What will go deeper than a CTX

[atlanta7]

Hi, We have a permission which yield a lot of Bronze age items . It is pasture one field 10 acre very reedy . That's why I am looking for a 6 inch coil for the CTX to get into the reeds .
My son and myself us CTX's We have been using the 17 inch coil on open screen wide open .
Just wondering if anyone knows if any other could punch deeper ?
Any info appreciated .

[mr fox]

I was talking to a guy a few months back using an aka sorex and he has been detecting since the 80s and has had every type of detector and said that was the deepest pasture machine he ever used said he was selling it to buy a signum and he was coming from a ctx and said it was a lot deeper than ctx must be someone else on here who has compared machines

[Keith67]

I have a Sorex, I enjoy using  it but it takes some getting used to, it's Russian so you just have to get used to the slightly different language for one or two controls.  It's not difficult.  Sparky machine.  I have not had the chance to hunt deep yet as it is sensitive and hasn't let me, but maybe on a quiet field i'll see the results. Not a simple switch on and go machine but then neither is the ctx from what I have heard.  I can't say it's deeper than a ctx as I have no comparison, but I bought it based on good depth reports from some well respected detectorists.

[detecting_deano]

I've got a ctx and recently got a signum although I've only got a couple of hours under my belt with the signum I think it might just edge it depth wise but i find it's alot harder to set up and ground balance etc than the ctx and also harder to gauge if it's set well this may change as i get used to it like I say though it's early days for me so couldn't put my hand on heart and say it's a fact

[DaveJ]

For deep pasture sites and depending how clean the sites is and as you have mentioned find BA items,i use either my IDX Pro with 15'' Concentric,T2 with SEF 15x12,Nexus dual 9'' or my TDI Pro PI with the 20'' Sierra Grande Mono,the TDI although being a PI machine does offer very good conductivity tonal discrimination at depth,or even on some sites depending on the size of the targets that i am after then the TW-5 twin box could be used.

Spoilt for choice i guess 

[Dirtdigger]

If you want serious depth then the GPX 5000 is your best bet. HUGE learning curve though and obviously an expensive purchase.

[Keith67]

I've got a ctx and recently got a signum although I've only got a couple of hours under my belt with the signum I think it might just edge it depth wise but i find it's alot harder to set up and ground balance etc than the ctx and also harder to gauge if it's set well this may change as i get used to it like I say though it's early days for me so couldn't put my hand on heart and say it's a fact

I can relate to that Deano.  GB on Sorex needs to be done on low setiings or it can be tricky.  In fact it runs better on a low power setting and with gentle increases to see how far you can tweak it up on various sites. It's not a machine for high settings very often but still punches well on the more conservative numbers.  I guess the Signum may have the same characteristics.

[unclened]

vista smart ...very stable even in deep mode....

[shooter]

Have you tried a JCB??

[kevsat]

the signum is a deep detector certainly ...but it never convinced me on thin section stuff ...the e trac was better on this type off target ..havnt used a ctx  but guys with em have said its no better than the e trac ...on deep silver the mxt wins every time with the 950 polo coil

[Hauptmann aD]

First answer one question:
What do you wish to find at depth?

For a medieval hoard it would be a different machine than looking for single coins. (And digging a modern penny from a half meter hard and dry ground is in no way fun or rewarding.)

And remember - depth is it not alone.