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.
Nox coin ring video
- Thread starter KyJoe
- Start date
sgoss66
Well-known member
littlenugget --
While I haven't tested enough to be sure, the "on-edge" problem is largely confined to LARGE targets. Small coins, like dimes, and also GOLD rings, will read well on-edge, with the Equinox. So it really is a rather small number of in-ground targets we are talking about here...
Steve
While I haven't tested enough to be sure, the "on-edge" problem is largely confined to LARGE targets. Small coins, like dimes, and also GOLD rings, will read well on-edge, with the Equinox. So it really is a rather small number of in-ground targets we are talking about here...
Steve
littlenugget said:"Minor" weakness of Equinox ????? What?????? well if i buy Nox good bye to big old silver rings and maybe , some big silver coins
Again this seems to only be a problem mostly with park 1 and field 1.. park 2 hit rings just fine on edge as does field 2 and if thats not enough just use a single frequency in p1,p2,f1,f2.
sgoss66 said:
The reason I say this, is that any conductor I have (ring - coin) at a clad quarter conductivity is causing the vdi to drop or wrap to non-ferrous 1-5. The 1 oz silver bars cause a wrap if stacked to a ferrous -1 to -6 and a single silver bar will hit fairly clean at 37-38, all this on edge of-course. So its a bit odd that a lower conductor (quarter conductivity 30-35) would wrap further around than a silver one oz bar or two for that matter, all the way into the non-ferrous 1-5.
Edit: A clad quarter will hit and ID correctly on edge but my silver ring that comes in at 31 lying flat will drop to 1-8 with bouncy vdi.. seems like its something to do with conductors in the 31+ range.
I did some testing awhile back when Steve mentioned it on another forum..
My testing showed that dimes and small thin silver rings were not a problem.
Silver Quarters, Halves and medium to large silver rings standing on edge did not fare well at all..
Real bad!
I’m not losing sleep over it because the Equinox has surprised me a bit on my first few hours of use..
I think it does need to be addressed by Minelab though.. It might be fixable with a software update..
While their at it maybe they will calibrate the depth meter to a penny instead of a quarter..
The depth meter needs some work for sure.. They know how to make one work because they are fantastic on the
E-Trac and CTX..
Bryan
My testing showed that dimes and small thin silver rings were not a problem.
Silver Quarters, Halves and medium to large silver rings standing on edge did not fare well at all..
Real bad!
I’m not losing sleep over it because the Equinox has surprised me a bit on my first few hours of use..
I think it does need to be addressed by Minelab though.. It might be fixable with a software update..
While their at it maybe they will calibrate the depth meter to a penny instead of a quarter..
The depth meter needs some work for sure.. They know how to make one work because they are fantastic on the
E-Trac and CTX..
Bryan
sgoss66
Well-known member
TN Mike --
You might be "mis-understanding" wrap-around a bit. Think of the VDI scale as a "circle," not a line. If you have a rusty nail, for instance, that is reading -9 on a machine with a -9 to 40 scale, sometimes the iron will "high tone," right? As I understand it, what's happening is that instead of reading -9 (the lowest ID), on some sweeps it goes "one lower" -- which actually then becomes a 40 ID (again, think circular). In this case, it's the other way around, with a high conductor. If a high conductor goes "too high," it apparently can then end up in the iron range, i.e. -9 or -8 or -7. Now, I can't swear that this is exactly what is going on here, with my ring, but in terms of understanding "wrap around," this is essentially how "wrap around" works to the best of my knowledge. Again, think "circular" ID scale, versus linear...
Steve
You might be "mis-understanding" wrap-around a bit. Think of the VDI scale as a "circle," not a line. If you have a rusty nail, for instance, that is reading -9 on a machine with a -9 to 40 scale, sometimes the iron will "high tone," right? As I understand it, what's happening is that instead of reading -9 (the lowest ID), on some sweeps it goes "one lower" -- which actually then becomes a 40 ID (again, think circular). In this case, it's the other way around, with a high conductor. If a high conductor goes "too high," it apparently can then end up in the iron range, i.e. -9 or -8 or -7. Now, I can't swear that this is exactly what is going on here, with my ring, but in terms of understanding "wrap around," this is essentially how "wrap around" works to the best of my knowledge. Again, think "circular" ID scale, versus linear...
Steve
sgoss66
Well-known member
OK, one more video, a tad bit more testing. Someone in a youtube comment asked about turning it not flat, not vertical, but 45 degress.
SO, I did a video where I ran 3 additional tests.
1.) 45 degree angle on the ring. (hint -- MUCH better response)
2.) Ring back to vertical/on edge, Iron Bias run to maximum (which should favor an iron ID) and then to minimum (which should favor a non-ferrous ID). (hint -- just as expected, much better response on the vertical/on-edge ring with iron bias at min. versus at max).
3.) Ring at vertical/on edge, sweep direction across the "short axis" of the ring (as in all the other videos), and then turning 90 degrees and sweeping across the "long axis" of the ring. (hint -- MUCH better response when sweeping across the "long axis.")
Summary -- the WORST read on my silver ring comes with it PERFECTLY vertical/on edge, sweeping the SHORT axis, with iron bias MAXIMIZED. ANY deviation from this "worst case scenario" gives much better -- even in some cases "diggable" -- response on the ring. Less "vertical" orientation of the ring, lower iron bias, or sweeping the long axis of the on-edge ring all improve the response substantially.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lc3wDTb3paI
Steve
SO, I did a video where I ran 3 additional tests.
1.) 45 degree angle on the ring. (hint -- MUCH better response)
2.) Ring back to vertical/on edge, Iron Bias run to maximum (which should favor an iron ID) and then to minimum (which should favor a non-ferrous ID). (hint -- just as expected, much better response on the vertical/on-edge ring with iron bias at min. versus at max).
3.) Ring at vertical/on edge, sweep direction across the "short axis" of the ring (as in all the other videos), and then turning 90 degrees and sweeping across the "long axis" of the ring. (hint -- MUCH better response when sweeping across the "long axis.")
Summary -- the WORST read on my silver ring comes with it PERFECTLY vertical/on edge, sweeping the SHORT axis, with iron bias MAXIMIZED. ANY deviation from this "worst case scenario" gives much better -- even in some cases "diggable" -- response on the ring. Less "vertical" orientation of the ring, lower iron bias, or sweeping the long axis of the on-edge ring all improve the response substantially.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lc3wDTb3paI
Steve
I'm thinking of wrap around the same as you. The problem I'm seeing is, is that a silver quarter is reading a vdi of 1-7 non ferrous on edge and will bounce into the 20's at the edge of the coil. A silver quarter comes in at 30-31 while laying flat. That would be a wrap around of 21-27. A amex one ounce silver bar come in at 37-38 and on edge parallel to the coil and hardly if at all wraps around. And if on edge width wise to the coil will drop to a 25 vdi. Stacking two of these bars on edge parallel to the coil causes a -8 to -9 vdi, thats a wrap around of 10-11, less than half that of a silver quarter which shouldn't wrap around further than two one ounce silver bars stacked. Hopefully I explained clearly and sorry for any confusion.
sgoss66
Well-known member
Mike --
I still think you might be confused. Here's why I think that...
First of all, an item should not "wrap" multiple digits (like 10 or 20 digits). Perhaps a couple at most? Like, a -9 target might "wrap" to a 40 or MAYBE 39, or a -8 target might "wrap" to a 40. As I understand it, it's no different than the "bounce" you see on any other target; for instance, a quarter that is a "30" in an air test might read 29 and 31 on successive sweeps. The quarter is "bouncing" by one digit up, or one down. Likewise on a nail; if a nail that air tests as -9 "bounces up" by one digit, it would read -8, but if it "bounces down" by one, it would want to read "-10," but since it can't read "-10" it reads 40. That's how I understand "iron wrap" to work.
Second, it wouldn't be correct to speak of "wrap-around" when referring to the ID value of one target, as compared to the ID value of a different target (one silver bar's ID value compared to the ID of two silver bars stacked together), or targets of different orientation (a flat quarter's ID compared to a vertical quarter's ID). Wrap around refers to the "bounce" that occurs on successive sweeps of the same target, on occasions that -- due to the target's ID being very close to the "end" of the ID scale -- happens to push the ID past the "end" of the scale and thus "around" to the "other end" of the scale (the circular thing).
Now, one thing that needs to be said here, is that in my "simplified" examples above, where a -9 nail reads either -8 or 40 on some sweeps, is referring to a SINGLE FREQUENCY VLF machine's behavior. It is MUCH more complex in Multi-IQ. If you notice, the ring I was sweeping vertically in my video tonight, where I ran it with no disc, was reading sometimes in the -7/-8/-9 range, OR ELSE, on the few higher-tone "chirps," they were usually in the teens or 20s -- NOT in the high 30s, like you might otherwise expect (the "bounce by a couple of digits" thing, I was describing above). Part of the reason for that, I think, is because you are getting multiple reads of the target from multiple different frequencies when running multi-freq. mode, and so what a target "IDs" as, is determined by algorithms that are MUCH more complex than the ID algorithms of a single-freq. machine. They HAVE to be, as the machine has to "reconcile" all the different numbers from ALL the different frequencies, to come up with the "probable target ID." I think what is going on with the Equinox is A.) more complex than the "simple" wrap-around that you get on a single-freq. unit, and B.) also due not only to possible "wrap around," but also to the complexities of the algorithms trying to decipher and ID what is going on under the coil, given the multi-frequency interrogation of each target that is happening "simultaneously" on the Equinox.
Clearly, I am speculating here, as I don't know exactly how the Equinox works, but I think, based on the little bit of understanding that I DO have, that I'm probably not WAY far off the mark...and besides, I DID stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night! LOL!
Steve
I still think you might be confused. Here's why I think that...
First of all, an item should not "wrap" multiple digits (like 10 or 20 digits). Perhaps a couple at most? Like, a -9 target might "wrap" to a 40 or MAYBE 39, or a -8 target might "wrap" to a 40. As I understand it, it's no different than the "bounce" you see on any other target; for instance, a quarter that is a "30" in an air test might read 29 and 31 on successive sweeps. The quarter is "bouncing" by one digit up, or one down. Likewise on a nail; if a nail that air tests as -9 "bounces up" by one digit, it would read -8, but if it "bounces down" by one, it would want to read "-10," but since it can't read "-10" it reads 40. That's how I understand "iron wrap" to work.
Second, it wouldn't be correct to speak of "wrap-around" when referring to the ID value of one target, as compared to the ID value of a different target (one silver bar's ID value compared to the ID of two silver bars stacked together), or targets of different orientation (a flat quarter's ID compared to a vertical quarter's ID). Wrap around refers to the "bounce" that occurs on successive sweeps of the same target, on occasions that -- due to the target's ID being very close to the "end" of the ID scale -- happens to push the ID past the "end" of the scale and thus "around" to the "other end" of the scale (the circular thing).
Now, one thing that needs to be said here, is that in my "simplified" examples above, where a -9 nail reads either -8 or 40 on some sweeps, is referring to a SINGLE FREQUENCY VLF machine's behavior. It is MUCH more complex in Multi-IQ. If you notice, the ring I was sweeping vertically in my video tonight, where I ran it with no disc, was reading sometimes in the -7/-8/-9 range, OR ELSE, on the few higher-tone "chirps," they were usually in the teens or 20s -- NOT in the high 30s, like you might otherwise expect (the "bounce by a couple of digits" thing, I was describing above). Part of the reason for that, I think, is because you are getting multiple reads of the target from multiple different frequencies when running multi-freq. mode, and so what a target "IDs" as, is determined by algorithms that are MUCH more complex than the ID algorithms of a single-freq. machine. They HAVE to be, as the machine has to "reconcile" all the different numbers from ALL the different frequencies, to come up with the "probable target ID." I think what is going on with the Equinox is A.) more complex than the "simple" wrap-around that you get on a single-freq. unit, and B.) also due not only to possible "wrap around," but also to the complexities of the algorithms trying to decipher and ID what is going on under the coil, given the multi-frequency interrogation of each target that is happening "simultaneously" on the Equinox.
Clearly, I am speculating here, as I don't know exactly how the Equinox works, but I think, based on the little bit of understanding that I DO have, that I'm probably not WAY far off the mark...and besides, I DID stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night! LOL!
Steve
looks like we have the quattro, going to have to wait 10+ years for the etrac, there was always going to be these problems with new multi.
this detector hasn't made me go wow yet, but in its price range its not bad.
hasn't made my old spots new again but has picked a few oldies out so will give it some time and me some time to see how it does in to the future...
this detector hasn't made me go wow yet, but in its price range its not bad.
hasn't made my old spots new again but has picked a few oldies out so will give it some time and me some time to see how it does in to the future...
Fishers Ghost
New member
Maybe I am missing something here?? These iffy responses to coins and rings edge on to the coil is how all vlf and Pi metal detector react..
Old or modern makes no difference. Edge on coins and rings will very often sound off when the coil is not centred over the target, making pinpointing difficult The target will be a few inches away from where you think it is.
Higher frequency machines seem to give better results to edge on coins etc but the signal will still be a bit choppy and TID will be a bit off.
When you get this type of signal it is a good idea to move the coil around the target and approach from several different angles. There will be a position that produces a strong sharp signal and correct TID
Old or modern makes no difference. Edge on coins and rings will very often sound off when the coil is not centred over the target, making pinpointing difficult The target will be a few inches away from where you think it is.
Higher frequency machines seem to give better results to edge on coins etc but the signal will still be a bit choppy and TID will be a bit off.
When you get this type of signal it is a good idea to move the coil around the target and approach from several different angles. There will be a position that produces a strong sharp signal and correct TID
This what I am saying also that in most cases you wont see this happen, but those that have many silver targets or thicker ones may not read, maybe read but jumping all over and broken up. The same test on 3 different detectors with almost the same results and when I did this test a few years back the Explorers and E-Trac did the same thing, so I feel this is something that all the better detector seem to do. Try it yourself with your detector by running a roll of quarters across the coil and you will see it wont hit on it, or broken up signal. I feel it is something like to do with the the Eddie current bouncing off off the target and not receiving as it suppose to.
Try with the roll of quarters, then with only 2 quarters and keep adding one at a time and see how many before it nulls or breaks up.
Rick
Try with the roll of quarters, then with only 2 quarters and keep adding one at a time and see how many before it nulls or breaks up.
Rick
sgoss66
Well-known member
Not ALL machines are struggling as much as the Equinox is, with my coin ring. I ran this very same ring, very same dirt, very same hole, with my CTX 3030. It BANGED it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eOfaPrRVMwY
Now, I do agree that many detectors will struggle with on-edge coins, and I agree that "stacks" of coins can present difficulties too. But my coin ring, on edge, just inches from the coil, would not have been expected (IMO) to present as much difficulty to the Equinox as it does.
Again, NOT bashing the machine, but pointing out what I consider a bit of an "oddity" in its DNA...
Steve
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eOfaPrRVMwY
Now, I do agree that many detectors will struggle with on-edge coins, and I agree that "stacks" of coins can present difficulties too. But my coin ring, on edge, just inches from the coil, would not have been expected (IMO) to present as much difficulty to the Equinox as it does.
Again, NOT bashing the machine, but pointing out what I consider a bit of an "oddity" in its DNA...
Steve
Fishers Ghost
New member
After working my way through approx 58 different metal detectors all of which produce clipped signals for on edge round, rectangular and wire shaped bits and pieces, you might think that in these days of high technology that it would be a simple matter to average these clipped signals and produce a single tone that represents an average of the mixed tones that would also be an accurate representation of the type of metal detected. This can in fact be done. I think that Tesoro made a tecta that did exactly that. I don't recall which model it was. But those clipped tones actually give a lot of info to the detector operator that results in a better indication of the possible target ID.
There will be times when an averaging cct will fail to ID correctly especially with rusty/ferrous items that can bang the TID from one end of the scale to the other.
I do agree that the Equinox should be expected to do a bit better than what it seems to be doing for oddly orientated targets. The only people likely to be irritated by these clipped signals will be those more experienced detectorists. Newbies will think it is normal, which I guess it is.
Just some thoughts.
There will be times when an averaging cct will fail to ID correctly especially with rusty/ferrous items that can bang the TID from one end of the scale to the other.
I do agree that the Equinox should be expected to do a bit better than what it seems to be doing for oddly orientated targets. The only people likely to be irritated by these clipped signals will be those more experienced detectorists. Newbies will think it is normal, which I guess it is.
Just some thoughts.
