Steve Herschbach

I had an opportunity to go on this trip but life intervened and I could not go. On reading Steve’s account I’m not afraid to say that perhaps I’m really just too much of a weenie for a Condor style adventure anyway.

If there were such a thing as a best detector I’d only need one detector. That seems to be a near impossibility for me. The only way I can seem to get down to less than four is to just write off some aspect as being minor enough that I could sacrifice and live without it. So for instance I could decide that chasing tinier gold than my Equinox 800 can find is not a big deal, and so let my 24K go. I’ve considered it. But fact is I would be giving up a definite advantage in one distinct area, and I can’t quite bear to do that. Not for the few hundred bucks I’d get and the small amount of space it takes up. Do I really use my DFX with Bigfoot that much? No. But in some ways for what it does it’s irreplaceable, and so it stays. I tell myself that I could really make do with just a good VLF and a good PI, but even then it’s two detectors. When I think about all that the idea that there is one best detector is kind of a fantasy. That would take something that swings as nice as a T2/F75 while detecting as deep as a GPZ 7000 with the target id of a CTX 3030 and the separation of a Deus while hitting gold as small as a Gold Bug 2 and leakproof to 200 feet while having a Bigfoot option along with 20 other coils. We are a long way from that detector still.

But, but, but…. where would the forum be were it not for hair splitting?!

Depth on high conductors like many coins is not this detectors strength, and I do not recommend getting one if coin detecting is your main goal. Get a detector made for that task. The 24K is a great VLF for hunting gold nuggets, but even there it’s no match for high power pulse detectors on all but the smallest gold. If you want the 24K to use for looking for gold nuggets, and decide you want to do a little coin detecting with it, or better yet, jewelry detecting, that’s fine. But don’t buy it thinking it’s a coin detector. There are better choices.

Yeah, it’s been discussed before, and I thought it a good idea. I’ll get it done in the next few days. Thanks for the reminder.

Equinox is marginally more sensitive to the smallest low conductors. In my very extreme high magnetite content soil, Deus 2 will hold accurate target id on high conductor coins to substantially more depth than my Equinox 800. The two detectors hit the target to the same depth, but the 800 starts upscaling as much as two inches sooner than the Deus 2, pushing the targets up and around into reading ferrous. The D2 tended to hold accurate id close to the bitter end and then just lose the target. That one thing made me buy one. And of course in dense ferrous the limited time I spent so far with the D2 saw it picking smallish non-ferrous out of dense square nails better than the 800. Really the only edge I saw for the Nox was on really small gold or foil. I must reiterate this is Sierra type heavy magnetite blond soil derived from granitics, not red soils derived from serpentines. Mileage will most likely vary in other type soils.

When I have done product work for Minelab and others that is what I do. It is actually difficult to find huge differences in the field and more often than not top tier detectors will all find the same targets. But differences do exist in the extremities, and I know I’d not have to dig 1000 targets to find those differences. Still, it gets pretty hair splitting at times and net result is the same. If anyone can’t do well with any of these latest SMF detectors they need to find a new hobby. During Equinox late prototype testing….. The secret when cross checking is don’t even bother with good targets. Hunt for the weakest iffiest targets, and only compare on those. There are clear differences between the Equinox 800 and Deus 2 for instance. Took less than an hour for me to sort that out.

In my world the choice is more about whether I want to use a PI for genuine power, or settle for a VLF to deal with some discrimination issue. All VLFs are second tier detectors when it comes to raw power, and from my perspective top end models are all pretty satisfactory at this point. If you genuinely care about making more finds put all your efforts into research and getting to new and hopefully better locations. That will make far more diffence than hunting that same old park the hundredth time with the latest new whiz bang toy.

There is nothing wrong with Deeptech but nothing particularly special about them either. If you want a real good single frequency detector they are an option. But there are also lots of other really great single frequency detector options. If you are interested in widespread dealer support or resale, those other options are simply the safer way to go. Look at the reality of where the interest is. Endless discussion of Legend, Deus 2, Equinox, Manticore. Or whatever new multi might be in the works by anyone. Like it or not single frequency is now yesterdays news, and no amount of grousing by some old timers is going to change that.

The link I posted just before you posted gets into details. To a large degree the truth is multifrequency is best now. Just depends on where you are and what you do. Florida it's salt. West coast beaches it's magnetite and salt. Gold prospectors in deserts it's magnetite and salt. Lots of places it's very little of either. Half of metal detector design or more is about getting the detector to play well with the environment. https://www.detectorprospector.com/forums/topic/1599-gb-numbers-mineralization/?do=findComment&comment=19002

I need to update this but it is still a good basic reference.....

Just lower. 8 kHz would be a standard lower frequency but the Fisher 1280x designed for saltwater runs at 1.5 kHz. It’s all trade offs. In general I’d say under 10 kHz as lower frequency, 10-20 is mid frequency, above 20 is the high end. 12 - 15 is better on low conductors than lower but still good with the silver, and a good compromise compared to even higher frequencies. It’s been a good choice for general purpose do it all machines. But silver only 3 - 5 khz have probably been the focus more often than not.

Good point Simon, and in general I agree. Lots of hot rocks in my area at least come in on the Nox at around 13, which is about where nickels hit, but more disturbingly, where 1/4 oz nugget would read. In tiny gold areas you can just notch them out, but in larger gold areas it could cost a larger nugget. Some of this will just depend where a person is at and the ground they are encountering.

In general lower frequencies are less reactive to ground and therefore get better penetration on high conductors in difficult soils.

I've probably used both more than anyone Jeff!! OK, I admit we are talking 900 but sorry, I don't think that's much different than an 800 when it comes to gold. At least I have not been able to convince myself that getting a 900 would make enough difference in that regard that I'm just sticking with the 800. They are just two different tools in my toolbox and which one I grab depends on the job. The 24K is slightly more sensitive to the tiniest gold, and it's coils are generally more knock resistant to while using the scrubbing techniques often employed to find those small nuggets. The Nox on the other hand can effectively employ larger coils and more sophisticated discrimination capability. I own both and if I was in a situation tomorrow where I was after tiny nuggets or finely dispersed specimen gold I would grab the 24K and 6" concentric coil. If I was going to search tailing piles full of junk for larger gold I would grab the Equinox with 12" x 15" coil. From an overall usefulness perspective if I had to keep just one it would be the Equinox, but so far I keep the 24K around also as it does have its place. The 24K is also more straightforward in what it does and so if I am going to use a PI, which is usually the case, chances are I'd be tossing the 24K in as a backup unit rather than the Equinox, but it's a pretty close call on that. Again it would depend on the exact situation. I do think that people used to older VLF nugget detectors would take more easily to the 24K. It's just another nugget detector. The Equinox requires new modes of thinking and is totally different in how it is used to hunt gold. I guess the simple answer is if you just want a nugget detector, that's what the 24K is. The Equinox is a superb do-it-all machine for people that also want coin, releic, and jewelry capability, all in one machine. But those extras might get in the way of some people who just want to hunt gold nuggets.

Cleaning Threads

I will say it's always safe to not clean a coin. But I will also comment that people in general vastly overestimate the value of coins recovered while metal detecting. Guesses at how coins that have spent time in the ground will grade are often way off the mark. You have to do your due diligence in finding out if the coin is of exceptional value for some reason. If not, then it's really just a personal decision whether to clean it or not.

Well there again is a reason to wait. The Axiom has a transferable warranty, and you just KNOW somebody will be getting one and selling it used sometime in the near future. Get it used with warranty to try and if not happy, sell yet again with warranty. That makes buy and try a bit more palatable. So far though that has not been happening and I was a little surprised to see only one sold used on all of ebay so far, and none available used at this time.

To this day I think the GPX 5000 is one of the most capable all around nugget detectors made. It also has been one of the best available options for relic and beach hunters wanting a high power PI. This is directly due to the large range of coils and tuning options. I honestly do prefer the Axiom myself for my own use though and would not go back to the GPX 5000. For me it and my uses it would be going backwards. But he asked a direct question framed a certain way and I gave a direct answer to the question as posed. My entire career and mode of operation has been being a devil's advocate and attempting to see things from different perspectives. I can switch roles instantly. So while I personally like the Axiom myself I have no problem at all seeing valid reasons for other positions. The key ones you yourself touched on. There is no rush. Waiting for more independent feedback and waiting to see how the accessory coil situation plays out will kill nobody. If I put my Axiom sales hat on though I will offer just one thing. A picture. It says all you really need to know about Axiom vs GPX 5000.

I beg to differ with Tom. It’s a yes or no thing, not blah blah quasi blah blah. My answer is no.

+1 703-367-7999 https://www.wikihow.com/Call-the-USA

A concern I have with the Manticore believe it or not is the 50% more power thing. Boosting transmit power in bad ground can overload the detector and shut it down. In worst case scenarios the shut down is silent. I've been saying since day one to anyone that would listen that the Manticore is geared more to turf and beach detecting than anything else. It was fine tuned for Florida beach conditions, not high mineral ground. It was fine tuned more for silver coins than for small gold. None of this is surprising to me at least, nor should it be to anyone that listened. Anyway, it would not surprise me also that what in theory should be the deepest settings on Manticore will backfire in the worst ground.

There is a general communication disconnect between people who only hunt in moderate to low mineral ground, and those who mainly hunt extreme mineral ground. People read depth quotes given from low mineral ground and think their detector is broken. "Gee, my detector only hits a dime at 7" - what's wrong with it or my settings?" People from low mineral land tend to love air tests. People in extreme ground tend to scorn such tests. The low mineral people tend to struggle to figure out why anyone would use a PI detector and even argue against their use. When placed in bad ground low mineral people will often do exactly the wrong thing and then wonder why they are having no success. I see this often in gold prospecting when people who have hunted coins in turf or Florida beaches try to find gold nuggets for the first time. Wrong detectors, wrong coils, wrong settings, wrong technique. The worst ones to teach are often the ones who have been at it the longest since they have the most to unlearn. It's hard to break old habits. With newbies at least I don't have to fight ingrained misperceptions. It's literally like people speaking two different languages at times, with both misunderstanding the other. Some of the stupidest arguments about metal detector performance come when low mineral people compare results with high mineral people and both call the other a liar.

Great report Daniel, thanks. I have just two comments to clarify a couple things for people who only hunt lower mineral conditions. This is what I saw with Equinox and was why early on I recommended not using real low recovery speeds in bad ground. This conflicted with advice coming from the low mineral camp to run very low recovery speeds. That’s fine in moderate soils. In extreme ground, it will cost you. Why? Hunting extreme ground is like hunting a bed of nails. Too low reactivity lets the ground mask everything while faster recovery speeds or reactivity allows for better see through capability. But too high is not good either of course. To quote myself from 2018 “Lower settings = more depth and faster settings = less depth is totally wrong unless you detect in the air.” Long story short very low recovery speed or reactivity can hurt depth in very high mineral ground and/or hot rock situations due to ground and hot rock masking. It should be obvious that large coils “see” more ground. In extreme ground and on a single target, increasing the coil size increases the amount of ground the detector has to deal with, while the target size remains the same. The ground in these cases is an undesirable target, and you are making the ratio between the desired target (bullet or gold nugget) and the undesired target (ground and hot rocks) worse by using a larger coil. This leads to the counterintuitive situation where in the worst ground, going to a smaller coil will actually increase target definition and perceived depth over the larger coils. Large coils may actually overload and lose all ability to detect at all, unless transmit power can be reduced, which effectively reduces depth, but allows the detector to function. The Equinox Beach 2 mode does this automatically and despite the name is a fallback mode for extreme ground of any sort. And so long story short again, stick with stock coils or go to smaller coils in extreme ground. Larger coils may not only not add depth, but can actually lose depth in the worst ground!

Oh gosh, let's see. Lack of coils is a big one. Axiom is not bad there but nothing beats the GPX series by when it comes to coil selection. Way more settings for more varied situations with GPX, as long as you can actually master them. And if you have, and machine you know and are familiar with counts for something. You already own it, and it costs nothing to keep owning it versus buying another detector. If nothing else maybe you end up hating the Axiom and wishing you had your GPX back, so hanging on to it until your really are sure you want to go that route is cheap insurance if you can afford it. If you like the Axiom enough you'll just stop using the GPX, then it will be an easy decision to sell it. A simple difference though is if smaller gold in highly mineralized ground matters Axiom has the easy edge there. Half ounce plus nuggets at depth, GPX due to large coils if nothing else. I always liked the Nugget Finder 18" mono, what a sweet coil. Anyway, that was off the top of my head fast before I go walk the weiner herd.