Apex in iron

Yikes. I will hold out my final judgment until mine arrives and I put it through paces but that was terrible. I think Dr otek detector can separate in iron better than that. Thanks for posting.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
 
I say complete nonsense totally different results than everybody else is getting either he is using a screwed up preproduction machine or he is purposely intent on poor results.
 
Not impressive in the least. I would like to have seen the At Max on the same targets just for fun. Wish i had not pre-ordered now as there is no way i can hunt with that in the places i detect, as i would leave way to much behind compared to my NOX 800. Bummer!
 
Maybe and maybe not. I bet he knew before he made the video it would react this way. He is probably disappointed in his purchase.
 
His videos were taken down about the Pre-production test sample to evaluate for any issues or recommendations about any improvements, etc. needed prior to actual production. Probably violated Garrett's Non Disclosure Agreement regarding test samples. Videos such as his could damage initial sales.......so violating NDA could have penalities for whomever the sample was actually given to.
 
The video has already been taken down by whoever posted it. I wonder if he got a nasty-gram from Garrett’s lawyers if it was a pre-production model. I heard from several sources that the Apex testers were under some pretty strict confidentiality agreements which included no video of the pre-production units in action. John-Edmonton would probably be a more authoritative source about that. A couple folks might be in some legal hot water...
 
I say complete nonsense totally different results than everybody else is getting either he is using a screwed up preproduction machine or he is purposely intent on poor results.
I would like to see these other results... All I have seen is a few sponsored users finds and air tests which don't mean anything. This was the first video with the Apex not being used by a Garrett affiliate. So the first honest test. Not looking good for Garrett. I hope I'm wrong as my machine will be here Thursday. If it performs like that I will have to give it to my 7 year old because I won't be able to resell it.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
 
Even though it was only a test model, you'd like to think that being able to work in moderate iron with a small coil would be a given basic requirement, and would have been sorted long before going out to a tester.
Perhaps the software just isn't able to do it, this is their first go at multi and Minelab have a big lead in experience on that front, and even Minelab don't get it right first time.
It kinda reminded me of a FBS nulling on iron, it seemed slow to react.
 
Put any detector and coil in my hand, get someone with a camera, and I can make it look bad. Doesn't mean it is.

I watched the videos and there were too many unanswered questions about settings. Also, if I am hunting in an area with nails and other bigger-size iron, I know good-target masking can occur. I'd use a slower and methodical sweep speed and not the fast sweep the fellow used.

Also, if I am hunting any area with a lot of nearby targets, some being nails or other ferrous debris, I am going to use the smallest-size coil I can. The 'Viper' coil is 6X11. It might be 6" in width, but that doesn't make it a smaller-size coil. Not with the rest of the winding layout making the 11" stretch.. The folks at Garrett need to make a dedicated, functional, small-size coil for the Apex.

I should have my Apex my next Monday and I look forward to giving it a good evaluation. No 'perfect' detector made, but it looks like it might b a versatile enough detector to satisfy a lot of 'average' or 'typical' urban Coin & Jewelry Hunters, and it just might do for some iron-infested Relic Hunting applications .... if they get a smaller coil out for it.

Monte
 
Ya I wouldn't let this vid decide if ya buy a Apex or not. This dude was out to make Garrett look bad. Was test unit so you know this is not the final prod models. The at series had way better separation than what this guy showed
 
Ya I wouldn't let this vid decide if ya buy a Apex or not. This dude was out to make Garrett look bad. Was test unit so you know this is not the final prod models. The at series had way better separation than what this guy showed


The guy has stated online that he wasn't out to trash the detector. He didn't know it was an early stage detector.
Hopefully Garrett sorted it before they started production as i believe it can't be updated online.
 
The guy has stated online that he wasn't out to trash the detector. He didn't know it was an early stage detector.
Hopefully Garrett sorted it before they started production as i believe it can't be updated online.

The Apex uses a mini USB port for charging. It is possible for USB/mini USB cables and ports to be for charging and data uploads like on the Deus/ORX, and many other recently produced detectors. We'll know soon.
 
I can say from my experience that the detectors that Garrett has sent me in the past for various tests requested, are not the same as the finished, released model. Sending out detectors is part of the process trying to get the best software programs into the machine to satisfy the majority of users it was designed to be used for. No detector does it all. Although I did not see the previously posted video, the fact that is was a tester machine pretty well explains what happened.
 
His videos were taken down about the Pre-production test sample to evaluate for any issues or recommendations about any improvements, etc. needed prior to actual production. Probably violated Garrett's Non Disclosure Agreement regarding test samples. Videos such as his could damage initial sales.......so violating NDA could have penalities for whomever the sample was actually given to.

on the other hand, it just may "stink" in iron period, and he wanted others to know! one thing to keep in mind is that unless garrett has a "priority circuit designed from scratch, circumventing minelab's patents (which are very much in play) they have to 'work around" minelab's patents in order to bring this detector to market.IF garrett duplicates any part(s) of those patented designs, then they leave themselves open to a law suit. i'm just sayin'

(h.h.!)
j.t.
 
I can say from my experience that the detectors that Garrett has sent me in the past for various tests requested, are not the same as the finished, released model. Sending out detectors is part of the process trying to get the best software programs into the machine to satisfy the majority of users it was designed to be used for. No detector does it all. Although I did not see the previously posted video, the fact that is was a tester machine pretty well explains what happened.

just curious .how do you know they are NOT the same? did garrett mention something to you?..they may very well be the same, and the detector could just be 'horseshit" in iron by design!,and THIS is what the guy is attempting to establish in his video! maybe he wants to 'tell the truth!" let people know.
i'm just sayin'

(h.h.!)
j.t.
 
I would like to see these other results... All I have seen is a few sponsored users finds and air tests which don't mean anything. This was the first video with the Apex not being used by a Garrett affiliate. So the first honest test. Not looking good for Garrett. I hope I'm wrong as my machine will be here Thursday. If it performs like that I will have to give it to my 7 year old because I won't be able to resell it.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

i just picked up the minelab vanquish 540 pro-pack,and it IS doing it right in the junk.guys are really doing well with it, and it's PRESET MODES. simple to use, and it's going' deep,and separates really well in the trash. remember!..minelab
has a lot of experience with multi-iq and it's patents are "solid" so a competitor must be careful when introducing a competitive detector.since this is garrett's first foray into (s.m.f.),they could be experiencing "teething pains" (so to speak!)..possible 'hang ups" in software ,and the like. i'm just sayin'

(h.h.!)
j.t.
 
Handling "iron" is not an easy task to describe, and it's also not something that should be determined using only one detector and one coil without having other detector set-ups along for side-by-side comparison.

Also, it can get difficult for everyone to understand what is meant by one person who makes a statement like "I hunt iron infested sites" or "Where I hunt there is a lot of iron." To readers of those statements, the person making such a remark might have a completely different understanding of what those man.

I know what I mean when I reference a site as being heavily littered with nails and other ferrous debris, and often I have seen people join in a hunt who are absolutely amazed and just how dense and very littered some of the places are with ferrous debris. Not only can many of them not handle such a challenging site, but their detector and coil choice do not do very well either.

In my 'signature' I make the following statement:

Detector Outfit: An assortment of favorite detector makes and models, with the best coils mounted for the tasks I'll take on.

I have two favorite detector and coil combination models I assign to 'get-serious' Relic Hunting in dense iron contaminated sites. I have some that I more-or-less prefer just for urban Coin Hunting applications. Then I have several detectors that can do a decent job in most of the ferrous challenged sites as well as in a lot of the urban places where I want to chase coins or jewelry, and those are my 'General Purpose' models.

My Apex is schooled to arrive Monday the 31st and I have several sites planned to take it or evaluation, and it will be going up against all the units I have in my outfit. Due to the coil size being bigger and not smaller, I don't think it's going to rival my 'get-serious' Relic Hunting models, but I am hoping it might do well enough to fit in a 'General Purpose' category. I don't want lack-luster performance to consider it as only a good urban-site Coin Hunting only model.

Monte
 
Back
Top Bottom