Well part of the reason I used 2018 was because that was the first full year the Equinox had been out, and probably long enough to see if any serious silver shooters were gravitating to it over other machines including their Etrac's and CTX's. I can say my silver numbers went up with the Equinox over what I was using which was the Nokta Impact and I do like that detector a lot. That could be a fluke, but other things I have noticed have made me thing it's not a fluke at all.
I can say that when hunting with someone who uses the Etrac most of the time I went from being constantly out hunted to pretty much even. I have not seen an advantage to the Etrac over the Nox yet in side by side hunting when it comes to silver coins. Old nickels I have noticed an advantage numbers wise. You mentioned digging possibly more junk with Equinox. I certainly don't think I dig more junk since I got mine. If anything honestly I dig less junk now than ever. Also I think Etrac users get fooled or dig iffy's just as much and may dig more rusty nails. I very seldom dig a rusty nail in Park2 with the iron bias on 0! All that being said I am still considering a used Etrac to round out my arsenal at some point.
Well EQX has higher chance of giving say 24/25 or 26 on silver dime.
Yet user will dig copper sometimes or even clad dime.
You see 45 or 46 conducitve in Etrac odds are you are fixing to dig clad dime or silver dime and not a copper penny.
So even if when comparing over undisturbed higher conductive coin. Etrac user can identify denomination odds wise more times. This is selective digging.
But in a site many folks using Etrac will dig 42, 43, and 44 conductive numbers even knowing odds wise it’s copper or clad dime. Some worn silver could be there.
So if you go to a site with a bud. Goal to only dig silver. And develop say a formula. 3 points for any silver dug, 1 point for every clad dime dug. -3 points for every copper penny dug. And -5 points for any junk targrt dug. Silver ring counts +3 points btw.
And do this with 2 different folks using each detector. Etrac will likely score higher. Granted the EQX runner could have more finds via help with copper coins numbers. And EQx could score higher if sites are riddled with copper with few silver. But still not match numbers wise the silver number finds.
Need to do this in multiple multiple sites to get valued added data.
Or if we try this on already hard hunted Etrac /CTX pounded sites EQX could be the winner too.
If we do this on sites busted hard with EQX this would up the odds of Etrac being clear winner.
Virgin sites Imo Etrac would score higher.
Next what about IH coins, memorials and those nice aluminum twist caps?
Yeah EQX runner will be digging these to get IHs.
The Etrac user will be smiling watching EQX runner dig them.
Etrac user will be watching for 33-35 conductive numbers. And will dig few twist caps or memorials. Tone on Etrac won’t be the higher squeall though.
Again if we assign a scoring system for +2 for every IH dug. -1 for every memorial penny dug, and -2 for every twist cap. And a -5 for any other junk target dug. Etrac I think would win here over the long haul score wise.
Bottlecaps.
Etrac user won’t hear high percentage.
EQX runner has to go through a drill to ID and move on. Some could be dug though, especially deeper ones.
Back to nickels.
If we took CTX and Equniox to virgin sites only and had a nickle hunting contest.
And each with tonal nickel windows set up.
CTX would win most of the time. Or in the long haul with many virgin sites detected.
But if we take these same 2 detectors to already fbs pounded sites. Eqx 800 would win most of the time or in the long haul with many fbs pounded sites hit.
Why?
Most nickels likely ferrous challenged hence Eqx IDs better and can even detect some of these CTX won’t.
If we enter Etrac into both scenarios above.
Etrac in first scenario I think would win but by a small margin.
In the last instance it would fair a bit worse than CTX still losing to Eqx.
Both Etrac and CTX would dig less junk targets. However due to faster sweep speed allowed and lighter weight the time Eqx wastes spent say beaver tails would be a made up somewhat at least.
Almost done here.
Something for folks to think about.
The fbs came first then the fbs2 via CTX then the mighty EQx.
So Eqx was subjected moreso overall to already hunted fbs/fbs 2 sites.
Wonder what Eqx would have found if fbs or fbs2 wouldn’t have been in the sites meaning they didn’t exist period?
Folks who have used Eqx in fbs and fbs2 hard hunted sites have already shown a trend with their posting.
So the Eqx has had a tough go to prove itself. I think it has too.
There are still virgin sites out there where fbs and fbs2 have not been and other detectors too. So an Eqx just might Ben used in these and bring home the bacon even better then some here think. Including myself. Most of my use and testing has been in already fbs/fbs2 sites.
And the main reason plus my testing I have posted what I have above.
Whatever one what decides to buy to use.
Remember this.
Minelab explorers, Etrac, and CTX, and Eqx for whatever reason are the pinnacles of bad dirt performance for a VLF detector with above average ID of targets detected.
Bad dirt here I mean is medium mineralized and higher.
Cheers and happy hunting.