Steve Herschbach

I'm going to brag up a little project I have been working on. As the AMDS nerd I have single-handedly been building a new website for the location. Got the domain name, chose the hosting service, chose the software to run the store on, then set it up by customizing it for our use, and then the tedious part - adding all that product. I got most of it up in a month of spare time work, and now add bits and pieces when the mood hits me. Funny looking at this old thread, but reminds me I should get the Banjo Pan added to the site. You will note that the site has no prices or buy buttons. It is basically a catalog site. This is for several reasons. First, it makes my job way easier. Second, it is being realistic about a new reality. Shipping costs from the Lower 48 to Alaska and then back down to the Lower 48 are so much higher than they were 20 years ago mean we realistically can't compete with outfits based in the Lower 48 on price alone. Free shipping on a gold panning kit to the Lower 48? Are you kidding? It is more than we make on the kit! It also means that if we charge that shipping people down south will just buy somewhere else, so we are not going to waste time (money) chasing a market we can't realistically serve. There are some higher price smaller size items like metal detectors where it might work, but for now we are trying to do what we do best - serve the Alaska market. If people down south see something we have that they want, then they can contact us for a quote. For me as the web head though implementing a system that will update price increases, current inventory, and shipping is more than I want to tackle being off site. At a minimum I'd need to tap into the company database and script the solution to that can of worms. Long story short a catalog site at least shows what we have while avoiding a lot of maintenance headaches. I've set it all up so they could add online sales later if they want to but pretty much told them it will have to be somebody else doing it other than me. With that set of parameters it has been a fun project as I enjoy building sites. I like them clean and simple as possible and I like good photos. That has been a challenge given a lot of the crappy imagery outfits like Keene have available. Luckily new AI upscaling tools are available now that let me do way more with what is available - plus the fun for me of playing with those new tools. Topaz Gigapixel AI is truly amazing it what it can do and constantly improving. Just eliminating backgrounds has gone from hours long work to seconds now, and free in MS paint instead of a fortune in Photoshop. Anyway, doing what I can with what I can legitimately lift from vendor websites, and will fill the gaps taking photos on my next visit to Alaska. Enough of the nerd talk. I'm really only posting about it as I have and am putting a lot of work into it and am proud of my new baby and want to show it off a little. Check it out if you are interested at https://miningsuperstore.com/shop/ and do not miss the stuff we have you don't see in most shops - mini excavators, trommels, the Sierrablaster, etc.

Not long enough but do first trip focused on your family - you can always go back to just chase gold. Have fun and safe travels!

The whole point of the AQ was to collect feedback to build it right. We did our part but so far Fisher has not done theirs. It’s not rocket science. The AQ electronics are superb, it’s the physical housing that was a fail from the start. I think physical knobs should be avoided on underwater detectors. No matter how good they are a weak spot in any underwater design. We have better options these days. And all that was needed was an underarm drop in battery design. Gee, it might look like this. Just make the battery area under the arm longer to contain two or even three 26650 Rechargeable Lithium-ion batteries. Battery compartments do not have to end directly under the elbow.

A lot of those are in fantastic condition, awesome finds! I assume those are the cream of the crop first deserving of getting framed. What kind of ratio do you get on great condition finds versus scummy corroded finds? In other words, how rare are the cleaner buttons overall? Are there conditions that favor the buttons being preserved in better condition i.e. soil type, fertilized versus non-fertilized ground, etc.?

I ran Sharp as my standard setting in Alaska and only used mono coils. 18” NF round. It’s a powerful mode and in Australia DD coils would be a necessity in a lot of places to get it to run. But if ground allows, and mine did, Sharp plus mono will outperform.

The last thing I expect is anything related to any prior White's product.

Well more like two operations a few months apart, but long since over that now. A new lease on life and detecting for sure, thanks.

Was this your work Bob? If so, one of the more famous illustrations in metal detecting. I believe I lifted this from one of the old Tesoro catalogs and repost whenever the subject of proper digging technique comes up. I really appreciate good illustrations and graphic design, and it was the quality of your work in that regard that really helped set your books apart from all the rest.

Long story is I was an early prototype tester on the Manticore. The performance has never really been a question for me. I've worked with Minelab on various projects for over a decade but I had to bail on the Manticore before release due to health issues which made detecting out of the question for a time (got both hips replaced). One thing I have told Minelab repeatedly over the years is that accessory coils should be developed along with the detector, so that all models have at least three coils on release. Small, medium, large. Instead, accessory coils get very low priority and take ages to come out. I get cranky about certain things, being ignored is high on the list, and swore I would not get a Manticore until the 5x8 coil was available. I thought and still think that coil will outperform on the Manticore... not that there was ever one to test before release. I dabbled with the D2 instead, but no, I am not a fan of a limited selection of wireless coils with zero prospect of aftermarket support. It may take forever but that does eventually come for Minelab models. I also favor the Minelab control/menu scheme as something I am more familiar with. You are correct then in that I always knew I'd be getting a Manticore eventually as it just jives better with me and my style of detecting. But again, the lack of coils really irritated me and I basically boycotted getting a Manticore until that got resolved. Well that has finally happened and I did actually get a Manticore with 5x8 coil recently. Another reality for me however is that my PI detecting tends to have priority and so I have not been in any rush to get out and use it. I doubt I'll have anything to add to any of the ongoing discussion because other people have long since passed me up in knowledge and experience with the Manticore. My early prototype use does not even really apply as many changes were made between then and final release, and even an update since then. In that respect I'm as much a newbie as anyone with the Manticore. My shiny new toy, not even peeled the screen protector off yet....

Funny, Andy Benson and I were just talking about this yesterday. Since day one I have repeatedly said that with the Manticore, less is more. I don't pound my chest over being an original prototype tester on the machine but I was running this detector way before any of you ever heard of it. I tried to pass the knowledge won there on to early users who kept having difficulty with the detector. In every case the main problem in my opinion has been running settings higher than would be ideal. From this thread in 2023: "Basically Manticore is a high strung Equinox with a graphic display and main way to tame the beast is reduced sensitivity until you get a handle on its high performance engine. This would be directly via the Sensitivity control, or through the use of lower power modes, or both together." and "I can only repeat so many times that the Manticore at 1/2 to 3/4 settings is like a maxed out Equinox. The Manticore has extra headroom, but only for locations and situations that allow it. Anyone with a mindset that they can drive a Ferrarri with the pedal mashed to the floor anywhere all the time is going to crash and burn with Manticore. It is imperative that people back it down and then work their way up. Again, target ID stability is a great tool for determining when you have good settings, and above that, well, yeah, it's going to get squirrely." Getting more depth by using lower power modes and reducing sensitivity may seem counterintuitive but it is a reality when running in bad ground. The main benefit will be better target id stability and less false signals. When I say lower power modes I am referring specifically to ATHC as being the root cause of many problems. ATHC boosts the transmit power, which can create blowback in adverse conditions. This can result in less depth, target id instability, false signals, especially ferrous false signals, and reduced target separation. Long story short is people tend to think that maxing out settings gets more depth, reducing settings gets less depth. This might be true in air tests and pure white sand or loamy conditions. Adverse ground and salt conditions changes everything and taming the beast by avoiding ATHC and running lower sensitivity levels will benefit many users. The use of small coils like the 5x8 can also really aid in the worst ground by reducing the amount of ground seen by the coil, which improves the ground to target ratio in favor of the target. Very often, less really is more.

Thanks for the advice, but no, I'll pass. I have plenty of detecting options and I am not competing with anybody. If I lived close to a shore it might be a different thing, but for me beach detecting is more an amusement for when I am not nugget hunting than the number one detecting priority. Sooner or later somebody will get it right, if not Fisher, then somebody else. I'll wait. But have fun with your new toy!!

That’s awesome Bob! Yeah, different ground means different results, a thing often forgotten on the internet. This is where I was detecting yesterday. That is not “black colored sand” - it is almost pure magnetite. Most PI models struggle in this stuff and what you see with a VLF is shocking for those that have never experienced it.

More horsepower equals more useable depth. Hit targets that machines like the D2 hit at depth with good id in my bad ground. The Apex either gets a poor target id on those same targets or misses them entirely. Close that gap. The Apex by all accounts, not just mine, is a moderate performer when run next to machines that cost 2-3 times as much. One might say that’s to be expected and in my case it is expected. So charge me for the 8 cylinder engine instead of the 6 cylinder - I’ll gladly pay for more horsepower. But it has to deliver.

Yeah, see that mirrors all of us. This really all started on April 2 when this thread popped up. I sure hope you get answers that satisfy you as I remember your frustration out of being shut out of the machine originally. Maybe it will have been worth the wait as possibly being able to get a better machine for less now. I can assure you the AQ is a real sweetie for actual performance, great depth, absolutely superb audio - very important for somebody like me that hunts by ear with a PI. I admit to being hugely tempted, thought about offering $1200, but to be honest I’m still pissed off they never released the upgraded drop in battery model as promised, and I don’t like rewarding bad behavior with more of my dollars. Maybe shooting myself in the foot I guess, but I get in a snit about stuff like that.

Mirrors my thinking exactly. Though to be honest I think the Apex lacks a little punch in my mineralized ground. With that being said if the Storm proved to be nothing more than a waterproof Apex with just a tad more horsepower under the hood, I might be first in line to get one. I really, and I mean really, like the form factor and basic control/menu layout. No side mounted buttons, everything within reach of a finger - thank you Garrett!

I can't answer for others. The main problem for me I guess is I am pretty sure I already know the answers so why bother? In my opinion FT is just pawning off the same machine they have been selling for a couple years now and any hope that this is some new improved version - let's just say I'm doubtful. Fact is I have zero intention of getting one of these machines so it is not a critical question for me and I have better things to do with my time. Practically everyone I might have asked in the past has been fired or quit the company. Also, the FT website and their push to sell this machine at extra discount is very new, and before a couple weeks ago there was very little interest from anyone on the subject of what FT is or is not selling now. Honestly, the question you are asking applies as much to you as anyone. Only now have you decided it's worth your time to ask, but I guess that still puts you ahead of the rest of us. Maybe @The_Stalker who originated this thread and appears to be the only person who ordered one at a discount recently might know.

It's right there in the main chart on my GPX timings reference page. What you are posting is derived from the full chart but the version you posted does keep it simpler as long as people know how to read it. The most important part is the methodology for finding the proper setting, which the full chart includes in bottom right. In general the paradox of PI is that as you follow the chart left, the settings are progressively less powerful. Yet they actually perform better in increasingly bad ground. Ultimately it is no different than what we have to do with VLF - AS CONDITIONS WORSEN, REDUCE THE POWER/GAIN/SENSITIVITY! A very simplified way of looking at the Minelab GPX timings scheme is to treat it as a base level gain setting. Minelabs recommended methodology is exactly what I have done with both VLF and PI for decades. Learn to tune the detector to the edge of ground feedback, and ride that edge, adjusting as needed when ground conditions change.

Actually all we can do is speculate, and have, at the link Tony provided. What FT is currently advertising in their website appears no different than the model originally sold three years ago. Ultimately the questions you are asking can only be answered authoritatively by First Texas themselves. I recommend you send your message to them to find out for sure what’s going on. Having an answer in writing from them could prove very useful to anyone thinking of buying an AQ at this time. If you get those answers I know I and quite a few others would love to hear what they are. Thanks.

Hi Bob, Welcome to the forum. I just wanted to say I think your books are examples of the finest ever written about metal detecting. Best wishes to you on over 50 years of metal detecting. https://stoutstandards.wordpress.com/2017/05/11/bob-sickler-the-detectorist/

My opinion, which people can take or leave as they please. It's not like I know anything about the goings on in the industry, so don't mind me Jason, I'm sure you've got it nailed.

Setup for disappointment if I ever saw one.

Given everything you have said, hot ground, small gold, no real detecting experience - Minelab SDC 2300. As easy to operate a gold vacuum as you can hope for. Don’t worry it will find big nuggets also but if you are using a 1/2” screen and getting nowhere near that I’d not be sweating depth on multi-ounce nuggets. Threads Tagged “Minelab SDC 2300”

Interesting. I merely looked at the eBay page for the AQ and got this email today from FT. I made no offer or anything, just viewed the page. Now it’s them making the offer, and I assume I could counteroffer. They are really trying hard to get rid of these.

By definition it is a mono coil. You have a Dual Field and a Mono.