Advertise with us Call 972-775-8527



AIM To Buddy  Digg This  Del.iscio.us  Fark  feedmelinks  Furl it!  Scuttle  Simpy  Spurl  YahooMyWeb  StumbleUpon

Discovery 2200 vs. Lone Star
 Moderated by: Old Rivers  

New Topic

Reply

Print
AuthorPost
qquake2k
Member
 

Joined: Tue Mar 3rd, 2009
Location: California USA
Posts: 4
Notable Finds: 
Brand of detector you use : Bounty Hunter
Status:  Offline
MyPOTD: 
#1  Posted: Tue Mar 3rd, 2009 01:20 pm

Quote

Reply

PM

Report
voters: 0      
Does anybody have any information, opinions, or experience with the Discovery 2200 vs. the Lone Star? The 2200 has touch pad controls, so the adjustments are in "steps". The Lone Star, however, has knobs, so it's more continuously adjustable. Would that make the Lone Star easier to adjust in some situations? Thanks.

Jim

draaiorgel
Guest
 
$user_ctitle
Joined: 
Location:  
Posts: 
Notable Finds: 
Brand of detector you use : 
Status:  Offline
MyPOTD: 
#2  Posted: Tue Mar 3rd, 2009 04:39 pm

Quote

Reply

PM

Report
voters: 0   
Hi qquake,  :042::042:

Hey, an' welcome to our forum. :137::137:

Nice to see your 1st post.  :153:

:136:  I can't help you with your question on these models.

But overall I'm sure it boils down to a personal preference. :182::182:

Do I want buttons, or knobs? :138::138:

The split for either is around 50%/50%  :173:

Ian n Eileen.  :159::159:

MWB
Member
 

Joined: Mon Jun 28th, 2010
Location:  
Posts: 1
Notable Finds: 
Brand of detector you use : Bounty Hunter
Status:  Offline
MyPOTD: 
#3  Posted: Mon Jun 28th, 2010 10:48 pm

Quote

Reply

PM

Report
voters: 0      
I have an Elite 2200 which is functionally identical to the Discovery 2200 I understand. I REALLY like the sealed touch pad for there are not as many ways for dirt and water to enter the unit. I also like the one-handed use. I can access all the controls with my thumb on the hand that swings the machine.

Mark


 Current time is 02:40 am


Currently viewing - 0 member(s) and 0 guest(s)




WowClassic 2.0 - Copyright © 2007-2008 Nancy Chandler
Page processed in 1.8064 seconds (89% database + 11% PHP). 45 queries executed.