Where does YOUR Unit rate?

holey moley your t2 beat my dfx.. am dumbfounded the dfx is so low on that chart.. : (
 

I don't know. My DFX is about 7" max with the 9.5 coil, tweaked seven ways to Sunday.

I have to agree with the CZ-3D. It's deeper than my DFX. I proved that last weeks on an IH. DFX didn't hear a thing. Got a sweet repeatable quiet tone from the CZ at 8.5".
 

Minelab Explorer II and SE are the best.
 

yep the t-2 # 6, but didnt need a chart to tell me that. ive dug 2.5 ft for a 6in tin ring, not a happy camper, looking for copper culture stuff, most stuff around here doesnt get very deep.
 

Sounds to me, in my experience, like this test was done very quickly and not terribly accurately. But they did get me to read. lol.
 

Tee Hee. I especially like the iron seperation test when factored in with the depth tests.

Tee Hee!

What this does not account for is experience in using YOUR detector. We all learn tricks and tweaks with practice.

I ain't complaining (neither will the T2 users, I'm sure). Relative to my Minelab Muskateer Advantage I'd say the F-75 is just about that much better . . . but that DFX result has to be wonky. I KNOW they're better than that. Probably those default settings, again. The Explorers cost 20% more and are heavier so they should be spanking me. :D The Sovereign is the one I was hard pressed to decide against with the F-75.

The test with the silver coin beside a bolt - I did my own with a silver quarter beside a railroad spike and I got an overload siren unless I was at least 4" away or it was 6" below the coil. :icon_scratch: Granted that spike is a wad of iron in the detector's field.

I do have coins under nails and tabs in my test garden and it does "see through" the trash (the tab if it is 1"+/- or more off vertical alignment) if you have the settings dialed in (low discrimination to "take the hit" and decide for yourself).
 

Montana Jim said:
Neat charts... but...

The tests are irrelevent to one's own location and experience.
Click to expand...
Its ok Jim mine didnt rate well either
 

People, people. There is a ton of charts, graphs and opinions out there and you can work them anyway you want. I wouldn't take this one as gospel. One mans testing, no conditions listed, experienced with all detectors? or master of none? Were they all tested at the same time in the same conditions at the same place? The minelabs depth being on top does not surprise me but I am very skeptical about the outcome for all those detectors. And this chart has been around for a long time.
 

Born2Dtect said:
I am not surprised with the results. I use a Minelab EXP II.

Ed D.
Click to expand...


I am not surprised either :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
 

Hmmm..... You might remember that an earlier chart from this guy has been on this forum before and was blasted by a few members. Charges of Minelab bias were made.

Frankly, why isn't the XP GoldMax Power at the top or near the top?


George
 

these test numbers seem a little optimistic to me to say the least. I'm glad my explorer SE did well, and i know it does go deep, but 14" on a king George seems unrealistic to me. ::)
 

As it stands now my Minelab is the machine to beat. I do have to give the Tesoro more of a chance. I might even try a more top of the line Tesoro. But the Minelab stays with me until a different detector beats it.
Mind you we're only talking depth. Because as deep as the Minelab is, it is also slow. I'm probably always going to need at least two machines.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Hello all

⬅️ Previous Thread

This seems unheard of..... AND a Carbon Fiber Lower Shaft?! That would be nice!

Next Thread ➡️

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Metal Detecting Stuff

Latest Discussions

Back
Top