Welcome! Log In Create A New Profile

Advanced

Just a few comments and a quick correction:

June 28, 2019 10:06PM avatar
Quote
glabelle
I don't do much depth testing anymore, since it is no longer the most important parameter IMO.
For those who still spend a lot of time in public parks, and if they are wide-open with very, very little masking trash, and if they have been well-hunted for many decades, then I will agree there is some merit in wanting to achieve just a wee bit more depth of detection. The Nokta Anfibio Multi, to mention only one of the more modern detectors that impressed me with depth-of-detection, is also another very versatile, General Purpose performing detector and not a more specifically oriented model many choose for deeper high-conductive coins.

For the most part I have ignored all the great cries for Depth, Depth, Depth that we have been hearing since the late 1980's, and especially since the Minelab BBS and FBS models that especially promoted standard 10", 10½" and big open 11" DD coils. I have ignored it for most of the 54+ years I have been detecting because I have concentrated on working in high-debris sites, and especially very dense iron trash targets, such as in challenging RR ghost towns and other old town sites. Similar other places too, like demolition sites, or the left-overs in trashier places like logging camps, mining camps, many homesteads, outbuildings, and high-use recreational sites like old resorts or picnic groves and such that were very popular from the 'teens' through the 'forties' that have an abundance of bottle caps and other ferrous junk.

Good-target masking has left most of the older and desired finds behind and the benefits will be in our favor if we use smaller-size coils and detectors with a quicker response-and-recovery. That gets down to circuitry design with an efficient small coil. Sometimes a Concentric and sometimes a Double-D, all depending on how the coil was designed, and especially how the detector engineer made the detector itself. I own models that can work better with one type of coil than the other.

All of my General Purpose detectors provide me very quick response-and-recovery and handle most of my Test Scenarios quite well. If they didn't they wouldn't be in my Regular-Use Detector Team.


Quote
glabelle
However, I got the 15" coil for a beach trip next month and thought I'd better compare all coils.

Here's some results using the 6", 11" and 15" coils, and my conclusions below. A nickel was buried in my substrate (Play Sand from Lowes).
For those looking to find some sort of 'test medium' that is very consistent, reasonably mineralized to provide some ground mineral challenges, and easy to work with in a 'Test Bed,' I suggest you make yourself a wooden box of adequate size, and get some of this playground sand. You can learn a lot about detector function and in-the-field performance than you might imagine.


Quote
glabelle
1) Park 2, 40KHz, Recovery 1, 2 tones, passes Monte tests.
2) does detect, but gets a shot "blip" rather than a smooth response.
3) Best response, ID's nickel correctly. Passes Monte tests
4) Yes, but IDs as iron
5) FP each mode, noise cancel & ground balance. Test substrate reads "6" in ground balance before test.
6) detected over 1/3 (center only) of coil.
7) IDs as iron.
8) Monte's tests, 4 way and 2 way only. 15" coil not tested on these.

Other:
Monte tests: Nail board, nail on top of nickel.
Nickel always IDs 12 or 13 when detected.
I thank you for crediting the EQ-800's performance on some of my 'Test Scenarios.' They can teach folks what detectors can and can't do --- sometimes show the benefits of one type of search coil over another since detector designs work differently --- call attention to the use of different operating frequencies, if a detector offers a selectable multi-frequency option ---and lead to learning about Audio Target Classification. ATC methods or techniques can often help audibly classify a lot of common ferrous junk and eliminate bad-target recovery.

Your comment on #8, for those who do not know about one simple test, I use two targets I encountered a while back with one being a round Iron Nail about 3¼" to 3½" long. The other is a non-ferrous, brass, Button Front. I lay the Button Front on the ground, that place the Iron Nail on top of the Button Front so it is centered.

The task is to sweep the center-axis of the search coil directly across the Test Sample going completely across from off to one side, back-and-forth for a possible 2-Hits (1 from each direction) on the Button Front. Then sweep completely down the length of the nail with the center-axis of the search coil for a possible 2-Hits. You can either get 0-out-of-4, or maybe 2-out-of-4, or the best performance being 4-out-of-4. I conduct this test 3 times. The first time is with the Discrimi9nation set low enough to hear the Iron Nail. The second time is with the Discrimination increased to just barely reject the Iron Nail. Then one final time with the Discrimination increased to the Ferrous / Non-Ferrous break-point for a total of 12-Hits. My two primary-use Relic Hunting models, a 15 kHz Nokta CoRe and 19 kHz Nokta Relic will get 12-out-of-12 good hits with their smaller coils mounted.


The Correction:.
Under 'Other:' You implied my Test was with a US Nickel (5¢) coin and a Nail. It isn't. I use a thin, brass Button Front which is almost the exact diameter of a modern US Zinc 1¢. That's because that is how I encountered this challenge and a 5¢ coin is too large and is then more easily detected by most detectors. The 'challenge' for a detector in my Test Scenario is to get good, solid hits with the Iron Nail rejected or just giving a 'proper' Low Iron Audio Tone, or barely rejected, or very rejected at the Ferrous Break Point while still being able to detect the smaller-size and thinner Button Front. I never change-up the test sample pieces in order to maintain a very consistent performance test, detector to detector.

Just a few comments and Test Sample clarification. Not to pooh-pooh the EQ-800 because I believe it is definitely one of today's worthy General Purpose models .... and I envy they made a nice 6" coil for it. I sure wish I had a 5" or 6" coil for the XP ORX I use. I have a 5" or 6" coil on all my other dedicated Relic Hunting devices.

Monte

"Your EYES ... the only 100% accurate form of Discrimination!"

Stinkwater Wells Trading Post
Metal Detector Evaluations and Product Reviews
monte@ahrps.org ... or ... monte@stinkwaterwells.com
503-481-8147
Fisher: 1, Nokta-Makro: 3, Teknetics: 1, Tesoro: 2, White's: 2, XP: 1
Killer B's 'Hornet' and White's 'Pro Star'
Note: Detectors are listed alphabetically by Brand. Models are chosen based on search site conditions.
*** All working well today to make memories for tomorrow. ***
Subject Author Views Posted

Equinox 800 depth and other tests

glabelle 185 June 27, 2019 12:09PM

Just a few comments and a quick correction:

Monte 81 June 28, 2019 10:06PM

Re: Equinox 800 depth and other tests

GeoW 89 June 27, 2019 09:44PM

Re: Equinox 800 depth and other tests

glabelle 91 June 27, 2019 09:52PM

Re: Equinox 800 depth and other tests

OregonGregg 97 June 27, 2019 06:14PM

Re: Equinox 800 depth and other tests

NWCindy 104 June 27, 2019 03:15PM



Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login

Online Users

Guests: 43
Record Number of Users: 13 on January 18, 2018
Record Number of Guests: 302 on March 10, 2018