We field tested the X5 against 4 different units today: A CID - 950 loop,
An XLT - 950 loop,
The X5 - stock loop,
An Eagle SL90 -w/both 4" & 950 loops, alternating.
And for one signal: an Excaliber - 10" loop.
Location of field test: Dunne Park, Hollister, CA. The park has been well hit, but occasionally still gives up coins back to the teens & '20s. Average to low mineralization.
The 1st zone: long parking strip of hardpan dirt totally littered w/pulltabs & iron. It has given up well over 150 wheaties & silver in the past years, for those working it w/small coils, or 2 filter machines. Nothing necessarily deep....just potentially masked.
The 2nd zone: a section of turf. Typical of hard worked parks. Wheats tend to start at 4-5". In both zones we were strictly testing for high conductors in a depth and/or target separation tests. Because we were usually all wearing headphones, we couldn't hear each others quality of signals, and had to go by opinions of whether that person "would have dug it" or "it's iffy" etc.... Any coin dug without comprehensive comparison is not detailed here.
In the hard-pan junky zone, the CID and Eagle w/4" coil seemed to do best at eeking out high conductors amongst the trash. On easy ones, all 4 machines got them w/no problems. On 2 wheats close to tabs, the CID and Eagle w/4" seemed to do the best. When the X5 went over those 2, it was not an easy signal. Ie.: he'd have to swing it various directions, and interpret clicks & repeatabilty (as opposed to non-masked coins that gave no doubt). The X5 was tried in all different disc. levels, sens. levels, manual & auto GB, etc... on each target. To the extent that the X5 would get a repeatable signal over those 2 wheats, it seemed to also get clicks & clacks elsewhere that, in my opinion, sounded the same. But I'm not a silent search fan, so to others, they may have heard the subtle differences. The point is, the CID & Eagle got them securely, and the X5 seemed to struggle. To the X5's credit, on a few signals that the CID & Eagle got as possible coins amongst junk, the X5 gave a non-repeatable signal, and sure enough, we'd been fooled. Jeff can chime in here and add some target comparisons I may have forgotten about in this zone.
Next, we went to the turf. The XLT seemed to excel the most here. We were trying for high conductors, & ignoring anything less that 4" deep. The XLT got 2 wheats. The rest of us got fooled by deep clad. The 2nd of the wheats was a good deep turf coin type sound. The XLT measured it at 6" and a solid penny/dime sound. The Eagle measured it at 5" w/a wheatie type TID. The CID had to struggle to get anything. The X5 once again seemed to struggle, even trying all diff. settings. Jeff both went over this one w/the X5, so he can chime in and give the exact quality of signal. But for sure, it was not a 4-star signal. Before digging this one, we tested it w/an Excaliber (similar to Sovereign), and it picked it w/PLENTY room to spare. Digging down perhaps 6" deep revealed a '53 wheat.
On another another turf target, the Eagle w/950 heard a semi-high conductor, mixed w/junk. The X5 could not get this one, even lowering the disc. to 2, and passing all diff. ways & speeds. It turned out to only be a deep zinc next to junk, but the point is, a machine good at target separation, should have got this one.
In conclusion, the X5 seems to be kin to a 1266, mixed w/a CZ6, mixed w/a Shadow X2. It didn't seem to do anything that any # of machines in our closets can easily do now. Maybe for those more used to silent search machines can make use of it, but I'd have to take a pass.