Depth - Whites versus Minelab - field observations

[Charles (Upstate NY)]

I used to hunt with a guy who was known as a Whites guru, especially with a DFX. I have also hunted with several at the intermediate DFX skill level. Often when we hunt we mark targets and compared both machines on the same target before digging. This is the only valid machine comparison in my opinion and even then experience level and the particular site conditions on the given day muddy the results.

Both machines offer several levels of performance in terms of the experience of the operator. Lets keep it simple and say beginner, intermediate, and advanced. That said based on the many targets we compared here is what I think. Keep in mind that this is specific to our local soils and site conditions, results in your area may be quite different.

Small cent sized targets...

0-6 inch range - DFX wins hands down. The machine is highly accurate, pinpoints on a dime, fast, lightweight, well built, and well balanced.

7-8 inch range stock coils - Explorer is king in this range and this is pretty well established but why? My theory is that the DFX requires a higher intermediate to advanced skill level to match the Explorer in this depth range. Targets that were solid hits and ID'd accurately on the Explorer were more iffy on the DFX. Therefore even a beginner with an Explorer can make finds at this level.

9-11 inch range stock coils - This is where things get interesting. Target ID accuracy falls off sharply with the Explorer stock coil after 8 inches (again in our soils) while the DFX target ID accuracy having fallen earlier seems to hit a plateau. Signals on both machines pretty much stink, both machines require near expert skill level to make these finds.

9-11 inch range 15 inch Explorer coil - While not a fair comparison to the DFX 9 inch coil, the 15 inch DD coil for the Explorer effectively pulls many of the 9-11 inch small cent size targets up to the 7-8 inch range in terms of quality of signal.

Deep large cent silver quarter signals - The DFX seems to have difficulty with these. Intermediate level DFX operators could not get a signal on several deep large cent and silver quarter signals that were solid on the Explorer. I did find a number of deep large cents that sounded horrible even with the Explorer so this is not unique to the DFX.

Deepest small cent size target I ever saw dug? Don't faint Explorer camp but it was dug with a DFX and a 9 inch concentric coil. It gets worse, I swept the target before it was dug with a 15 inch WOT coil and it ID'd as iron. It ID'd as iron on Dave's DFX also but his machine was telling him something, giving some type of hint that it might not be iron. This is the expert skill level coming into play here. I would have walked past that target with my 15 inch coil and never gave it another thought. How deep was it? Well Dave's elbow was even with the rim of the hole, that mother was deep.

I admit I enjoy needling the Whites camp but only in fun. The Whites machines can perform, I think they require more effort in terms of learning to use them at the expert level (why I swing a Minelab) but they can perform no doubt about it.

Just my two cents worth.

Charles

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Upgraded Night Vision Monocular Digital Infrared Monocular Telescope for 100% Darkness with 8X Zoom - Grab it through Amazon!

[Jack(IN)]

Great post Charles! I've got a friend who has a DFX and is just learning, but will soon have it mastered, especially since he hunts every day. He does get frustrated when he can't pick up a signal that I've identified. He has tweaked his DFX and will do more, but I sold mine before I learned it(DFX) and prefer the Explorer. Both machines in the right hands are super detectors!!

 

[muleskinner]

Although I consider myself a metaldetecting rookie, I've been into electronics for over thirty years. I've done some reading and research on detectors, and I'm on my third detector. Considering the money I spent last time around, anyway let's say I did my homework before the purchase.
As I understand the top Whites put out 2 frequencies, one in the single Hertz and the other at least ten times higher. People need to understand that low frequency means depth in most conditions. High frequency means the ability to detect small objects. So they do a good job of picking the bands to run on.
Minelabs top detectors run on a minimum of 17 frequencies or 28 for the Explorer.
Now the question I have is which has the highest output wattage? And who has the circuitry to decipher the info that's coming back to the receiver? It seems nobody talks about wattage. Any stereo buffs out there, or radio buffs out there?
I know I'm rambling again but that will be the difference in depth. My last purchase was a high end Minelab that amazes me at it"s depth abilities. But if I had the money I'ld buy a high end Whites. I can't believe Whites guys can walk and swing as fast as they can. They cover twice the ground that I do.
God Bless
Muleskinner

 

[bakergeol]

Really excellent post Charles. It answered some of my questions.

Well done
George

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

I see a lot of people walking fast and swinging fast, no way they are hearing deep signals.

I walk behing them and I find stuff they missed.....

 

[diggerfororo]

Hi Youall:

I have been involved with electronics for many years as a communications tech. The deciding factor in the depth is mainly 2 things. 1 power (wattage) and a little thing called radio wave propagation. I have drawn a rough (and I mean rough) drawing of what the trans. signal looks like on 3 different types of detectors. The first is a single freq. unit. You will notice that the signal is "v' shaped so at it's max detection range the signal is only a pinpoint. The next unit is 2 freq machines ( whites - fishers) the signal is more rounded an the bottom giving you more coverage. The third is multi freq units (minelab) This signal is very wide at it's max range giving it more coverage at max than any other type unit. It is pretty easy to find a target that someone has already marked. The test is ((could you have found it on your own)). I don't use either a minelab or a whites but they are both good machines. I use a prototype unit from fisher that I have had for 15 years. this unit has a little more power than any other machine I have tested.

Les

 

[bakergeol]

The issue of the number of frequencies affecting the depth of the detector was initially promoted by Minelab. It is of course marketing hype. My detector transmits over 100 frequencies which a lot of detectors do. The issue is how many frequencies are received. A lot of people actually believe that an explorer will receive 28 frequencies which it does not. The debate is does the explorer receives 2 or 3 frequencies and which ones? It is not difficult to reason out. If the explorer receives very high frequencies such as a GB 2 it would be just as sensitive to very small gold and would be an effective gold detector. It of course is not.

The reputation of the Explorers are richly deserved but marketing hype is just that- Hype.

George

 

[Mirage]

Great post Charles. My son Nate hunts with me on a weekly basis. He uses the DFX and I use the explorer II. We do the same thing with comparing signals. I think your observations are dead on. The only thing is the depths in Ohio are not the same for in NY. For some reason we cannot get the depth in Ohio that we can get in New York.

The only time I wish I had a DFX is when we go to a new location and there is a good amount of silver within 4" of the surface. That's when my son always seems to do better.

Bob

 

[Born2Dtect]

Charles,
0-6 inch range - DFX wins hands down. The machine is highly accurate, pinpoints on a dime, fast, lightweight, well built, and well balanced.

Question on this statement. I'll admit the EXP,s are heavier, but I am used to it and I am not a great physical specimen. Whites can be swung faster but I can see this a bad point as the search pattern is conical and the coverage area is not uniform at ground level to say 6 inches. This coupled with going faster and being less thorough may cause missed finds. I have seen some complain about pin pointing, I can do this well with my EXP II often able to probe items 3 inches or less the first try and dig field finds with the first shovel full. The DFX is better balanced. Do you like the DFX or the EXP better? If you could only use one machine?

Ed D.

 

[DFX Hunter]

Great posts. I own a DFX and I have to agree, most of my finds are in the 0-6 inch area, though I'm still learning the machine. I have on occasion hit a target that was in the 8-10 inch area and one that pinpointed at 8 inches but by the time I finished digging, it was closer to 12 inches (There was a lot of halo effect surrounding it though). And that was on the stock coil. With practice, program tweaking and ( as with all machines) the correct coil for the ground conditions, I hope to discover targets in the golden 9-11inch area as it's well within the DFX's capabilities.

I haven't used a Minelab but I've read all the sniping between the SE and DFX users on other forums and after all the posts, nobody was in front as regard which was the better machine. Both, in the hands of a well seasoned expert, will do the job and will hit deep targets. You can't go wrong with either if you're prepared to put the effort into learning it.

As one user said , Trying to compare a DFX to a Explorer SE is like comparing a Ferrari to a Lamborghini.

Best solution: Buy both

 

[Jim DE]

Beware of the man with one gun (detector)