Whites VX3 VS Garrett Vortex VX9 Video

[Jeff McClendon]

I see a lot of requests for Garrett to step up and do a remake of some of the detectors that they acquired from their purchase of White's Metal Detectors especially the V series. Some have speculated that the Vortex V series is just that, a reimagining of the Whites V series.

Personally, I prefer the Whites V series color screen and some of the audio choices and I am a huge fan of mixed audio which sounds like an MXT.

I like the light weight, internal rechargeable battery, 3 tiered ferrous/non ferrous display, easy to see screen, simple to adjust features and waterproofing on the Garrett Vortex VX9. I am not a fan of its audio.

So, here is a video comparison between the VX3 and VX9 for low and high conductor US coin target ID accuracy in high iron mineralization dirt. Using a USA nickel and USA quarter for test targets.

Up averaging of target IDs and audio responses plus loss of depth is a given in high iron mineralization and common low conductor coins and trash can respond like high conductor copper and silver coin and jewelry targets. This can make selective digging really difficult even on shallow 3" deep low and mid conductor targets.

Due to the high magnetite content in the soil here, the Vortex VX9 ground balances at 96.75 on this dirt.

The results you see in this 6 minute video are exactly what I see when hunting wild targets here. The VX3 has the advantage in overall coil size for sure. Notice that I have all of the iron filtering on minimum setting on the Garrett Vortex VX9.  Which detector's simultaneous multi frequency technology works best for identifying targets in these soil conditions?

There was lightening in the area and plenty of WiFi EMI interference. I tried to especially help the VX3 using frequency offsets. Nothing would help.

I have a new screen ordered for my VX3. 

Thanks to Eureka Treasure Hunters Club, Denver Colorado for letting me borrow their Garrett Vortex VX9.

[IBMe]

One thing for sure, the VX3 display beats everything out there. Thanks.

[JCR]

A thoughtful and interesting comparison.  Thanks

[Jeff McClendon]

1 hour ago, JCR said:

A thoughtful and interesting comparison.  Thanks

I have some other in the ground targets that are deeper but most VLFs can’t hit them. 

Most of my coin and jewelry hunting is done in public areas where the only choice is very selective digging.

So I really appreciate a detector that is capable of having accurate target IDs on mid depth and deeper targets. Detectors that can’t do that won’t get used very often or go bye, bye. 

In all of the years and detectors that I have run through that test, only some of the recent SMFs have passed it

It’s a simple 2 coin target ID accuracy test which also includes EMI susceptibility but it has never proven wrong. If a detector can detect those targets accurately, it will work well here.

The VX3 simply failed. Vortex VX9 borderline passed but to Garrett’s credit, the Apex failed that test miserably so way to go Garrett with the Vortex.

 

[JCR]

Yes, for those of us who hunt in difficult mineralized ground conditions, the recent advances in SMF tech have been noteworthy, but I think the real game changer has been an emphasis by the various design/engineering teams to improve ground handling & target acquisition at depth in the minerals.  The shallower targets now get accurate TID and the deeper targets are no longer invisible.  Better EMI mitigation goes a long way toward this also.   All one has to do is consider the performance of the introductory software on the current top tier detectors to their performance using the most recent software versions.  It is night and day past 6” in my red dirt.  Still more improvements to come, and I think, new outside the box approaches to push the boundaries further.

[EL NINO77]

Yes Jeff, in this test you can clearly see the difference between the multifrequency of the 1st generation /VX3/ and the 2nd generation./.Vortex../

Even though the VX3 is a multifrequency detector with 3 different frequencies....the processing of VDI targets works similarly to a classic single-frequency detector..this means that the VDI shift is set depending on the depth of the target in the mineralized terrain..even though the targets are detected in the test

In the Vortex, which is a more modern multifrequency detector, you can see a generation higher level of multifrequency processing...and the Vortex is significantly better at VDI target accuracy in such mineralized terrain..

for someone who selectively detects targets below a certain VDI, this is a very important factor..

for me, definitely yes...

 JCR...you are right ...     today's modern detectors do very well in such a detection area..

[Jeff McClendon]

Thank you for commenting El Nino77. 

As much as I like the V3i and VX3, if Garrett decides to reimagine them, I hope they use second generation or better simultaneous multi frequency technology instead of the SMF tech from the original Whites V series. Whites DFX has the same problem here and the Minelab Explorer, Safari, Quattro, Etrac series also have similar issues detecting here.

[EL NINO77]

Yes,, ETRAC, CTX...are also still in the 1st generation of multifrequency...if we are talking about very mineralized terrain...

[Luki]

Il 30/07/2025 alle 01:30, Jeff McClendon ha detto:

Grazie per aver commentato El Nino77. 

Per quanto mi piacciano i modelli V3i e VX3, se Garrett decidesse di reinventarli, spero che utilizzando una tecnologia multifrequenza simultanea di seconda generazione o migliore, invece della tecnologia SMF della serie Whites V originale. I Whites DFX hanno lo stesso problema e anche le serie Minelab Explorer, Safari, Quattro ed Etrac hanno problemi di rilevamento simili.

Jeff, fai attenzione alla bobina che hai installato sul tuo Spectra.