EQUINOX 600 VS 800 RECOVERY SPEED

[Calabash Digger]

heres a look at the two... I will have depth test video up before long too.

 

[hbru123]

Great video, I noticed that you had the iron bias set on 2 on the 600 which corresponds to 4 on the 800, I tried 2 on my 600 and it definitely affected the signals and I noticed 1 which corresponds to 2 on the 800 does better, you also get less depth with it set higher

 

[Calabash Digger]

Thanks I didn't catch that,, thought it was just recovery speed settings... well that might explain some of my depth test results where the 800 was a little better...

 

[hbru123]

Thanks I didn't catch that,, thought it was just recovery speed settings... well that might explain some of my depth test results where the 800 was a little better...

No problem, I figured that out when I was doing some testing.

 

[GoDeep]

"That's like hackin' bushes"

 

[Metal Detecting Stuff]

Great video, shows a good comparison. Thanks for posting!

Wayne

www.metaldetectingstuff.com

 

[vferrari]

Great test Calabash. I was waiting for that Demo. The "higher" iron bias setting on the 600 probably affected that 5" dime + nails response but still diggable.

The depth impact of recovery speed is generally overblown and is minimal at the high end settings (6-8) where you typically want them to be. I don't see myself going below 5 or 6 at all. There is no point crippling the machine by choosing the lower recovery speed settings. It provides minimal, if any, depth advantage and significantly increases ground noise such that the S/N ratio actually goes down and affects your ability to hear the deep targets. I think ML optimized the recovery speed settings near the high end which is slightly different than the Deus where the optimal recovery speed settings are closer to the middle.

As you can see, the iron bias setting can have a significant affect on shallow targets surrounded by iron. I am probably going to run with iron bias off most of the time.

 

[Goldstar1]

Great test Calabash. I was waiting for that Demo. The "higher" iron bias setting on the 600 probably affected that 5" dime + nails response but still diggable.

The depth impact of recovery speed is generally overblown and is minimal at the high end settings (6-8) where you typically want them to be. I don't see myself going below 5 or 6 at all. There is no point crippling the machine by choosing the lower recovery speed settings. It provides minimal, if any, depth advantage and significantly increases ground noise such that the S/N ratio actually goes down and affects your ability to hear the deep targets. I think ML optimized the recovery speed settings near the high end which is slightly different than the Deus where the optimal recovery speed settings are closer to the middle.

As you can see, the iron bias setting can have a significant affect on shallow targets surrounded by iron. I am probably going to run with iron bias off most of the time.

Have you noticed much difference between 6, 7 and 8 ? Just wondering as that is one of several features why I want to get the 800.

 

[Calabash Digger]

I like 7 for thick stuff and 6 for general..

 

[WaterScoop]

Cool video” thanx for this hands on test. Nothing like a real non biased test.

 

[vferrari]

I like 7 for thick stuff and 6 for general..

That. Going to see if 8 makes a difference in mineralized soil next week.