Why is the CZ3D so expensive?

[Coinstriking Michigan]

The old Fisher may not have been the worlds best business people but can anyone really say that the new lineup is better than the old? I've personally used the F2 and the F70, the F2 is basically a beep and dig because the numbers bounce so damn much, and the F70 was so noisy you could only turn the sens up to about 60-65 before it became unbearable. I still think the Coinstrike is the best detector ever made.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

A History of Mining on the Kenai Peninsula, Alaska - Grab it through Amazon!

[CoilFisher]

I don't think I've seen but 1 or 2 people that use the CZ-3D...I don't think it's a stellar seller.

Ahem, I use the CZ-3D.
And, yes it's worth the price. If you don't want to buy a new one--get a used one. Takes alot to break a detector.
They do the job---well.

 

[ivanll]

Makes little difference in who/where it's made.............. when it's not working it's next to useless, whether it's new or not.
We have no Fisher or other authorised qualified service facility in this region, so one have to do our own repair.
Upside is if/when you do get it working, then it works pleasantly good.
Fixed the trouble with my new CZ-3D and tried it out in a park and on a wet beach................sweet.

ivanll

 

[huntindog1]

Can a person buy a CZ-3D and have it tuned like a CZ-5?

 

[woof!]

There are circuit differences. The factory doesn't do custom conversions. You could check with Dankowski, for a price he might be willing.

--Dave J.

 

[spanishgold1]

i have an at pro and a cz-3d and I prefer my cz-3d in most cases. I like the simple features, and sometimes simple gets your senses working for you rather than rely on a meter to tell you to dig or not.
I agree they should of build on the CZ-3D, but minds superior to mind must be in charge
In writing Tom, she suggested that I get the F75 over the CZ-3D. Im just wondering if they are coming out with a newer F75

 

[seeker41]

I think it's sad to see the direction Fisher went....The Los Banos Fishers were great. What do you get now? Noisy, flimsy, plastic crap that look and feel like toys.

man, you just blasted a guy that was dogging an old cz!
you are dead wrong about the "Noisy, flimsy, plastic crap that look and feel like toys" just becuse your used to old heavy poor ergonomics and slow electronics dont bash what you havent really tried!!!!!
chuck.

 

[CoilFisher]

I am not saying this to defend either argument here, but I believe Tom D. did say on his forum an F-75 in 4H tone was essentially a CZ-3D.

(However, I am not sure I understand that as the CZ is dual frequency and the F-75 is a single high frequency at 13kHz).

 

[gleaner1]

The cz3d is a living legend, like the cz21 and 1270 and the beloved world famous 1280. Nothing really so good ever gets cheaper, does it?

 

[ponderosabob]

The 3D is virtually the same thing as the 5, except there's a minor difference in how the nonferrous categories are scaled. Someone else here can probably explain it better than I can.

I left Fisher in '95 because I could see it was headed downhill with no plan to fix it. When I returned to take a look at the place before we bought it in (as I recall) 2007 I was shocked at what I saw, both physically and the accounting data. I told the boss we shouldn't take it even if it was free, but he thought some aspects of it were salvageable and in the long run he was proven right.

Among the things we didn't know at the time, was that after I left they'd decided the CZ calibration procedure was too time-consuming, so they developed a shortcut method that could sorta fake it as long as you didn't actually test the unit afterwards. When we brought manufacturing to El Paso, we didn't know they'd abandoned the correct procedure and therefore the new people received the wrong training. It took us a while to discover what had happened. I dredged the original procedure out of the files and we went back to that with some very minor changes.

What most people don't know is that the "old Fisher" had been shipping them improperly calibrated for years, as best I can figure probably close to a decade. It was the "old Fisher" that created a nice little side business for Dankowski, who was deeply enough involved in the CZ3D revision to figure out how CZ's should be calibrated.

There were numerous other things that happened at the "old Fisher", involving CZ's and other products, which we inherited and took some time to discover. The "shortcut" CZ calibration procedure was just one example.

When people post that the "old Fisher" was this great company that did everything right, and then First Texas bought it and screwed everything up, they simply don't know what they're talking about. The "old Fisher" was losing a million dollars a year on $7 mil revenue-- and their sales were falling off a cliff because dealers didn't want the product any more. That's what the "old Fisher" had become.

Fortunately there were several products worth saving, and several people who were "keepers".

--Dave J.

I call B.S. on this.

Fishers' downfall was spurred on by the fact that they made and built a quality product in AMERICA, and refused to compromise it's build quality and engineering.
The dealers did not want to stock and sell them because there was not as much profit in it for them as there was with the high-markup cheap detectors.
This is evidenced by the plethora of cheap, chinese made, ho-hum, unstable operation, shallow, erratic, poorly engineered, and exceedingly cheaply built dime-a-dozen detectors on the market nowadays.
Detector engineering, design and build quality peaked in the 90's within the Fisher line, and there is nothing you can buy these days that is comparable.

This holds true for many products that used to be designed and made in America. It is just a fact of life.

When First Texas bought Fisher, - is was only to gain the benefit of their technologies, and the only true Fisher products they continued to produce were the ones with strong enough demand, and the ones that could
be produced cheaply enough to make sufficient profit. Probably due to already having some parts still in stock from the buyout etc. As they ran out, and it was no longer cost effective - that line would be dropped and/or replaced
by a cheapened model (lower manufacturing cost).

Great detectors are expensive to make.

Cheap detectors are easy to sell.

The rest is all Marketing and CYA.

 

[woof!]

Sorry, Ponderosa, you simply don't know what the heck you're talking about. I do, because it's been my life for over 30 years.

The funniest part is that "FT bought Old F to gain the benefit of their technologies" stuff. I was the chief designer for the Old Fisher, became the chief designer for FTP, and am now the chief designer for the New Fisher. The technology was me. The Old Fisher had zero technology worth buying. That Lobo Supertraq you've got listed...... I designed that, too.

The other funny part is your theory is that the legacy products were killed off by made-in-China. So, what made-in-China products were those? Meanwhile, the Old Fisher's best legacy stuff, the CZ3d (minor variant of the CZ platform intro'd November 1991) and the Gold Bug 2 (intro mid-1995) that I designed, ARE STILL BEING MANUFACTURED. 24 and 19 years later respectively. By us. The Old Fisher forgot how to manufacture stuff (I was there, I saw it with my eyes, it was shocking how bad it had gotten) and if we hadn't bought it, today there would be no Fisher of any kind.

Your assertion that a good metal detector can't be made at low cost is also wrong. The $200-400 MSRP range has become a sweet spot where you can buy a metal detector that has performance nearly the equal of many machines costing twice as much.

Ponderosa, you're a newbie here. There are some people here who do really know their stuff, and if in your first post you're trying to pretend you know more than they do, well, you can't expect them to be favorably impressed.

You're welcome to give it another try sticking with subject matter you know about or asking questions about subject matter you don't know about. That plan's got more long-term traction than the one you started out with. Have a g'day.

 

[digger27]

Sorry, Ponderosa, you simply don't know what the heck you're talking about. I do, because it's been my life for over 30 years.

The funniest part is that "FT bought Old F to gain the benefit of their technologies" stuff. I was the chief designer for the Old Fisher, became the chief designer for FTP, and am now the chief designer for the New Fisher. The technology was me. The Old Fisher had zero technology worth buying. That Lobo Supertraq you've got listed...... I designed that, too.

The other funny part is your theory is that the legacy products were killed off by made-in-China. So, what made-in-China products were those? Meanwhile, the Old Fisher's best legacy stuff, the CZ3d (minor variant of the CZ platform intro'd November 1991) and the Gold Bug 2 (intro mid-1995) that I designed, ARE STILL BEING MANUFACTURED. 24 and 19 years later respectively. By us. The Old Fisher forgot how to manufacture stuff (I was there, I saw it with my eyes, it was shocking how bad it had gotten) and if we hadn't bought it, today there would be no Fisher of any kind.

Your assertion that a good metal detector can't be made at low cost is also wrong. The $200-400 MSRP range has become a sweet spot where you can buy a metal detector that has performance nearly the equal of many machines costing twice as much.

Ponderosa, you're a newbie here. There are some people here who do really know their stuff, and if in your first post you're trying to pretend you know more than they do, well, you can't expect them to be favorably impressed.

You're welcome to give it another try sticking with subject matter you know about or asking questions about subject matter you don't know about. That plan's got more long-term traction than the one you started out with. Have a g'day.

Woof, just want to say thanks for "saving" Fisher.
I also own Tesoros and love them, but me and my F2 made quite a team for the 3 years or so I used it.
I found out I seem to have quite an affinity for the Fishers...sometimes you just "click" with a certain brand and with these I think I have.
When something you buy pays you back more than 10X's over its initial cost and is so much fun to use that makes you very thankful that product was in existence.
I never had problems with jumpy numbers over good targets, I learned the language well and even a hidden language watching the behavior closely that helped me find so many quality targets that it should probably be not allowed by law.
Now this year with the F70, a learning year for me filled with experimentation and constant setting changes and much less digging so I never expected much, still the amount and quality of great targets I actually found amazed me and the things this things seems to be able to do in almost any site has my jaw aching from dropping so much.
I have learned much this year but am still at the beginning of that learning curve as far as I am concerned, even though I paid for the thing in just my clad and jewelry finds at melt prices in its first season of use.
Next year, with a few favorite settings and techniques now stored away in my tiny little brain and memory I have no idea what might be in store for me but I suspect it will be awesome.
Thanks!

 

[H-2 CHARLIE]

Wolfie .. How long do I hold out for the Fisher new P.I. ?

How about 13" mono for the gold bug pro . need some depth .

 

[woof!]

Wolfie .. How long do I hold out for the Fisher new P.I. ?

How about 13" mono for the gold bug pro . need some depth .

Holding out for a product (for example "the Fisher new P.I.") you imagine might exist someday, but have no facts about, is arguably not a great strategy. Unless what you're really trying to do is have an excuse to avoid impulse buying, in which case it's arguably a darn good strategy.


I can tell you there won't be a 13 inch mono for the GB Pro, because VLF's aren't compatible with mono searchcoils. For that matter not all PI's are compatible with mono searchcoils. I believe there are some aftermarket induction balance searchcoils available in the 13 inch or so range for the GB's, but they don't buy a lot of depth, they're more for improved coverage for relic hunting type use (not for gold prospecting).

 

[Steve Herschbach]

My tongue is bleeding from biting it so much while reading this thread. Dave certainly knows the inside story better than nearly anyone.

I can comment from the perspective of being a major Fisher dealer from the glory days until the end at Los Banos. People who own detectors like the Coin Strike will probably not believe it but it was those units and others at the time that sank Fisher.

We were selling tons of Gold Bugs and Gold Bug 2s, CZs, and 1200 series detectors. Then I got sent a prototype Gold Strike and saw the early Coin Strike and I saw trouble immediately. There were people like me that told them these units would fail but they were too invested in them to listen.

It is not about whether those detectors work or are any good. The reality at the time is people were expecting the CZ-100 and the Gold Bug 3. The Gold Strike in particular was such a huge departure from the Gold Bug series, not only in how it operated, but in being heavier and much more expensive, that it was doomed to fail. It cratered on release. The Coin Strike is not a bad detector but again, it was not what people expected. It operates totally differently than a CZ and in a very not intuitive way. Yes, there are people who see it for what it is and love it, but far, far more people hated it. It did not meet expectations.

Imagine the next Apple iPhone coming out and all the sudden acting more like an Android phone. Look at Windows 8. The buying public expects a certain progression with what you deliver and if you change too radically, disaster can ensue. A superb marketing staff might be able to explain the changes and pull it off, but that was another thing Fisher sorely lacked by them.

The icing on the cake was that Dave had moved on and while at other companies designed machines like the Lobo and MXT/GMT that were far better received and popular still. Our Fisher sales went to almost nothing, as did nearly all other Fisher dealers, and Los Banos died an ugly death. Luckily I was a multiline dealer by then and we simply went with what people wanted - and it was not Fisher any more.

I have said it before but will say it again. Thanks Dave for your part in giving us some of the best detectors ever made. I know that there are others who deserve credit also but you are getting the lions share. Some of the best moments in my life occurred while using a machine you had a hand in and I am looking forward to whatever is cooking next at First Texas. Best wishes and a Happy New Year!

 

[woof!]

My tongue is bleeding from biting it so much while reading this thread.

Some of the best moments in my life occurred while using a machine you had a hand in and I am looking forward to whatever is cooking next at First Texas. Best wishes and a Happy New Year!

Yeah, Steve, I've darn near bit my tongue off myself....... over that prototype you were expecting nearly a year ago and ain't seen yet. It didn't hit any brick walls, just got bogged down. We finally got past the swamp and we're fighting the alligators on land now.

 

[woof!]

If Tom Dankowski were to argue that it was he who saved the CZ series by making it possible for customers to get the thing calibrated right, I wouldn't dispute him on that. I'm glad that he cared when the factory itself didn't.

And you, Steve, deserve some credit for saving the GB2. Old Fisher was shipping you crap, we began not knowing that, and you worked with us to resolve the problem. The GB2 which was intro'd in 1995 and which by 2007 or so Los Banos had nearly killed, is now 19 years later selling more than the Old Fisher ever did. From a procurement and manufacturing perspective we hate the damn thing (it uses parts that are almost impossible to obtain these days and has high labor costs), but when customers keep ordering the things it's hard to pull the plug. The thing's so popular that Chinese counterfeiters tried to knock it off. (It didn't go well for them, people kinda noticed that the fakes didn't work worth a darn and with the cops closing in, the middlemen dealing in counterfeits told the Chinese factory not to ship any more.)

 

[mikeraydj]

Woof! since you are here. Did you have anything to do with the F5? Why did they make a clickable ground balance knob that does nothing? Was it for a feature that they decided not to use? If so what? And why do they still manufacture them with this type of knob?

 

[woof!]

We were selling tons of Gold Bugs and Gold Bug 2s, CZs, and 1200 series detectors. Then I got sent a prototype Gold Strike ..... and I saw trouble immediately. There were people like me that told them these units would fail but they were too invested in them to listen. ........ The Gold Strike in particular was such a huge departure from the Gold Bug series, not only in how it operated, but in being heavier and much more expensive, that it was doomed to fail. It cratered on release.

Gee, Steve, the story I got from the Old Fisher is that the Gold Strike was a fantastic machine. And that the reason it died on impact was because the All-Powerful Great Steve had pissed on it, and from then on out nobody wanted to touch it.

[EDIT] It's understandable that for PR purposes they'd want a plausible alibi. The problem was that they actually believed their own BS. So they forged ahead with the CoinStrike. By the time they started getting that platform right with the Excel and the Edge, they made it look like a bored-stiff machine and not even the hot rod flames could fix that. It was like Fisher regarded the product as a sort of joke. They sold a few to the diehard Fisher fans, but that wasn't enough to pay back the development cost.

 

[woof!]

Woof! since you are here. Did you have anything to do with the F5? Why did they make a clickable ground balance knob that does nothing? Was it for a feature that they decided not to use? If so what? And why do they still manufacture them with this type of knob?

I'm assuming that the ground balance function works fine, and that you're referring to the push switch.

Yep, there's a reason, but it's a reason that doesn't matter to customers.