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

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.

Super Detector....I doubt it!

C

Cody

New member
When we talk about how deep are we going to go with hobby detectors there is a basic problem no matter what type we use. These detectors do not transmit a signal such as a Doppler radar so that there is no limit as long as we increase the power in how far the signal extends from the coil. On a very fundamental level there are electrical and magnetic lines of force that are in phase and enforce to propagate the signal or they are out of phase and do not propagate the signal such as a Doppler radar signal. It does not make any difference if it is pulse induction or sine wave induction. Like the electromagnetic waves perpendicular to the direction of current flow in our house wiring the signal only expands outward and then collapses to a very short distance from the wire.

However, as I understand the problem, if we drive the coil real hard the magnetic properties of the soil can be magnetized and retain the magnetism for a short period of time. What this does primarily is drive the ground rejection/ground balance nuts so we no longer can eliminate soil minerals effectively. These fundamental limitation to detection of metal targets due to the induction of eddy currents into the target is why I don
 
...because I could sure use one that gets about 6-12 inches more depth with the same competent level of target discrimination that the Explorer has.

I believe science and engineering have always figured out ways to overcome their limitations. Therefore, I will continue to use my EX, but look for that triple D (deeper discriminating detector) to come out someday.

Never say never.

Mike
 
Mike, I feel exactly as you. I have been at this for 46 years as I said and have no intentions of not looking for something better. I have wondered at a "aid" to what we already have. These are just thought that run through my mind with no serious consideration. I have wondered about using a batter and two electrodes to "excite" the electrons of a metal target to make them more detectable. I see this as something to do around an old tree as this would be limited. It sort of like the heater voltage on the cathode of an electron tube so when a signal is applied the tube conducts more easily.

Anyhow getting past soil minerals appears to be a major problem to magnetics. I think the field is there but we are not able to make use of the ultra deep faint signals nearly as good as we need to.

I realize that there may be a detector on the shelf just waiting to send all of us into a feeding frenzy at the right time so what I am saying should be taken with a grain of salt. I know I reference patents a lot but I am the type that deals with the science of electronics and magnetism as I understand them. No matter how well I learn to use a hobby detector it is limited to how good of a detector we have available.

I very honestly could care less who manufactures the super detector as I will be on one like a duck on a bug the second it hits the market.
 
I think the EX2 is very close to that today. I just dug a 1918-D wheat and an 1889 dime in the same hole on Sunday at a measured 11 inches, using a Coiltek coil. And I had a witness. That depth meter was just a fine line at the bottom.

Unfortunately, this location dates much farther back, to the mid-1800's. I have dug a plated copper fork at 15 inches here, so I know there are deeper coins. Just can't pick 'em up.
 
Hi Cody!

Do you know of, or can you find out for me:surrender:'What is the legal MAX. power one can employ in a metal detector's search-field? (in the USA):usaflag:
 
Whilst on the subject of the elusive super detector, and the reference to the EXP II, prompts me to comment, and ask the question.

The EXP II has the potential (Theoretically) to be one of the best examples of innovative design, of the past 40 years of the hobby.

Presently, its main claim to fame is its sensitivity and 'two parameter' Digital VDI.

In my professional opinion, the EXP II's 'accuracy' only extends to a range dictated roughly by the diameter of the head used. (and target size dependent). After that it is governed by the total noise factor of soil and environment.
In other words it to is limited to behaving within the laws of physics, as are all other metal detectors.

I admire the Minelab designers methodology of signal processing.

Alas, I think there is a flaw (or limitation) in their display routine, whereby the display does not accurately reflect the responsiveness of the audio accuracy.

Also, I suspect the method used to ground cancel, creates a dilemma in areas of heavy ferrous contamination.

That said, I wonder now if they have reached the limit of their ability to improve matters? (I THINK NOT), but in the meantime why have they reverted to SINGLE frequency detectors again?

They made great play in denigrating the principle when others use it.

WHY CHANGE NOW?

Well,they claim some 'new' technology.
V-FLEX..........."Oh no". "Not again".....Please, spare me.

Why this advertising crap, all over again?

Say it simply....Please.

Lower noise?

Digitisation at the search-head?

Come on Minelab....You have good design engineers...So why do you need the advertising department's gimmicks?

In the market, PERFORMANCE WILL SELL ITSELF......MattR.UK.

............................

TO ALL THOSE WISHING FOR A SUPER DETECTOR.

USING TODAYS PRINCIPLES OF 'NEAR-FIELDS' MAGNETIC SEARCH FLUX, THEN ACCURATE DISCRIMINATING IS DEPTH LIMITED MAINLY BY:-
TARGET SIZE,
HEAD DIAMETER and DESIGN,
FREQUENCY USED,
The POWER EMPLOYED to drive it.
MOST IMPORTANTLY..THE TOTAL NOISE FACTOR...Be it within the electronics of the unit, or the environment, or the soil itself.


There are factors which can electro-chemically enhance some targets.
This in turn enlarges their electrical image, hence improves their detectorbility....The HALO effect (Anyone who denies that, is simply ignorant).

Then there is the final frontier...

How deep a hole are you prepared to dig, in search of an unknown object? Well?....I suppose, its as deep, as you're hopes are high!

Good luck......for it favours the those who try the hardest!
 
MattR,

No matter how we season elephant stew it is still elephant stew. The Explorer and all hobby detectors I know of are as you state limited to behaving within the laws of physics. This I think is most misunderstood by users of these fun little machines. A search head has an electromagnetic field that will extend only to a specific distance based on power and size of the head. A disturbance in the field is measured and presented to the user. That is our elephant like it or not and we will always have elephant stew no matter how we keep changing the seasoning.

You know the Explorer is pulse induction so I can talk of that with you and not have to go through the routine of wondering why an engineer or technician cannot recognize pulse induction. In my opinion Minelab went the wrong direction from the Sovereign to the Explorer. They should have gone to three frequencies but instead opened the door to the DFX. I suspect the limitation of adjustments on the Explorer has to do with the time domain implementation of pulse induction whereas the DFX uses frequency domain and presents the data in graph form. I see the X-terra is some kind of correction and wonder when we will see a more practical three or so frequency implementation of pulse induction but something between 3khz and 20khz for those of us that are not interested in nuggets shooting. For the ones that are then a three frequency between 30khz and 60khz.

Ground canceling would be improved as would be the signal to noise ration which I think is the actual major problem. It is not how deep the field penetrates the soil but those coins that refuse to be nice and flat and the size of a silver dollar. Those dimes seem want to bee at an angle and present a very weak signal. I looked into the obvious of why not drive the coil with more power and my understanding is hobby detector are not limited by the US Government. The limitation are, according to one design engineer for a major manufacture, is tests have shown more power than what is presently being used does not significantly improve detection. It has to do with how soil minerals respond to the field in that the magnetic domain can be retain alignment and cause serious problems. I understand a major design principle of the Explorer to be not driving the domain into permanent so the retention is too long of a period of time.

Low noise is in my opinion the primary reason for single frequency since that is the major problem with wide band. I cannot believe that the digitization of the search-head is for no more than to change coils although I see this as an alternative to simply manufacturing another DFX similar type detector. My opinion again is that they should and use time domain instead of single frequency in three different models. That looks to me like the bottom line of if we cannot sell it in a single box due to cost and the current line up then break it down into three boxes that cost less and use single frequency.

Let me post your summary because all of us need to burn this into our thinking.

 
Yes, it was used heavily in that area and others. I installed electronic equipment throughout Vietnam so was exposed in 68-69. It took a while for the problems to reach a point where I knew something was seriously wrong. It took the government a good 30 years to admit their mistake and the VA about the same length of time to take any real steps to do something about it.
 
Thanks be to God with only a vision and hearing problem. Have you used any of the newer Excellerator, I just order the 14" for the Explorer.
 
I was one of those that didn't believe in Nam, and I was wrong. 3,000,000 people were slaughtered when we pulled out, yet Hanoi Jane et al, NEVER said one single word about it.

I don't want this thread to take on a separate life debating wars etc. I just wanted to thank ALL of you vietnam vets for your service. You guys were abused by many of your fellow americans when you returned. While I was safely here in America (the draft missed me twice in 71 and 72) I apologize to you as a group for the mean spirited, uninformed idiots that spoke harshly to you (if we can do it to slaves, we can apologize to our vets)
 
[quote MattR]Whilst on the subject of the elusive super detector, and the reference to the EXP II, prompts me to comment, and ask the question.
...
Come on Minelab....You have good design engineers...So why do you need the advertising department's gimmicks?
...
In the market, PERFORMANCE WILL SELL ITSELF......MattR.UK.
[/quote]

For the same reasons Fisher HYPED ,and continues to hype the ID Edge.
TO SELL MACHINES.
I agree that performance WILL dictate whether or not a machine CONTINUES to sell well, but it's the nature of the system to hype every new machine, get them firld tested by well known people (ALWAYS on previously cleaned out sites), to get them out the door, isn't it? Even as a relative newbie, maybe I'm already just a sceptical of fart, but it sure seems to be the same pattern over and over, with marginal real performance gains.
Just my 2 cents (not even Wheaties).
Tagamet
 
According to Thomas Dankowski of Fisher Research the max legal power regulated by the FCC is 100 milliwatts. For any metal detector.
 
I love the 12 inch coils on open areas of pasture land and beaches , the hotshot has AMAZED me completely on some of the depths i have pulled coins out from with this superb coil - totally amazing DEPTH!!!!. - this is the gospel truth 2 -3 inches of extra depth on medium sized coins Easy. So if you want more depth on low mineralised open areas buy a bigger coil . Getting coin hits with reasonably accurate target id at 10 - 12 inches is superb and coins over a foot deep can be found with this amazing coil . I really get excited when out with the hotshot as i can suck some super deep coins out of ANY worked out grassland site that is not loaded with trash or iron. If the site is trashy or mineralised then the hotshot should be kept tucked up nice and warm in the house because its hates trashy and even moderate amounts of iron.
 
Hello Matt, in my humble opinion, the reason for the offering of a single frequency detector, with the capability of outputting three different frequencies, is to attempt to solve the age old problem of needing more than one machine for coins, jewelry, relics, and small gold nugget hunting. Makes perfect sense to me to be able to change up to three different coils, with the machine autosensing which is attached, and thus change frequencies for the type of target being hunted. Seems to me that is the perfect down scale innovation, and I applaud the engineering and the marketing departments for their creativity. I use the EXP II almost exclusively, but I have many very happy customers who have purchased the new VFLEX (variable frequency flexibility) X-Terra-70 for just the reason the manufacturer intended. The icing on the cake, is a fine detector at a more mid-range price. This kind of ingenuity has been sorely needed in the industry.
Happy Hunting......Chuck......Treasure Hut. :beers:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top