Software version

[Cobradude22]

What software version is everyone running on their Noxes? I was using 3.0 but rolled back to 1.7.5. This seems to be the sweet spot from my research.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Minelab PRO-FIND 35 Waterproof Pinpointer Metal Detector for Experts with Tone ID & Adjustable Sensitivity - Grab it through Amazon!

[nuggetdog]

3.0 The only thing I don’t like about this version is it’s hard to tell the difference between copper cents and dimes by looking at the numbers, everything else is great. I’m going to dig those numbers anyways.

 

[Bayoutalker]

I'm running 3.0. Works great for me.
What don't you like about it?

 

[vferrari]

What software version is everyone running on their Noxes? I was using 3.0 but rolled back to 1.7.5. This seems to be the sweet spot from my research.

My research shows 3.0 to be the sweet spot. No way I would give up the F2 iron bias filter introduced in 2.0 and the 4khz single frequency added in 3.0 is just another tool in the toolbox when targeting deep silver or large caches. Since these are just add on capabilities they really should not negatively influence performance enhancements introduced in 1.7.5 at all, so why deprive yourself of these additional capabilities?

 

[relicmeister]

My new 600 came w/ version 2.1.12 and haven’t updated it yet. I keep the 11” coil on it. The used one I just bought had 1.7.5 but I just updated to 3.0. I’ll probably update the other one to 3.0 eventually but not in a rush.
I’d like to compare them first. The used one I keep the 6” coil on

 

[Donut]

What’s the big deal about the update.
its only accesses when you access those updates in the options, if you don’t like F2 stay in EF.
If you don’t like 4 khz don’t use it , it’s not in multi.
The optional updates are for the more experienced operators that know their machines.
for me I like the 3.0.
But remember an update make the machine work better and more sensitive. In my situation I lower the sensitivity down to around ten but if I’m in an open field or big beach I raise the sensitivity for a stronger signal for depth.
IMO in trashy conditions I run it much lower than most here.
Doug

 

[Cobradude22]

I found the 3.0 update changed the way Clad behaves on the readout. Everyone is talking up the 4khz and I haven’t seen anything yet that’s impressed me. When I use it everything is a high reading. I guess it could be useful for checking targets. But I prefer to use the all metal mode for checking targets. Also never use iron discrimination. I go off the 50 tones. You could miss a target using the F2 setting, then again you could miss one by not using it. It’s a trade off. Again just interested in others opinions, as I’m not the only one who has rolled back. As in another theory of mine, if you were minelab, would you have your underdog machine outperform your flagship detector for over half the cost. Think about it. Happy hunting everyone. Thanks for the feed back.

 

[ColonelDan]

My research shows 3.0 to be the sweet spot. No way I would give up the F2 iron bias filter introduced in 2.0 and the 4khz single frequency added in 3.0 is just another tool in the toolbox when targeting deep silver or large caches. Since these are just add on capabilities they really should not negatively influence performance enhancements introduced in 1.7.5 at all, so why deprive yourself of these additional capabilities?

I agree with vferrari. I installed 3.0 and never looked back. Works well for me on Florida beaches.

 

[vferrari]

I found the 3.0 update changed the way Clad behaves on the readout. Everyone is talking up the 4khz and I haven’t seen anything yet that’s impressed me. When I use it everything is a high reading. I guess it could be useful for checking targets. But I prefer to use the all metal mode for checking targets. Also never use iron discrimination. I go off the 50 tones. You could miss a target using the F2 setting, then again you could miss one by not using it. It’s a trade off. Again just interested in others opinions, as I’m not the only one who has rolled back. As in another theory of mine, if you were minelab, would you have your underdog machine outperform your flagship detector for over half the cost. Think about it. Happy hunting everyone. Thanks for the feed back.

So you are saying they introduced 3.0 to reduce performance on the Equinox so as to not hurt sales on their $2500 CTX dinosaur (not a cash cow for them BTW)? Yeah, I thought about that for 2 seconds then came to my senses. To be fair, I know that's not exactly what you were driving at but is one way what you said could be interpreted. I actually have an alternative theory on 4 khz (and it is not the Asian horde hunter baloney ML put out there). I think 4 khz was put out there to field test some alternative signal processing algorithms that ML might be considering for future detectors. Perhaps a Multi IQ-based CTX replacement. 4khz definitely appears to run hotter but with less chatter than 5 khz in my A-B comparisons on high conductors. It's not the end all and be all, just another blade in the detecting Swiss army knife that is Equinox.

I am betting that ML will introduce a higher-end Multi IQ machine with the sophisticated discrimination patterns and target ID scheme of the CTX. Yes the eTrac and CTX are silver slayers but are left wanting on mid-conductors and do not have the recovery speeds necessary for bed-o-nails type conditions the Equinox can handle and which are the last bastion of unrecoverable keepers. The FBS2 detectors are rather expensive and slow one-trick ponies that are anachronisms in a fast-paced, quick edit detecting era IMO. But Equinox is definitely not their equal on accurately IDing deep silver under ideal ground conditions.

But to my point earlier, I see no reason to hold back on these bolted on cutting edge features which have been implemented in a manner such that you are free to take them or leave them. You can choose not to flip out those additional blades, but the other existing blades in the knife are unaffected so why not have them there just in case.

At least that's how I look at it...

The best thing is that ML realizes that everyone is going to have their own opinion and experiences related these updates and instead of forcing them down our throats, they have given us the ability to roll back. Which is great for those who think think if it ain't broken, no need to fix it. I don't need to convince you to upgrade just as you don't need to convince me to roll back. We can each have it our way. That way we are all happy campers - so kudos to ML.

Happy Hunting.

 

[Cobradude22]

So you are saying they introduced 3.0 to reduce performance on the Equinox so as to not hurt sales on their $2500 CTX dinosaur (not a cash cow for them BTW)? Yeah, I thought about that for 2 seconds then came to my senses. To be fair, I know that's not exactly what you were driving at but is one way what you said could be interpreted. I actually have an alternative theory on 4 khz (and it is not the Asian horde hunter baloney ML put out there). I think 4 khz was put out there to field test some alternative signal processing algorithms that ML might be considering for future detectors. Perhaps a Multi IQ-based CTX replacement. 4khz definitely appears to run hotter but with less chatter than 5 khz in my A-B comparisons on high conductors. It's not the end all and be all, just another blade in the detecting Swiss army knife that is Equinox.

I am betting that ML will introduce a higher-end Multi IQ machine with the sophisticated discrimination patterns and target ID scheme of the CTX. Yes the eTrac and CTX are silver slayers but are left wanting on mid-conductors and do not have the recovery speeds necessary for bed-o-nails type conditions the Equinox can handle and which are the last bastion of unrecoverable keepers. The FBS2 detectors are rather expensive and slow one-trick ponies that are anachronisms in a fast-paced, quick edit detecting era IMO. But Equinox is definitely not their equal on accurately IDing deep silver under ideal ground conditions.

But to my point earlier, I see no reason to hold back on these bolted on cutting edge features which have been implemented in a manner such that you are free to take them or leave them. You can choose not to flip out those additional blades, but the other existing blades in the knife are unaffected so why not have them there just in case.

Well said. I’ve never thought about it like that. Very interesting opinion indeed. I absolutely love the equinox. It’s a fantastic machine. I can’t wait to see what’s coming to the table next. It’s crazy to think how far detecting technology has come.

 

[Dirt Duke]

I tried V 3. Didn't find any advantage in 4kHz. Tried it for a couple of weeks and went back to Multi. Found V 3 TIDs shifted and depth indications to be way off. Shallow coins showed as very deep. Gave up on V 3 and went back to V 2. Happy.

 

[MackDog]

I switched to V3 and won't go back. My machine is much more stable and smooth. I can now run it at 24 sensitivity

 

[brianc053]

I'm running V3 and like most I've never thought about rolling back, but I agree with Cobradude22 that it changed the way pennies vs. dimes are identified and made them seem more similar. I usually can still tell the difference, but it feels like I'm getting fooled more recently and it could be because of v3.0. Just yesterday i was also confused because some pennies were coming up 20-21 and some were 24-26, yet the difference was not because of copper vs. zinc (I was careful to segregate the "weird" pennies with different VDI's, and I could not explain it with date/metal composition. I guess that means it had to be the ground itself or orientation...my point is that maybe V3 isn't doing as good a job as the earlier software versions on this specific situation).

Oh, and vferrari I had a compliment for you:

....I am betting that ML will introduce a higher-end Multi IQ machine with the sophisticated discrimination patterns and target ID scheme of the CTX. Yes the eTrac and CTX are silver slayers but are left wanting on mid-conductors and do not have the recovery speeds necessary for bed-o-nails type conditions the Equinox can handle and which are the last bastion of unrecoverable keepers. The FBS2 detectors are rather expensive and slow one-trick ponies that are anachronisms in a fast-paced, quick edit detecting era IMO. But Equinox is definitely not their equal on accurately IDing deep silver under ideal ground conditions.

This paragraph was so insightful, especially the "last bastion of unrecoverable keepers" line. I'm relatively new to hard-core detecting (last 2 years), so I feel like all that's left for me is the "last bastion" stuff. I've posted many times about pulling old coppers out of a field that's full of square nails. I never tried doing that with an older machine, and I don't know if others have tried in this field before, so i don't know if I'm pulling stuff they missed - or if I'm the first to look for it. All I know is that it's hard - even with an Equinox - but as I've learned the machine I've learned how to do it successfully.
Your confirmation that recovery speed is crucial in these use cases was helpful - thank you. (I'd be interested in an update from you, vferrari, on whether you think the Equinox or the Deus can handle the "last bastion of unrecoverable keepers" better - but maybe this isn't the place for that discussion. I think in the past you've said you prefer the Deus in the "bed-o-nails type conditions".)

- Brian

 

[bunkeru2k]

My machine has been impossible to tell between clad dimes and copper pennies from the start. I had to have the unit replaced and both of them had the exact same VDI issues with distinguishing those. The 4khz did seem to help in one instance with big EMI and also has helped be one more tool in regards to whether a target is worth digging.

 

[Donut]

My machine has been impossible to tell between clad dimes and copper pennies from the start. I had to have the unit replaced and both of them had the exact same VDI issues with distinguishing those. The 4khz did seem to help in one instance with big EMI and also has helped be one more tool in regards to whether a target is worth digging.

bunk. This is what I do. I run multi and if I have a week signal with a no TID I then switch to 4 khz for that questionable target and then if I get a good VDI I dig.
Also if I’m having a TID problem I lower my sensitivity down to 10 because I at times get a better reading because it’s not picking everything else around. Just my thoughts
i also slow down.
Doug

 

[treasureguy56]

What’s the big deal about the update.
its only accesses when you access those updates in the options, if you don’t like F2 stay in EF.
If you don’t like 4 khz don’t use it , it’s not in multi.
The optional updates are for the more experienced operators that know their machines.
for me I like the 3.0.
But remember an update make the machine work better and more sensitive. In my situation I lower the sensitivity down to around ten but if I’m in an open field or big beach I raise the sensitivity for a stronger signal for depth.
IMO in trashy conditions I run it much lower than most

Hey Donut , I know this responce is a bit out of date , but I was wondering with your sensitivity turned down in an open field ( farm field situations ) . What kind of response are you having with lower sensitivty settings . I've been running in the high teens with sensitivity and you DO hear everything . Can you give me an example of what level your running yours at and your results .
Al

 

[Grizz12]

I was wondering how to look at my 800 to see which version I have?