Another Deus2 Vs. Equinox Comparison Video (from Ukraine, But In English)

[GB_Amateur]

Interesting video which was linked on the Dankowski forum.  Not perfect (as none ever is), but worth a watch, IMO.  It's not typical of ones I've seen.  (Pretty sure this isn't posted here yet....)

 

 

[Calarms]

That was interesting video thank you

[phrunt]

The Deus did pretty well, but essentially for me it means little that the Deus was 2 or 3cm deeper with them both using 11" coils as I'd not be using an 11" coil if I was looking for deeper targets with the Nox, I'd bang on the 15x12" coil which I find quite a bit deeper than the 11" in my ground.

It shows the Deus has potential though, if they made more coils for it.  It's a shame the guy never shows the screens so we can see what's going on.

[Jeff McClendon]

That was a very good video. I like that way of using undisturbed ground. I doubt I would like digging a hole that big in semi-frozen ground however. He did a very good job of being unbiased during the testing and of letting the detectors be the center of attention.

The smallest target was around 1 gram with the heaviest 16 grams (I think).

Deep HC was very effective and impressive on all of those targets. The settings posted were very incomplete and were not default settings. Also, Iron volume seemed to be off during depth testing and on during separation testing. Audio Response seemed to be cranked up above 5 which is default on Deep HC....maybe I am wrong on that. Also seemed to be using Square audio.

Whatever mode the Equinox was in..........the list only said All Metal so it could have been Park 1, Park 2, Field 1, Field 2 Beach 1 or Beach 2........definitely not Gold modes so who knows. Recovery speed 3 is fine for depth testing if the tester slowed down their swing a lot. Recovery speed 3 is lousy for separation testing. So is auto tracking ground balance which I assume is what ground balance=auto meant in their settings list. Not for one moment suggesting that the Equinox even with manual ground balance and recovery speed 8 would match the Deus 2 in iron target vs silver coin separation testing......not going to happen EVER.

So, note to self if I ever video a test like this........clearly state what all the settings are, actually show them on the screen along with target IDs and also if one detector is in tracking, they both should be in tracking. If one detector has iron volume on at 20 of 25 they both should have at least iron volume on at an easily audible level, if one detector is running a program with a maximum of 24 to 40 kHz and one is running a program with a maximum of 14 kHz on 1 gram to 16 gram weighted targets, which would you expect to do much better on that sized targets in mild ground? This is another deficiency that Minelab needs to address with the Equinox.....a lower weighted deep mid to high conductor coin/relic mode like Deep HC for milder ground conditions.

The tester seemed to be very unfamiliar with the Equinox (using borrowed settings and swinging way too fast). Probably hasn't had much time on Deus 2 for obvious reasons. 

Not saying this test was not valid. 

I am saying that Deus 2 in Deep HC is very, very good in those ground conditions with whatever settings the tester was using that were not listed.

 

[phrunt]

Interestingly he has done this same video a week or so ago with the CTX and 11" coil.  He made out he dug the hole for the Equinox video but he's been using the same hole for ages in various videos 🙂

I don't know why he chose to do the Equinox video in English as the others he's done are in Ukrainian.

Here is the CTX video vs Deus 2

The Interesting thing in this video is the  silver coin he starts with in both videos the Deus 2 seems to hit with a better signal in this video than it does in the Nox video.

I didn't bother watching the rest of the video, I guess you could use Youtube to translate it into subtitles but I just can't be bothered watching it, someone may find it useful.  He never shows settings but the CTX seemed to be discriminating to me so was blanking on the target.  Unless this guy starts to show settings that he's using and visually show the screens of the detectors while doing the video then I don't find his videos useful.

 

 

 

[mn90403]

Saves me the time of watching them!

[palzynski]

This is a good video . From what I have seen on this video the D2 11 seems to be at least as good as the Eq800 11 for depth. But not much difference .

However the guy concludes a little too quickly for me. A detector cannot be assessed after short static tests and he seems to forget the field tests which are the most important part of the assessment job ...  May be he will do them later  ...

For example he completely missed the mechanical ergonomy which is probably the most important difference between the Equinox and the Deus2. The D2 will probably be around 300g lighter than the Eq800 with the CB in the pocket , and this should make an important difference  in the field during long outings .. 

[GB_Amateur]

11 hours ago, Jeff McClendon said:

Whatever mode the Equinox was in...

Yes, that was the first thing I wondered when watching the video, and I went back afterward to see his settings, hoping I had missed it -- I hadn't.

11 hours ago, Jeff McClendon said:

Recovery speed 3 is fine for depth testing if the tester slowed down their swing a lot. Recovery speed 3 is lousy for separation testing. So is auto tracking ground balance which I assume is what ground balance=auto meant in their settings list.

I also wondered about this choice, and particularly when he swung the coil relatively quickly.  I don't know that he would have gotten a stronger signal with the Eqx had he changed those, but it's one of those things that I look out for when watching detector performance videos.  Unfortunately I don't undestand a lot of detctors (XP's in particular) as well as I know the Eqx, so I can't be as critical of the settings chosen for other detectors.

11 hours ago, Jeff McClendon said:

The tester seemed to be very unfamiliar with the Equinox (using borrowed settings and swinging way too fast). Probably hasn't had much time on Deus 2 for obvious reasons.

Always a weakness of detector comparisons -- how well do the testers know the detectors they are comparing?  It's difficult to ignore the comparison part completely but IMO they should always be taken with a large grain of salt.  I like this video for what it shows about the Deus 2 on its own.  And as you note, possibly it also could be configured for even better performance in his test.  Overall I appreciate his efforts and they do seem to show that the Deus 2 is a strong performer, in his conditions and for his targets at least.

[abenson]

I didn't catch whether or not his ground was mild or mineralized. From some of the depths he was getting I would assume mild. As has already been noted it would be nice to know what mode he was using on the Equinox. I would have dropped the iron bias on the Equinox down to F2=0. hard for me to read but I think he had it set as FE=4. In any case this test is similar to others I've seen in mild soil where the Deus is just a few centimeters deeper than the Equinox.