Find's Treasure Forums

Welcome to Find's Treasure Forums, Guests!

You are viewing this forums as a guest which limits you to read only status.

Only registered members may post stories, questions, classifieds, reply to other posts, contact other members using built in messaging and use many other features found on these forums.

Why not register and join us today? It's free! (We don't share your email addresses with anyone.) We keep email addresses of our users to protect them and others from bad people posting things they shouldn't.

Click here to register!



Need Support Help?

Cannot log in?, click here to have new password emailed to you

Changed email? Forgot to update your account with new email address? Need assistance with something else?, click here to go to Find's Support Form and fill out the form.

Equinox 900 vs Legend

synthnut

Well-known member
I own ML machines and have enjoyed using them over the years…For the most part they have always been one step ahead of the competition…In the last few years, this has not been the case…Im not going to bash ML or talk about the short comings of the early model Equinox….I will also not bash the short comings of the Legend, however I do own one….What I will say is that the Legend and the Nox 900 really seem to be the same feature wise except for one HUGE difference in my book…The vdi scale is what I’m talking about !!…The Nox 900 has by far the better vdi scale…No more ganging up target ID’s in a close range…Hearing and seeing the difference's in target ID’sis paramount…..There is a problem though….With everything else being pretty much equal, is this extended vdi scale worth twice the price of the Legend ?….That’s up to the individual…I LOVE the extended scale, but I’m not doubling down to get it…Sorry ML !!
 

CoinRobber

Active member
I own ML machines and have enjoyed using them over the years…For the most part they have always been one step ahead of the competition…In the last few years, this has not been the case…Im not going to bash ML or talk about the short comings of the early model Equinox….I will also not bash the short comings of the Legend, however I do own one….What I will say is that the Legend and the Nox 900 really seem to be the same feature wise except for one HUGE difference in my book…The vdi scale is what I’m talking about !!…The Nox 900 has by far the better vdi scale…No more ganging up target ID’s in a close range…Hearing and seeing the difference's in target ID’sis paramount…..There is a problem though….With everything else being pretty much equal, is this extended vdi scale worth twice the price of the Legend ?….That’s up to the individual…I LOVE the extended scale, but I’m not doubling down to get it…Sorry ML !!
There is more to the 900 than just an expanded vdi scale. I have heard claims from a well known tester "iffy signals" that the Nox 900 is 1 to 2 inches deeper than a 600 or 800. Plus it's faster by quite a bit. Should that be true
i would be upgrading to a 900 for sure. The most annoying bit though is paying hundreds and hundreds more for that little extra. I am considering buying a 900 some time next year. And will probably sell my legend pro pack
to help fund the 900. I don't expect to get a good price for the legend though , nokta don't hold good second hand prices. The manticore looks to be the one to have if you can afford it. I can't afford a manticore.
 

CoinRobber

Active member
I do respect “iffy” but would like to see proof of 1-2” depth increase…I’m more concerned with unmasking and separation abilities…depth is great, but you have to get through the layers of junk before you can even think about depth unless you’re at the beach …
I can say one thing for sure , if the 900 is a better performer than the 800 it would worth using. The build quality looks to be very much improved over the 600 's and 800's too. The selling price in the UK is going to be around
£1300 to £1400 from what i hear. If that was the price i would be maybe thinking of saving up extra for the manticore. Which is a whopping £1800..I could then go dig extra Junkers down to china . :)
 

DigDog

Well-known member
I own ML machines and have enjoyed using them over the years…For the most part they have always been one step ahead of the competition…In the last few years, this has not been the case…Im not going to bash ML or talk about the short comings of the early model Equinox….I will also not bash the short comings of the Legend, however I do own one….What I will say is that the Legend and the Nox 900 really seem to be the same feature wise except for one HUGE difference in my book…The vdi scale is what I’m talking about !!…The Nox 900 has by far the better vdi scale…No more ganging up target ID’s in a close range…Hearing and seeing the difference's in target ID’sis paramount…..There is a problem though….With everything else being pretty much equal, is this extended vdi scale worth twice the price of the Legend ?….That’s up to the individual…I LOVE the extended scale, but I’m not doubling down to get it…Sorry ML !!
That was the same with the MC, was the 2d screen worth the extra, I guess that is different for everyone.
The 900 I guess is a MC without the 2d option. Is the 900 worth double the legend, that again is up everyone individually to decide.
The current technology only goes so far especially in depth. To say one is really alot deeper or will find alot more is a nice thought but thats all it is.
Unfortunately not all locations and conditions are exactly identical so a truly fair comparison is not possible.
All detectors in a category no matter the brand are going to fair about the same in the end.
At the end of the day, week, month, year is one going to find alot more than the other would not have found. Or go inches deeper.
You can either enjoy using what you have and find or worry about what you might have found or might have missed.
One is based on reality the other on emotions. Marketing and sales uses your emotions. There is a saying in sales, sell the sizzle not the steak.
 

Ted S

Well-known member
I take great pride in finding coins with my 600 that others miss. You can also find coins with your Legend if you put in the time using your machine and doing a bit of research. Sorry to say this but most of your time has been spent complaining about Minelab and the ongoing lawsuit. There is nothing you or I can do about it. If your performance is less than you had expected with the Legend give it some more time. Good luck!
 

CoinRobber

Active member
There is more to the 900 than just an expanded vdi scale. I have heard claims from a well known tester "iffy signals" that the Nox 900 is 1 to 2 inches deeper than a 600 or 800. Plus it's faster by quite a bit. Should that be true
i would be upgrading to a 900 for sure. The most annoying bit though is paying hundreds and hundreds more for that little extra. I am considering buying a 900 some time next year. And will probably sell my legend pro pack
to help fund the 900. I don't expect to get a good price for the legend though , nokta don't hold good second hand prices. The manticore looks to be the one to have if you can afford it. I can't afford a manticore.
I have just read a post from nasa tom saying that the manticore is only 5 MM deeper than the nox on a buried 14 inch dime.. That's 0.2 inches deeper.
 

DigDog

Well-known member
I take great pride in finding coins with my 600 that others miss. You can also find coins with your Legend if you put in the time using your machine and doing a bit of research. Sorry to say this but most of your time has been spent complaining about Minelab and the ongoing lawsuit. There is nothing you or I can do about it. If your performance is less than you had expected with the Legend give it some more time. Good luck!
Actually I don’t hunt for coins and i am very happy with my legend.
Would i like to add aML? Of course.
I have had them and like the brand.
I think you are misunderstanding me. Perhaps you haven’t read all my posts to make an informed decision I don’t know.
Don’t want to turn this into a political statement but as an analogy.
If someone is a democrat or republican they might claim their party is perfect and no complaints. Others might disagree on some things and issues. And some might not like the party at all.
I like both, and have some issues with both. I post both what i like and dislike with both. Thats called having an open mind and discussion.
Now perhaps you just don’t like to hear what i have to say, and thats fine your entitled to an opinion but so am I. Perhaps you are bias towards one brand and think everything is perfect about it and thats fine also.
Continuously complaining about what i voice my opinion about on a public social media site but not others that do the same is a bit bias and hypocritical. I will have a civil conversation about anything with anyone, but i wont tell them what they can or can’t talk about because I don’t like what they are saying.
There are jobs available on some social media platforms for content moderation.
I am also sorry to say that if you did some research you would see most of my time is not spent on the ML lawsuit.
Perhaps take it up with the individual who opened up the can of worms on the forum of a detector they don’t even own or like. That’s called trolling and if you don’t call that out than its bias plain and simple.
It would be like me going on a whites or XP forum and continuously posting derogatory comments just because i don’t like them. That’s exactly what’s happening. Cant say that about me because i think i have said i like ML detectors more than i have said about NM. I definitely have owned more ML than NM. Heck i never even heard of a NM up until a few months ago. So you can’t even go there. I would suggest doing your research before criticizing unless again this is purely bias rhetoric.
As i have said to you before, sorry if my posts offend you in some way, but we both can express our opinions, feelings and thoughts but what you are saying is totally inaccurate.
Problem with social interaction today is that most communication is done via the keyboard, even big business transactions are done by text by many. Very impersonal but more importantly things get taken out of context very easily. Sadly with the new generations the days of a in person conversation with a handshake or even phone call is gone. The little in person interaction we do have is now often covered with face masks.
The kids sadly will suffer in the long run.
Eye contact, facial expressions, body language, tones are all missing.
Just think if we just went to a detector with just a screen that read “coin detected” and nothing else.
Again sorry for the misunderstanding.
 

DigDog

Well-known member
I have just read a post from nasa tom saying that the manticore is only 5 MM deeper than the nox on a buried 14 inch dime.. That's 0.2 inches deeper.
If the 700 and 900 don’t leak or have major issues i will probably get one of them now instead of the 800. The 2d screen on the MC is just not worth it to me personally especially with the new 700 and 900 coming out. Maybe they will come down in price as well if the market is flooded. Have to wait and see what happens.
 

sgoss66

Well-known member
I have just read a post from nasa tom saying that the manticore is only 5 MM deeper than the nox on a buried 14 inch dime.. That's 0.2 inches deeper.
Yes, he did say this, but I don't think this tells the whole story -- which he explains later on. I'll try to explain what I'm saying, below.

BUT -- before I post this, I want to make it clear that I am NOT making any definitive statement as to what the machine will or will not do, in terms of depth. I have never even touched one so how could I? I have no way of knowing. BUT, with that said, there are a few things that I think must be understood, and after explaining what I mean, I'll speculated just a bit...

First of all, NASA-Tom lives in Florida. In most places he hunts, AND FOR SURE the location that he tests his machines (his test garden), his "dirt" is almost entirely composed of non-mineralized sand. In other words, it is as close to an "air test" as you can get, essentially, for an in-the-ground target. And here is why that's important to keep in mind...he says 14" is his max depth for a dime, on his Equinox. Meanwhile, neither I, nor anyone else that I hunt with, in almost four years of swinging our Equinoxes, have ever dug a single dime with the Equinox deeper than 9". Never. Not once. Further, I have two 10" deep dimes buried in my test garden -- one silver, one clad. I can not get even a peep on either one of them, with my Equinox.

SO -- why is that? Why can NASA-Tom achieve 14.0" on a dime, with his Equinox, when I can achieve 9" max? TWO REASONS (which we all know) -- the amount of mineralization in my dirt, and EMI.

SO, to continue, NASA-Tom says, again, that he can hit that 14.0" dime in his test garden with his EQX, but -- he can achieve this only about 10% of the time. So, WHY ONLY 10% of the time? Because of EMI. There are times EMI renders his 14" dime undetectable. Obviously, the mineralization of the soil in his test garden isn't changing, but his EMI does, and so does ours -- from minute to minute, hour to hour, day to day, and site to site.

SO -- why is all of this important to the point I eventually intend to make? I think it is important to understand that in terms of "raw depth," the VLF-IB platform -- which of course all of our current detectors utilize with the exception of PI machines -- is pretty much "maxed out," in terms of depth capability. There is just not all that much more that can be squeezed out of this particular technology -- and this is a fact that is largely agreed upon by all of the physicists and engineers who build detectors, that I have ever heard talk about the subject. After all, a Fisher F75 -- which is what, 15-year old technology -- can ALSO hit NASA-Tom's 14" test-garden dime (if I am not mistaken). We have been "near" the maximum, in terms of the "raw depth" capability of the VLF-IB platform, for roughly 2 decades.

BUT -- and here's the important part -- there ARE still gains to be made, in terms of REAL-WORLD depth capability. Again, though NOT much gain is left to achieve in terms of "raw, maximum depth," or "air-test depth," so to speak, the gains to potentially be made are in terms of HOW CLOSE a machine can come to achieving that "maximum depth," or "air test depth" for coins IN THE GROUND. Specifically, these "real-world," or "in the dirt" gains can potentially be achieved by...

1. Improving a machine's "bad dirt handling," so as to allow MORE of us, in DIFFERENT areas, who experience different, more mineralized types of dirt (unlike NASA-Tom's "pure" sand) to get closer to reaching that 14" raw depth maximum on a dime.

2. Improving a machine's "EMI handling," so as to allow MORE of us, who deal with various forms of EMI, to get closer to reaching that 14" raw depth maximum on a dime.

3. Improving on a machine's "ID algorithms" (which is related to #1, above) so as to allow MORE of us to get an ACCURATE ID on the deepest targets, INSTEAD of IDing those fringe-depth targets as "iron," so that we might actually be more apt to dig a target that is closer to that 14" maximum.

SO -- in his "perfect" dirt, NASA-Tom has indeed stated that his ability to detect and accurately ID a dime at 14.0" with his Equinox (which he can achieve about 10% of the time), has improved to 14.2" with his Manticore (which he can achieve about 70% of the time), BUT -- and this is what my long-winded post has been leading up to, in terms of my "point" -- I think it is important to say that THE 0.2" INCREASE IN "RAW" DEPTH THAT THE MANTICORE ACHIEVES, DOES NOT MEAN THAT THE REST OF US WILL ONLY SEE 0.2" DEPTH GAIN ON REAL-WORLD TARGETS.

Why do I say this? I say this BECAUSE, if we assume that the Manticore handles bad dirt better, handles EMI better, and is able to ID targets more accurately, then...that means that ANY OF US, whose dirt type and EMI issues PREVENT us from EVER digging a 14" dime, or even a 10" or 12" dime, may now be able to "come closer" to that 14" raw depth maximum. In my specific case, which -- again -- is a "max depth" of 9" on a dime, I personally may very well, with a Manticore, now be able to detect a dime to 9 1/2", or possibly 10", or maybe even a bit more. In other words, the objective of the Manticore's technology is to try to MITIGATE those reasons why most of us are unable to even come close to a VLF-IB machine's "raw maximum depth."

So, is the Manticore able to mitigate the factors (bad dirt, and EMI) that PREVENT us from detecting a coin anywhere NEAR the maximum capability of the unit? I have no idea, personally, but according to NASA-Tom, the answer is YES. Given that he does not achieve that 14.2" maximum depth in any of the "inland" sites he hunts, he has noted that he IS experiencing much more significant depth gains. In fact, a couple of posts AFTER he noted the 0.2" increase in ABSOLUTE max depth, he also noted that DUE TO BETTER EMI MITIGATION that is built into the Manticore, he is averaging TWO INCHES more depth, with his Manticore, at "inland" sites (i.e. when he is "coin and relic hunting," not "beach jewelry hunting"). TWO INCHES? That is awfully impressive...

Now, will the REST of us gain 2" depth? I have no idea, but I suspect not, as most of us deal with far more highly mineralized soil than he does. BUT -- I DO feel pretty confident that we will achieve quite a bit more than 0.2" depth increase, if switching to the Manticore...

Just my two cents..

Steve
 
Last edited:

sprchng

Well-known member
Yes, he did say this, but I don't think this tells the whole story -- which he explains later on. I'll try to explain what I'm saying, below.

BUT -- before I post this, I want to make it clear that I am NOT making any definitive statement as to what the machine will or will not do, in terms of depth. I have never even touched one so how could I? I have no way of knowing. BUT, with that said, there are a few things that I think must be understood, and after explaining what I mean, I'll speculated just a bit...

First of all, NASA-Tom lives in Florida. In most places he hunts, AND FOR SURE the location that he tests his machines (his test garden), his "dirt" is almost entirely composed of non-mineralized sand. In other words, it is as close to an "air test" as you can get, essentially, for an in-the-ground target. And here is why that's important to keep in mind...he says 14" is his max depth for a dime, on his Equinox. Meanwhile, neither I, nor anyone else that I hunt with, in almost four years of swinging our Equinoxes, have ever dug a single dime with the Equinox deeper than 9". Never. Not once. Further, I have two 10" deep dimes buried in my test garden -- one silver, one clad. I can not get even a peep on either one of them, with my Equinox.

SO -- why is that? Why can NASA-Tom achieve 14.0" on a dime, with his Equinox, when I can achieve 9" max? TWO REASONS (which we all know) -- the amount of mineralization in my dirt, and EMI.

SO, to continue, NASA-Tom says, again, that he can hit that 14.0" dime in his test garden with his EQX, but -- he can achieve this only about 10% of the time. So, WHY ONLY 10% of the time? Because of EMI. There are times EMI renders his 14" dime undetectable. Obviously, the mineralization of the soil in his test garden isn't changing, but his EMI does, and so does ours -- from minute to minute, hour to hour, day to day, and site to site.

SO -- why is all of this important to the point I eventually intend to make? I think it is important to understand that in terms of "raw depth," the VLF-IB platform -- which of course all of our current detectors utilize with the exception of PI machines -- is pretty much "maxed out," in terms of depth capability. There is just not all that much more that can be squeezed out of this particular technology -- and this is a fact that is largely agreed upon by all of the physicists and engineers who build detectors, that I have ever heard talk about the subject. After all, a Fisher F75 -- which is what, 15-year old technology -- can ALSO hit NASA-Tom's 14" test-garden dime (if I am not mistaken). We have been "near" the maximum, in terms of the "raw depth" capability of the VLF-IB platform, for roughly 2 decades.

BUT -- and here's the important part -- there ARE still gains to be made, in terms of REAL-WORLD depth capability. Again, though NOT much gain is left to achieve in terms of "raw, maximum depth," or "air-test depth," so to speak, the gains to potentially be made are in terms of HOW CLOSE a machine can come to achieving that "maximum depth," or "air test depth" for coins IN THE GROUND. Specifically, these "real-world," or "in the dirt" gains can potentially be achieved by...

1. Improving a machine's "bad dirt handling," so as to allow MORE of us, in DIFFERENT areas, who experience different, more mineralized types of dirt (unlike NASA-Tom's "pure" sand) to get closer to reaching that 14" raw depth maximum on a dime.

2. Improving a machine's "EMI handling," so as to allow MORE of us, who deal with various forms of EMI, to get closer to reaching that 14" raw depth maximum on a dime.

3. Improving on a machine's "ID algorithms" (which is related to #1, above) so as to allow MORE of us to get an ACCURATE ID on the deepest targets, INSTEAD of IDing those fringe-depth targets as "iron," so that we might actually be more apt to dig a target that is closer to that 14" maximum.

SO -- in his "perfect" dirt, NASA-Tom has indeed stated that his ability to detect and accurately ID a dime at 14.0" with his Equinox (which he can achieve about 10% of the time), has improved to 14.2" with his Manticore (which he can achieve about 70% of the time), BUT -- and this is what my long-winded post has been leading up to, in terms of my "point" -- I think it is important to say that THE 0.2" INCREASE IN "RAW" DEPTH THAT THE MANTICORE ACHIEVES, DOES NOT MEAN THAT THE REST OF US WILL ONLY SEE 0.2" DEPTH GAIN ON REAL-WORLD TARGETS.

Why do I say this? I say this BECAUSE, if we assume that the Manticore handles bad dirt better, handles EMI better, and is able to ID targets more accurately, then...that means that ANY OF US, whose dirt type and EMI issues PREVENT us from EVER digging a 14" dime, or even a 10" or 12" dime, may now be able to "come closer" to that 14" raw depth maximum. In my specific case, which -- again -- is a "max depth" of 9" on a dime, I personally may very well, with a Manticore, now be able to detect a dime to 9 1/2", or possibly 10", or maybe even a bit more. In other words, the objective of the Manticore's technology is to try to MITIGATE those reasons why most of us are unable to even come close to a VLF-IB machine's "raw maximum depth."

So, is the Manticore able to mitigate the factors (bad dirt, and EMI) that PREVENT us from detecting a coin anywhere NEAR the maximum capability of the unit? I have no idea, personally, but according to NASA-Tom, the answer is YES. Given that he does not achieve that 14.2" maximum depth in any of the "inland" sites he hunts, he has noted that he IS experiencing much more significant depth gains. In fact, a couple of posts AFTER he noted the 0.2" increase in ABSOLUTE max depth, he also noted that DUE TO BETTER EMI MITIGATION that is built into the Manticore, he is averaging TWO INCHES more depth, with his Manticore, at "inland" sites (i.e. when he is "coin and relic hunting," not "beach jewelry hunting"). TWO INCHES? That is awfully impressive...

Now, will the REST of us gain 2" depth? I have no idea, but I suspect not, as most of us deal with far more highly mineralized soil than he does. BUT -- I DO feel pretty confident that we will achieve quite a bit more than 0.2" depth increase, if switching to the Manticore...

Just my two cents..

Steve
Very important to also remember who is now apparently on Minelab's payroll!!
 

fwcrawford

Well-known member
Yes, he did say this, but I don't think this tells the whole story -- which he explains later on. I'll try to explain what I'm saying, below.

BUT -- before I post this, I want to make it clear that I am NOT making any definitive statement as to what the machine will or will not do, in terms of depth. I have never even touched one so how could I? I have no way of knowing. BUT, with that said, there are a few things that I think must be understood, and after explaining what I mean, I'll speculated just a bit...

First of all, NASA-Tom lives in Florida. In most places he hunts, AND FOR SURE the location that he tests his machines (his test garden), his "dirt" is almost entirely composed of non-mineralized sand. In other words, it is as close to an "air test" as you can get, essentially, for an in-the-ground target. And here is why that's important to keep in mind...he says 14" is his max depth for a dime, on his Equinox. Meanwhile, neither I, nor anyone else that I hunt with, in almost four years of swinging our Equinoxes, have ever dug a single dime with the Equinox deeper than 9". Never. Not once. Further, I have two 10" deep dimes buried in my test garden -- one silver, one clad. I can not get even a peep on either one of them, with my Equinox.

SO -- why is that? Why can NASA-Tom achieve 14.0" on a dime, with his Equinox, when I can achieve 9" max? TWO REASONS (which we all know) -- the amount of mineralization in my dirt, and EMI.

SO, to continue, NASA-Tom says, again, that he can hit that 14.0" dime in his test garden with his EQX, but -- he can achieve this only about 10% of the time. So, WHY ONLY 10% of the time? Because of EMI. There are times EMI renders his 14" dime undetectable. Obviously, the mineralization of the soil in his test garden isn't changing, but his EMI does, and so does ours -- from minute to minute, hour to hour, day to day, and site to site.

SO -- why is all of this important to the point I eventually intend to make? I think it is important to understand that in terms of "raw depth," the VLF-IB platform -- which of course all of our current detectors utilize with the exception of PI machines -- is pretty much "maxed out," in terms of depth capability. There is just not all that much more that can be squeezed out of this particular technology -- and this is a fact that is largely agreed upon by all of the physicists and engineers who build detectors, that I have ever heard talk about the subject. After all, a Fisher F75 -- which is what, 15-year old technology -- can ALSO hit NASA-Tom's 14" test-garden dime (if I am not mistaken). We have been "near" the maximum, in terms of the "raw depth" capability of the VLF-IB platform, for roughly 2 decades.

BUT -- and here's the important part -- there ARE still gains to be made, in terms of REAL-WORLD depth capability. Again, though NOT much gain is left to achieve in terms of "raw, maximum depth," or "air-test depth," so to speak, the gains to potentially be made are in terms of HOW CLOSE a machine can come to achieving that "maximum depth," or "air test depth" for coins IN THE GROUND. Specifically, these "real-world," or "in the dirt" gains can potentially be achieved by...

1. Improving a machine's "bad dirt handling," so as to allow MORE of us, in DIFFERENT areas, who experience different, more mineralized types of dirt (unlike NASA-Tom's "pure" sand) to get closer to reaching that 14" raw depth maximum on a dime.

2. Improving a machine's "EMI handling," so as to allow MORE of us, who deal with various forms of EMI, to get closer to reaching that 14" raw depth maximum on a dime.

3. Improving on a machine's "ID algorithms" (which is related to #1, above) so as to allow MORE of us to get an ACCURATE ID on the deepest targets, INSTEAD of IDing those fringe-depth targets as "iron," so that we might actually be more apt to dig a target that is closer to that 14" maximum.

SO -- in his "perfect" dirt, NASA-Tom has indeed stated that his ability to detect and accurately ID a dime at 14.0" with his Equinox (which he can achieve about 10% of the time), has improved to 14.2" with his Manticore (which he can achieve about 70% of the time), BUT -- and this is what my long-winded post has been leading up to, in terms of my "point" -- I think it is important to say that THE 0.2" INCREASE IN "RAW" DEPTH THAT THE MANTICORE ACHIEVES, DOES NOT MEAN THAT THE REST OF US WILL ONLY SEE 0.2" DEPTH GAIN ON REAL-WORLD TARGETS.

Why do I say this? I say this BECAUSE, if we assume that the Manticore handles bad dirt better, handles EMI better, and is able to ID targets more accurately, then...that means that ANY OF US, whose dirt type and EMI issues PREVENT us from EVER digging a 14" dime, or even a 10" or 12" dime, may now be able to "come closer" to that 14" raw depth maximum. In my specific case, which -- again -- is a "max depth" of 9" on a dime, I personally may very well, with a Manticore, now be able to detect a dime to 9 1/2", or possibly 10", or maybe even a bit more. In other words, the objective of the Manticore's technology is to try to MITIGATE those reasons why most of us are unable to even come close to a VLF-IB machine's "raw maximum depth."

So, is the Manticore able to mitigate the factors (bad dirt, and EMI) that PREVENT us from detecting a coin anywhere NEAR the maximum capability of the unit? I have no idea, personally, but according to NASA-Tom, the answer is YES. Given that he does not achieve that 14.2" maximum depth in any of the "inland" sites he hunts, he has noted that he IS experiencing much more significant depth gains. In fact, a couple of posts AFTER he noted the 0.2" increase in ABSOLUTE max depth, he also noted that DUE TO BETTER EMI MITIGATION that is built into the Manticore, he is averaging TWO INCHES more depth, with his Manticore, at "inland" sites (i.e. when he is "coin and relic hunting," not "beach jewelry hunting"). TWO INCHES? That is awfully impressive...

Now, will the REST of us gain 2" depth? I have no idea, but I suspect not, as most of us deal with far more highly mineralized soil than he does. BUT -- I DO feel pretty confident that we will achieve quite a bit more than 0.2" depth increase, if switching to the Manticore...

Just my two cents..

Steve
Interesting post… food for thought that is for sure!!👍
 

sgoss66

Well-known member
Very important to also remember who is now apparently on Minelab's payroll!!
NASA-Tom, in my judgement (and I have "known" him for a long time, via message/text/email/phone) is about as straight of a shooter as they come. He's not going to "fudge" stuff...

Steve
 
Top