steveg

Here's the video, for what it's worth...

Hello all! Based on requests from several folks who are curious, I went ahead and did some air testing with my new Minelab 6” coil, attached to my Equinox 800. I wanted to give some idea of the relative capabilities of this coil as compared to the 11” coil. While all the normal caveats of air testing apply – such as air-test results in no way mirror in-ground results, etc. etc. etc., I do think there is at least a little bit of value when doing side-by-side air testing of two different coils for comparison purposes. Anyway, how much value exists in such a test is up to each individual to decide; I simply wanted to provide the data. I also did a Youtube video, which I will post a link to as soon as it is done uploading. In the video, I did NOT record the testing of all the coins; I ran only the silver Roosevelt dime in the video to show you, audibly, what quality of signal I listened for in order to call it a “hit.” In other words, how repeatable of a signal I listened for before I assigned a depth value to that particular coin, with that particular coil. The rest of the video is just some discussion of a few points regarding the coil, and the testing. Anyway, here is the data… Minelab Equinox 800 11” and 6” coils, air-test comparison, done indoors Park 1 Mode Sensitivity 18 Noise Cancel Channel 7 All-metal mode (horseshoe button engaged) Ground Balance 0 Recovery Speed 4 (on the 800, equivalent to 2 on the 600) Iron Bias 2 (on the 800, equivalent to 1 on the 600) Here are the results: After this “apples to apples” comparison, where I tested both coils using identical settings, I then re-tested a couple of coins (specifically the silver dime and the silver quarter) on the 6” coil, but this time bumping sensitivity to 22. I found that I was able to run sensitivity about 3 points higher, as the 6” coil is (as expected) less affected by EMI. Since “18” is a rather conservative sensitivity for a 6” coil, (but that is as high as I could go with the 11” in my indoor testing, and since I wanted to keep it “apples to apples”), I wanted to see how much depth gain I would get on the 6” coil if I bumped sensitivity up some. Here are those results: In summary, you can see that the 6” coil (at 18 sensitivity) loses roughly 1 ¾” depth on each coin, in an air test, as compared to the 11” coil. You can also see that by bumping the sensitivity on the 6” coil up from 18 to 22, you “gain back” most of the loss of air-test depth, getting to within ½” to ¾” of depths achieved by the 11” coil, set at 18 sensitivity. SO…while you DO lose depth with the 6” coil, as expected, you may – in a real-world scenario – be able to gain most of that depth back, due to being able to run it at a higher sensitivity setting. Overall, I am thus far impressed with the coil, and can’t wait to use it “in the field,” where I can begin to get a feel for its REAL value – its ability to separate, in trashy sites. Steve

Chase -- I agree with you. And further, there is of course the same issue (some manufacturing variation) on the OD of the CF tubes from my supplier. Tolerance is supposed to be +/- .1 mm, but with the CTX lower rods I build, I have to check each tube individually with a micrometer, to hold them to that tolerance... But yes, what you are saying as a "potential issue" is a part of why I have been hesitant to attempt any production of Equinox rods. As I understand it though, with most of the "wobble" issues occurring at the UPPER cam lock, I have decided that I am willing to give it a shot, starting out with lower rods. As I said, I think the length of the Minelab middle rod being necessarily limited by that "handle nipple" is part of the issue. As Alluminati said, the longer the portion of one rod that is available to be inserted into the next rod, the less "wobble" or "slop" you should have. Length matters, LOL! And from that perspective, I feel confident enough that making a lower rod, with a little extra length to it, should work out reasonably well; I just need to make sure I hold my supplier to tight tolerances, and hope Minelab now does the same! ? Steve

Gents -- I totally agree with Chase; when they are having these pieces of shafts made, the tolerances have to be really tight for a telescoping shaft system to not have wobble, OR -- you have to have really good cam locks. And since it's hard to get suppliers to build components to really tight tolerances, these issues are cropping up. I am thinking of building some carbon-fiber shafts for the Equinox. I plan to start out with just lower rods -- mainly for people who want an extra shaft, as the accessory coils become available. I terms of progress on this, I am at the stage of completing the design for the lower portion of the rod where the coil attaches, and getting bids on the price to machine these pieces. At that point (soon), I will build a prototype lower rod for myself, which will fit into the Minelab middle rod. Once I have a good prototype, I will likely begin to offer those for sale. Then, from there, I may consider other options -- a middle rod, to go with the lower (and some type of good clamping/cam-lock system to attach them); possibly a lower and middle rod as one piece, that would fit into the Minelab upper; OR, possibly an upper and middle rod combined into a one-piece...this option might help for those having the "wobbly rod" issue. Anyway, these are just ideas I'm working on putting into action; meanwhile -- didn't mean to thread-jack...I just thought this was at least peripherally pertinent to mention here. The electrical tape idea seems like a good "quick fix." A big problem with the design, aside from the somewhat "iffy" cam locks, and the apparently "iffy" QC by whoever is making Minelabs rods, is this...if you remove the handle/control box, what you will find is there is a little "nipple" at the bottom of the handle that fits into a hole in the upper rod. This is likely so that the handle/control box cannot rotate/spin. BUT -- the problem is, that "nipple" is only a few inches above the upper cam lock -- and it sticks far enough into the upper rod that you cannot make a middle rod any longer than the current middle rod -- the length of the middle rod is in other words LIMITED by the position of that "nipple." A much longer middle rod, that could insert much farther into the upper rod, would -- as Alluminati mentioned -- be beneficial, as the farther into a rod that another rod can be inserted, the more you cut down on the "slop." And that's part of the problem there at that upper cam lock -- they couldn't build the middle rod any longer, because the distance it can be inserted into the upper rod is limited by that "nipple" on the control box handle. Steve

Dan -- Great job on the finds; sounds like the permission wasn't quite what you'd hoped, but you managed to make it a reasonably good day anyway! I hear you and Steve, about the 600. I just picked one up slightly used, from a forum member here. I'll be turning loose one of my CTX's, and replacing it with the 600. I'll definitely keep my other CTX, but it, the 800, and a 600 should do me quite well! I really love the Equinox. It's a great machine for me. Steve

Daniel -- I got the coil in the mail yesterday. Perhaps I will make some time to do just the testing you mentioned. I am curious as well. Indeed, as you said, things in the ground are different, but it should be interesting to see the results, anyway. As an aside, this seems like a good place to share a somewhat interesting thing that happened on a hunt the other day. I was hunting with my Equinox, sensitivity 24 (almost no EMI present), and the 11" coil. My friend was hunting his E-Trac, with a 6" Detech Excelerator coil, and he was hunting in auto sensitivity (with lots of iron in the ground in places, he was trying to combat all the threshold nulling). Now, with him running "mild" settings (i.e. auto sensitivity), and me running hot at 24, this is not a good comparison. However, we were comparing signals during the hunt, as we usually do. At one point, I came across a solid, but deep signal -- classic deep-coin hit with the Equinox, but I couldn't get it to lock onto a good, small range of ID numbers (as is often the case on the real deep ones, for me). I was thinking wheat cent, with most of the IDs bouncing around mid 20s, but wanted to see what kind of numbers my buddy would get on his FBS machine, to see if his unit suggested "wheat cent" as well. I marked the top-dead-center of the target, and had him swing it with his E-Trac, and he got NOT A PEEP. Not even a break in his threshold. So, he went to auto +3. Still no joy. Finally he switched to manual, and cranked it up, and then he was able to pick up the target (though with skewed ID numbers, especially his FE number, to the point where he said he may or may not have dug it.) We repeated this same thing on another deep coin a bit later on -- identical scenario in that the EQ picked it up well, but some bounciness in the numbers, while a cross-check with his E-Trac with 6" coil and auto sensitivity was a no-go. Not entirely surprising that this happened, it was just interesting to see how drastically the use of different coils and different settings will affect results. Again, I'm just putting this here for the sake of information; it's only peripherally related to what we are talking about -- in that we did not have our machines set up similarly at all. The two interesting things I took from this were that ONE -- with a small coil and auto sensitivity, his machine was entirely blind to a coin at about 8" deep that the Equinox with 11" coil and running hot presented a clear "dig me" response on, and TWO -- switched to manual sensitivity, cranked up high, the E-Trac and small coil was able to give a reasonably similar response to the target that the Equinox running hot with larger coil did. Just wanted to share; nothing ground-breaking, but worth mentioning I thought. Meanwhile, I will try to make time for some air testing with the 6" vs. 11" EQ coils... Dew -- I agree, on your point about working a site with the 11", followed by the 6". That is how I approach real old, relatively small sites, where I want to try and extract every good target that I can. It's also how I will approach the particularly "trashy" sections of parks and yards that I've hunted hard with the 11" coil in the past. It's time to "re-hit" some of these spots with the small coil... Steve

Holy smokes, Dan, what a hunt!!!! CONGRATS!! That token looks like it could possibly be a sales tax token; Oklahoma or Alabama possibly; I'd say definitely made of aluminum... Steve

Geoff -- I agree; 6" coils on other Minelab machines (specifically FBS) got really good depth. I'd have to assume similar results will be had with the Equinox 6"...especially with sensitivity bumped up (as a smaller coil usually allows). Steve

Dew -- True, you are right of course. I guess I shouldn't have said "the same settings." Given that you are processing less "stuff" with a 6" coil vs. an 11", you can often run sensitivity higher on the 6", in my experience. What I was trying to figure out is that I have a couple of places back in PA which are littered with square nails; one in particular is an old church that dates to 1800, but has burned at least twice -- so the remnants of those burns (square nails, etc.) are everywhere. I have made some good finds there; I got in there for a short while about a month ago while back home, for the first time with the Equinox, and surprisingly managed to pull another 8 Indians; that's more keepers than I ever pulled from this site in one hunt, and I've been hunting it for years! But, the targets are deep; greater than 6" in all cases and often 8" or even a bit more. So the gist of my question was this... obviously the 6" coil will help me to pick amongst the nails at this site, but will it have enough "umpf" to get down to those 6" to 8" targets? It won't do me any good to be able to see around the nails (in this particular site) if I can't get enough depth to see the targets that are down there... So that's where my mind was going when I asked the question. I agree that depth is NOT everything, but at some sites (like this one) it IS important... Steve

Hi all! FINALLY, after a long wait, I have a 6" coil on the way. I'm really looking forward to trying this coil in some really trashy spots I have in mind. A question for anyone that has the coil -- have you done any depth comparisons with it and the 11"? I'm curious as to how much depth would be lost, given equal settings, on a coin-sized target? Thanks! Steve

Looks like that little coil is "doing you right!" Hope to have mine soon... Steve

Steve and GB_Amateur -- Thanks for answering my question -- very much appreciated! GB -- that mnemonic is perfect! Steve

Hi all. I know I've seen this info before, but I can't seem to find it... I currently have an Equinox 800, and am going to buy a 600 as a backup. I know the 600 has only 4 settings for Iron Bias (instead of 9), and 3 settings for Recovery Speed (instead of 8). Can anyone remind me what the "equivalents" are between the 600 settings and the 800? I THINK I recall that Recovery Speed 1 on the 600 equals 2 on the 800, Speed 2 on the 600 equals 4 on the 800, and speed 3 on the 600 equals 6 on the 800. Is this correct? Meanwhile, I can't remember how the Iron Bias Settings relate. I assume 0 on the 600 equals 0 on the 800, and 3 on the 600 equals 9 on the 800? Would 1 on the 600 equal 3 on the 800, and 2 on the 600 equal 6 on the 800? In other words, is this "chart," below, correct? Reason I ask is, I know the settings that I prefer on the 800, and I'd like to set the 600 up as close as possible to what I run on the 800. Thanks, Steve

Propjob -- I totally agree with your idea of using a 6" deep coin as a basis, marked with a golf tee. That's a perfect way to test the pinpoint function, in my opinion. The only other caution is, before burying that coin, make SURE there are no other targets within a foot or so radius -- i.e., bury it in clean ground. You don't need another target nearby throwing you off, when trying to learn pinpoint. I find the pinpoint on the Equinox EXTREMELY accurate (though occasionally a bit "quirky," as it occasionally starts off with very low volume and has to be turned off and then back on to "reset" it; I have a theory as to what is going on when that happens, if you are interested, but don't want to take this discussion off in the weeds at this point). Point being, once you get used to the pinpoint, I think you'll find it very accurate. I do not think that using a coin on top of the ground is the best way to learn pinpoint with this unit, as this is such a powerful, sensitive detector, that a coin "too close" to the coil can throw things off. The coil is very sensitive, including around the edges, especially on a shallow target (one close to the coil). So, that can throw you off a bit, as sometimes you might be picking the target up with the edge of the coil, not the center -- and thus confusing you a bit. That's why I think your 6" deep coin idea, in clean ground, will be a much better way to learn. One thing I want to point out; you said something about trying to "dispel the notion that targets are read off the tip of the coil." I'm not sure what you mean here, but I think you may be confusing a couple of things. Here's what I mean. As I'm sure you know, there are two different ways to pinpoint that many people use; the "X" method, and the "wiggle back" method. Of course the "X" method involves invoking pinpoint mode, and then sweeping left to right over a target, finding the "loudest" sound, and then turning 90 degrees, and sweeping perpendicular to your initial sweeps -- finding the "loudest" signal from THAT angle. Where the two "loudest" sounds overlap (from your two sets of sweeps) is your target location -- in the CENTER of the coil. I'm sure you know this. Then, there's the wiggle-back method, which involves NOT using the pinpoint mode, but just regular "search mode." When you hit a target while searching, you simply "wiggle" the coil left and right, drawing it slightly toward you, very slowly, while still wiggling left and right. Right where the target's tone "ceases," while drawing the coil slowly back toward you -- the target will at that point be located right off the FRONT TOE of the coil. Is this perhaps what you are thinking, when you said something about "the notion that targets are read off the tip of the coil?" The "hot spot" of the Equinox coil is right at the center, where the lower rod attaches to the coil ears; the only thing I know of that's been said about a target "being read off the tip of the coil" is when doing the "wiggle-back" pinpoint method... Steve

Happa -- I agree with Chase on the buried coins -- which will also help to see if you might have a faulty machine. I doubt you do, though; but, some testing might be in order. MEANWHILE, I would DEFINITELY make it a priority for a little while to go back to what you used to do, and "compare signals." YES, your Safari vs. their E-Tracs and Explorers would have given similar tones on a buried target, when comparing signals in the past -- but, that's why I think comparing signals now, with their FBS compared to your Equinox, would be so immensely helpful. YES, the sounds are different on FBS vs. Multi-IQ, but you would be comparing a "known" (FBS sounds on a deep coin) with an "unknown" (Equinox sounds on a deep coin), which should really, really help you to learn the "unknown." In other words, if they locate a deep, likely-to-be-wheatie target, and call you over to listen, you can listen with THEIR machine, first (and you'll of course recognize the target's sounds given your prior experience with FBS), and then, work the target with your Equinox, and listen closely to how the machine behaves. This will help you to figure out in your mind "what sounds like THIS on an FBS machine sounds like THIS on the Equinox." Yes, I have dug deep wheats that are down into the zinc range, and the same with deep Indians. So, you could be passing over some. They also sound much more subtle, at depth, than a shallow penny sounds. I at times will even get some occasional high-tone chirps mixed in, from certain angles, on a deep wheatie or deep Indian -- i.e. much higher than what you'd expect for a penny. Bottom line, burying targets at different depths and working them with your Equinox, and ESPECIALLY "comparing targets" with your FBS hunting partners, should move you quite a bit closer to having success with your Equinox. Don't lose confidence; I promise you that the Equinox (at least, one set up properly and working properly) will find coins every bit as deep as your buddies' FBS units, in most types of ground (including everywhere I've hunted). And for what it's worth, my machine of choice for many years was an Explorer, and I run a CTX now alongside my Equinox...and so when I say the Equinox is every bit as deep as FBS, it's a statement I feel confident in stating after through testing and experience with both Multi-IQ AND FBS. Steve

Happa -- Not sure what to tell you, as I'm hitting wheats and Indians to really good depth with mine. I know for sure what I'd do in your case, though; on your next hunt, ask your buddies to call you over when they hit a suspected deep wheat, and give a listen with your Equinox. "Comparing signals" is, to me, one of THE BEST ways to learn things, and is especially helpful when you are hunting a new machine. Listening to those targets "in the wild," should really help you with respect to the Equinox "learning curve." I will assume, if you have the machine set up reasonably well, that you will hear the same targets your buddies are hearing with FBS units, BUT, they may not sound quite the way you expect them to, on your Equinox. Deep targets are much more subtle and less distinct that shallow targets, as would be expected. It may just be that your ears are not yet attuned to listening for deep targets on the Equinox, like they were with your Safari. IF, however, by chance, you CANNOT pick up those deep wheats that your buddies are getting with their FBS machines, it would be time to look at your settings. And if it's not the settings, then there may be something more serious going on, but no need to go there at this point. Barring an issue with your machine itself, I am confident, based on my experience with the Equinox in different types of dirt/different states, that it should be every bit as deep, and similarly capable, of hitting deep copper coins as an FBS unit is -- ESPECIALLY when running Park 1 mode. Steve

I appreciate the info, Sinclair. Glad to hear there's an update being worked out, to perhaps fix a few of the little "quirks" the machine has. Not that it's not a real nice machine already, but any improvements Minelab might make, would likely mean that much better of a machine, from my perspective. Steve

I have found that faster sweep speeds on Minelab FBS machines will increase falsing, and I do notice that a bit on the Equinox as well. If I am working in iron with the Equinox, I always slow down my sweep speed. NOT the machine's recovery speed, but my SWEEP speed. Steve

Yes, some great finds, indeed! Glad to see you having so much success with the Equinox! Super job digging the silver coins -- which sound like they have been elusive for you before! Meanwhile, I'm still waiting for my first gold -- CONGRATS on yours! Steve

Superb, Skate! Great to hear you are up and about, and even better to hear your story! It may not have been MUCH swinging, but at least you got to swing a little, AND do a good deed in the process! Steve

I can't explain the technical "why" of it; my assumption is that it has to do with the orientation of the EM field associated with the induced eddy currents in a tilted target (relative to the receive coil) versus horizontal one (relative to the coil). I can't explain the "why" of it, only that it's something that I commonly have observed over the years, with several different detectors... Steve

Nothing. You aren't missing anything; you are exactly correct. BUT -- you don't even need to pair two of them, if you own an Equinox, OR if you have aptX-LL headphones. In either of these cases, you only need one. IF you have aptX-LL Bluetooth headphones, just get one, set it to "transmit," and use your Bluetooth headphones as the "receiver." IF you have an Equinox, but no Bluetooth headphones and want to use "wired" headphones, get one of those units, set it to "receive," plug in your favorite wired headphones, and then use the Equinox's built-in transmitter to transmit the Bluetooth signal. The only time you'd need TWO of them, is IF you want to use wired phones, AND you want to use them with a machine that does not have a Bluetooth transmitter built in... Steve

Non-horizontal targets are NOT "extremely rare." And yes, a target tilted vertically will throw off pinpoint, for sure. It's pretty common to be off by several inches when detecting an "on-edge" coin. Steve

Beautiful ring! Steve

I agree with TedinVT -- if you have never seen a negative number, I'd bet it's because you have not hit the "horseshoe" button; Park mode defaults to discrimination of the lowest 11 digits on the display (-9 to 1), so that would explain why you haven't seen them. If you hit the "horseshoe" button, you have toggled off all discrimination, and then you will see negative numbers AND hear corresponding, low iron tones... Steve