a new detector. But we hunt in the ground not the air, so these air test prove nothing.

This is incorrect. Air tests can prove quite a bit. For example, if I have 2 equinox's and one is air testing a dime at 5 inches and the other on the same settings is doing it at 10, there is an issue with one of the machines. How can you say that proves nothing? I just don't get the logic here. Go look up Eric Foster and see his thoughts on air tests...

In addition to 'proving' something, they are useful because they also tell you what your machine sounds like to various metals, how your machine can react to those metals using various settings, etc.

The best test in my opinion is two hunters with two different models hunting the same ground and both swing over a target before it is dug and see which detectorist calls the right signal.

This may or may not be a good test. Is it a recent drop? Something buried long enough to produce a halo effect? Do both detectorists really know their machines? Are both machines made for that soil?

If two detectors are used in a test garden. One will hit a 12 inch silver dime and the other will not hit a 9 inch dime . Which detector is deeper? If a machine cant see a dime laying beside a nail and the other detector can and also the other the detector can see the SILVER DIME below the nails and the other cant.

Which one is more LIKELY to unmask in the field better?

Its not philosophical debate but more of a common sense issue for me.

What so called variables would make the other machine unmask in the field better than the others.

We hunt iron and test machines and I have never seen those variables that can make a machine that test poorly become a KILLER in the field. Just the opposite if its a dog on test its one in the field.

I would agree with all of this.
 
I totally disagree with the halo affect theory,and it’s not my reason why,it’s scientific..The eddy current penetrates the target,and reports back to the machine .Depending on what type of metal it is makes the difference how much the eddy current can penetrate the target before it reports back.Thats how the machine decifers that report,and how you get a low tone of high tone.The eddy current cannot penetrate a (halo) ,it’s physically impossible.So,I know old timers and self proclaimed elite book writers on this hobbie have been talking about the halo affect for years,but common sense from scientific evidence on how these machines work and the eddy current tell me it’s impossible.Like I said,it’s not my theory,certified electrical engineers state this.
 
I totally disagree with the halo affect theory,and it’s not my reason why,it’s scientific..The eddy current penetrates the target,and reports back to the machine .Depending on what type of metal it is makes the difference how much the eddy current can penetrate the target before it reports back.Thats how the machine decifers that report,and how you get a low tone of high tone.The eddy current cannot penetrate a (halo) ,it’s physically impossible.So,I know old timers and self proclaimed elite book writers on this hobbie have been talking about the halo affect for years,but common sense from scientific evidence on how these machines work and the eddy current tell me it’s impossible.Like I said,it’s not my theory,certified electrical engineers state this.

The halo effect is two things: 1) when the ground around the object is more compact and condensed it allows one to easier to detect the target (think of a conductor) and 2) The item can rust around the object which can cause a greater field of detection and it to actually gain weight (rusting causes an increase in mass).
 
Comparing detectors is not easy to get the true blue assessment.
Lots of variables need to be used in comparing.

With enough scenarios a trend will usually develop.

There likely will always be exceptions.
I don’t rate detector models on exception though.

Two dimensional, three dimensional, using iron and nails, modern trash, real small iron bits, shot gun shot, bits of foil, all these on top of the ground, some buried and some where the nonferrous is indeed buried but the trash and or ferrous is not.

Emi is something that is hard to get a handle on too, I don’t live in a metropolis so I can’t rate in such an environment.

So my new 6”Nox coil is headed my way.
I will be supplying pics to show some comparisons to other models detecteos as well as the stocker 11”dd Nox coil.
 
Problem is comparing can be a personal expectation thing as well.

I've got a 15 year old Whites DFX that wouldn't make the pimple on the butt of an E-Trac when it comes to comparing on deep silver coins. Take that same DFX and set it to 15 kHz only and except from +94 down to -20 and it will make the E-Trac look like a toy on gold. Heck it will match the Deus on any piece of gold.
 
If two detectors are used in a test garden. One will hit a 12 inch silver dime and the other will not hit a 9 inch dime . Which detector is deeper? If a machine cant see a dime laying beside a nail and the other detector can and also the other the detector can see the SILVER DIME below the nails and the other cant.

Which one is more LIKELY to unmask in the field better?

Its not philosophical debate but more of a common sense issue for me.

What so called variables would make the other machine unmask in the field better than the others.

We hunt iron and test machines and I have never seen those variables that can make a machine that test poorly become a KILLER in the field. Just the opposite if its a dog on test its one in the field.

You bring up just the variables that I'm trying to convey, but reversed. You are assuming a person with my consensus is strictly looking for depth. The iron on the surface many times can sound different than 6" down. I'm sure you've dug calling square nails that sounded like high conductors until out of the hole.

Most machines are affected by falsing iron and these can drive down tones and Vdi's. Stop and think of it, look at all the unintentional iron trash we dig, it never sounded like iron or we would not havedug it. Again it might have sounded questionable but not poke 100% trash.
 
A lot of folks may read this thread. Some good info.

I have said this before. Will repeat.
You tube vids can be misleading.

An example.
I likely can hit a whole lot of coins located with Etrac initially using white’s v3i.
And can show this with video.
I can even take a few steps back and approach target area with V3i and hit the coin. Is this really real world hunting ?. No!!! I repeat No!!

So lookers of you tube beware.

Now detecting is about locating (in the blind) initially, not on targets we know already exists.

There are things like angular detection of target, coil distance off the ground, speed of sweep, and actual coil placement error and still detect a find.

Any one target, any and all of these things above can change depending on the target scenario.

One thing though, it seems the better detectors are more forgiving on some of the things above at least and this is the why folks are generally more successful.

Sure anyone can take a medium priced detector and make finds.
This don’t tell the whole story though on the detector’s actual capabilities vs some other units likely costing more.

Think about the following.
How does a manufacturer know how to price a detector?
Is it purely tech/engineer/labor/ materials that drive, or is it where the detector ranks in the pecking order compared to other previous released models??
Yes the manufacturers know where their products rank, at least I think they do.

And then there is always the talk of skill when it comes to detecting.
Well, if it were all about skill then most folks should still be using groundhog Garrets and White’s Xlts, then right?
And we know they don’t mostly.

Now this sure doesn’t mean skill is not important. It sure is. But some detectors are designed actually so the less skilled can make some grand finds in tough situations usually when it comes to detecting.

Really the Etrac is a no brainer for coins. When one thinks about it (detectorist with experience using other units) in the USA.
You don’t need engineering degree, or tons of detecting time using, just listen for the high more whaling tone.
Ingenious detectors Minelab made, actually the whole explorer series. Etrac is a member of explorer series in my book.
 
Last edited:
A lot of folks may read this thread. Some good info.

I have said this before. Will repeat.
You tube vids can be misleading.

An example.
I likely can hit a whole lot of coins located with Etrac initially using white’s v3i.
And can show this with video.
I can even take a few steps back and approach target area with V3i and hit the coin. Is this really real world hunting ?. No!!! I repeat No!!

Please explain. No testing is real world hunting. First of all your mindset is different. But at least it's a while undisturbed target, with or without iron. It's true you may have found it with MD1 AND ate checking it with MD 2. If you are there on a different day with a different detector, does not matter wilhich one, uou cant assume you would hit it again even with the same detector.
 
I think what Youtube videos do show is that it is possible not that what you see can be expected. Kind of like drag racing videos. I watch a lot but I know just because this car beats that car doesn't mean your results will always be the same. It does, however, mean it is possible.

There are times when the V3i can go just as deep as the E-Trac, and visa-versa. That said, there are also some pretty set expectations one can deem reliable. For example you can just about always count on the E-Trac to get better depth on a silver coin in a worked over site than the Compadre. Not saying the Compadre is !!!!, just reality does apply no matter how experienced/good the operator is. User results ARE limited or boosted according to the detector being used most of the time.

Skill isn't everything. It makes the difference between two hunters when given equal or even near equal detectors, but, experience is only as good as the detector being used.
 
LOL at all the cutting/pasting from the internet in this serious discussion....:laughing:

Maybe you weren't aware phrases could be searched? :laughing:
 
Back
Top Bottom