Equinox Software Update 3.0...

[Tom_in_CA]

3 hours ago, Bootyhunter said:

Sounds like user error with the person running the Equinox.

I love it.  I just love it.   I will point out this quote to my friend.  And chide him : "Tsk Tsk".   Just to watch him pull his hair out, haha

 

Ok  he will ask :  "Pray-tell :  What settings did I do wrong ? "   

 

Because, mind you, it's never the machine,  right ?  It's always the user, right ? 

[Bootyhunter]

2 hours ago, Tom_in_CA said:

I love it.  I just love it.   I will point out this quote to my friend.  And chide him : "Tsk Tsk".   Just to watch him pull his hair out, haha

 

Ok  he will ask :  "Pray-tell :  What settings did I do wrong ? "   

 

Because, mind you, it's never the machine,  right ?  It's always the user, right ? 

Not "always" but,  most of the time, and unless you were checking exact same targets with both machines then luck was and is always a factor. 

[steveg]

10 hours ago, Tom_in_CA said:

I love it.  I just love it.   I will point out this quote to my friend.  And chide him : "Tsk Tsk".   Just to watch him pull his hair out, haha

 

Ok  he will ask :  "Pray-tell :  What settings did I do wrong ? "   

 

Because, mind you, it's never the machine,  right ?  It's always the user, right ? 

Tom,

One thing I have heard anecdotally -- and I can't imagine how/why this could be the case -- but I've heard from a few folks that when they have installed one of the new EQX updates, they find the machine to suddenly be extremely unstable -- and so they end up doing a "restore" or "reset" back to original settings, and then re-installing the update, and then things work properly.  Based on what you are saying, I have to wonder if a "reset" and "reinstall" might be worth a try, on your buddy's machine.  What you describe, just does not sound normal.

Oh -- and one other thing -- he will NEVER "spank" you, if he has to keep his sensitivity down due EMI.  I know this is kind of obvious, but perhaps especially so with this machine.  While the EQX does quite well on "fairly deep" targets at lower sensitivity levels, sensitivity over 22 (I think that is the number) is where I believe NASA-Tom Dankowski has stated that the machine really begins to "shine," in terms of maximum depth (almost like a "boost" process, if I recall correctly?)  So, if he has EMI problems -- at that site, or any other that you hunt -- and he combats it by lowering sensitivity (which, of course, must be done sometimes to fight the EMI), then he'd be handicapped (since you are hunting only for the ultra, fringe-depth targets).  NOT that there's much else he could have done, but hunting a site where the EQX's sensitivity needs to be kept in the teens, is NOT a fair fight in terms of putting it up against FBS and hunting for the fringe-deep coins.  I rarely hunt the machine below 23 or 24 sensitivity, unless absolutely forced to, by EMI...since I too (as you know) spend a good bit of my detecting time hunting those "fringe depth" old coins that have been left behind by others...

Steve

[midalake]

9 hours ago, steveg said:

but I've heard from a few folks that when they have installed one of the new EQX updates, they find the machine to suddenly be extremely unstable -- and so they end up doing a "restore" or "reset" back to original settings, and then re-installing the update, and then things work properly. 

I have been saying this since update #1 !!!!!!!!!!   In which I installed it and my machine was unusable!   Did an uninstall and reinstall everything was great! 

Also do a FACTORY RESET before all installs.  [ya I know they say it is not necessary] 

[Tom_in_CA]

11 hours ago, steveg said:

.....  I have to wonder if a "reset" and "reinstall"...........

That's the ticket.   ?   Another remedy that doesn't need to point to the machine vs another machine itself  ?

 

But seriously :  I'm game for anything that can prove me wrong.  Because I'd certainly like the lighter  package, waterproof, etc....

[Tom_in_CA]

2 hours ago, midalake said:

I have been saying this since update #1 !!!!!!!!!!   In which I installed it and my machine was unusable!   Did an uninstall and reinstall everything was great! 

Also do a FACTORY RESET before all installs.  [ya I know they say it is not necessary] 

Yup.  My silly friend simply isn't done with all the steps.  It's not  the machine vs another machine.  It's "you didn't do it correctly".  Will love to see him reading this/these "outs".

 

As it turns  out,  my buddies and I are planning another trip to do some turf hunting in SF .  And they (both 800 fans) are simply saying that this particular *ss*kick spot will not be on the list of spots to try . DESPITE the oldies that are being porked out.  They are not interested in re-setting, re-installing.  They are contented and resolved that this is simply a spot where NO AMOUNT OF FIDDLING is ever going to allow the Nox to outhunt the Exp II.  

 

So now it appears we'll be off to other turf zones.   Ok, anyone care to guess the outcome ?   Ready to roll out the excuses ?  ?

[steveg]

Tom,

I don't know why the "snark" is necessary, in your response my post; I was genuinely trying to be helpful for your friend, not "making excuses."  If there are install problems, that others have mentioned, where a glitch occurs (unstable machine after updating), and then a full factory reset and then re-install resolves the issue, I don't know why you'd imply that your friend would not appreciate the suggestion.  

I will say one last thing on this topic.  I have a test garden, that's been buried for 10 years now.  When I got the CTX, about 3 years ago, I tested it thoroughly against my Explorer.  Obviously -- similar to what you and your buddy did when comparing targets -- I was taking a KNOWN target, and comparing it...first, with the Explorer (which at the time was my "go to" machine) and then with my CTX.  I knew quite well how each of the different coins in my garden tended to react, when the Explorer was run over them (I ran the Explorer -- and many other units -- on these targets MANY times).  In my garden, I know which of those coins are "tough targets," which ones are on the very fringe of detection, and which ones you MIGHT get a chirp from, but is NOT a "diggable" target if you were "in the field."

What I concluded, was that no matter what settings I adjusted on the CTX, it was nearly identical, in terms of depth capability, to my SE Pro.  I could not get it to trump my Explorer, depth-wise.  THEN -- I got an Equinox.  By this time, my last Explorer had died, so the CTX was my "go to" machine.  But -- as I said -- I knew the CTX to be very nearly identical, in terms of depth capability, to my Explorer (which I had used for about 7 years prior to getting the CTX).  

SO -- I then tested the CTX and Equinox head-to-head; obviously, very similar to what you and your friend did, I compared the two units to known targets...I knew the depth of each target, I knew the coin type, and I knew how it "behaved" when detected by various machines.  And what THIS testing revealed, is that my Equinox is roughly 1/2" to 1" DEEPER than my CTX (and, by extension, my SE Pro).  This was testing on multiple buried targets (including silver dimes, quarters, and wheat cents).  Finally, then, over the course of a couple of months, I did the same type of head-to-head testing IN THE FIELD.  I'd find a deepie with the CTX, and then grab the EQX, and interrogate.  And -- confirming the test garden results -- the EQX would give a slightly clearer/slightly more "diggable" signal on the targets as compared to the CTX.  

These results -- in central Oklahoma dirt, anyway -- were gathered using the very same type of "testing" that you and your buddy did.  And the results are MUCH different from what you report.  And for the life of me, I can't understand why that carries exactly ZERO weight, in your mind.  I COULD say that yes, it may be such that your California dirt renders the EQX less capable than your Explorer (as opposed to my Oklahoma dirt).  Obviously that's a possibility, but then you have Raphis -- a very long-time, very talented detectorist to say the least, confirming that the EQX is at least the equal of his Explorer in CALIFORNIA dirt (although, not specifically San Fransisco dirt).  

I don't know, Tom...hard to figure why you have such a hard time putting any weight on the experiences of others...BUT -- we've had this discussion before.  I know it doesn't have any influence -- but it's all good!

Steve

[Tom_in_CA]

18 hours ago, steveg said:

.... I've heard from a few folks that when they have installed one of the new EQX updates, they find the machine to suddenly be extremely unstable -- and so they end up doing a "restore" or "reset" back to original settings, and then re-installing the update, and then things work properly.  Based on what you are saying, I have to wonder if a "reset" and "reinstall" might be worth a try, on your buddy's machine.....

Thanx Steve.   I'll pass this on to him.  If the problem of constant chatter persists elsewhere, he was simply going to take the 3.0 back off.   But perhaps he'll try what you say,  and re-install for another trial period .  Thanx.

[Tom_in_CA]

3 hours ago, steveg said:

These results -- in central Oklahoma dirt, anyway -- were gathered using the very same type of "testing" that you and your buddy did.  And the results are MUCH different from what you report.  And for the life of me, I can't understand why that carries exactly ZERO weight, in your mind.  I COULD say that yes, it may be such that your California dirt renders the EQX less capable than your Explorer (as opposed to my Oklahoma dirt).  Obviously that's a possibility, but then you have Raphis -- a very long-time, very talented detectorist to say the least, confirming that the EQX is at least the equal of his Explorer in CALIFORNIA dirt (although, not specifically San Fransisco dirt).  

I don't know, Tom...hard to figure why you have such a hard time putting any weight on the experiences of others...BUT -- we've had this discussion before.  I know it doesn't have any influence -- but it's all good!

 

Steve, I am absolutely NOT dismissing the glowing reviews for the Nox.   And I saw first-hand that it spanks my Explorer in a relicky iron-riddled ghost townsy location.   No problem. 

 

But when it comes to turf, so far I have not seen that.  Yes I've seen the glowing testimonials, but haven't seen it in action so far.   And as for Dan / Raphis :   His hunting partner in So. CA, and I, have been in conversation lately :  And as it turns out, when they compare signals @ the Etrac to the Nox, they are coming to a draw.  Neither has the edge.  They can each hear each other's flags, and each make the same TID judgement calls.     That's a little different  than Dan's report of the move from SE  pro to Nox, where Dan is .... yes .... saying the Nox is doing better than his prior SE.    But when  it comes to the Etrac vs Nox, those 2 guys are not seeing any edge.  It could be debated that the SE pro and the II and Etrac are a little different depth-wise.   The SE pro incarnation *did*  suffer some criticism that it  didn't have *quite* the depth of the others  in the incarnation lineup of Explorers.

 

Yes I'm "influenced" by all the glowing testimony.  That's WHY  I'm interested in seeing how it will stack  up.   If it can at least *match* my Exp. II in the turf (and not even necessarily "spank" it), then that will be great !   Because it's lighter, water-proof, better in iron, etc...  What's not to  love ?  ?

 

We may head back to SF for some more turf hunting.   Will report  back after that.