mh9162013

 

Look at what people are asking for Tesoro's. Like they are some magical devices. Get a Simplex for less. And if you like beep and dig don't look down. 

I've seen Tesoros go both ways. Some people willing to sell them for super cheap (like $50 for a Compadre) or pricing them like you said, as if they're magical devices (or collectible).

 

Paying close to new or even 60-75% doesn’t even seem worth it sometimes considering some of the holiday bundle deals or dealer street prices one can get.  I still think it is crazy what people want for AT Pros and F75s considering options like the Simplex and Equinox 600 go for new... 

I agree 100% about what people are asking for for used "higher-end" Fisher and Garrett machines. I've had some success negotiating some of these sellers down, but I fail with most of them. Many of them know so little about the hobby that they can't understand why that they bought an overpriced machine to begin with.

The problem with percentages is that some machines are already overpriced by the manufacturer.

The F75, F70, AT Pro and AT Max are great examples. Yes, they're great machines, but not for a $500 or $600 asking price for just the detector. For example, the base street price of an AT Max with a few accessories (Carrot, wireless headphones, etc.) is $722. But based on what you can buy from other companies (like N/M and Minelab), along with the AT Max's capabilities, it should probably be priced as a package closer to $550...or so.

So taking 25% or 50% off of $722 is a lot different than $600.

 

Not 100% sure, but they are probably monetized enough by YouTube that they can shed the restrictions of sole detector manufacturer sponsorship to use whatever detector they deem best. 

That makes sense!

 

laugh if you want but local famewhore YouTubers I watch every week have switched to the Equinox from Garrett and use them river hunting as well as in the field.

I noticed that as well. 

And the "tiff" between Aquachigger and some other guy has revealed that I think Relic Recoverist may be sponsored by Minelab now...not 100% sure if this is true, but that's a rumor...

"Farmwhore YouTubers..."😆

 

I have also never used an arm cuff strap

Neither have I.

 

I do when I use it in the water. I have a Limbsaver detector sling. The rest of the time I use that ring attachment to keep the detector from falling out of my golf cart. There is a harness strap that we use for the dog. Going across fields gets bumpy.

Interesting. I ask because I know some people use slings to hold their detectors off the ground while they dig or pinpoint. I'm curious to learn more about how that process works and if it's something I should consider in an attempt to keep my machine cleaner and speed up the target recovery process.

Do you have some sort of sling attached to your Equinox, F350?

 

Add another datapoint to the breakage bin.

On Thursday, with nice weather (~50 F = 10 C) and sunny I was loading my gear into the SUV for an afternoon detect in my current site (muni park previously an industrial yard).  When travelling near home with my detector I just leave the shaft extended to it's optimal (for me) length, coil attached -- ready to hit the ground running.  It fits across the floor of my backseat just fine.  I've been doing things this way since I got my ML Equionox 800 in late March 2018.  (Relevant Note:  3 year warranty has expired).  As I was putting the detector in the back seat (coil first...) I bumped the coil on something, probably either the near car door (standing open) or more likely the back of the front seat.  I heard a 'crack' sound, not too loud, and at first was going to ignore it.  And then I remember this and many other threads on the same subject....

Taking the detector out and looking at the coil attachment area it didn't take but a fraction of a second to see the source of the noise.  The top of the tab had broken completely through at the location where the through bolt passes.  Fortunately I had my 6" coil in the vehicle (always try to bring it along) and better yet, the 12"x15" inside so I put on the latter and my afternoon hunt survived.  (I'll make a separate post on the results of that, which included a detecting first for me.  Stay tuned for that.)  I did check the tightness of the wing nut and it was not very tight; definitely not what I would call over-tightened.  Further, thanks to phrunt's suggestion I've been putting spray silicone lubricant on all my rubber coil gaskets (not just on Eqx but on other detectors as well) to minimize the friction when the coil is rotated.  I will state (obviously without proof) that I didn't use a lot of force loading the detector and that I'm confident I've torqued the coil similarly on many occasions in the past without incident.

Now let's review the history of this coil while in my possession (since it was new in box).  Only counting local detects and only counting days when the only detector+coil I used was the Eqx+11" stock, reviewing my detecting logs I see that I've hunted with this coil for 820 hours.  I probably have another 40-80 hours with the coil if I were to include remote hunts (e.g. this past June in Utah and this past August in Massachusetts) plus those days when I hunted with multiple detectors or the Eqx with multiple coils.

Probably more relevant is that I've modified my shaft by replacing the two lower sections with the ML X-Terra 705 lower sections so in fact the Eqx coil(s) is attached to an X-Terra lower shaft.  Does this enter into the investigation?  Yes.  Let's delve deeper.

Of those 800-900 hours that the 11" coil has been in use, between 450 and 500 of them (the most recent) were with this modified shaft.  Could there be a tolerance (would 'intolerance' be a better word) issue?  Here are some measurements I just made this evening.  (Note:  measuring soft items is a bit tricky but more complicated than that, measuring a stack of items in which there are 'mushy' contacts between them, such as rubber gaskets embedded in plastic insets -- exactly what we have here -- leads to some measurement uncertainties.  Thus I give a range of thickness measurements for each combination.)

1) My Equinox stock shaft with used = ~400 hours wear gaskets:  0.890-->0.899 inches.

2) My current setup (X-Terra lowest shaft w/used = ~500 hours wear gaskets:  0.882-->0.884 inches.

3) Brand new (unused) Anderson lower shaft for X-Terra with one shim (included in purchase and determined by me to be the right amount of adjustment):  0.894-->0.897 inches.

4) Brand new (unused) ML stock X-Terra lower shaft purchased from Gerry earlier this year:  0.896 --> 0.902 inches.

5) Opening on my slightly used ML Equinox 12"x15" coil:  0.889-->0.894 inches.

BTW, for those who prefer metric measurements, 0.010 inches is about 0.25 mm.  Looking over these numbers, the X-Terra and Equinox shafts are likely pretty close when everything is new.  The thing that jumps out is that my used X-Terra lower shaft (gaskets 'used' exclusively with the Equinox coils) are about 0.010 inches thinner than everything else.  I don't know if we can call that a smoking gun, but it appears those gaskets have worn over time.  Is that current combination enough to lead to stress that caused this breakage?  I guess Minelab engineers should be able to answer that -- they've seen enough returned coils with broken ears to figure out what's going on....

To add a bit more evidence (admittedly anecdotal), I do recall measuring things when I changed from Eqx stock shaft to X-Terra shaft almost 2 years ago and the difference then was not 0.010 inches or I would have added shims to make up the difference.  I don't know how the gasket compounds compares between Equinox and X-Terra but it sure appears that the X-Terra gaskets wear measurably with time.  (I have a spare set of those plus the ones on the shaft I bought from Gerry.  Time for a change now that the horse has escaped through the open gate....)

So, what next?  This next picture (with broken coil attach tab piece and bakelite washer I've had salted away since I was in high school > 50 years ago) gives a big hint.

I'll report the results of this garage fix in a couple days after I see if it works.

 

If JB Weld doesn't fix it, it can't be fixed...

Just sayin'

A few months ago I found a chunky sterling silver ring. For a silver ring, it's pretty nice. I'll trade you if you're interested...😁

 

In the past there were a few in the 500/600 bucks range on craigs list. (no hardcase included as I've no need for this). But right now they want 1600 plus

Perhaps they hope a potential buyer will confuse the old Deus with the new one?

I see the occassional Deus online, but they're rare and the seller is usually asking for just a smidge under street price. I think they're uncommon (in my area, at least) b/c most casual detectorists won't buy the Deus. Most of what I see for sale as used machines are Garretts, Equinoxes and entry-level detectors from all sort of companies.

I'm always browsing online sites for used metal detectors.The next best thing to metal detecting is buying a machine you don't have for a great price, then tinkering with it and selling it later to break even or make a modest profit. However, people often ask for way too much money for their machines (except for maybe the Equinoxes). This is especially true with White's and Garrett machines.

Apparently, what many people sell their machines for isn't based on what the machine is worth. Instead, it's what the seller originally bough it for. I'll see used AT Pros for $500 and used AT Maxes for $600 or more. Sometimes they have the Garrett Carrot and some other accessories that they got for free from their purchase bundle. But geez...

I know this is their thinking b/c the description will say, "asking for $600, but originally paid $700+ for everything..." No honey, that's now how this works. If it was, I have a CD player from the early 2000s that cost me $120, so that means its selling price today is $90...right?

What phrunt said...

 

I just wish Minelab had taken greater care to design the equinox in many ways. If they had, they might not be in the position they may now find themselves in.

I agree, although I wonder if what has unfolded is what they expected and accounted for. Or, maybe they knew it would be an issue, just not as bad as it ended up being.

It's a common practice for companies and business to deliberately release a faulty product or service knowing (or at least believing) the cost savings will outweigh the consequences. I can't stand this practice and believe it should be severely punished by the courts. 

At the very least, these are just metal detectors and not, you know...Boeing 737 MAX airplanes...

If I was a diver, I'd find a way to put the Equinox into a true, waterproof casing, a la SeaGhost.

 

This is an interesting thread on it, https://www.prospectingaustralia.com.au/forum/viewtopic.php?id=33659&p=1

If diving is your thing perhaps the Equinox isn't ideal although with 3 years warranty there is very little risk, let it flood and get them to replace it if it ever leaks.  After 3 years especially if it's an Equinox 600 and leaks, you've got your value out of it anyway when you compare it to the price of the Deus 2 or you could just sell it and buy a new one to renew your warranty.

If I keep my Equinox 600, when its warranty is done, I have thought about the idea of sending it off to Eastern Europe, Russia or wherever and converting it into the SeaGhost or w/e it's called.

 

But there are also users who know full well they are exceeding the limits, but continue to do it over and over rather than buying a true diving machine.

I agree that this probably happens. But from the stories I've read, people are getting water intrusion after a light dunking or brief water incursion of only a few feet. 

I just watched a Youtube video from Gigmaster and he took some close up pics showing cracks in his control pod. I dont' recall how old his machine was, and I think he said the cracks were around the charging socket. He said he wondered if he was getting leaks through these cracks.

 

I just looked through the latest manual I have downloaded (version 7, specifed as 4901-0249-01 EN on its last page -- might not be the latest manual...) but couldn't find any time limit for control pod submersion.  Did I miss it?  If not there, where did you get this information?

I don't see it in the manual either. The only mention of the overall waterproofness says nothing about duration underwater.

Great find and cool pics!

 

why aren't those in the ocean detecting (and even some in the freshwater detecting) camps throwing wild "can't wait for the release!" parties?

Just to add to what Chase already mentioned, I think another reason is the overall design of the Deus II and how, in my opinion, it doesn't look "dive rated" waterproof.

There's a reason Ikelite camera housings look alien and often cost more than the cameras (and lenses!) they house. Real waterproofing is hard to reliably accomplish and requires a special level of engineering and design. Just think about how different the Sovereigns and Exacaliburs look from each other...

 

Just my take on what you mentioned for what it's worth - not trying to win an argument or anything but thought I would respond.  I know none of this is going to change your mind.   I just thought is was interesting that you previously said, the Equinox appeared to perform better but it was not just good enough to be better overall, it was also important to know "how much better" - so I wanted to see what was prompting that statement.  Other than coil selection and waterproofness, was not seeing much on the list that would sway me back to a lesser performing detecting platform. 

Re waterproofing:  I didn't know you were a water hunter.  Fresh or salt?  Better waterproofing is great unless the detector can't do what you need it to and the Max tends to false out in salt being high gain and single frequency.

Re S-shaft: I like the APEX Design and S-Shaft (great control module design) but the balance of the AT series did a number on my wrist with that large, retro control module just sitting there like I am trying to swing a side-view mirror around.  Not really ergonomic.  Nox has different issues, but an S shaft would have been a nice option.

Re looks: Something to be said for looks but Max "looking better" is definitely in the eye of the beholder.  Lol.

Re smaller coil:  I noticed you mentioned the Equinox 6-inch round accessory coil but you have never mentioned the Coiltek Nox 10x5 coil.  I have owned both and the 10x5 is the accessory coil Equinox users should not have been made to wait 3 years for. It is a great coil and, yes, improves the Nox looks as well. Lol.

Aftermarket Coil Selection:  No argument there. Coil selection for the Nox is disappointing (but at least we have that 10x5 now).  Would be a great "bake off" competitor to the 8x5 you speak so fondly of.

Simpler Settings:  OK, again, somewhat debatable - Equinox 800 is one of the few mid to high end detectors I have used where the default settings seem to be right where I need them to be making it a true grab n go.  Equinox 600 is even more straight forward with fewer adjustment choices.  Really shouldn't have to tweak settings much at all after you get it set up for your typical situations just switch modes, GB, noise cancel, adjust sensitivity as necessary.  I have found the navigation to be pretty intuitive too.  My only gripe is the inability to go back and forth in the menus.  I guess ML considered that there were few enough settings it was good enough to just enable cycling through the settings in one direction.  I disagree.  On the AT I owned, I really struggled with settings navigation.  It seemed less intuitive and there are some quirks to things like iron volume and tone settings that vary depending on where you set the ferrous breakpoint.  Weird.

Customer Service:  I agree that Garrett's customer service is top notch.  Having dealt with both companies over the past year or two on non-warranty repair issues - they both provided great customer service in terms of accessibility, communication, and turnaround time.

Thanks for responding back with your points.  Great dialog.

I agree, this is a great dialog. I prepared a longer response to your comment, but for some reason I lost it. But the biggest point I wanted to make is that I don't regualrly water hunt, but I want a machine that would allow me to, as hunting a freshwater late or river/stream is something I'd like to try. Also, I know the AT Max CAN hunt saltwater beaches, although I know it's not ideal and will have limited depth capabilities.

I also don't mind hunting in heavy rains...like thick downpours that make it necessary to have a windshield wiper on the front of the detector. I have faith the AT Max can handle this. I also occassionally clean my metal detectors and I like trusting the waterpoofing enough to know I can take the control box/pod and washing it in a sink.

The AT Max is a bit nose heavy with the stock coil, I'll admit. But I would remedy this with the 5x8 coil assuming I kept the AT Max and not the Equinox.

Ideally, I'd have the Equinox's capabilities in the AT Max's form factor. I know, I'm probably the only person in the world that wishes for something like this...

8 hours ago, Chase Goldman said:

I'll bite - besides replaceable batteries, what else do you see is an advantage of the Max over the Nox?

Better waterproofing

S-Shaft design

Looks better...looks A LOT better

The 5x8 coil (makes the detector look perfectly proportional and from what everyone says, makes it very ergonomic)

Aftermarket coil selection (especially The Arrow by Detech)

Simpler settings (this is a double-edged sword, of course, as fewer settings mean it's harder to "dial in" your machine for different conditions)

Garrett's legendary customer service. I hear that Minelab's can be good too, but there are more negative reports about Minelab on than Garrett.

10 minutes ago, Tom Slick said:

You can save a lot of testing time by using the Equinox and actually learning it. You can also save hours and hours by posting a question on the forums like " who here has sold their Equinox and kept, or bought the AT Max. (Crickets chirping I'm sure).

I have no doubt that Equinox, in most situations, will outperform my AT Max. The only question is by how much. But the AT Max has certain advantages over the Equinox, in my opinion. While these advantages may not matter to most people, they matter to me.

And no, just "using the Equinox" won't save time. Running tests offers a more time-efficient (and still enjoyable) way to compare the Equinox to the AT max under my conditions, using my method of hunting and taking my preferences into consideration. And logistically, it's easier for me to test metal detectors than actually go hunting with them. Finally, running these tests is teaching me a lot about the Equinox. 

This doesn't mean results from actual hunts don't matter. But adding a series of tests to my occassional outings to go hunt (which isn't as often as I'd like) is the most efficient way for me to make a decision between the two machines.

1 hour ago, Chase Goldman said:

You may already have your answer.  The versatility of Equinox likely enables you to set up the Equinox to spank the AT Max for your specific different circumstances.  My advice to you is to do some book study and practical validation on test targets before head-to-head testing to really learn how the various Equinox mode settings are set up for different circumstances and target objectives including how settings such as the ferrous break, recovery speed and the two iron bias filters affect response.  The descriptions in the Equinox user guide manual are a pretty good place to start as is Steve’s compendium of informative Equinox forum posts.  That way you can anticipate what you should do to set up Equinox to be optimized for a given situation then verify expectations with head to head testing.  There may be some odd corner case where the AT Max excels over the Equinox, but that shouldn’t necessarily win the day.  If you don’t learn the modes and settings before you test then you are just guessing and basically flying blind. Give it a shot.

I agree, but I think this is what's going to happen:

I run my battery of tests and the only settings I mess with in the Equinox will be changing the modes (Park 1, Park 2, Field 1 and Field 2). As for the AT Max, I'll probably just mess with the modes (Zero, All Metal and Custom) and maybe the sensitivity.

I have a strong feeling that the Equinox will still edge out the AT Max. Depending on how much better the Equinox does, I'll start doing some comparisons after adjusting for recovery speed, both types of Iron Bias, etc. In other words, I'll make sure I understand the Equinox more to better make adjustments with it and take full(er) advatnage of its capabilities.

I just made my test garden. It's just a dime at 4-5 inches down in my highly mineralized soil. This dime is also 1 inch away from a brand new nail. I originally buried these items around 6-7 inches down, but neither the AT Max nor the Equinox could detect the dime. And only on the rare occassion, could either make ANY sort of sound on the nail (or a combination of the two targets).

But after burying both items just 4-5 inches down, the AT Max could detect both targets and separate them, but gave readings b/w 11 and 99 on the dime. As for the Equinox, in both Park and Field modes, it could reliably detect the nail and dime. But when hitting the dime, the VDIs ranged from around 18 and 25. So as many of you have already said, the AT Max can often detect what the Equinox can detect, but at "depth," its VDIs are no where near as consistent or accurate as the Equinox.

So in just 2 rudimentary tests today, the AT Max is already 0-2 against the Equinox.

10 minutes ago, Jeff McClendon said:

Iron bias default settings do make a difference. Some have said that Park 1 and Field 1 are the exact same default modes meaning they have exactly the same frequency weighting using Multi but with slightly different discrimination patterns, different iron bias settings and different tone settings. There does seem to be a difference in the frequency weighting between them from my experience. There is a huge difference in the frequency weighting between Park1/Field1 and Field 2 for sure.

I didn't think about the frequency weighting differences, but those could play a role, for sure.

I didn't really notice a difference between Field 1 and 2, though.

39 minutes ago, Jeff McClendon said:

What made this change of results possible?

I don't know for sure, but I figure the Iron Bias settings might have something to do with it; I know the recovery speeds are the same between those modes. The dime was about 2-3 inches below the nail, but still very close to it (in regards to the horizontal, not vertical, plane).