Is It Better Than D1 ... Gary Speaks

[brys]

[Steve Herschbach]

It’s not a simple question. There seems to be a desire to retire the Deus 1 as obsolete, and for some reason it seems important Deus 2 be better than everything at everything. Why could it not be some detectors are better at some things, and others better at other things? Better for what, and where? Better for saltwater detecting? No doubt. Better than a Deus 1 running a 5x10 HF coil, when hunting tiny gold flakes, in the western U.S.? I’d say jury is out.

No one person running a detector in one part of the world can see the whole picture in its entirety, and any one persons reports should be only one part of a general consensus, that will take time to develop. There seems to me to be a rush to judge winners and losers, when in my experience it takes 6 months to a year, for the real picture to reveal itself. But that is the way the hype machine works, build extreme interest early to get people to buy fast, without fear that what they are getting is better than anything ever made before. New buyers crave that assurance, that safety, so it's easy to feed.

Personally I'm thinking the Deus 2 is indeed the better overall detector, with Deus 1 perhaps retaining some edges in what are admittedly very niche situations. Regardless, I doubt XP cares much what detector you buy, as long as it’s an XP. 

[Skull diver]

29 minutes ago, Steve Herschbach said:

without fear that what they are getting is better than anything ever made before.

You're damn right Steve...And I fallen again like a child.

Just curious to personally check the silence on the seabed 😂

[Guest]

“What the XP people have set out to do is find a solution that will make the ground virtually invisible to the machine…”

Took this out of that mag article above. Is this not ground balancing? Is there something new there? 

[brys]

xp could   upgrade d1  owners with ground grab and ground stab if they wish i reckon its doable and usefull to get more depth

[Guest]

4 hours ago, Loren said:

This is a gross over simplification, but basically when a machine outputs two or more frequencies, you can subtract the result of one frequency from the other and eliminate the ground much more effectively (XP calls it conductive soil subtraction).

Thanks Loren. Makes more sense when you put it that way. Those guys get caught up in marketing instead of useful information and I get lost in it. It sounds more expensive the way that guy said it.