Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Maltfoto

Equinox 600 Vs Fisher F44 & F70

Recommended Posts

I think this fits here.

Some folks may not believe this.  It’s ok to test a detector.  But for whatever reason Equinox will see some things other detectors single freq struggles on.  My point being, I don’t think there are really test that can be assembled that will indeed show Equinox total capabilities.

On paper I think the Minelab engineers know this.  Real world hunting and comparing targets will show.   The only question I have is what kind of test bed did Minelab use ( if they used one) to show this detector series capabilities.

Or did they just depend on the actual real world detecting on targets in the wild.  Any case some thing is up with tech used with Equinox.  And I think it involves soil masking and perhaps masking caused by tiny bits of ferrous or rust.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good point sharpshooter.. I have thought about this many times myself. The Equinox continues to surprise me with every hunt. This is more obvious in really tough conditions which I actually look forward to hunting now. 

Bryan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Jeff, Thanks for the reply and interest in my post.  The settings on the f44 for the coin nail test were 16 on the sensitivity  and all metal mode. After hearing your results jeff, I am going to do a retest of the coin nail test. But it might be a while as I lent my f44 to a friend today.  Why did I buy the 600 instead of the 800? Some people asked. Simple answer - Because I got a great deal on the 600 even though I had read that the 800 was better machine.  Why did I buy a eqinox machine at all especially if I was happy with my fishers whites and garretts?  The answer is Because as I said before is that I have used machines from almost every manufacturer except minelabs and I saw the eqinox  as a good machine to try out the current best that minelabs has to offer. I wanted to find out if there was any truth to all the minelabs hype I had been reading on the internet. The answer to that question is mostly no.  And that's where I am coming from.  The eqinox has its strengths and weaknesses like all the other machines I have tested. It certainty is not the holy Grail  -do all- of metal detectors that some making it out to be.  I would take the f44 or my land ranger pro over it any day for relic and coin hunting, and my White TDI with certain coils blows it out out of the water for gold prospecting.  The only area where I.found the 600 to really excell was as a VLF salt water beach  machine. The discrimination was nice to have as I have used many PI machines with no discrimination. The PI machines still had much better depth then the 600 although. All the best, Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Michael the TDI and Equinox use Completely different technology (PI and VLF)for detection and usually aren’t compared to each other except for showing the different uses for each, and again the 600 wasn’t designed for nugget hunting.  

As for the F44 and Land ranger performing better the the Equinox. I can see where some people who hunt on mild ground or have very little experience running a Multi Frequency Minelab might think that.  They are different and some people don’t take to them.  Sounds like you will probably do better with your Fishers if that’s what your comfortable with.  

I’m sure you will have no problem trading your Equinox for another Fisher.

Bryan

 

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well Michael, since you are a first time poster making a statement I will just say I disagree with your conclusions and leave it at that. No point in any discussion really since you are as comfortable in your certainty as I am in mine.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Michael,

thanks for the reply including the settings for your F44 vs the Equinox 600. 

Comparing any two VLF detectors no matter what they cost or how they have been hyped with one in all metal and one in a discrimination mode is like racing a V8 engine car against a non-turbo 4 banger on a one mile straight away. The winner is predictable.

As most people here have said your testing would be more valid if it had been done with an Equinox 800 in all metal or if all your testing with your Fisher detectors had been done in a discrimination mode against the Equinox 600.

I actually agree with you about the lack of an all metal mode on the Equinox 600. For the price one pays for it I would happily have given up one of the Field or Beach modes for an all metal mode. But that is how Minelab has usually done things when it comes to their VLF detector families like the X-Terra series and the Go Finds too. They always leave off features in their less priced models which makes me think there really might be an Equinox 1000 someday.

Jeff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/4/2018 at 11:46 AM, Jeff McClendon said:

I actually agree with you about the lack of an all metal mode on the Equinox 600. For the price one pays for it I would happily have given up one of the Field or Beach modes for an all metal mode. But that is how Minelab has usually done things when it comes to their VLF detector families like the X-Terra series and the Go Finds too. They always leave off features in their less priced models which makes me think there really might be an Equinox 1000 someday.

Actually this is not about an economy model cost savings measure on ML's part but is sort of the way the detector design community is headed as they move heavier into digital signal processing.  It is not even clear to me that the CTX 3030 flagship detector has true all metal mode (as opposed to simply a zero discrimination pattern).  I do not own a CTX, just went through the manual in detail, so I am sure a CTX expert will set me straight.  But  I can tell you with certainty, the Deus @ $1500 does not have a true all metal mode (Gold Field mode being the closest approximation).  Point is, this is not about saving cost.  It is about the the detector designers favoring digital signal processing over transmitting the raw unfiltered signal.  All metal mode is not something you will automatically find on many high end detectors.  So the OP's statements like, "When I pay $650.00 for a machine I expect it to have that option on it -period. Their is no excuse why it does not" that imply the lack of a true all metal mode is an Equinox oversight or that all high end detectors have this feature, is not consistent with many high end detector designs of recent years (though true metal is still a feature on a number of recently released detectors).  Though I do understand why you like it, Maltfoto, my point was there are ways you can use the Equinox zero disc mode to your advantage without losing a lot of capability vs. true all metal and, as I discuss below, the 800 would have been more suited to your feature preferences and detecting style.

The move in the detector community away from including All Metal Mode or at least the marketeer's imprecise use of technical terms that have kind of blurred the line between Zero Disc mode and (true) All Metal Mode is addressed in Steve's excellent Detector Mixed Modes Guide.  This will better illustrate whey you will not find all metal mode on all detectors, even high end detectors, and also how it can be mitigated through mixed modes or intelligent application of available features on detectors which do not incorporate the feature.

Regarding Equinox.  Gold Mode available only on the 800 is probably the closest thing to a mixed mode.  It invokes most features of true all metal mode through its use of VCO pitch like audio and true audio threshold for target acquisition and target ID at depth using the discrimination circuit.  Though still not precisely true all metal, this weak signal mode is also the mode that is the ideal mode to test small gold target performance versus the Fishers.  Again, it seems for the type of detecting Maltfoto prefers, the 800 would have been the better choice.  Regardless, I think the 600 is a great complimentary detector that, despite its shortcomings, does still have advantages over the Fishers in some, if not most, scenarios.   So hanging on to it and learning more about how to get more out of it with experience would be a great move by Maltfoto, if getting an 800 is out of the question.  Thanks again to Maltfoto for kicking off a great discussion.

 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
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
Sign in to follow this  

  • Similar Content

    • By Dig It
      Have been looking bck. at past post on waterproof headphones for 800 NOX. Just wondering if there is a clear winner ?
    • By Jeff McClendon
      I have had my XP Deus for almost 2 weeks so assume I know next to nothing in 10 hours of detecting. I have had my Equinox 600 long enough to have hundreds of hours so I know a little. Today I thought I would set up both detectors with small gold jewelry programs. I wasn't expecting anything special. It was 28 F here and I did not want to dig any targets deeper than 4 inches and I went to a public park soccer field that I have never detected before.
      The Deus was set up like this: software V4.1, 9" HF coil, slightly altered by notching GM Power program saved in slot 12, frequency 14,414, disc at 6.1, sensitivity 80, iron vol. 3, reactivity 2, audio response 4, 3 tones, volume 7 on WS5 headphones, GB 87. I had two notches set up. The first was from the 0 to 35. The second was from 62 to 99. So most of the small gold range, small aluminum, beaver tails and nickels were detectable.
      The Equinox 600 was set up like this: firmware updated, 11" coil, Field 1, multi frequency, disc at 0, sensitivity 13, iron bias 0, recovery speed 3, 5 tones, volume 20 on Avantree low latency bluetooth headphones, threshold 9, GB 3, I also had two notches set. The first was from -9 to 0. The second was from 14 to 40. So most of the small gold range, small aluminum, beaver tails and nickels were detectable.
      I detected roughly 1/4 of the soccer field in 1 hour with the Deus and had a really nice, quiet walk. I found two 4" nickels, plenty of small aluminum, and a young person's good quality stainless steel and tungsten ring. Dug 23 targets none over 4" deep. I did not skip any detected targets meaning those that had at least one audible beep. The Deus was a pleasure to use. I was careful to not walk too fast, kept my swings low and smooth, and overlapped swings at a medium speed roughly one complete left and back to the right swing in around 2 seconds
      I detected the exact same area with the Equinox 600. Immediately I began to detect numerous targets. I counted 47 in all at the end of the hunt. It was getting really cold so I dug 15 of the 47. Most were small aluminum can slaw in the less than 1/2" size at 1" to 3" depth. I Also recovered 4 complete beaver tail pull tabs at  3" to 4". I also recovered 1/3 of a crushed aluminum soda can at 2" depth. I used the same swing speed and walking speed as best I could.
      This really surprised me to say the least. I need someone who owns both of these detectors to help me understand why these similar settings (or maybe I am a complete idiot!) resulted in one detector completely missing over 40 targets (I heard absolutely nothing). Obviously I am an XP Deus newbie so this topic is about my ignorance more than anything else I'm sure. I am not trying to engage in an XP Deus vs Equinox 600 discussion. I just need some settings advice. The only person I know with both of these detectors where I live, recently had a heart attack (he's okay) and I don't want to bother him with this. 
      Thanks in advance for anyone that responds to this topic.
      Jeff
    • By calabash digger
      Testing on a piece of Colonial gold I found.
       
    • By Tnsharpshooter
      https://www.minelab.com/usa/knowledge-base/frequently-asked-questions
    • By calabash digger
      Head to head shootout of the 9 inch coils...Steve if this causes to much drama I understand.
       
    • By Tnsharpshooter
      Smaller coils attached in pic.  For gee whiz, longest section with coils removed both detector is the lower rod on Equinox. It measures 24 1/8”.

×