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
Question on T2..What is the difference in 5 and revision 6 modes models..Thanks
- Thread starter Elton
- Start date
due to adding bottle cap junk and DP tones........Things I could definately do without. Maybe a coinshooter would like a 6 to help with bottle caps. I'd like to have a 5 instead.....any coin hunters wanna trade? 
My T2 needs to go back for a split handgrip & I'd love to ask them to make mine a 5 again, but I highly doubt they would ever do that, for me especially since I'm not the quiet good soldier they'd like me to be
My T2 needs to go back for a split handgrip & I'd love to ask them to make mine a 5 again, but I highly doubt they would ever do that, for me especially since I'm not the quiet good soldier they'd like me to be LilloEsquilo
New member
Hi Bill, when you say a huge depth loss, are you kidding? Has anyone compared the versions head to head to find out if this is really true? Or was that just sarcasm?
I have the R6 version, and if the R5 is significantly deeper, you'd need a backhoe to get down to the goodies. I've used the top of the line Minelabs around here, and I can't say I've noticed any drop off in depth using the R6 T2.
So I'm just curious if anyone has actually tested the machines and verified this or if you're just kidding us.
And yeah I'm sure they'd LOVE for you to be the good soldier and parrot the party line, good for business and all, but you know what, to hell with that, if you don't work there, you don't have to blow your lungs out singing the company song every morning and give the SS salute to the picture of the CEO You can get those fun and games at any corporation in America, why do it for your hobby too? Good for you for keeping it real man.
I have the R6 version, and if the R5 is significantly deeper, you'd need a backhoe to get down to the goodies. I've used the top of the line Minelabs around here, and I can't say I've noticed any drop off in depth using the R6 T2.
So I'm just curious if anyone has actually tested the machines and verified this or if you're just kidding us.
And yeah I'm sure they'd LOVE for you to be the good soldier and parrot the party line, good for business and all, but you know what, to hell with that, if you don't work there, you don't have to blow your lungs out singing the company song every morning and give the SS salute to the picture of the CEO
You can get those fun and games at any corporation in America, why do it for your hobby too? Good for you for keeping it real man.
Ed in SoDak
Member
JMHO, but I don't think adding a tone or modifying an existing tone would affect depth at all. Detection and ID are separate circuits from the audio portion. There were a few of us early owners who complained of excessive interference near powerlines, but I don't believe our opinions were given much weight. But if they did choose to address this issue, it's conceivable that overall gain may have been reduced in order to reduce interference falsing,
I have an "upgraded" T2. When purchased, it was r5, I had it upgraded to r6 while having a coil replaced that had a loose internal connection. While I mentioned electrical interference, I don't think my unit behaved any differently after the upgrade, it still falses in air in the same two areas that it did before the upgrade. Nor do I believe that I lost any depth of detection.
Who knows for certain, other than Tek, what was changed in the r5 to r6 versions. There's bound to be differences from one unit to the next, just considering variations in individual parts and components, which are often manufactured with tolerances of 10% or greater, as far as the actual resistance or capacitance or gain of a device might measure. So this alone is bound to inject some variability between one machine and the next, all other things being equal. Good final tuning procedures might mitigate some of this, but every tuning job might be a little variable also. To account for this, manufacturers usually specify performance at the lower end of this bell curve, but again, we don't know the actual tolerance for the T2's specs.
All I know is with my limited experience digging deep targets, I did not notice any immediately discernible loss of depth of detection or reduced sensitivity at shallower depths. Could some other variable be at fault? I've read the upgrade is mostly software, but also a few parts may have been changed. This may be where to look, as it injects the extra variability of parts tolerance and factory re-tuning accuracy.
Anybody else who's been through the upgrade notice anything??
-Ed
I have an "upgraded" T2. When purchased, it was r5, I had it upgraded to r6 while having a coil replaced that had a loose internal connection. While I mentioned electrical interference, I don't think my unit behaved any differently after the upgrade, it still falses in air in the same two areas that it did before the upgrade. Nor do I believe that I lost any depth of detection.
Who knows for certain, other than Tek, what was changed in the r5 to r6 versions. There's bound to be differences from one unit to the next, just considering variations in individual parts and components, which are often manufactured with tolerances of 10% or greater, as far as the actual resistance or capacitance or gain of a device might measure. So this alone is bound to inject some variability between one machine and the next, all other things being equal. Good final tuning procedures might mitigate some of this, but every tuning job might be a little variable also. To account for this, manufacturers usually specify performance at the lower end of this bell curve, but again, we don't know the actual tolerance for the T2's specs.
All I know is with my limited experience digging deep targets, I did not notice any immediately discernible loss of depth of detection or reduced sensitivity at shallower depths. Could some other variable be at fault? I've read the upgrade is mostly software, but also a few parts may have been changed. This may be where to look, as it injects the extra variability of parts tolerance and factory re-tuning accuracy.
Anybody else who's been through the upgrade notice anything??
-Ed
Ed in SoDak
Member
For the details of what all was changed in the r6 version, check back into the older threads, the question came up frequently and there were some good replies explaining it all.
-Ed
-Ed
Ed in SoDak
Member
Ok, here's the skinny on the r6 update, back on page 55: http://www.findmall.com/read.php?58,318704,318704#msg-318704
Search around the posts from that time frame, it was a hot topic for awhile.
-Ed
Search around the posts from that time frame, it was a hot topic for awhile.
-Ed
The ID range was affected by about 2", (less), on the R6 over the R5. It was enough so that at the time all this took place, it was noticeable to me.
I did not run any depth test on the R5 to the R6. Perhaps if I have the time, I will do it as soon as the weather improves. The weather is so bad at my shop, I had to escape to S. Florida for a week just to feel the heat.
As far as the interference goes, I have not witnessed such that made me feel there was a problem. Any complaints of it were usually caused by a bad coil, or improper settings for the area conditions. It was mainly the coil though.
I have had the T2's apart, and there shielded internally.
Without any mention about it in the manual, different settings in the discriminator circuit could re-adjust the sensitivity setting without you being aware of it. This may be some of the problem with the unit dealing with RF interference.
I did not run any depth test on the R5 to the R6. Perhaps if I have the time, I will do it as soon as the weather improves. The weather is so bad at my shop, I had to escape to S. Florida for a week just to feel the heat.
As far as the interference goes, I have not witnessed such that made me feel there was a problem. Any complaints of it were usually caused by a bad coil, or improper settings for the area conditions. It was mainly the coil though.
I have had the T2's apart, and there shielded internally.Without any mention about it in the manual, different settings in the discriminator circuit could re-adjust the sensitivity setting without you being aware of it. This may be some of the problem with the unit dealing with RF interference.
BuckeyeBrad
New member
I guess I'm at least partially responsible for this perception, so I'll tell the whole story. I bought a new T-2 right when they came out. Of course as we know now, this was the V.5. I had the bad coil thing early on and FT promptly replaced it and the detector worked fine, so much so that it was the detector I used primarily at that time. I liked it so well that when I had the opportunity to buy a nice used T-2, I jumped on it. So now I had two V.5's which performed virtually identically. In fact of the MANY pairs of the same detectors I've had, the only others that were identical was the Shadow X-5's. After time, lo and behold, FT announces the V.6 optional update. I decide to send one of the detectors to them and see how I like it with the new features and to compare to the original. After I got the V.6 back and used it a few hours I concluded the new features were definitely nice but I noted these two T-2's were no longer equal per se. Total depth of detection WAS in fact the same BUT the depth of ID ability was NOT. This seemed most evident in the DP mode but was still less than the V.5 in all other modes including the AM, since we all know the T-2's do ID in all metal. After awhile I decided to check into this and called FT and was connected to The Man himself, Dave. His take was he hadn't heard any similar feedback and that he didn't feel this reduction of ID depth was by design. Now keep in mind this was not long after they'd initially started to perform the V.6 updates and I suspect there weren't many out there yet and God only knows how few users were in the same situation as I, what with one of each versions with well known performance before the update. I suspect not many if any. Since depth of detection was still the same, I never bothered to look into this further. The introduction of the F-75 might have contributed to my not getting to the bottom of this completely. So, it can be one of several possible "realities". One being that V.5's do in fact have more ID depth. Another is maybe my particular V.6 wasn't optimally tuned when the upgrade was done although if that was so, why would it still have the same overall depth of detection? Maybe ID depth is a separate allignment procedure and that was done within or out of spec but whichever, it was definitely less than before and I would/could only be aware and sure of that since I still had the "control" unit, my original V.5. So.... a lot of words but no definite answers. Though inconclusive, I hope it helps.
So, it can be one of several possible "realities". One being that V.5's do in fact have more ID depth. Another is maybe my particular V.6 wasn't optimally tuned when the upgrade was done although if that was so, why would it still have the same overall depth of detection? Maybe ID depth is a separate allignment procedure and that was done within or out of spec but whichever, it was definitely less than before and I would/could only be aware and sure of that since I still had the "control" unit, my original V.5. So.... a lot of words but no definite answers. Though inconclusive, I hope it helps.Scott in ME. He raved about the T2 when he first got his for field hunting here in New England. Was pulling out great stuff.....then was not too happy with the new ones. Mr. Bill had a version 5. If he still does we will do some serious side by side testing once the snow melts. Maybe even a video
or I like more iron number range in heavy iron. But it's a tough call. The F75 really is not that much different, and I have been steering people toward T2's rather than paying a grand for an F75. But, hard to answer until Mr. Bill & I do side by sides with his 5 series & my 6....
Bill
Bill
BuckeyeBrad
New member
Bill's Ver.5 was mine unless he's found another one. 
BuckeyeBrad
New member
I just wanted to add that IMO the difference that I saw between the two T-2's I had as mentioned above ISN'T a big deal. If you have a site that has the potential of fringe depth good targets, chances are you won't be getting reliable, if any, ID readings or tones. Your only shot will be listening for the target in all metal and judge its size, shape, and depth. Both of those detectors were equal in doing that function with the V.6 having more overall flexibility of setups. Those fringe targets will be some of the best that have been missed over the decades of detecting. Please do not take what I said as meaning the V.5 is "better".
Ed in SoDak
Member
Well, I reviewed some of my old posts. I was one of the very first to receive an updated T2 since my machine just happened to be at FT for a new coil the week that R6 was releasd.
At that time I did note that interference was lessened, but not eliminated. I probably did not have enough time with R5 to notice any depth loss. Besides, anything much over 8 inches around here requires a pick. I've tried recovering deep targets over the years and have given up on many as too difficult to retrieve.
The 3b mode was changed to add the "Lift Coil" message. Reading the old posts, it did not seem like they altered the way the mode operated. The dp mode was entirely new. I did not see any new or exchanged parts inside my T2. I had before pictures to compare. The update is installed via a small port beside the chip. The chip itself was not exchanged. Someone at the factory placed a check mark on my chip and the mark was identical after the revision.
Shortly after upgrading my T2 and a few others, Dave J. went on vacation. Another tech took over during Dave's absence, but it was obvious from some older posts that updates around that time were running into some small snags. It's thus conceivable that final tuning may have been a bit more variable. At any rate, it's sounding like we have two R6 units that by their owner's impressions have lost some depth of ID. Without additional info from other users of both revisions, it's hard to say if we're looking at a definitive difference between the two revisions, or just some variation in the individual detectors.
Bill, if you do perform a comparison, also do a coil swap, just to see if it makes a difference. On my unit, it's hard to say if any performance difference was due to the update or the new coil. When did it become apparent to you? Your posts back then, after you had the upgrade performed didn't seem to bring up the issue. But then I didn't reread ALL the old posts, so I may have missed it.
I'm just trying to inject some reasoning into what all the contributing factors might be. By swapping coils, we might help eliminate one. If other people who have used both versions would add their impressions, that would also be a big help.
-Ed
At that time I did note that interference was lessened, but not eliminated. I probably did not have enough time with R5 to notice any depth loss. Besides, anything much over 8 inches around here requires a pick. I've tried recovering deep targets over the years and have given up on many as too difficult to retrieve.
The 3b mode was changed to add the "Lift Coil" message. Reading the old posts, it did not seem like they altered the way the mode operated. The dp mode was entirely new. I did not see any new or exchanged parts inside my T2. I had before pictures to compare. The update is installed via a small port beside the chip. The chip itself was not exchanged. Someone at the factory placed a check mark on my chip and the mark was identical after the revision.
Shortly after upgrading my T2 and a few others, Dave J. went on vacation. Another tech took over during Dave's absence, but it was obvious from some older posts that updates around that time were running into some small snags. It's thus conceivable that final tuning may have been a bit more variable. At any rate, it's sounding like we have two R6 units that by their owner's impressions have lost some depth of ID. Without additional info from other users of both revisions, it's hard to say if we're looking at a definitive difference between the two revisions, or just some variation in the individual detectors.
Bill, if you do perform a comparison, also do a coil swap, just to see if it makes a difference. On my unit, it's hard to say if any performance difference was due to the update or the new coil. When did it become apparent to you? Your posts back then, after you had the upgrade performed didn't seem to bring up the issue. But then I didn't reread ALL the old posts, so I may have missed it.
I'm just trying to inject some reasoning into what all the contributing factors might be. By swapping coils, we might help eliminate one. If other people who have used both versions would add their impressions, that would also be a big help.
-Ed
It can be several reasons that people get different ideas. Lack of experience..which you do not qualify for. LOL
Difference in machines.
Areas used. All machines may not function in every area the same.. Or All machines are not peaked out the same. I had a CZ5 that was very hot, and I had a CZ5 that wasn't...So can of worms "No Sir" Good advice As Sara Palin would say "You Betcha".... Thanks Bill and all who responded.
Difference in machines.Areas used. All machines may not function in every area the same.. Or All machines are not peaked out the same. I had a CZ5 that was very hot, and I had a CZ5 that wasn't...So can of worms "No Sir" Good advice As Sara Palin would say "You Betcha".... Thanks Bill and all who responded.