Menu
What's new
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

Explorer a P.I.

A

Anonymous

Guest
I just noticed a post on the Fisher forum by Thomas J.Dankowski (NASA Tom) who developed the Fisher 3D saying that the Explorer is in fact a modified type of P.I. machine.
This can't really be correct can it !
 
If so it's one of the most advanced TID PI's on the face of the planet and someone from NASA should know <img src="/metal/html/smile.gif" border=0 width=15 height=15 alt=":)"> <img src="/metal/html/smile.gif" border=0 width=15 height=15 alt=":)"> <img src="/metal/html/smile.gif" border=0 width=15 height=15 alt=":)">
HH
Beachcomber
 
The Explorer is a hybrid.
It's neither a VLF nor a PI, but uses the principles of both.
What it actually uses is "Time Domain Analysis".
It transmits two square waves interspersed with each other a min 1.5KHz signal, with a 15HKz signal where "space" should be during the mark / space period of the signal. This gets around the fact that the amplitude of the harmonics would normally fall off in an exponential way as they get higher.
The synch demods in the Explorer only tune to multiples of 1.5KHz, and only to three different frequencies at any one time, so it's NOT a 28 frequency machine as Minelab claim (quite why they see the need to make false claims is anyones guess, but not the truth is coming out, a lot of people are shying away from them due to mistrust).
The processing in then done very siply by integrating the outputs from the thre banks of demods, the voltage is then read off after passing though a few amplifiers and processed to give the TID info.
So, now you know!
 
Great information...I haven't seen anything about this before yet today there is a post on a Minelab forum mentioning that the Explorer uses a modified pulse technology.
 
While everything you are saying maybe true what part of the Explorer is based on PI Technology. I always thought the main thing that set PI's apart from VLF's is that on a PI the Transmitter is turned off while the receiver on but on a VLF the receiver and transmitter are both on all the time whihc is what gives the PI it's big advantage in highly mineralized conditions. The Explorer doesn't act like any PI that I have ever used but does act like the VLF's that I have been using for years.
HH
Beachcomber
 
You mention people are shying away from the Explorer because fo mistrust of Minelab. Seems liek they are cutting off thier noses to spite thier face. Since whatever technology they are using it works extremely well!!!
You want to talk about mistrust and misleading the public just look at Garretts latest ad touting the Infinium LS as a 96 frequency multifrequency detector. In a big full two page ad they only mention that it is a PI in one very short sentence that unless you are reading very closely you will easily miss.
HH
Beachcomber
 
The Explorer does not detect gold chains or wire gold(native) like a P I (remember those "invisible gold" P I discussions). These are readily detected with a VLF but not a P I or Ex. I have always wondered why Minelab's Explorer and P I units had this same characteristic. Perhaps this hybrid theory can explain this.
George
 
I always thought that was just a characteristic of Multifrequency machines as the Fisher CZ's won't pick that stuff up either and they use Fourier Domain Signal Processing. It seems that most detectors that work well around the saltwater have problems with gold chains and other small gold items. However the Explorer when set up properly is able to detect smaller gold chains and jewelry on a Saltwater beach in the wet sand and water than any of the other detectors I have used over the years. Once you set a single frequency VLF's Discrimination high enough to eliminate the salt response a lot of gold chains and other small gold items become undetectable!!!
HH
Beachcomber
 
have this problem with gold chains or wire gold outside of a beach environment? I am not a beach hunter but a nugget hunter. Here in Colorado we have areas which are famous for wire gold. Some good sized gold specimens which give incredible responses at 10" with my X-5 and CMT are undetectable with the Explorer or any P I unit.
It would be interesting to see if a Cz would be able to detect these specimens.
George
 
I think the CZ would have an edge over the Explorer depending on your mineralization. The CZ's have a Salt/Normal switch on them. In the Salt mode they lose a lot of thier sensitivity to small gold. They still aren't great on small gold even in normal mode but still better than in the salt mode. However if you are hunting in heavy mineralized areas you may need to use the Salt mode of the CZ in order to ground balance it properly. Like you I hunt for gold in all shapes and sizes just I do it at the beach, in the Ocean and in Lakes. My favorite machine for the lakes is the X-5 because of it's sensitivity to gold and the ability to find the gold that all the others leave behind. Still it would be interesting to see how a CZ does on the types of gold that you search for!
HH
Beachcomber
 
While the Exp uses a digital transmit waveform, the receiver uses synchronous samplers, which is a phase-analysis technique, not time-domain. Therefore, I don't really see any similarities to a PI. It's the same as other VLF's, except for the transmit signal.
--Carl
 
Beachcomber,
Fishers use two filters, seperate off the 15KHZ and the 5KHz, then process then using TWO metal detectors in the same box. At least the CZ-5 and CZ-7 do.
Not sure how the CZ-3D does it. Might use a signal processor, haven't pulled on apart yet. May well be one of the AMD devices as they are low power consumption for high throughput.
 
Garrett, Fisher and Minelab.
Three makes I wouldn't touch with a barge-pole. They're all full of s#*t. Making so many false claims about their products, all to "kid" the consumer that they have the "Latest new fangled, impressive sounding, same old thing as last time"!!
They must think we're all stupid or something, and I for one won't buy ANYTHING from any one who insults my intelligence, by TRYING to be clever.
 
Whites Eagle Spectrum for inland. Laser (Tesoro) for medieval and Roman silver, Goldquest on deep sand, Atlantis Imperator (modified) for deep cache hunting. Extensively modified Sovereign XS2-a (waterproofed, re-stemmed, and a lighter own design 10" head) for wet sane. So I guess I DO use a Minelab, but only because I haven't got my DFX sussed yet <img src="/metal/html/wink.gif" border=0 width=15 height=15 alt=";)"> .
The Spectrum matches the Explorer for depth and beats it for finds rate over here in the UK, but as we don't really have anything approaching the mineralisation you guys in the US have, no surprise there.
The ONLY place Minelab scores is where you have really bad ground. Anywhere else like on ploughsoil, I can bury any Minelab machine, and do so every time our club goes out on a hunt.
Garret, well...Nice looking, well made, but just don't seem to perform very well over here in the UK, and as for Fisher, sorry guys, they like iron too much, and are now very poorly rated, or so it seems, over here in the UK.
 
Hi Sean,
Interesting how different machines do better in differnt locations. All depends on the type of target, mineralization, electrical interference, etc.
I totally agree with you on the marketing hype, but I would not put myself off of a machine that works for me just because of advertising. My specialty is nugget detecting along with a bit of everything else. If you took away my Fisher Gold Bug 2, Minelab GP 3000, and Garrett Infinium the only nugget detector I would have left is my White's MXT! It is a good detector, but certainly no match for the Gold Bug 2 for small gold, and no match for the PI units for performance in the worst mineralized conditions.
Best of luck to you in the UK. I hope to hunt for gold coins there someday.
Steve Herschbach
 
Hi George,
I live in Colorado also and I really need to test my modified GQ clone on the Colorado wire gold you mentioned. I suspect my PI will detect much of it.
Unfortunately, most of this gold is found on private property which I do not have access to. As such, I haven't found any, so I have not been able to check it.
I have tested my PI on John B's special gold that is "invisible" to most PI's and after a few mods, I was able to detect it with a decent signal. This gold is much like the wire gold you mentioned.
Fortunately, I have a friend who might have some of the Colo wire gold I might be able to use for testing. If so, I will let you know how it works out.
Reg
 
have you heard anything about those German discriminating P Is we saw posted on some earlier
threads(Digger, Klondike)?
Like Steve I would love to have one of those UK detecting vacations.
Thanks George
 
Well, if any of you are over here in the UK anytime in the future, drop me an email via my website and you're more than welcome to come detecting with me. <img src="/metal/html/smile.gif" border=0 width=15 height=15 alt=":)">
I extend this to anyone who's on this forum. I'm not protective of my sites, and I think it's great when a fellow detectorist get to make a good find.
Roman, Medieval, modern, I 've got the lot, let's go dig some up. <img src="/metal/html/wink.gif" border=0 width=15 height=15 alt=";)">
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top