Monte

Zincoln, Congratulations on your success that hunted site. I knew you would be one to put in the time and effort to learn the Deus, and it looks like it is a good fit or your time and patience level. Keep up the efforts, and I hope the weather starts improving for you. Monte

I kind of figured you might. 🙃 So, here is the section you took my quote from and I will try to explain: I have owned SMF's from just bout every brand since the '90s, and while some do have some strengths for certain applications, I have still favored a Single-Frequency unit most of the time. And seldom do the SMF's show an overall improvement in performance. Just the opposite on occasion. Decades of using most SMF models, or at least those from Minelab, White's, and Garrett. As I said, some do have certain strengths for certain applications, but I have used a lot of SF detectors, Selectable SF models, and SMF's that also provided a SF option. I have done side-by-side comparisons of a SMF unit with their own SF choices, and against both Selectable SF models and good-old SF designs. More often than not, I had more EMI issues with a SMF detector and none, or not as bad, using any SF that worked well in that environment. Also, a lot depends on who manufactures the SMF because circuitry design of each brand and model can differ. For example, I have and use, when best suited, a Minelab Vanquish 540 w/Multi-IQ. They work a little different in Frequency assignment than the Equinox series, but their Multi-IQ also has some issues, with both types, in some urban Coin Hunting sites with a 'pocket-spill' when several coins are stacked and/or in-contact. When that happened to to me at several parks in high-use areas, and I could visibly see the small group or cluster of coins, the audio and visual responses were a bit 'odd' or unexpected for such a coin arraignment. That was in the SMF Multi-IQ search. But when I switched the Equinox to a SF, the response was somewhat improved. Also, I grabbed a couple of other detectors to sweep over several of those coin clusters, and the Apex in MF, worked excellent, as it did with a selected SF. I also used a SF Simplex +, F-75+, Bandido II µMAX, an F-19 Ltd., Racer and Racer2, and in all cases the Audio response was better than the Vanquish or Equinox in SMF Multi-IQ. It boiled down to overall circuitry design and coil choice. So, from my personal in-the-field experiences, I have found SOME SMF's just fall a little short at time, depending on the site environment, and while I do use them and like some for certain places I like to hunt, for me they are usually no better than, or not as good as, a SF search. By the way, when I was mainly comparing performance, while some was typical urban Coin Hunting conditions, 85% of the time I was working some very challenging, iron-littered ghost towns and similar places. For those reasons and the fact I like SF, the coming X-Terra Pro will be a nice fit in my current detector team. Monte

Do 'we' need another SF detector? Yes, definitely, IF it is something new, improved and creative, which the X-Terra Pro looks to be. As for Nokta, and the former Makro, they have been too fast at discontinuing some of their models that were very good detectors with a lot ofc performance. I point to the excellent Nokta FORS CoRe and FORS Relic long with the Makro Racer and Racer II. I have, and will not part with, my Relic, original Racer and a Racer II that I need to send off to their service department this week. And talk about MSRP, yes, they dropped the Makro Multi-Kruzer and seem to be eliminating anything 'Makro', but they do have two selectable SF models in their current line-up. The waterproof Nokta Anfibio Multi at $749, and the non-waterproof Impact priced at $599. So the sleeker and waterproofed new X-Terra Pro seems to be targeted in a competitive price range. And let's not ignore the Quest Q60 in the selectable SF game. As for Minelab, there can be lot of 'talking heads' at times and somebody might have stated something yet not been a final decision-maker. And while SMF is a popular current trend for some groups of people, there is still a greater number on very satisfied, and successful, SF operators all around the world and I am sure Minelab thinkers are aware of that. Certainly they know that there are those former X-Terra owners who like their older-period model, but just haven't been thrilled with buying different Frequency coils, and many want waterproof. Therefore it was a cleaver way to use a known and proven name and step it up with an improved unit in that series. They can still continue with their SMF's, but simply produced a model that I feel will be well received by many. Monte

Mike, I agree completely!! Monte, a SF fan.

They made a selectable single-Frequency model like the: Quest Q60 Makro Multi-Kruzer Nokta Impact Nokta Anfibio Multi XP Deus (original) So the new X-Terra Pro had some similar offerings before it was brough to market, and good things can be said about each of those listed above. Monte

Well, I plan to buy an X-Terra Pro because they did justice to the X-Terra concept, but instead of buying a flock of separate coils at different Frequencies, they are giving us a selectable SF detector in a more proven package that is well balanced and waterproof. And instead of using round tube-type rod system they are using the really good Vanquish rod system, and even better, the Vanquish coil design with the thicker, threaded left rod-mount 'ear' and not that hokey-looking new system for the Equinox units. I have owned SMF's from just bout every brand since the '90s, and while some do have some strengths for certain applications, I have still favored a Single-Frequency unit most of the time. And seldom do the SMF's show an overall improvement in performance. Just the opposite on occasion. With the two Equinox 800's I had, a SF was used perhaps 40% of the time, especially where I had improved performance. I really enjoy my two Vanquish 540's, including a lot of Beech Hunting on dry or damp sand at the lakes and reservoirs near me. but I have been hunting freshwater and saltwater beaches for a long time using some chosen Single Frequency models and, when properly tuned, I kept pace with those using a CZ or DFX or Sovereign on the Oregon coast I was hunting at the time. I have no doubt the new X-Terra Pro will provide even better performance. There are a lot of avid detectorists who prefer a SF unit to an SMF, either all-the-time or part-of-the-time, so I know there is good market for this new model. Also, for those with a Vanquish Multi-IQ detector, the new X-Terra Pro just might make an ideal 'companion' detector. Monte

I also prefer a round shaped coil, and I have very little use or need for a bigger-size coil. A good 85% or more of my hunting is in dense debris and / or thick brush where smller-size coils rule. Other than that I do like a good mid-size coil which would be a round 7" to 9" or something like a 5X8 to 5X9½ elliptical shape for "fringe-areas" to more "open-areas". I like the looks of that coil, and if it is a bit thinner and lighter compared with others, I think I'll see if they make one for the Tek. T2+. My other detectors are already fitted with coils I like, but I might do some selling or trading to get another new T2+ just to use a coil like the Detech 9" Ultimate. 'Quieter' in and around EMI is a good thing. About ½" to 1" or so seems about right compared with the Viper. Glad to hear it is generally working okay afield. I have noticed through the years that, depending upon the make and model detector, the aftermarket coils often reflect a VDI read-out that is of two or three numbers, high or low, from a stock or manufacturer's' coil. I have what I need or my Apex devices, although I would really like to see Garrett make a smaller-size coil for the Apex, especially a Concentric. But that Detech 9" looks like it might make a good combination with a T2+.❓❔❓ Monte

Texas is 95.2% private property so out don't a lot of open public land and need to get permissions. Most State Parks restrict detecting. Also, most grade schools I have come across so far have fenced and secured playgrounds. That said, I have not had any problems so far detecting city or county parks. I just make sure my recovery efforts leave the area looking undisturbed as I normally do. Monte

Monte said: Realistic or conceivable? Yes, but less likely. But using a lower Disc. setting helps a detector process targets better when you have a lot of very close-by Iron trash that causes good-target masking. The more Discrimination or rejection you use, the more negative behavior you'll have from the unwonted junk and that can often make it more difficult for a detector's circuitry to recover and process a good or higher-conductive target. mh9162013 said: That makes a lot of sense; thank you for the explanation. As for relying more on sounds and less on VDI, are you referring to the decision to give a target a second look or the decision to dig? When it comes to a potential target, I always rely on sound first. Only when I get the high tone (or mid time, if I'm willing to dig for nickels or gold), do I look at my VDI. However, even with a high tone, if it's in the 70s (or really jumpy and all over the place) and I don't feel like digging a penny, I'll let it go. So are you suggesting that if my goal is to get silver coins I should dig all high tones, no matter what the VDI is doing? Thanks again! I go by an audio response most of all because that's how I started in early '65. We didn't get visual Target ID until '83 from the original Teknetics, but that's also the same year we got an excellent slow-motion detector with a quick-response and fast-recovery that handled common ferrous trash quite well with the Tesoro Inca. I concentrated most of my detecting time back then to hunting renovation work, old building tear-down sites, and such in urban applications, and mostly trying to get out of town to work homesteads, pioneer and military encampments and fort sites, signally-located school, church and dance hall sites, ghost towns, etc., etc. Initially, most visual TID detectors required a very fast-motion sweep speed that didn't work that well in heavily littered and densely brushed-up old sites or dealing with building rubble. The new slow-motion detectors handled it better, and they could isolate non-ferrous targets in places with masking ferrous debris much better, so I used them the most. Also, the visual TID that detectors feature is going to be more challenged when there are a lot of different sizes, shapes and types of metal objects very close together, and that also makes a Target ID unit less accurate when it comes to producing a good, functional visual response. Therefore, it is more important to rely on hearing a good audio response. Also, depending upon the particular make and model detector and how the circuity processes the audio response from various targets, you can learn to listen closely to a detector's response and learn its language. But, not all detectors speak the same language or have the same accent or characteristics. For example. here in the USA we all (should) speak American English. But then you have the drawls or other accents or pronunciations associated with different regions, such as some folks from Texas or Wisconsin or localized areas of the NE or SE, and sometime others don't quite hear it right or understand it. Same with some detector audio responses. Many of the more modern detectors with a digitally-based circuitry design also don't "speak the same language" of some of the better analog detectors we had. And most detectors used to produce a single-tone audio response with a language all their own that users could learn, whereas most of the newer models the past couple of decades use a digitally-processed multi-tone audio. It might be a 2-Tone or 3-Tone, maybe a 4-Tone, 5-Tone or many, many more audio tones. And those individual Tone pitches are based on the target's conductivity range and how the detector's circuitry is designed and the cut-off audio break-points for the different tones. An individual coin, laying flat-to-the-coil and within maybe 2" to 4" or so with no other metal objects close by, just might produce a 'proper' audio tone pitch. However, if a desired target is in a canted or odd orientation, and especially if there is one or more other metal objects too close to it, you will get a "blended' signal based of the different types of metal within in the detection field, and that might produce a very different audio Tone ID. Mix some higher-conductive and lower-conductive targets together and you can get a mid-range response, and that makes using audio Tone ID even less reliable, if you are trying to rely on it for a dig or no-dig decision. The same applies to the visual Target ID, too. Yes, I have visual Target ID on my Garrett Apex devices, Nokta CoRe and Relic units, and I do glance at it from time-to-time just to get an idea or hint as to what I might be about to recover. I do the same with the audio Tone, if using a 3-Tone on the Nokta models or 5-Tone of the Apex units. However, I listen mainly for the audio information from a target, just as I do with my single-Tone, non-display Tesoro Bandido II microMAX and Silver Sabre microMAX models. Depending on the make & model detector I am hunting with, I use one of three Discrimination levels. With my Tesoro's I have the control always set at minimum because that's very close to the Ferrous / Non-Ferrous break-point and for the most part I am just barely rejecting most Iron Nails. On my Nokta CoRe and Relic have have the Disc. set just low enough to barely accept Iron Nails. Then there are times with very little trash that I set a Disc. level at or close to Zero / '0' to find both types of metal targets. Although I do have and use some very good modern detectors with Visual Target-ID and Audio Tone-ID, I have enjoyed this great sport for over fifty-six years relying on audio responses, and for over a thirty-eight years making a lot of great finds in challenging sites using slow-motion / slow-sweep detectors with a Quick-Response / Fast-Recovery, and either barely accepting or just barely rejecting common Iron Nails. No reason for me to change a successful approach. Just listen and learn what a detector & coil combo are telling me. Monte

Yes, indeed! Hunting any heavily littered site with a dense mix of ferrous and non-ferrous debris IS a challenge. One reason why most hobbyists don't hunt those types of places. I do because I enjoy the challenge of the environment, and also enjoy the good finds that eventually make their way into my hand. Usually, IF the detector circuitry and coil used work well at responding to a silver 'stash' or a tight cluster of silver coins, then you'll usually get a higher-range VDI read-out. It would be in the mid-to-upper 90's with your detector. Be aware, however, that not all detectors will produce a good response on a "short-stack" of larger silver coins. I use my 'Silver Short-Stack' of 5 Walking Liberty Halves on top of a Silver Dollar, all making metal-to-metal contact, and many detector will not give a good audio or visual response. Generally the reason is related to the Discriminate mode's Ground Balance setting, but that's a different discussion. Sometimes the detector's circuitry is good, but a coil change can make a good audio response become a broken-up or negative (none) audio response. Why th8½X11 DD as 'standard'? Because back in '88 we started to see manufacturers switching to larger-size coils s 'standard' because so many hobbyists kept asking or "more depth -- more depth". White's went from an 8" to the round 950, and thn others started as well, By 2006, just 15 years ago, we had Minelab going to 10" and then 11" round DD's, White's to an 11" DD, and oh3rs followed or thy went to the 7X11, like Teknetics in '06 with their 11" BiAxial on the T2, and then that coil size on so many models from Teknetics and Fisher. Nokta and Makro from '14 to now used their 7X11 and in the last couple of years to a round-shaped 11' DD. Garrett to their 8½X11 DD. Personally, if I owned a metal detecting business, those bigger-size coils would be optional Accessory oils, not standard. I'd use something like a mid-size coil as 'standard' such as a 5X8 or 5X9½ elliptical or a round-shaped coil in the 7" to 9" diameter, not bigger. Realistic or conceivable? Yes, but less likely. But using a lower Disc. setting helps a detector process targets better when you have a lot of very close-by Iron trash that causes good-target masking. The more Discrimination or rejection you use, the more negative behavior you'll have from the unwonted junk and that can often make it more difficult for a detector's circuitry to recover and process a good or higher-conductive target. Even when a good target is in plain sight on top of the ground. I have a couple of test scenarios and in-the-field encounter examples I use to describe the issues with using a higher Disc. setting. If you go back, try to have a smaller coil, like the 'Ripper', and work slowly and methodically. Pay more attention to the audio response and less dependence on the visual VDI report, especially when it is very trashy. Monte

I've detected since early '65, and started hunting older homesites (existing or vacant former homesites) in late '68. I try to dedicate 85% or more of my hunt-time to working anyplace that is considered 'old'. Sometimes, at least a smaller percentage, I can get lucky and make some desirable finds relatively soon. Most of the time, however, it takes a while to really get a handle on the sate environment, and then put in the time to thoroughly cover the area with the right detector, best coil, and working it slowly and methodically. Only 2 Hours? Not nearly enough time to do a good job of covering any 120 year old sire. Aluminum, or any othr non-ferrous debris is going to cause some issues, both with the 'teaser' good-sounding higher-conductivity responses, and the target-masking when too close to a desired target. Using a lot of Discrimination will increase the number of good targets you're not going to find, and ignoring some of those 'larger-size' encounters might be an idea to use to avid recovering a bigger-size piece of junk .... however. Hare's a little true story to make you wonder. I believe it was late late 1980's in Ogden Utah. A fellow ot permission to hunt an older home he was working along the side of the house in the dirt that extends out about 1½' to 2' from the house where you could plant shrubs, flowers or just have dirt. Good signal so he got down to recover it. It was directly below a bedroom window where a kid might play around and push money out while 'playing', or ??? What caused the good-size signal a few inches down? Fifteen, and I mean 15 coins, all Silver Dollars and Silver Halves, 7 of one and 8 or the other denomination. Kind of something to think about when you decide to 'walk-away' from a larger-size signal.❔❔ I presume you are using the AT Max with the stock 8½X11 DD coil, correct? I have that size coil as the largest coil I use on any detector in my outfit nd keep in on my 2nd Apex. It's a very good coil for a beach, or working a plowed field, pasture or farmland, or a wide-open grassy park. It's definitely not a good pick for hunting any site with a lot of trash, building debris or dense brush. A smaller-size coil is best, or a good mid-size coil, IF the detector and coil work well in such an environment with a good fast response an quick recovery. On my primary-use #1 Apex I keep the 'Ripper' 5X8 DD coil mounted full-time and that combination works very well for a lot of, the trashier places I like to hunt, especially those with a lot of Iron Nails and other ferrous debris. I really wish Garrett would make their 4½ Concentric coil to work with the SMF & Selectable Apex. The only available smaller-size coil right now that I know of is the NEL 5" Sharp DD, and it works okay. With the AT MAX you have the advantage because you can get the Garrett 4½" snooper coil. If i o3ned an AT MAX I'd use the 'Ripper' size most of the time and have the 4½" on a spare rod for a quick change to work trashier areas. On my Apex devices, all three of them, I have them set to turn-on with my Custom settings of MF, Volume at '8', Iron Volume at '2', and Discrimination accepting everything from '20' on up. I like to hear some of the low-tone Iron I most areas. I keep the Iron Audio push-button selection turned 'Off' and ONLY use it on occasion as a 'momentary' function to double-check some questionable audio responses. EMI? The 1st thing I do is reduce the Sensitivity to see if that helps. The 2nd thing I try, if necessary, is to change to a Single-Selectable Frequency on the Apex, and I usually am able to deal with EMI at 15 kHz, and if not then 10 kHz tends to handle it. The 3rd thing I adjust ... if necessary ... is the Frequency Shift. If you select the ZERO Disc. mode and then reject targets with a VDI or '38' and below, you're no longer in a Zero Disc. function but simply a Custom setting. If you doubt you're going to encounter a 'cluster' or 'stash' of coins, then you can try to recover only those targets that produce a smaller-size response that might b similar to what you'd get from a small Dime to a larger Silver Dollar. That might eliminate going after the over-size aluminum or any pesky iron junk, like a rusty can or bigger-size tin shard. Do not reject anything higher than a VDI close to '35'. Get and use a smaller-size search coil, like the Ripper or smaller 4½" snooper coil. Make sure you are not rushing things and work the coil in a slow and methodical sweep that overlaps. Grid some areas and clean them out. That will also allow you to find targets that are otherwise masked or partially mask right now. Monte

Congratulations, kac, on another successful hunt. As you know, I have 3 Apex devices sporting different coils, and my primary-use Apex w/'Ripper' coil continues to impress me with a combination of comfort, long operating battery 'run-time', and impressive performance afield. Nico depth, great recovery time, and very responsive to small, thin, 'tricky' targets. I continue to praise the Apex for all it offers and the performance it provides, making it a terrific mid-priced model that can compete well with many more spendy devices. I think some of the introduction period had negative replies by some folks who were bias toward a different brand, some who didn't give the Apex enough time in use to learn and know it, and I also know a few who simply flashed out some comments they had heard or read and never saw or laid their hands on an Apex at all. Monte

I bought a new GTI-2500 in 2001, only used the big imaging coil a short while then swopped to the small coil for trashier areas. A t the end of a two or three long days I didn't like the weight or balance or performance. All Metal mode, as you noted, worked fine, but the Disc. mode left a lot to be desired. I never owned a garret model with the 2-Box attachment because I had tried a coupler of them at a dealer's test area and compared them with a couple of others from Fisher and White's. It's a neat design concept, but the performance wasn't there. I also favored the TM-808 from White's and had one of those for a while. Shortly after that few days I didn't have a broken heart when I parted with the GTI-2500. I agree, I think it would be good for Garrett to make theTM-808 under any label they want, and just discontinue the GTI-2500 and it's 2-box device. Monte

I own and regularly use 3 Apex devices and have a 4th as a loaner-unit for friends and family. My original Apex just after release, Ver. 1.23, nd shortly after got a 2nd Apex, Ver. 1.25. The first one had some noisy behavior with the Viper coil and I tracked it down to an issue with the connector at the control box and something going on inside. I called Garrett, sent it in, and it was quickly taken care of and returned. Problems solved. All four Apex units have the 1.28 Ver. update. All four are 'saved' with my turn-on settings of 'Custom' program that accepts '20' on up. Sensitivity at maximum, Volume '8', Iron Volume '2' and in MF. Then once I get started, GB and begin hunting I will reduce the Sensitivity if needed for EMI, or I will opt for a Single Frequency. Usually it is the default 15 kHz and sometimes I use 10 kHz to help deal with EMI. I hunt some wooded areas, in and around a lot of dense, thick brush in ghost towns or other old-use and out-of-the-way places, and hit renovation work, homesteads, and work around building rubble. Quite a few sites also have some rocks to work around. I pamper my equipment and do my best not to 'knock' the coil into solid objects, but we all now that happens from time-to-time. Since the first unit was taken care of, I have not experienced any 'knock-noise' from normal hunting coil contacts. Also, using the stock 'Viper' coil as well as the 'Ripper' and 'Raider' and NEL 5" Sharp DD coils I am not having any stability issues and the Apex runs a lot quieter and smoother than several other detectors I currently own or have in the past year. And I get very impressive battery run-time with the Apex. I also have 4 pair of MS-3 headphones, one for each Apex, and 3 AT Pro-Pointer AT's, one for each of my three personal units. Each is assigned to and paired with the Apex, and I haven't had any problems with the Apex / MS-3 / AT Pro-Pointer unpairing when I am out hunting. I only have one 'problem' when it comes to the Apex series, and that is I really would like to have Garrett make a smaller-size coil for it, especially something like their 4½" Concentric coil. I'd get two of them right away, to mount one full-time, and a spare for back-up to keep in my Accessory Coil Tote. Oh, I have one other problem nd have sisnce the Apex was firs mentioned and introduced, and that is they assigned it as an 'Ace' series model. I NEVER state that it is because it absolutely is NOT an Ace. Not in design or performance. Totally different. That, to me, was one bad marketing move. Otherwise, I feel it is a fantastic mid-priced detector that works well for general-purpose use, and can do quite well in some bad iron contaminated places, too. Monte

'Lightning' isn't a bad name, and 'Thunder' might be fitting for a coil, or perhaps 'Flash' or 'Streak'. I just home they don't forget to include a 'Bolt' in the box to mount the coil. That could create some 'Rumbling' if they fall short of what is expected. Seriously, I look forward to more competition in the upper-end of the market of SMF's, and perhaps down-the-road they might offer a mid-priced version to compete with that segment of the market. Also realize that not everyone wants or needs a waterproof detector and a good land-based unit would appeal to many, and could be produced for less $$$. Monte