By
RobNC
Ok.. I've encountered some really tough ground conditions in a lot of areas that I hunt regularly. We are talking the red dirt with little shiny particles all in it that also has iron mixed in. My Teknetics T2 struggles in it. My ORX struggles but will fish things out if you can stand the machine gun blips. I keep reading that the Equinox is more suited to deal with this. Now, I tried an Equinox 600 and found it to also cut up on certain plots of land, and the particular one I had was really horrible in iron. The tones also played tricks on my ears and I found the bleepity bling like sounds to confuse my caveman brain. The ORX has been a decent detector for me, and helped me rehabilitate myself after a car accident this year. However the tones in it are so close together that my ears can not often discriminate high from mid tone. There is no way to adjust it.
Let's fast forward to today. The Equinox 600 does not have the adjustability of the 800 concerning tones, or at least that is my understanding. I walked away from my Equinox 600 ticked off that I could not seemingly bond with it. In my mind there was a single thought - how much better would the 800 be? For those of you that have especially used the XP ORX or the Teknetics T2 and also used an Equinox 800 I'm asking you, does the Equinox 800 do better in contaminated soil than my current 2? It is possible I will trade the XP ORX towards the EQ800. Would that be a "step-up" in capabilities? I've always found this forum and the people here honest and fair with no BS. So I ask you, would it be worth the extra money, hassle and such to truly give the Equinox 800 a chance even though I had a 600 and it didn't quite suit me. It is entirely possible the 600 I had may have had a fault of some type for all I know. And what of depth with the EQ800 vs the XP ORX?
Reaching out to everyone in the know.