Equinox 800 -vs- E-Trac?

[CoinHunterAZ]

I’m seriously thinking of doing another upgrade. I currently have the AT Pro, and an older Tesoro Sidewinder. and I think both are decent machines and I’ve found a lot of good stuff with both of them. I’ve been reading good things lately about the 800, but wondered if I’d be better off money wise with the E-Trac. My hunting is primarily coin shooting and relic hunting. Is the E-Trac a better machine for what I do? The 800 is more in line with what I’d like to spend. Decisions, decisions. Any advice will be appreciated!

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Diving for Pleasure and Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[against the wind]

I upgraded from an AT PRO to an Etrac about 6 or 7 years ago. I loved the AT PRO but when it came to finding silver,, it was no match for the Etrac.
A big problem with the Etrac, (for me), was that the Etrac does not like rain.
You won't have water problems with the Nox 800. From what I am seeing and reading,, the Nox is outperforming the Etrac in numerous areas. Although I did find some gold targets with the Etrac, it is not known for finding gold. The Equinox has a gold setting and is submersible to 10 feet and salt water does not bother it.
The MSRP difference between the NOX 800, ($850), and the Etrac, ($1,500), is around $650. I don't really need another metal detector but I think I'm leaning towards the Equinox 800.

 

[smokeythecat]

I'd go with an Etrac or an XP Deus. Both will eat up an 800. The Deus has the ability to get through really bad ground and gets the little things my friends with the 800's miss.

 

[vferrari]

I'd go with an Etrac or an XP Deus. Both will eat up an 800. The Deus has the ability to get through really bad ground and gets the little things my friends with the 800's miss.

Disagree - 800 is much more versatile and better value overall than either the eTrac or the Deus (at least at the present Deus price point). With Equinox you are able to vary recovery speed and multi IQ enables stability at the beach and in very heavy mineralization as well as specialized setups optimized for specific target types and detecting situations like high conductivity coins, mid-conductivity relics, jewelry, salt beach hunting and gold prospecting. Deus has the edge in thick iron situations otherwise fairly equivalent to the Equinox for general detecting situations though I give the depth edge to the Equinox over the Deus with the release of the new 12x15" coil. Equinox has better TID at depth than Deus (especially with the larger coil) and kills Deus in wet salt sand. ML is moving away from FBS tech with the Equinox using Multi IQ, so even though the eTrac has not been discontinued by ML, I am sure that it will eventually be replaced by something akin to he Equinox but with a more precise TID system. IMO Deus and 800 compliment each other well for their own shortcomings. eTrac is a great deep silver machine but its slow recovery and relatively high cost, make it more of a specialized one-trick-pony compared to Equinox. HTH

 

[CoinHunterAZ]

Thanks for the opinions guys. Still on the fence but my next detector will be a Minelab.

 

[HighVDI]

800. You would be surprised what all those Etracs and CTX 3030's have left behind at the public parks!

 

[CoinHunterAZ]

800. You would be surprised what all those Etracs and CTX 3030's have left behind at the public parks!

Interesting, why would you suppose that is? Newer and better technology?

 

[Hawks88]

For the latest technology and versatility the Equinox might be the best bang for the buck. IMO.

 

[vferrari]

Interesting, why would you suppose that is? Newer and better technology?

The reason is at sites with a lot of trash targets or iron, the slower recovery speed of the FBS detectors such as CTX and eTrac would hinder target separation, allowing some keepers to be masked. Also the FBS setup was not optimized for mid conductors, so recovering gold and nickel at depth was hindered compared to the Equinox and other newer detectors. CTX and eTrac are great detectors, but their strong suit, precise target ID and ability to sniff out deep silver make them less versatile than detectors like Deus and Equinox. And as far as Equinox is concerned, you get a hell of a lot more bang for yor buck at $899 than an eTrac or even Deus at around $1200 to $1500.

 

[HighVDI]

Interesting, why would you suppose that is? Newer and better technology?

What V said. Although I know a couple people who claim their EQ is just as deep if not deeper than their CTX.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Coin-hunter : I notice that "nuggets" was not on the list of the hunt types for your objective. And I see that some persons have already pointed out that the 800 is hotter on mid and low conductors. Ok, granted, but is your objective jewelry hunting in junky parks ? Then if so, you can simply lower the disc. knob on ANY detector, and ... presto ... fill your apron with low and mid conductors from junky parks. So I don't see what benefit the 800 is going to grant you there.

Micro-jewelry (earing studs and dangly thin chains) from the beach ?? SURE ! But otherwise, no : I'd go with the Etrac (or Explorer II, 3030, etc....). For regular coin/relic hunting. JMHO.

 

[CoinHunterAZ]

I’m really not much of a jewelry hunter. If I find some great, I’ll keep it! Not a nugget hunter either, although I did find a pretty good sized one with my Tesoro near Lynx Creek. It’s just not my thing.

My primary hunting is stage stops, defunct railroad stations and the like. These spots have generally been pretty trash infested. There’s also a really old park nearby that I’ve been hunting for many years. I like coinshooting and relic hunting the most.

My Tesoro Sidewinder is plenty lightweight, but outdated. I think the AT Pro is a decent machine, but a bit heavier than I’d like. I love the idea of wireless headphones. I’m leaning towards the Nox 800 at this point. Seems like a good choice to me anyway.

 

[vferrari]

Coin-hunter : I notice that "nuggets" was not on the list of the hunt types for your objective. And I see that some persons have already pointed out that the 800 is hotter on mid and low conductors. Ok, granted, but is your objective jewelry hunting in junky parks ? Then if so, you can simply lower the disc. knob on ANY detector, and ... presto ... fill your apron with low and mid conductors from junky parks. So I don't see what benefit the 800 is going to grant you there.

Micro-jewelry (earing studs and dangly thin chains) from the beach ?? SURE ! But otherwise, no : I'd go with the Etrac (or Explorer II, 3030, etc....). For regular coin/relic hunting. JMHO.

Tom - the mid conductors I am talking about are ABOVE the disc setting. Relic hunting in thick iron and trash (AZ's "stage stops") consists of picking out brass and lead in addition to high conductive silver amongst primarily iron junk - mid conductors are not just about jewelry. Regardless, the FBS detector signal processing on the CTX and eTrac is intensive and results in slow recovery vs. the 800 regardless of the target type, even ML acknowledges that. While an FBS is processing and determining the last target was trash or iron junk (even if it is discriminated out) your coil has already passed over the keeper. Finally, even if I agree with you that you can tweak the eTrac disc to get the same performance as the 800 in trashy situations (which I don't), why would CoinhunterAZ want to pay $600 more than the Equinox just to get the "same" performance? Again, not sure you can beat the FBS machines on deep silver in ideal conditions (low iron density, low mineralization) and super accurate target ID at depth, but most relic hunting is done in other than ideal conditions and not sure the value proposition still exists for $1500 and up FBS detectors with the 800 on the street.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Tom - the mid conductors I am talking about are ABOVE the disc setting. Relic hunting in thick iron and trash (AZ's "stage stops") consists of picking out brass and lead in addition to high conductive silver amongst primarily iron junk - mid conductors are not just about jewelry. Regardless, the FBS detector signal processing on the CTX and eTrac is intensive and results in slow recovery vs. the 800 regardless of the target type, even ML acknowledges that. While an FBS is processing and determining the last target was trash or iron junk (even if it is discriminated out) your coil has already passed over the keeper. Finally, even if I agree with you that you can tweak the eTrac disc to get the same performance as the 800 in trashy situations (which I don't), why would CoinhunterAZ want to pay $600 more than the Equinox just to get the "same" performance? Again, not sure you can beat the FBS machines on deep silver in ideal conditions (low iron density, low mineralization) and super accurate target ID at depth, but most relic hunting is done in other than ideal conditions and not sure the value proposition still exists for $1500 and up FBS detectors with the 800 on the street.

vferrari , thanx for the input. Yes: The Etrac, explorer, 3030 etc... powerhouses are not known for ability in lots of iron/nails. Yes, they will tend to mask. Not good at averaging/see-through tasks. And yes, the 800 is no doubt better in that department.

But for normal turf, @ high conductors (and a lot of relicky pursuits @ similar conditions), the tried & true FBS is hard to beat. My hunting partners got the 800. And we will be doing some flagged target tests @ ghost townsy conditions. I usually simply reach for my Silver sabre or Compass 77b in such cases.

 

[vferrari]

Tom - I agree normal turf coinshooting, the FBS Minelabs are usually deeper on high conductors and the accurate TID makes some undesirable targets like bottlecaps easier to pass up.

It is really hard to do unbiased and conclusive A to B testing in the field whether it be flagged targets, scanning the same patch of ground for keepers, or similar methods because it is hard to control all the variables such as user proficiency with each detector while also taking into consideration the spectrum of detector mode settings and settings available to the Equinox and CTX user. Nevertheless, hope you post back with the results as it will no doubt be intersting.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

.... It is really hard to do unbiased and conclusive A to B testing in the field ....

I understand what you are getting at. Sometimes, in doing "flagged target tests", you can ask a person "Do you hear this ?". They will scan it, and announce "yes". Simply because they heard a beep. But as you know, that's not the full story. The REAL story is: Would you have known this target vs another target. Ie.: pass or dig, etc....

There was a fellow in CA with a new-introduction machine, that wanted to put-it-through the paces, on known targets. So we agreed to meet at a certain turf zone, where I was fairly certain that I could still flag suspected deepies (wheaties/silver), for him to try. And ... each time, he'd proudly announce that he can hear it, and would agree with my consensus of "deep wheatie or silver". Heck, he could even pull out the headphone jack, and ... sure enough, there'd be a beep of sorts. Hmmm.

But after awhile, I began to notice that he wasn't getting any deep suspects for me to sample. And I began to suspect that there wasn't subconscious bias at play, since ...: When someone points out a signals and says "deep silver", and you know this person is generally correct at this location, then the subconscious reaction is to AGREE with them. And interpret ANYTHING you hear as being just-as-the-person is telling you.

So I played a trick on him. I purposefully flagged something I thought was lousy . Like a nail false or whatever. And then ... when asking him what he could hear, I lied and told him it sounded like deep silver. He waved over it, and gleefully agreed with the assessment, and that his new machine agreed, etc.... Then I revealed that I had been purposefully deceptive, to see if he was being tricked by subconscious biases. When he realized what I'd done, he changed his tune, and said "come to think of it, it *did* sound kind of junky". Doh!

But with 2 long-time skilled users, who are aware of the mental mind tricks, I think that flagged target tests CAN be done.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

.... - I agree normal turf coinshooting, the FBS Minelabs are usually deeper on high conductors and the accurate TID makes some undesirable targets like bottlecaps easier to pass up....

Vferrari, since you seem versed in the real nitty gritty on this subject , a further question for you:

If we agree that a machine like the Exp. II, 3030, and Etrac are hard-to-beat for sniffing silver out of the turf (good ID's for such cherry-picking endeavors), then how about this:

If someone were to put the newly introduced larger coil on their Nox 800, could they replicate the depth , in turf on silver, of what an Exp. II is getting with a standard 10.5" pro coil ? Because, since the 800 is already reknowned for target separation, then perhaps the drawbacks of larger coils (poorer target separation) will be less of an issue. Ie.: since it's already got the "leg up" in that department in the first place, then perhaps by using the larger coil, it could begin to replicate the Exp. II in deep-silver-turf strategy ?

 

[vferrari]

I understand what you are getting at. Sometimes, in doing "flagged target tests", you can ask a person "Do you hear this ?". They will scan it, and announce "yes". Simply because they heard a beep. But as you know, that's not the full story. The REAL story is: Would you have known this target vs another target. Ie.: pass or dig, etc....

There was a fellow in CA with a new-introduction machine, that wanted to put-it-through the paces, on known targets. So we agreed to meet at a certain turf zone, where I was fairly certain that I could still flag suspected deepies (wheaties/silver), for him to try. And ... each time, he'd proudly announce that he can hear it, and would agree with my consensus of "deep wheatie or silver". Heck, he could even pull out the headphone jack, and ... sure enough, there'd be a beep of sorts. Hmmm.

But after awhile, I began to notice that he wasn't getting any deep suspects for me to sample. And I began to suspect that there wasn't subconscious bias at play, since ...: When someone points out a signals and says "deep silver", and you know this person is generally correct at this location, then the subconscious reaction is to AGREE with them. And interpret ANYTHING you hear as being just-as-the-person is telling you.

So I played a trick on him. I purposefully flagged something I thought was lousy . Like a nail false or whatever. And then ... when asking him what he could hear, I lied and told him it sounded like deep silver. He waved over it, and gleefully agreed with the assessment, and that his new machine agreed, etc.... Then I revealed that I had been purposefully deceptive, to see if he was being tricked by subconscious biases. When he realized what I'd done, he changed his tune, and said "come to think of it, it *did* sound kind of junky". Doh!

But with 2 long-time skilled users, who are aware of the mental mind tricks, I think that flagged target tests CAN be done.

You "nailed" it (pardon the pun) regarding my concern on flagged tests and even "follow behind test" to see what the first detectorist missed which both have flaws. Recognizing these flaws is the best we can do when evaluating the results and quite frankly, unless someone is paying me to layout a fully scientific unbiased A to B comparison test, I wouldn't and couldn't do it much differently than what you plan to do. Interested to see those results.

Vferrari, since you seem versed in the real nitty gritty on this subject , a further question for you:

If we agree that a machine like the Exp. II, 3030, and Etrac are hard-to-beat for sniffing silver out of the turf (good ID's for such cherry-picking endeavors), then how about this:

If someone were to put the newly introduced larger coil on their Nox 800, could they replicate the depth , in turf on silver, of what an Exp. II is getting with a standard 10.5" pro coil ? Because, since the 800 is already reknowned for target separation, then perhaps the drawbacks of larger coils (poorer target separation) will be less of an issue. Ie.: since it's already got the "leg up" in that department in the first place, then perhaps by using the larger coil, it could begin to replicate the Exp. II in deep-silver-turf strategy ?

The problem is I don't really know the delta in ultimate depth capability between the FBS and Multi IQ machines in the first place - All I know that Minelab has acknowledged in their literature that FBS is superior for deep silver than Multi IQ (I don't own an FBS machine, I did own a BBS Excal - but never took to it). I am personally not overly concerned about depth myself. The Equinox appears to have sufficient depth for my purposes, and separation is key in the conditions and type of hunting that I do (CW relic hunting in highly mineralized soil) because the keepers are either deep beyond the capability of any VLF machine (PI territory) or relatively shallow and masked by the junk. Nevertheless, I can imagine that larger coils will indeed eek out more depth on Equinox on par with CTX/eTrac, but I am also not so sure that Equinox is really all that far behind eTrac/CTX in depth capability in the first place. From a depth perspective, what really blew me away with Equinox is that I was pulling nickels at greater than 1 foot in wet salt sand. That meant that if I got my coil over a gold ring, I would probably have similar depth performance. As far as I am concerned, that gold depth performance is more important to me than the silver depth performance and I know my friends with CTX's would agree with me that their machines would likely have had trouble hitting those nickel targets at that depth.

I know you didn't ask, but regarding the superior TID of the FBS machines, I do know that a lot of less experienced diggers will pull more bottlecaps with Equinox than they would with the same number of hours on an eTrac or CTX. But with experience you can ascertain the bottlecap audio "tells" on Equinox as well.

The way I look at it is that the Equinox and CTX/eTrac are complimentary machines. While today I would choose Equinox over CTX/eTrac as the better value proposition - if I owned a CTX/eTrac and pondered getting the Equinox, I probably would not get rid of the CTX/eTrac after picking up the Equinox unless they just ended up sitting in the closet.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

... but regarding the superior TID of the FBS machines,....

Excellent input. It is very apparent you have given the matter some thought, experience, fairness, etc... Thanx !

 

[CoinHunterAZ]

You guys have me salivating to get my new machine. Thanks for sharing your thoughts and knowledge. I have 30+ years of MD under my belt, just zero hours on a Minelab. As soon as I get back to AZ from NM I will get ahold of Bart and get it ordered. It will be a Christmas present to myself. Thanks again!