But alot of guys are tone guys anyhow, and anyone can learn to be - So the question is, how will it fare in the tone dept ?
They might just dumb that down too to a beep and ding, if so they might as well just switch its name to the Compromise 2000 or something.
Well, that's certainly not going to happen. We
already know it has
numerous audio options -- fully adjustable tone breaks, adjustable ferrous tone volume/pitch, adjustable non-ferrous tone volume/pitch, the option to run 1, 2, 5, or multi (50) tones...etc.
Some of your posts in this thread don't make a lot of sense to me. You've already concluded that your Ace 400 will be a superior ID machine (that the Equinox will be "smoked" by the Ace 400, in your words), that its a "given" Minelab has purposely "hobbled" the Equinox so as to make it a mediocre performer, that there's no way it will compete with the Deus, etc. etc. etc.
You seem pretty certain of how this particular machine will perform,
and how well it will perform
compared to other units, when it hasn't even been released yet. Not sure how you can be so certain of a machine you have never used...
You say "the only thing it has to offer over other mid-range machines" is multi-frequency. First off, to me multi-frequency is HUGE, but secondly, leaving that aside, how many mid-range machines are waterproof? How many offer switchable frequency, on the fly? How many offer gold prospecting ability with on-board, available frequency as high as 40 kHz? How many have built-in wireless?
Yes, SOME machines out there have SOME of these features. How many have all? And that's not even DISCUSSING the multi-frequency option, the one aspect of coin/relic detectors that Minelab is
legendary for...
Anyway, you are so certain that this machine will be "poor" with respect to VDI. Which to me, makes little sense. There is much more to ID of course than just "digits," but let's just talk about digits, since that's what you want to focus on. First off, I have never swung an Ace 400, but I'll talk about the Gold Bug Pro, since that's a machine I'm familiar with. The Pro has 100 segments of ID, 0 to 99. Just like your Ace. Excellent, right? It would "smoke," to use your words, the Equinox, right? Well, let's break that down. 0-40 is the iron range on the Gold Bug Pro. On the Equinox, the iron range is -10 to 0. I don't think you will be missing many gold rings because the Equinox only has 10 units of separation in the iron range, instead of 40. OK, so now, then, for non-ferrous tones, we have 59 available for the Pro (40 to 99), and 40 available for the Equinox (1 to 40). But even that is not totally true. On the Gold Bug Pro, I NEVER dug a good target above roughly 87-88. Both silver and clad quarters were in the 86-87 range, and while I never dug a silver half or silver dollar with it, I think the highest reading expected for either of those two coins is 89. So, there are 10 numbers "above" the highest-reading U.S. coin (90 to 99) that will virtually NEVER be an ID you'd dig -- it's largely iron wrap-around. So, instead of 59 units of "usable" non-ferrous ID numbers on the Pro, it's in essence really down to 49. So then, a more fair/accurate accurate comparison -- assuming that "40" on the Equinox will usually be iron wrap-around (similar to other Minelab machines) -- it's now 49 segments of "important" VDI on the Gold Bug Pro, 40 to 89 (again, a "100-number" machine), versus 39 on the Equinox, 1-39. I would assume the Ace 400 is "similar," though maybe not entirely. But -- at least compared to a Gold Bug Pro, I don't think you'd say 49 non-ferrous-range numbers "smokes" 39.
Take it a step further...what if even though you have that "100 segments" of ID on the Ace 400, it's only accurate down to 6" or 7", before the numbers start jumping/bouncing within a several digit range due to depth -- to the point of becoming inaccurate? Meanwhile, what if that "pitifully small range" of 40 non-ferrous numbers
remain accurate to 8" or 9" or 10" deep on the Equinox? Does that count for anything?
FINALLY, let's just say that the Ace 400 has, I don't know, let's be generous, 50 ID numbers
all concentrated through the mid-tone range from foil up to, say, zinc penny, where 95% of all gold will fall. Now -- with an infinite number of pieces of gold jewelry, infinite number of sizes and shapes (small rings, big rings, earrings, pendants, etc.), a HUGE number of alloys, different purity values, etc. etc. etc., how exactly does having "resolution" in numbers through the mid tone range let you dig ONLY gold, and avoid trash? How does having 50, versus say, 25, units of separation allow you to say, for instance "49, that's a gold ring, but 50 nope, no way, that's a pull tab." There aren't gold rings that would air test at 49 OR 50? It's largely a nonsense argument. That argument WOULD make more sense, if you are talking something like coins -- where most of them will read fairly consistently in an air test due to consistency of size and composition/alloy of the coin. But even then, I have seen Mercury dimes, for instance, that air test at slightly different digits of ID, and the same thing with wheat cents, etc. etc. And that is AIR TEST. That's not COUNTING what different soil types/composition, etc. will do to ID numbers of these objects when buried.
Bottom line here is, what you are saying is not well-reasoned, and it comes across as simple negative-Nancy hating on a unit that HASN'T EVEN BEEN RELEASED, yet. Obviously, you are free to do that if you like. But, at the same time, there's another side of the argument as well -- and that should probably be included here for posterity's sake. Thus my post.
We shall see. But I suspect the Equinox will be a very, very good machine, and that most of your assertions here will be rendered nonsense.
Steve
