Jump to content

How Simple A Detector You Want ?


Recommended Posts


I look what’s pre-order like the Simplex and  another they call Vanquish is one soon to be .

 With all the Simplex has to offer I’d never gave it that name .

 Then we have another called the Vanquish and with a name like that we just don’t know if the name fits yet. The meaning that I like best is to defeat in a conflict are contest . I guess in time the unknown will be known.

 I have the ORX and for me it’s been one of the simplest to use . More than the simplicity is the like of weight and I can even make it lighter by sticking the controller in my pocket.

 I demand more in a detector than I did years back due to the fact it would have fell on deaf ears back when. Then I was one of a few but now one of many.

 I thank you for coming along for the ride and the pleasure of detecting.

 Chuck 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have the ORX also, while you may consider it simple to use, what is not simple about it is the target ID. It's a bit weird at first and takes some getting used to. No depth meter is another place they dropped the ball on that one I think. HOWEVER it is lightweight and the wireless nature of it makes it a really comfortable unit to use. It's a good detector.

Simple for me in a detector is 1)Doesn't have so many settings you never can tweak them to get the most out of the unit because little to no documentation exists from the manufacturer or the little info they do give makes no sense or doesn't work as they say it should. 2) Batteries we can replace if we have to without sending the dang thing in for service. That is a major pain. 3) Buttons that work as they should, not taking a lot of pressure and that respond as expected in use. 4) Coils and covers that actually function in a manner promised. Don't tell us it is waterproof one on page, we take it out and call service to hear "oh yeah you should not submerge it more than 3 inches".

In reality a simple detector should be just that-simple. The easiest way to do that is be honest about what it can do from the beginning. Stop marketing products as something they are not. Don't act like your new detector is going to beat out your other model and detect a dime down to 3 feet. The biggest frustration in metal detecting is the marketing garbage and major padding of a detector's capability. Cut that mess out and just start stating facts. Do actual field tests, plant stuff if you have to but TELL US you planted it and what the detector can do. So what if it can't detect past 6 inches, but hey if you can find a way to tighten up the ID you might have something worth selling and that MANY people would buy.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't really care if it is simple or not. I just want it to give me accurate, consistent, understandable information that I can easily interpret about what is under the coil and roughly how big it is and how deep it is. If it takes me a few minutes to set it up or it is roughly turn on, ground balance and go, I don't care as long as I can really trust it. I have a detector that costs less than $200 new that does that better in my soil conditions than many detectors that cost over $500. And then there is the Nox :biggrin: !!!!!!!

Jeff

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/16/2019 at 11:52 AM, Steve Herschbach said:

One with an on/off button that only finds good stuff would suit me :smile:

That's the way to go, just an on/off button can't be simpler. 

Or a robotic gold detector like on of those robotic vacuum cleaners. Have the robo detector snlff up the gold, while sitting in a chair sipping a cold beer!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I bought a Excalibur a couple years ago and I hardly have used it. I find it very simple and easy to use...no screen to look at lol..I'm able to kinda know when a target is a bottle cap which I detest...No ground balance.. the only knob to adjust is the pinpoint (all metal) once in a while. I'm still kinda to this hobby so I've only had experiences with a few detectors...cant imagine the stuff you guys have seen/used. 

strick 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Similar Content

    • By diggindaboot
      THIS !! All the people boo hooing will be in line to get one at that price point. It will also force the hand of ML with their price structure. ML raised their price on the 800 and NM absolutely crushed that price point. The Legend doesn't have to be better, just equal to turn the fortunes in their favor. ML and their arrogant "obsolete" charge is foolish. Obsolete by definition means no longer produced or used. Many detectorist and their single frequency machines are still out there making great finds and having fun. Furthermore, single frequency detectors are still being made and sold. NM build quality is far and away superior to the Nox detectors. 
       
       
    • By Gerry in Idaho
      I thought I was pretty damn good, but this technology has me beat.
      https://www.nbcnews.com/science/environment/mining-gap-companies-push-find-raw-materials-electric-vehicle-boom-rcna5077
      Might be time to invest?
    • By mcjtom
      Metal detectors often seem to have a 'Depth Gauge'.  How is it calculated? Is it the strength (or inverse of it) of the amplitude of the return signal?  So, for instance, everything else being equal, the 'deep' target would mean either a stronger target at greater depth or a weaker shallow target?
    • By GB_Amateur
      While we're all abuzz with the announcement and advertised feature and performance characteristics of the XP Deus II, I'm wondering about tests that distinguish between detectors' target separation abilities.  'Word on the street' is that in trashy iron sites, the original Deus is still the best available.  Presumably those reports are based upon in-field testing, which of course is the real proof.  But the downside is, (AFAIK) these are qualitative observations, not quantitative.  Subjectivity involved?  Unfortunately, yes.
      We do have Monte's Nail Board Test for a special case -- iron nails near a single coin, all in the same plane and typically all on the surface of the ground.  Add depth combined with some mineralization (burying the MNB) and you've included another real world dimension.  But in the field, multiple nearby targets are seldom in the same plane.
      So you hopefully see the purpose of this post.  Has anyone seen/tried other methods to better simulate actual in-field conditions to differentiate between competing detectors to best be able to handle trashy sites?
    • By Rick N. MI
      I mostly hunt in lakes and the bottoms are mostly all sand. A test on a sandy beach with the Equinox 800 and Xp Orx, both hit hard on a 14k 3.7 gram gold ring buried at 14". For mild ground I don't see a need for multi frequency. I do like the multiple frequencies on the Orx.
      Is there an advantage to multi frequency in mild ground?
×
×
  • Create New...