E-Trac 12-FE Line vs SE S-Curve

[The Beep Goes On]

I was thinking of the advantages and disadvantages of both and wanted to see what your opinions were on this matter.

The SE's FE-CO numbers for good targets (general term for non-iron gold, silver and coin items) follow an S-curve from bottom-mid-right screen to top-right screen. The low and high end of this curve is flattened meaning that targets that fall in these areas are compressed (which is why you get a lot of 00-29's for most targets in the high range). Adjacent targets on the S-curve have different FE and different CO numbers since the line is generally diagonal. Targets that "bounce" also, generally, bounce in a diagonal direction (because the scale is not linear). This can be confusing, but having different FE and different CO numbers for adjacent targets may provide more information than otherwise.

The E-Trac is set up so that all good targets are, for the most part, on the 12-FE line. This only gives you the CO number to work off of when deciding to dig. The good thing is that, although the FE number might change depending on depth, etc., the CO number stays pretty much the same. The bounce is vertical instead of diagonal.

So, while the SE may provide more infomation (FE and CO difference in targets adjacent to each other on the S-curve) it is harder to wrap your head around information based on a curve and targets that bounce diagonally. The E-Trac, in effect only giving you the CO numbers with a possible variation in the FE numbers, seems to make it easier to understand. The consistent CO number is a great advantage in certain situations, for instance deep targets. The E-Trac's expanded FE and CO scale (35 - 50 compared to 32 - 32) also provides better resolution.

Do you think we lost information going from the SE to the E-Trac? Is the E-Trac more like a machine that just reads CO now (like 0 to 95 on the DFX, for instance)? Personally, I find the E-Trac setup much easier to use, but wonder if I have lost something that the non-linear setup of the SE provided.

HH!
Beep

 

[christopher-ohio]

sometimes quite fervently to say the least ...but overall many have come to accept and appreciate the differences between the SE and the E-Trac...and apparently are doing even better in hard hunted or trashy areas. I myself have yet to come to fully appreciate the ID changes with the E-Trac or find many good targets after an Explorer thus far but many others on here have seen a very positive change in their finds...HH

 

[The Beep Goes On]

OK...thanks Chris...I'll try to hunt down some of those posts.

 

[Neilo]

Hi Beep, I detect with a friend who uses an Explorer2 he is finding the targets I am missing. he is better able to seperate the rubbish targets than I am. I too own an Explorer2 and my number of finds have gone backwards since I started using the Etrac for sure. Last wednesday I got $55 my friend using the Explorer got $105 this is not a rare event it happens everytime we detect together.When I used to use the Explorer we were always finding about the same amount but not now.

 

[garnerjohn]

"The good thing is that, although the FE number might change depending on depth, etc., the CO number stays pretty much the same."

Hi Beep,
I have an e-trac and am a little confused over the FE 12 reading.
What sort of variation with depth can i expect from the E-trac's FE reading? What should I dig/not dig, wrt non-iron targets?

 

[The Beep Goes On]

garnerjohn - The ground I hunt is pretty neutral so I have found that most targets come in pretty close to where an air test would put them. However, if you are in mineralized or iron-rich ground, the FE numbers can be pulled lower, sometimes much lower than FE12. Andy's book says they can go down to about FE27 (a recent post showed that a patch of ground pulled some quarters down to FE28 ). So, if a dime comes up at 12-46 close to the surface, it may come up at 16-46 if it was a bit deeper. The CO number should stay fairly consistent regardless of the depth. Sometimes the target does not have to be deep for this affect to occur. Doing a Noise Cancel is a good idea if you find shallow target's FE numbers being pulled higher.

So, after you become familiar with your ground's characteristics and have dug enough targets to see how the ground is affecting your FE numbers you may not want to mask/discriminate anything over FE27. I usually mask FE30-35 if not in AM.

Because the E-Trac puts most targets on the FE12 line you find yourself looking at the CO numbers more often (or just using your ears and going by tone quality). So, in general, if the CO number was good but the FE number was higher than FE12 I would dig it if the FE number wasn't above FE27. Like usual, "it all depends"...you have to take your environment into account with all decisions like this.


HH!
Beep

 

[The Beep Goes On]

Hi Neilo - do you think the disparity is due to you not digging targets because they might be junk? For instance, you don't dig a 12-43 because you have dug a lot of those and they are always bottlecaps...? Or, are you just not sensing the targets the Ex2 user is sensing? If you are sensing the same number of targets, but the Ex2 user is digging a lot more holes than you, you might want to loosen up the mental discriminator and not pay as much attention to the numbers. I struggle with this too, so I know what you mean. It would be nice if, since they decided to go this route, the CO range was increased even more...like to CO100 for better resolution.

Beep

 

[spdnj]

Maybe I am not used to it yet but so far i don't like it. I find it hard to distinguish signals from each other. With the Explorer there were certain signals that came up that you new were a coin before you dug it. With the Etrac I find myself unsure. I am not sure if it is affecting finds as I would dig both signals with either detector but I feel like I have less info before I dig now.
I think the Etrac does have its strengths though.

 

[garnerjohn]

Beep - Thanks for the advice.
Next time out I'll try digging anything down to FE 27 and making a note of the depth.