Chase Goldman

Yes. I obtained a short audio patch cable for my Gray Ghost MDT headphones which have a detachable non-coiled audio cable similar to any wireless BT headset nowadays, attached the WM08 to the Headphones’ head band and voila instant, self contained wireless headset utilizing ML Wi-Stream vice Bluetooth. It’s not going to win any style awards, but it’s functional. Frankly, since the WM08 is small and can be pocketed or attached just about anywhere on your person, you can easily use any decent set of phones that utilize a detachable, non-coiled audio cable by obtaining an appropriately short non-coiled version of the audio cable using compatible connectors. With a little forethought on the selection of headphone and audio cable to be used, headphone cable management while using the WM08 should be a non-issue.

I have the Tele Nox collapsible shaft on my "backup" Equinox and keep my 6" coil on that shaft which I like. Makes a great packable detector. Can't wait to get that Coiktek 10x5 on it. Great little back woods packable setup. Point being is I like the Telenox brand, just not sure about this design from both a price and looks standpoint.

I agree, but not sure why they just didn't stop at the S Stem. I suppose they felt it was better to make use of that lower extension rather than just capping it. I guess fabricating such a beast out of CF is not cheap.

I primarily use Bluetooth and have used both the WM08 and a direct wired connection for wet conditions or water hunting, on rare occasions. Comments: I found the audio of the included ML 80 headphones disappointingly muffled and have preferred the Miccus SR71 clones that I purchased separately before getting the Equinox. I have no idea how these seemingly identical headphones have such disparate audio quality. Weird Having the WM08 as an available wireless option for a preferred set of detecting phones is a great add (especially the ability to transmit to multiple WM-08 receivers simultaneously), but the reception is wonky and incompatibility with the other ML Wi-Stream hardware (WM-10, WM-12, ProSonic) is really frustrating and buying the hardware as a separate vice bundle accessory is really cost prohibitive compared to competitor's offerings from Garrett and Quest at literally $100+ dollars less. Finally, I like ML's investment in an industry standard low latency BT protocol but am concerned about the long-term viability of APTX-LL because the demand does not seem to be at a level where BT device manufacturers are embracing the standard with multiple device offerings. Several device manufacturers seem to have abandoned making hardware compatible with the APTX-LL standard, indicating that things are headed in the wrong direction as far as ubiquitous manufacturer adoption is concerned. Glad ML is sticking to their guns with APTX-LL apparently being retained for the GPX 6000.

Imagine sticking two coils on that sucker! Apparently the lower shaft stem connection point allows for easier transport by moving the coil rod from the "S" stem to the "straight" stem or you can just use the straight stem configuration for swinging, if preferred. Nice to have choices, I suppose, but having the "useless" "S" stem sticking up in the "straight" configuration would drive me nuts. Not a pretty sight.

I use F2 exclusively. I start with the default (which is 6 for all modes on the 800) and adjust accordingly for the conditions at hand (usually it ends up between 4 and 6). I don't sweat iron bias masking with F2 like I did with FE.

I know this was directed at Gerry, but Coiltek is Coiltek and ML is ML and I suspect the Coiltek coil announcement and ML price hike timing are somewhat coincidental and weren't necessarily planned to intentionally coincide. I don't think there was anything coincidental regarding the price hike being timed to coincide with the 3 year anniversary of the Equinox release and the expiration of the first batch of Equinox warranties. That appears to be a calculated business decision.

Agree, but to be clear, as Steve commented earlier, I only provided the diagram to illustrate the basics to someone on how to visually identify if a coil is DD or concentric based on a question that was asked regarding whether the Coiltek coils were DD. I was not referencing the simplified detection patterns of concentrics vs. DD's in the diagram at all. We can talk about edge sensitivity too, but that was not why I pulled up the diagram as that was way beyond the scope of why I included it in my post.

Actually, in that case, the 9.5 x 5 would be my choice, unless you need the lower x35 frequencies. The extra 2 inches of clearance isn't going to buy you much if the iron is really thick. FWIW.

So did you guys detect it or was it not worth it (and why not)? Just curious and trying to learn as GB said.

Though the 14 x 9 depth performance should be about the same and coverage better than the 11" round (though the Equinox appears to be optimized around the 11" coil), it will be a bear to use on land, weight-wise. As noted before, the extra weight was added by design for water hunters. All things considered, I would skip this coil if planning to use it solely for land use. 37 minutes ago, Rick N. MI said: I'm still really interested in the 14"x9" for the lakes and will give it try anyway. It might go a little deeper than the 11" coil. So the 14x9 coil would be about equal to an 11.5 to 12" round coil. Being narrow should help in the water and the extra coverage. I would like to see Nel coils for the Equonox. The Superfly would be a nice coil for it. Should be a good choice for water provided it will squeeze that extra inch or so over the 11"

Agree, I didn't go deep into it, but I assumed they've done all the math and made the appropriate investments in the design and manufacturing lines etc. based on the historical failure rate percentages and the price hike factors into that as well as future repairs etc,. that going public would be a bad move because the downside would exceed the upside. In fact, I suspect that they will also quietly "extend" warranty coverage as necessary on a case basis for the flooded control heads and broken coil ears just to keep frustration from bubbling up to the surface (i.e., becoming public) after the warranties start expiring. The only thing that makes me wonder if they've addressed the issues, even quietly, is the number of repeat failures seen with those control heads, years after the intitial release. The control heads in the repair shops would presumably be refreshed with the "new design" at some point, yet I know of multiple folks who have suffered control multiple control head failures due to water ingress even recently. They probably are just rolling with the existing design based on low failure rate (further driven by the low percentage of users who are actually submerging their Equinoxes). Who knows...but the fact is that the Equinox is teflon to bad press. ML has a proven sales winner with great performance despite these other minor flaws and ML figure they can recoup with a price hike without affecting sales. That is a great position to be in from a business perspective.

Gotcha - they probably have an agreement with ML not to develop such a direct replacement in order to secure the Minelab IP needed to chip their new coil offerings.

Coil ear improvement, perhaps a further improvement/tweak to the Equinox rod and stem system, and perhaps some improved watertight integrity for the control head would be welcome tweaks to the Equinox line, especially considering the imminent Equinox price hike. Though ML could easily justify the minor price hike incorporating and announcing such tweaks and soften the PR backlash, it probably won't happen because: 1) the Equinox will still sell like hotcakes regardless and 2) you open up the possibility of existing users requesting these "improvements" under existing warranty conditions which can get sticky. I could be mistaken, but I have never seen ML release an upgrade to an existing coil design, so it is unlikely going to happen at this point. In short: don't hold your breath.

I agree that the 14x9 looks good for water work, but at 880 grams for its footprint (20 g greater than the 15 inch coiltek round and 220 g greater than the 15x12), that sucker is looking like that boat anchor 15" first texas coil that was released for the the F75 and T2. Can't imagine swinging that around on land.

I confirmed based on the Coiltek literature that the 14x9 was intentionally weighted down for "beach" work, meaning submerged water duty, just as Steve surmised above. From the Coiltek website: "The 14 x 9 NOX coil is the ideal weighted coil for beach hunting." https://coiltek.com.au/coils/nox/

My thought is that the Equinox appears to be performance optimized to the 11" coil, FWIW

It's a quick and dirty way to conservatively (i.e., underestimate) depth performance for a DD - it sort of breaks down quickly if you are not comparing similar sized coils. The field strength is probably more accurately tied to footprint but the length dimension of an elliptical coil contributes most to field shape vs. strength (i.e., coverage) because the sweet spot of the coil field is down the center of a coil for DDs. So if you want to compare an elliptical to a round coil the more "accurate" comparative metric would be areal footprint (but that could "overestimate" the comparative performance of an elliptical to a round for the reason stated above) - for a round coil that is pi * radius squared, for an elliptical coil that is 0.25 *(length * width) * pi. See my post above that compares the coil specs and gives a subjective metric of performance vs. coil weight. The Coiltek 9x14 weight seems high. Also, keep in mind, that the field strength does not necessarily scale linearly with increased footprint. It sort of tails off and also the medium (air vs. soil vs. soil type and mineralization) has a bigger effect the larger the coil gets. That's why the coils that are x inches larger/wider than the 11" round are not going to be x inches deeper. In my experience, the 11" coil seems optimal from a performance standpoint, all things considered. The only real way to know is to do empirical measurements (i.e., real world performance experiments).

Coil Weight and Footprint Specs for comparison: ML 6" round: 300 g, 6" wide, ~28 sq in., CWR .02/AWR .093 Coiltek 5x10" elliptical: 426 g, 5" wide, ~39 sq in., CWR .023/AWR .092 ML 11" round: 510 g, 11" wide, ~95 sq in., CWR .022/AWR .186 Coiltek 9x14"elliptical: 880 g (!), 9" wide, ~99 sq in., CWR .016/AWR .112 ML 12x15" elliptical: 660 g, 12" wide, ~141 sq in., CWR .023/AWR .214 Coiltek 15" round: 836 g (note this weighs LESS than the 9x14), 15" wide, ~176 sq in., CWR .018/AWR .211 CWR = Coverage/Weight ratio in in/g = subjective measure of swing coverage per unit weight. AWR = Area/Weight ratio in sq. in/g = subjective measure of performance per unit weight. Really only good for comparing coils of similar dimensions. As you can see the small, and large coils are fairly similar in their AWRs. Notice, however, the 9x14 weight and AWR which is really low compared to the 11" round and its total weight is GREATER than the 15" round coil. The reason for the discrepancy is apparently Coiltek added weight to the 9x14 to facilitate submerged water hunting (discussed in the Coiltek link below). Certainly takes it out of the running as a substitute for either the 11" or 15x12" ML coils on land. If you want raw depth and good coverage on land, go with the 15" instead. If you just need coverage and slightly better or equivalent depth to the stock, go with the 15x12 which weighs more than 220 grams less than the 9x14 despite having 1.4 times the footprint. Source Data: https://www.minelab.com/usa/accessories?type=350307 and https://coiltek.com.au/coils/nox/

Not necessarily a downer point of view, these coils are going to make some folks happy, others not so much. The only problem I have with the 15" round is adding more weight to an already nose heavy machine. It's not like you are going to gain 4 or 5 inches over the stock coil or the 12x15. So the question is the whether the weight is worth it for maybe 1 or 2 inches max depth under ideal soil conditions. Hot soil, the additional coil footprint is actually counterproductive. 5x10 is great not just for gold seekers but also for relic hunters in cellar holes, thick scrub and in thick iron patches where swing angle is limited and the additional coverage over the 6" round helps and when the 6" round depth performance (which is decent) is good enough. I can't stand the miniscule swing coverage of that 6" round, but its small target sensitivity and depth are great as well as the ability to swing it in tight spaces. The 5x10 fits the bill and fills the gap. I am not sold on the 9 x14 yet. Seems like it is just a tad too long and am not sure the additional weight is worth it, but it could be a good hot field coil with the right footprint and coverage vs. the stock. We'll see...

With coils there are more than "2" worlds that need to be considered. Depth and swing coverage are indeed key, but so is weight, small target sensitivity, performance in hot ground, ability to swing side to side in constrained places, and to a lesser extent, target separation (which is mainly driven by detector recovery speed, but coil dimensions play a role in thickntarget density patches). Finally, there is cost, with larger coils usually costing more than smaller coils which is driven primarily by the cost of material. In this case, weight could be an overriding concern over depth (if the 12" is considered "good enough") but you still want the 15" swing coverage. That's where the 15x12, like most ellipticals, is a good compromise balancing depth, weight, and swing coverage. Furthermore, in my case, in the really hot ground that dominates my detecting scenarios, the larger coils actually degrade overall performance because they "see" more ground and end up just reacting to the ground mineralization and actually reduce sensitivity to targets at depth. All that being said, if the coil weight is not of concern, and max depth and coverage are the main drivers under nominal ground conditions, the 15" is the obvious choice over the 15x12.

I know Texas Mike posted the specs confirming it's a DD, but visually you can clearly see that all have the overlapping coil center spine area, indicating all three Coilteks are DD coils. Coaxial (elliptical) and concentric (round coils), typically do not have anything physically within the inner (receive) coil area. Just pointing this out for future reference if you see coils without posted specs, its a way to physically see the difference.

As stated earlier in the thread, the Coiltek 15" round coil will likely get more depth than the 15x12 Equinox coil. The relative depth of an elliptical coil such as the 15x12, is tied more closely to the width dimension (12") or overall coil footprint while the larger dimension (15") determines swing coverage. So the the 15x12 would get depth performance similar to or slightly better than a 12" round coil vs. the Coiltek 15" coil which is likely deeper all other variables considered the same.

I was first attracted to this forum because I was interested in the Equinox prior to release and Steve H. was providing the best information on that machine based on his pre-release testing and the forum layout was slick and the site was rich additional information about detecting and detectors. But I am far from being a Minelab-only fan. I post a lot here, but I don't know if I am considered an "icon". But I go out of my way to demonstrate in my contributions here, that I have no brand loyalty and basically obtain and use the machine that best fills a specific detecting gap. That is why I have at one time or another owned machines from First Texas (Bounty Hunter, Teknetics, and Fisher), Garrett, Minelab, Nokta, Tarsacci, Whites and XP. About the only major manufacturer not represented was Tesoro (since Alain Loubet at XP developed their machines partially based on his love for the Tesoro's, I feel my Deus is a distant cousin). I was attracted to detecting because I have a technical degree and background, enjoy history and coin collecting, and, most of all, de-stressing. And detecting has proved to be my greatest de-stressing hobby ever - the excitement of finding a top shelf find is supplemented by the friendships I have made, the places I have visited, and just embracing the solitude of the fresh air and scenery. I have tried a variety of machine types (PI and VLF), brands, and models within a brand, have detected with literally hundreds of different folks, do a lot of reading and research, done different types of detecting (except for meteorite hunting and gold prospecting), done archeological surveys, attended and taught detecting classes, and have written magazine articles, therefore, I have gained some knowledge of the hobby (especially in regards to the detectors themselves). Because I am only an average, at best, and relatively inexperienced detectorist, I am keen to pass on what I have learned over the past 10 or so years of doing this to new detectorists so that they can get past the impediments that might exist due to the technical complexity and nuances of the tools and better enjoy the other aspects of the hobby itself, including the swinging for and recovering of finds (of course) but also the lesser known joys of researching history and discovering new and possibly untouched sites. That is how I try to approach my posts here. I hope this encourages people to ask questions and also post what they have found. But I can agree that it can be intimidating when you see posts documenting the 1000th silver coin post, 18th century coins, multiple gold and silver rings on single beach or water run (with little mention of the potential life and limb jeopardy involved in some of the more extreme pursuits), bucket list of rare relic finds, and of course gold coins and nuggets posted about. I also somewhat cringe when I hear hobbyists emphasizing and overly focusing on detectors "paying for themselves with finds" (I get it when the detector is how you actually earn a living). It's all fine and nice if that happens, but to primarily focus on finds value above all the other benefits of the hobby I think just makes it more like the job I am trying to escape from via the hobby, but that's just me. Some folks simply dump their pouches and show the good with the bad, and I think that shows a more realistic portrayal what actually goes on for most of us when we go on a detecting outing. I am going to try to make an effort to post more of the junk along with the treasure. Bottom line, I like that Steve is trying to encourage people to post their finds more - but the contest aspect of it may result in the same people posting their finds that do so today. I hope that isn't the case, but I too hope and encourage more people get into the habit of posting what they've found and even ask questions on what they've found because IDing finds is part of the fun. HH

First of all, what are you looking for that you are not getting out of (or think you are not getting out of) the 11" coil? Examples include: more depth, more swing coverage, target separation, ability to detect micro targets (all types), ability to detect small natural gold, ability to focus on high vs. low conductors and vice versa, ability to swing in constrained places, reduced weight/better balance, versatility, performance in mineralized ground. Since meeting all the constraints in single coil is difficult, your choice depends on balancing out these attributes to choice the compromise coil to get the performance you desire or need. The coil parameters that affect these attributes are: Diameter or cross-sectional area - Depth - greater diameter (or coil width in the case of the elliptical DD) generally improves depth. Your 11" coil should already be giving you maximum depth for most targets, especially high conductive coins since it can be operated down to less than 4 khz (more on that later). The caveat is a larger coil tends to be less sensitive to micro targets and since it "sees" more ground, can be adversely affected by ground noise which cannot be completely eliminated by ground balancing alone. In that case, you may have to increase the reactivity setting, lower sensitivity, or change coil frequency - all these things can limit depth to the point that you might be better off with a smaller coil. So if you are working a lot of mineralized ground, the 9" round x35 and the 9.5 inch elliptical may be better choices under certain circumstances. Speaking of the 9.5 inch elliptical, it's 5" width limits its ultimate depth considerably vs. the 11" coil, but it still gets decent depth for it's size. Swing Coverage - This one is pretty straight forward the bigger the diameter or length of the coil, the better your swing coverage. The 11" is pretty good. The 13x11 has better coverage but is overweight for the standard XP rod and stem system and makes it really unbalanced, and with little additional depth advantage - I would stay away from it. Target Separation/Tight Spots - obviously the smaller width coils provide advantages with respect to ability to swing side-to-side in tight spots and may have a slight advantage in separation due to less targets under the footprint of the coils, but for a DD configuration, the sweet spot is the center spine of the coil and that is basically the same for all the XP coils. Separation is mainly a function of recovery speed (reactivity parameter) rather than DD coil dimensions. But in high target density situations, having a smaller width coil can be an advantage. Weight - obviously coils with smaller footprints with all other things being equal (materials used, solid or open coil design, etc.) are generally lighter. Not rocket science. Coil Frequency - x35 coils are able to operate in roughly 5 frequency ranges: 4 khz, 8 khz, 12 khz, 18 khz, 25 khz HF (white coils) are able to operate in 3 frequency ranges: 14 khz, 28 khz, and either ~53 khz (9" round) or 73 khz (9.5" elliptical). From this we can see the x35 coils have the most versatile frequency range from < 4 khz for max high conductor/large target depth to >25 khz for great mid-conductor performance for small targets, small jewelry, nickels, gold, and brass and lead relics. The HF coils have a decent all around frequency at 13 - 14 khz for high conductive coin shooting (but not at max possible depth) and good mid-conductor performance similar to the 25 khz setting of the x35 coils. Finally the very high frequency settings of the HF coils are good for micro targets and small natural gold at shallow depths (higher frequency magnetic fields do not penetrate as far into the ground as lower frequency fields). So, the elliptical coil would provide the most significant performance difference from what you have now but only with respect to ability to swing in constrained spaces, weight, and perhaps better performance in mineralized ground or high target density sites. That is a lot to pay for that capability, but if you need it, you need it. You have the best coil now for coverage and depth. I like the 9" coils for middle of the road performance. If I could only have one XP coil for coin shooting, it would probably be the 9" X35 as the others have recommended. But for you, I am not sure it is worth the trip if you already own the 11" x35 because of the expense of the XP coils and the similarity in performance - you would only be getting an improvement in weight and perhaps a better coil for hot dirt and high target density situations - that's why I would recommend the elliptical if you really feel you need an additional coil, for those reasons. I obtained my 9" HF coil a couple years before the X35's became available and it is my favorite coil. Given the choice today, I would probably select the 9" X35 over the HF. I own a 9" legacy LF coil (the coil that originally came with my Deus), the 9" HF, the 5x9.5" elliptical, and the 11" x35. HTH