Jump to content

Could Not Make Eqx To See The Target


Recommended Posts

Thanks for all replies so far, we are going to try this place once again this weekend, I will report how it feels on v1.5
We may even dig that same test hole once again if we have time.

I have to say, that all nearby fields are very dense with coke, every meter or so, I just didn't realize it may blind the equinox this much. It really likes it, very very strong signal and it is not shallow as I could hear it only once per swing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How to try older versions / reload old version to see for myself ?


Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, KD0CAC said:

How to try older versions / reload old version to see for myself ?


When you run the Equinox firmware updater you can D/L off the ML website , it will check your detector firmware version.  On that screen is a drop down menu that gives you the option to update to latest version or roll back to either one of the two previous versions.

Honestly, at this point I see no reason to roll back.  I respectfully disagree with Nordic’s premise that the updates are biased to larger targets and are sacrificing overall drepth.  In fact, ML improved on the ability for Equinox to correctly ID edge on coins which increase low target profile “sensitivity” and should enhance depth performance for small targets.  The user profile “reset” bug of the original 1.5 version firmware was also addressed in the version 1.75 update.  Finally, the F2 iron bias filter algorithm introduced in Ver 2 is superior to the Fe iron bias algorithm IMO but ML smartly decided to retain the legacy Fe version as a setting option in ver 2, if that is your preference, without having to roll back to 1.75.  

Not all my issues have been addressed (hello, wonky pinpoint mode) but there certainly is nothing compelling in the previous versions to make me want to roll back to 2.0.  And frankly, my quibbles with remaining Equinox “issues“ are so minor I wouldn’t lose any sleep if this were the last firmware update Equinox sees from a bug fix standpoint.  I would love to continue to see performance enhancement feature adds similar to F2 in future updates, though.

All that being said, I agree that Nordic should go ahead and run the earlier version to convince himself one way or the other and fortunately, ML has made it relatively easy to jump back or jump forward with the various released versions of the firmware. 

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this ability to roll back and forth made me a little too anxious on what to use and what is best, and not just me.. From researching the topic, I lean towards a conclusion, that with firmware updates ML had to address users complaints mostly. Especially in regards to iron, bottle caps and such. And a lot of us do hunt coins and jewelry only, including my friend with Deux. I'm all hands with ML and that they release such updates, but from engineering perspective, I think such updates are very hard to make without sacrificing something else. I still believe v1.5 is probably the firmware that ML engineers came up with to be what they wanted it to be (other than user profile bug) and all other firmware revisions are fixes and making the masses happy. After all, they need to sell this stuff too. From my own experience, since updating to v2, I feel I haven't dug anything deep for a while, and not much beside coins, as if ML made the algorithm a little more weighted or averaged - as in, not seeing small things as it used to, in order to reduce falsing and filter funny shaped objects that respond with inconsistent phase shift as coil moves over them. All this requires a lot more maturity from the detectorist, which I don't think I am sure, but prefer to dig it all and learn that way, than not see objects at all.

I don't use user profile and I prefer v1.5 pinpointer, I feel it is a lot narrower/sharper than on any other firmware. Also, I don't think depth has changed. As long as ground is clear of other objects, equinox sees items them deep, loud and clear, but I feel that in busier ground, it may see less or filter out more, or average more, something amongst these lines. As an example, if I put a coin inside the horse shoe, older software seem to be able to see it better somehow, by a fraction. And nobody seem to run such tests, people either put nails and swing an inch above the target or bury targets deep into clean ground, or worse - do air tests. But real grounds, at least near me, are far from such scenarios. 

I just want to suggest to not to lose sleep over these updates. Find one that works well for you and stay with it, I guess. The only reason it sparked my interest again is this obvious "fall" before the Deus on a certain situation discussed earlier.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



Couple of thoughts.

First of all, I agree with you.  No one should lose any sleep over which version to use.  They are ALL acceptable and get the job done.  I have found awesome (and deep) stuff with each and every version.

If the masses perceived that the subsequent Equinox updates actually reduced depth, I think we would certainly be hearing about it en masse.  That doesn't appear to be the case.

Sometimes, things are just circumstantial or you run into an extended cold streak and the perception is something has changed with the detector (for the worst) and most of the time it really just turns out to be dumb luck or poor site selection.

Finally, remember that no one detector DOES IT ALL.  Equinox like every other detector out there is not perfect.  Neither is Deus.   But there is something to be said of diversity in detecting equipment and I find for me that Deus and Equinox make a great combination if I have the luxury to hit a site multiple times or have the time to go over the site with both detectors.  Also, sometimes you just have to acknowledge that under certain situations one detector is truly superior to the other.  I prefer Deus over Equinox in thick iron situations.  I prefer Equinox at salt sand beaches.  Otherwise, there is a lot of overlap and I find the detectors compliment each other.

Final note, regarding that user profile button.  I find it VERY useful to quickly interrogate iffy signals with diverse Equinox detection modes before I dig the target.  If I get an iffy signal on Field 2, I may have Gold mode or Park 1 loaded up in the user profile slot.  Sometimes that can may an iffy target turn into a definite dig me signal.  I also use Pinpointer to help characterize the footprint of the target (in fact, I rarely use pinpoint to actually pinpoint a target because I feel I can pinpoint better by wiggling the coil edge off the target).

Good luck and HH!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very good points, thanks a lot for jumping in.

As you said, a lot is based on perception and differences are subtle enough to be influenced by mood alone. There is no general consensus which version does better or worse, but people do rollback or use older versions to suit their tastes or other reason. I'm sure there are people here who are still on either version...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chase and Nordic, 

You both are way ahead of me on the 800! Im still in the crawling and standing stage as far as inland sites!  And i value both your opinions and instructions on the Nox!   

Pinpoint has not been a big issue to me on any of my detectors, because I've alway used a pinpointer! I've found very tiny stuff with the Nox, and i would be looking way too long without it! 

I'm sure with any detector, one can create a situation where the desired object will not be picked up! But i think those are few and far between! But thanks to you guys, and many of the poster's here, those situations are highlighted and delt with! 

Here in Florida, I'm more concerned with beach conditions, than coins in a horseshoe🤣 But info like this makes an educated detectorist! 

Keep up the good posts, and i will continue to be the apprentice! 👍

  • Like 2
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 ColonelDan
      I've read several threads on the soon-to-be-fielded Deus 2 and how it will compare to the Equinox. There have been many good views on this topic so I thought I'd share mine. As you read this, keep in mind the views expressed here are worth just as much as you've paid for them. 😁

      1. Wireless vs Wired: I'm 99% a salt water beach hunter with my EQX 800 and the way I grid a beach, I often go from the damp sand to the wet sand and then into the surf (only about 1 foot deep due to concerns over water intrusion so I keep the control box dry). Given that, a Deus II for me would have to be constantly wired from coil to control box in order to work in the surf. For that reason, a totally wireless capability would not be that enticing since the wire from coil to box would be a permanent configuration.

      2. Waterproof: I owned a Deus and found it to be a solidly engineered machine so I'm not a skeptic where XP claims of being waterproof are concerned. Were I to make a wager, I'd bet on much better waterproof performance in the Deus II than was the original ML waterproof claim for the EQX. Being truly waterproof is important for me and not because I hunt deeper than 1 foot in salt water these days because I don't. Ours is an outdoor hobby so I think all detectors should be waterproof...at the very least, reliably weatherproof. How many times have you been caught in the rain or dropped your detector in a puddle of water? Even if you are a land hunter and never go near any water, replacing a damaged or inop machine due to moisture intrusion isn't a trivial thing.

      3. Build quality: The Deus I had was quality built, rugged and reliable. No coil ear issues, wobbly shafts or arm cuff breakage. In my view, it was a much more rugged detector than Minelab products in certain areas. XP doesn't seem to pinch pennies as did Minelab on simple things. Recall the original skimpy gaskets they put in the CTX 3030 that caused flooding of the battery box. The issue was solved when they came out with merely a little thicker gasket! Their use of cheap coil ears, arm cuffs and wobbly shafts on the EQX series is another example. For a few pennies more per unit, they would have saved untold thousands in warranty replacement costs in both the CTX and EQX series machines. Although they are among the very best where software technology is concerned, I never understood that "penny wise pound foolish" approach in their physical build design.

      4. Overall Performance: This is where the EQX was superior to my original Deus. The multi-frequency/multi IQ of the EQX vs the selectable single frequency of the Deus was an obvious choice in my salt water beach hunting environment. I eventually sold my Deus for that reason. Now, if XP has really overcome that limitation in the Deus II with their FMF feature, I'll be happily impressed.

      5. Final Thoughts: I'm with the others who will take a "wait and see" approach. But, given my past experience with XP engineering, I have no doubt the Deus II will be a very capable salt water beach detector. Will it generally outperform the Minelabs? TBD. Will it be found that XP pinched pennies on their build quality? I say no. It will be a well built unit. Will it be more comfortable to use than the Minelabs? Yes. Will it be more complex in its settings options than the Minelabs? Yes. Will it's overall performance justify the higher price tag compared to the current EQX? TBD but that will be determined solely by and in the eye of the beholder as the saying goes.

      Just a few thoughts from my foxhole...  
    • By UT Dave
      I'd like to increase my knowledge and skill in tuning my Nox 800 for specific conditions.
      Those of you who tune your machines off the factory defaults, please share what you have!  Not what your settings are, but how you arrive at those settings.
      For instance, is there a relationship between different settings, such, that a preferred order of operations is suggested for optimal results?  I noise cancel, then ground grab, then adjust sensitivity.  FE2, Recovery, Threshold, is there a best practice for the order in which they are set?
      How do you know when you should increase or decrease FE2 or Recovery?  What factors or indicators go into that decision?
      I've arrived at my current default beginning state, by trying to make things first "worse" in my test garden.  By adjusting each setting individually up and down though the full range of adjustment, noting whether signal got better or worse at each step, to get what I considered the best signal on a deep silver coin.  But doing so in a controlled situation with a known target like that is one thing, knowing how to read variable conditions and how to tune accordingly is quite another.
      How do you make your tuning decisions in the field?  What are the settings you most frequently find need adjusted to accommodate search conditions?
      - Dave
    • By Veisal
      Here are some improvements to the ergonomics of the minelab equinox 600/800 made with a 3D printer 

    • By Momokahn
      Just like the college sports transfer portal, I too have decided to change my mind.😁  I was set on buying the new NM Legend.  Instead I visited a local MD dealer today and had a chance to test drive the dealers Equinox 800. The Equinox 800 checked every box and then some.  It will get me where I want to be in metal detecting.  The dealer was pretty impressed on how I was able to navigate through the controllers menus and settings. It is on order and will be here next week.  Now for the "goodies" getting thrown in for free.  Both editions of Andy Sabisch's Handbooks on the Equinox 600/800, a Minelab Hat (I love hats), and any magazine, current or past editions that are in stock.  And there are a lot in stock.  Excited is an understatement.
    • By Dan(NM)
      I had a very productive day hunting a city park in a nearby town. Took me 7 1/2 hours to round up all these keepers. The v nickel is the fifth one I've taken out of this park in the last 2 weeks. Ended up with a nickel trifecta to boot.  I think I'm going to get the 5x10 coil due to the amount of iron and debris in the places that are producing the coins. I did pretty good by going nice and slow and digging all iffy tones. I was very surprised to see the Canadian quarter come out, that's the second one I've found this year.
      Nox 800
      Park 1
      Recovery 3
      Iron Bias 0
      Sens 23
      Manual GB 30
      2 Tones
      Tone break at 10
      No Disc-wide open

    • By Dan(NM)
      I went back to a park that's been producing some good finds. Today was a very unusual nickel day. Ended up with 3 silver war nickels, a v nickel, an unidentified coin, 4 Wheaties and a religious medallion. I didn't really have a goal this year for silver coins but with today's finds that puts me at 112 for the year. Running park 1...2 tones..no disc...manual gb at 30..recovery speed 3..iron bias at F2-0.. tone break at 10...sens 23.  All war nickels hit at 15, the V hit 12-13, the unidentified coin(?) hits at 12.

  • Create New...