Let the tests begin Dfx vs Se

[DFX-SE Gregg]

Well a few said all tests would be tainted because the coil sizes I was using were not exact...so my first test results I decided to give the dfx an advantage...or so I thought! Well here goes...testing begins very simply with a cent, nickel, dime, half dollar and a silver dollar...results as follows... I want to make it clear these were just using no adjustments...factory preset coin program used for dfx. No adjustments...

These results are air tests, the first of a series of tests I will be conducting...remember I treated the dfx and se as detectors right out of the box turn and go programs....just to see some basic results...as I learn the Se more...I will make adjustments to both the Se and dfx to see if results are any different...really not so much in increased depth but depth difference between detectors....

Results in inches, based on solid strong repeatable signals.


dfx with stock (950) coil 1 cent 6.5 nickel 6.0 dime 6.5 quarter 7.0 half dollar 7.0 dollar 7.0

Se with smaller 8" ML coil 1 cent 8.0 nickel 8.0 dime 7.0 quarter 8.0 half dollar 8.5 dollar 8.5

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

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

[thompy]

i cannot believe the dfx does that poor on air tests, i think the qxt would smoke that on preset , good luck with the se Greg

 

[Charlie P. (NY)]

Wow. But this may just be telling us the factory presents are not very suitable for air.

Lots of U.S. coins have eagles on the reverse but none of 'em fly.

 

[WV Hillbilly]

It sure is hard to find someone who will be that truthful , especially about those two detectors . It is my understanding the experts say no detector will detect deeper in the ground than it will in the air alough
a lot of people will argue this point . I sure hope you find some custom settings that will do better . From what I've read detectors actually lose depth in ground as compaired to air . I'm certainly not badmouthing
those detectors but my lowly bounty hunter time ranger will beat those numbers in the air but might not do
near as well as yours in the ground . I recently bought a CZ3D & did a quick air test on it with a modern
dime & it hit hard on the dime at 12 " . This was in the turn on & go modes . I didn't try it to see how far
it would give a good signal on the dime because I only had a 12 " plastic ruler & I was more or less just
making sure it worked after I got it . I have to think yours have some settings that will do much better .
Best Paul

 

[erikk]

Last time I looked not too many people were using their detectors to find coins in the air

 

[DFX-SE Gregg]

i cannot believe the dfx does that poor on air tests, i think the qxt would smoke that on preset , good luck with the se Greg

Remember no adjustments in this case...trying to treat both detectors the same....as if just taken from box and turned on....also the Se had a smaller 8 ML coil on it. The Slimline stock coil wil be used in one of the future tests.... With adjustments I will expect more... At this point it is not depth I am looking for as much as differences in the detectors coming out of the box.

 

[DFX-SE Gregg]

Wow. But this may just be telling us the factory presents are not very suitable for air.

Lots of U.S. coins have eagles on the reverse but none of 'em fly.

Exactly Charlie I think you hit the nail on the head....this test just shows how out of the box the detectors may not be set up the deepest way...but more the safest stable way.

 

[DFX-SE Gregg]

It sure is hard to find someone who will be that truthful , especially about those two detectors . It is my understanding the experts say no detector will detect deeper in the ground than it will in the air alough
a lot of people will argue this point . I sure hope you find some custom settings that will do better . From what I've read detectors actually lose depth in ground as compaired to air . I'm certainly not badmouthing
those detectors but my lowly bounty hunter time ranger will beat those numbers in the air but might not do
near as well as yours in the ground . I recently bought a CZ3D & did a quick air test on it with a modern
dime & it hit hard on the dime at 12 " . This was in the turn on & go modes . I didn't try it to see how far
it would give a good signal on the dime because I only had a 12 " plastic ruler & I was more or less just
making sure it worked after I got it . I have to think yours have some settings that will do much better .
Best Paul

Exactly Paul...these tests are not to cause a debate about "oh you are wrong",,,they are more to inform users who maybe interested in one or the other. My next test will be a little more specific and even though I do not relic hunt I will use items also that are not all coin sized.

 

[DFX-SE Gregg]

Last time I looked not too many people were using their detectors to find coins in the air

The testing will become a lot more complicated as time goes by and the ground thaws here... This is just the beginning..with solid repeatables....

 

[Tin Nugget]

Greg, I have seen what you would call a pretty in depth comparison between the DFX and an Explorer II. The EX won out on coins but on average only by a little, 1/2 to 1 inch, when it came to jewelry, they were almost dead even and on things like a thin gold bracelet, small earring, the DFX actually did better. The only thing is, if I remember right, was that the guy doing the testing was not proficient with either detector but had been detecting along time so it was kind of, OK, well maybe. I know you have done a ton of detecting with the DFX and will be fair in your testing. I don't put much stock in air tests because the ground mineralization, composition etc. can affect a detectors ability's quite a bit but I understand you have to start with an air test. Looking forward to your comparisons. Is there any chance you can put some jewelry in the mix? Small gold earring etc. Any platinum laying around?

 

[EasyMoney]

Air test are little more than an indicator of the detector's potential, but they are usually the best first indicators.

In real tests, both factory representatives from White's and Minelab have gone head-to-head on S Cal beaches and sometimes the Explorers go deeper and sometimes the DFX's go deeper. There is no constant, and both run slow compared to many other detectors. The reason I know this is because of my close proximity to White's, and my frequent visits to their main factory - and my association with the personnel there the last 30 years.

The factory presets are put there for beginners, for those who want a turn-on-and-go detector. The truth is, that a Tesoro Silver uMax or Compadre, F-2, Ace, or a BH land Star will usually get better depth than an Expl or DFX without the latter being properly set up.

That guy on the UK site that publishes his "depth chart" openly admits that he only used the detectors right out of the box, but most people forget to read that part, they just look at the numbers. He sells a lot of Minelabs using those charts too.

My personal tests have shown me that there is seldom more than 1" difference plus or minus between the Expls and DFX's in the ground, certainly nothing to write home about. A cz or F-75 is a little different thing though, they can be even a whole whopping complete and total absolute 1" inch more, and sometimes 1" less. Wow. Will wonders ever cease?

All detectors are regulated as to how much power (gain) and how much they radiate anyway, it's a Federal requirement, a Federal Law that mandates it.

EasyMoney

 

[DFX-SE Gregg]

Greg, I have seen what you would call a pretty in depth comparison between the DFX and an Explorer II. The EX won out on coins but on average only by a little, 1/2 to 1 inch, when it came to jewelry, they were almost dead even and on things like a thin gold bracelet, small earring, the DFX actually did better. The only thing is, if I remember right, was that the guy doing the testing was not proficient with either detector but had been detecting along time so it was kind of, OK, well maybe. I know you have done a ton of detecting with the DFX and will be fair in your testing. I don't put much stock in air tests because the ground mineralization, composition etc. can affect a detectors ability's quite a bit but I understand you have to start with an air test. Looking forward to your comparisons. Is there any chance you can put some jewelry in the mix? Small gold earring etc. Any platinum laying around?

Great point... was thinking of using different sized objects next... I did find around 50 pieces of jewelry last year...one of the rings may be platinum...never had a jeweler look at it...did come in with a low reading..but no markings so I am not sure. But with the different sized objects will add jewelry...once again at this point the tests are out of the box tests...once I have a clue with the se will step it up a little...frozen ground not helping....

 

[DFX-SE Gregg]

Air test are little more than an indicator of the detector's potential, but they are usually the best first indicators.

In real tests, both factory representatives from White's and Minelab have gone head-to-head on S Cal beaches and sometimes the Explorers go deeper and sometimes the DFX's go deeper. There is no constant, and both run slow compared to many other detectors. The reason I know this is because of my close proximity to White's, and my frequent visits to their main factory - and my association with the personnel there the last 30 years.

The factory presets are put there for beginners, for those who want a turn-on-and-go detector. The truth is, that a Tesoro Silver uMax or Compadre, F-2, Ace, or a BH land Star will usually get better depth than an Expl or DFX without the latter being properly set up.

That guy on the UK site that publishes his "depth chart" openly admits that he only used the detectors right out of the box, but most people forget to read that part, they just look at the numbers. He sells a lot of Minelabs using those charts too.

My personal tests have shown me that there is seldom more than 1" difference plus or minus between the Expls and DFX's in the ground, certainly nothing to write home about. A cz or F-75 is a little different thing though, they can be even a whole whopping complete and total absolute 1" inch more, and sometimes 1" less. Wow. Will wonders ever cease?

All detectors are regulated as to how much power (gain) and how much they radiate anyway, it's a Federal requirement, a Federal Law that mandates it.

EasyMoney

Good point...that is the reason I mentioned it was an out of box test...I think at this point...(the point I do not know the Se at all yet) the tests will remain simple....but I will post some interesting numbers and finds for both this year...so instead of hearing it from a Whites employee...the tests will be conducted by the average person who is not concerned with which shows better results...I made a purchase of both...so I want both to do well... I get this odd feeling from reactions that some think I do not want the dfx to do well...just the opposite...if I felt that way...it would be gone already....

I am doing the tests and starting at the very first step out of curiosity...and others also across some forums are glad to see someone who is not a dealer or employee posting honest numbers.

 

[Digger]

I think Gregg's air tests do have value.

Personally I have posted video showing I get about 10" out of my air tests with the DFX, but since Gregg is only getting 7" with his DFX, tests with the SE should be valid as well. His tests so far are pretty much exactly as I would have expected. The DFX does have a rather moderate out-of-the-box set of programs. I believe whites did this to make it more stable for first time users. I think the SE's out-of-the-box settings are more aggressive and thus more depth.

Keep it up Gregg

 

[WV Hillbilly]

I am doing the tests and starting at the very first step out of curiosity...and others also across some forums are glad to see someone who is not a dealer or employee posting honest numbers.


Gregg
I am one of those people that just wants to know what reality is concerning detectors . I know that ground
conditions play a large part in how any detector performs . Also I believe the person using the detector can
make a huge difference . I don't care about brand names as I'm not into the old chevy / ford debate . I may
be wrong but I believe a lot of people strecth the truth a little about how well their detector performs . I for
one am glad you are doing these tests & look forward to seeing your results . Best Paul

 

[bakergeol]

Compared to these air tests, Gregg's results were similar to the Dfx vs XS2

http://www.nexusdetectors.com/Tests.html

Yes I know it is from a detector dealer website who is selling his own detectors(Nexus)
Regarding air tests -well you use what you got. If more of us would do comparison in
ground tests we would have better data.

You know Minelab has always maintained that their models(Ex 11) have better depth in the ground
versus air tests as the machine needs a soil matrix. No, I have never believed this. No I don't believe
in coin "halos" either which would enhance depth.

George

 

[deepskyal]

I gotta say I like your tests Gregg. From what I grasped on this forum since I've been here..you were a dedicated DFX user, so I trust your unbiased comparison.

I agree with the point that White's presets aren't the best. That's why so much has been written on custom programs to get them deeper. I probably won't own a minelab because I now have 3 White's detectors from an old 3000 to the DFX.
Yes, it is brand loyalty, I've been satisfied with my finds and honestly don't think I'd be finding that much more in my area deeper than what I've been finding. But...you never know.

I used to like Fords but I switched to Chevy...not because of how the vehicle was, but on customer satisfaction.
My DFX purchase was based on customer satisfaction.

Until I see a minelab in action...I'll just use my whites.

I look forward to more of your tests Gregg.
Al

 

[DFX-SE Gregg]

I think Gregg's air tests do have value.

Personally I have posted video showing I get about 10" out of my air tests with the DFX, but since Gregg is only getting 7" with his DFX, tests with the SE should be valid as well. His tests so far are pretty much exactly as I would have expected. The DFX does have a rather moderate out-of-the-box set of programs. I believe whites did this to make it more stable for first time users. I think the SE's out-of-the-box settings are more aggressive and thus more depth.

Keep it up Gregg

Thanks digger...when I learn to crank the se...I will go a lttle more aggressive and go with a program such as the dfx eeprom deep silver or my favorite the hi-pro before trying any major adjustments... then in stable settings raise the pag to 4 and also jack up the ac sens. for comparision sake...but these tests are not really always about which detector is better.. The tests I am doing are more out of curiosity...and also having both nachines I want to know which one to use where... I am sure under beach conditions both will perform very well and deep... I had a crystal clear signal at 7.5 in a sandy area last year with the dfx...in a pre set program...and have heard of signals much deeper with both at beaches...

My biggest program with the forums is something I have mentioned before...we all are in a hurry to show our finds...but rarely mention the programs/settings used...

 

[DFX-SE Gregg]

I am doing the tests and starting at the very first step out of curiosity...and others also across some forums are glad to see someone who is not a dealer or employee posting honest numbers.


Gregg
I am one of those people that just wants to know what reality is concerning detectors . I know that ground
conditions play a large part in how any detector performs . Also I believe the person using the detector can
make a huge difference . I don't care about brand names as I'm not into the old chevy / ford debate . I may
be wrong but I believe a lot of people strecth the truth a little about how well their detector performs . I for
one am glad you are doing these tests & look forward to seeing your results . Best Paul

Thanks Paul...being truthful if you follow my posts or have ever read some in the past...has sometimes caused problems. I am not into fairy tales...or the I have to find key dates or something better than you theory.... I enjoy everything I find...

As far as the chevy/ford debate.... that you are correct is for the simple thinkers.... If a brand does right for you enjoy... But if you can have more than one brand or find a different brand that works better why not? Funny there are a few on the Whites forum that scream for being "loyal" to Whites brand. If only they knew how many on that forum have sent me private messages stating they also own another brand! They have no idea!!!! I let them have their fun... After all...it is a whites forum...so staying narrow minded on the forum is required....but that is ok...its still a good forum with lots of new members this year....that really helps...

 

[DFX-SE Gregg]

Compared to these air tests, Gregg's results were similar to the Dfx vs XS2

http://www.nexusdetectors.com/Tests.html

Yes I know it is from a detector dealer website who is selling his own detectors(Nexus)
Regarding air tests -well you use what you got. If more of us would do comparison in
ground tests we would have better data.

You know Minelab has always maintained that their models(Ex 11) have better depth in the ground
versus air tests as the machine needs a soil matrix. No, I have never believed this. No I don't believe
in coin "halos" either which would enhance depth.

George

Goerge the ground tests are coming... If I get 6", I will say I got 6". If I get 12" in the ground I will say I got 12", I would rather just tell the exact numbers...and remember the qualifications for this test were strong repeatables.... I will be doing jewelery and a few larger items next...thanks for the graph...very interesting.