Jump to content
Steve Herschbach

Fisher CZX Metal Detector "Ground Breaking Technology"

Recommended Posts

The following information is from an apparent leak from a First Texas distributor meeting? The link is posted at http://www.detectorprospector.com/forum/topic/555-new-fisher-pulse-induction-multi-frequency-detectors/?p=10571 as part of the thread about upcoming Fisher products that have been circulating for a couple years. These leaks seem to jive with previous statements by Tom Mallory of First Texas.

The main one of interest to the people on this forum would be a new CZX model aimed at gold prospecting. Here is the text from the posted screen shot:

CZX - Fisher and Teknetics

  • This machine is ground breaking technology
  • Turn on and go
  • 2 frequency - 9:1 ratio
  • No need to ground balance or adjust the detector to the environment
  • It automatically senses the ground and makes changes accordingly.
  • First detector birthed from this platform is a gold unit priced around $1000, but deeper than current VLF, this detector will also see through red dirt, and highly mineralized soil.
  • From this platform other machines will develop. We intend to develop the CZX and MOSCA platforms to offer more machines in the $1000 to $2000 range than have ever been available.
  • Target release 2016
  • We have senior engineer Dave Johnson on this project

The "Mosca" platform referred to is further described and apparently is aimed more at being a general purpose non-prospecting detector (coins, jewelry, relics). Again, here is the text from the posted screen shot:

"Mosca" Fisher and Teknetics

  • Waterproof up to 10' (3 meters)
  • Wireless headphones - Waterproof loop and connectors for headphones
  • 2 frequency - 7:1 ratio
  • Hobby/Treasure Market - Great for Saltwater, Relic, Coin
  • Auto Ground Tracking
  • Single Pod Design
  • LCD Pad, control buttons, 2 AA batteries
  • Arm Pad in rear
  • Retail target - $1200 - $2000
  • Target release 2016
  • We have dedicated engineers on this project

OK, so a gold unit around $1000 that goes deeper than current VLF designs. I also have high hopes that knowing the proclivities of the engineer, Dave Johnson, that it will be relatively light and ergonomic. Dave also prefers simple and the design statements reflect that.

We seriously need something that brings gold detector weights and prices back to earth and so hopefully this will be it. I have stated over and over again I would be very happy with ATX equivalent performance in a less expensive lightweight package. Garrett so far seems disinclined to make that unit but they have a year at least before it may be a moot point. The CZX would have to obsolete the White's TDI as it is aimed squarely at or below the same price point and unless it beats TDI performance would be dead on arrival.

We will not have long to wait - 2016 is coming fast!

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And Dave Johnson's response to inquiries about this "rumor" http://www.findmall.com/read.php?18,2207202,2207330#msg-2207330

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I particularly like this quote from Carl Moreland (Geotech) at http://www.dankowskidetectors.com/discussions/read.php?2,69178,84619#msg-84619

"At PriorJob I did a lot of exciting work in TD methods, and it was difficult to walk away from all that. I did a pretty good job of wrapping it up in patents, so now I'm trying to figure out how to circumvent my own work and get back to exciting results. It ain't easy, and everyday dept management duties severely eat into my development work."

PriorJob would have been Carl's stint at White's Electronics. Carl now works at First Texas (Bounty Hunter, Fisher, Teknetics). The only significant patents I am aware of from White's in that time frame is the constant current and half sine patents discussed at http://www.detectorprospector.com/forum/topic/400-new-whites-patent-constant-current-metal-detector

TD refers to Time Domain as opposed to working with traditional VLF detectors that operate in the Frequency Domain.

The White's constant current patent bears a close similarity to the ZVT technology employed in the new Minelab GPZ 7000 and Carl's comment lends credence to the idea that White's is indeed up to some exciting things that may see the light of day in the coming year or two. Is it any coincidence that First Texas is also stepping up their game on advancing the technology? I think not!

I personally believe we are in the midst of experiencing the next big leap in metal detector technology taking place from several different angles. The end results are a new ability to ignore ground effects leading to much greater depths of detection, and ultimately discrimination methods that will vastly improve on those available currently in highly mineralized soils.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All the intrigue and espionage of a good soap opera just to get us detectors. Not to worry Google might get in on the act and slice em all. :rolleyes:  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, they say 2016 and that is right around the corner.

CZX - Fisher and Teknetics

  • This machine is ground breaking technology
  • Turn on and go
  • 2 frequency - 9:1 ratio
  • No need to ground balance or adjust the detector to the environment
  • It automatically senses the ground and makes changes accordingly.
  • First detector birthed from this platform is a gold unit priced around $1000, but deeper than current VLF, this detector will also see through red dirt, and highly mineralized soil.
  • From this platform other machines will develop. We intend to develop the CZX and MOSCA platforms to offer more machines in the $1000 to $2000 range than have ever been available.
  • Target release 2016
  • We have senior engineer Dave Johnson on this project

This machine would take the Africa market by storm by being turn on and go. The relic hunters in Virginia and elsewhere should like it. If weight and balance are right, I am going to love it as I have been pounding the table for a machine like this for years. I would like to see something with at least Minelab SD type performance in a light weight affordable package but at $1000 it simply needs to beat the TDI. The biggest question I have is how small a nugget can it detect? At $1000 this machine would be the natural next step up for any prospector using a VLF who has not made the plunge into PI.

The old CZ is dual frequency running at 15 kHz and 5 kHz, a 3:1 ratio. Staying at 5 for the low end a 9:1 ratio figures at 45 kHz and 5 kHz. Until recently a machine with no ground balance adjustment would have raised eyebrows, but the SDC 2300 has laid that concern to rest. Dave Johnson always likes power combined with simplicity and good ergonomics, and that bodes well for this detector.

The "Mosca" model looks to be aiming mid-way between the Garrett AT Pro and Minelab CTX 3030 with a multi-frequency all terrain model. The AT Pro has been wildly successful and it only makes sense to emulate that success.

Anyway, this is the one I want to see in 2016. I guess I had better get my lightweight ATX project completed before this makes it obsolete. Now I know how detector companies feel about project delays!

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rumor # 143

 

 Candy was overheard saying, Johnson is the only engineer that could challenge ML's dominance....

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hard to argue with that though there are a lot of bright young guys out there now we have not heard of. I think a factor of key importance to consumers in all this is the rapidly increasing competition developing on prices. My gut feeling is we have seen a high water mark reached with the GPZ 7000 in more ways than one. Witness the recent moves Minelab has made with various low price packages on GPX detectors. With gold prices declining and likely to break under US$1000 in the coming year the prospecting detector market is getting saturated. Everyone that needs one has one and fewer new people getting into it now, especially as it gets hard for even the pros to find much gold. The overseas markets have wised up to the fact you don't have to spend a fortune to find gold. I think going forward bang for the buck and ergonomics are going to rule the market. Minelab in particular is going to face serious pressure on detector prices going forward - in my opinion.

 

On the other hand - how much would a person pay for a GPZ with reliably accurate iron discrimination?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the other hand - how much would a person pay for a GPZ with reliably accurate iron discrimination?

 

How accurate? 40% accurate?

 

 I would be willing to pay about the same as for the 7000 IF after the innards where designed by the geniuses, the rest of it was designed by prospectors. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So with all this new hype about new detectors.....here I go again and wait.....at least its around the corner. My trusty ole 45 will do me fine until than. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

    • By Steve Herschbach
      Subject came up elsewhere so I thought I would run a little poll. The poll only gives you two choices but if you want to post about what you think your number one most comfortable detector model has ever been that would be great. It could be a lousy detector in every other way, all I am looking for it what detectors feel best on your arm when held for long hours. There are no right or wrong answers - this is a personal preference thing, determined in large part by hand and forearm size.
      The "S" rod grip is where the grip is just part of the rod itself, not a separate element. The Post grip is a separate post attached to the rod. Lots of people call this a pistol grip, but that really is more about the shape of the grip. I have seen good pistol grips in an S rod design. There are also Post grips on S rods so it is not the S that makes for the S rod grip but the fact it is integrated into the S. The photos here make it more obvious. There is a difference simply between curved shafts and straight shafts but that is actually a separate subject so I will make a separate poll on it.

    • By Steve Herschbach
      When I started the GPZ 7000 thread at http://www.detectorprospector.com/forum/topic/1230-minelab-gpz-7000-the-controversy-ends/ it was for owners of the detectors who have had time on it to air their opinions. It became apparent lots of other people wanted to weigh in with their opinions.

      I am therefore starting this thread for everyone else who owns anything else or not to voice whatever opinions they have on the detectors or companies themselves. Say anything you want, no holds barred really, but it would be nice if it was kept constructive.

      I prefer myself to keep things upbeat and positive. It is just who I am and I have tried to keep the forum as a whole along those lines. But I do not want people to feel like certain opinions or viewpoints are not welcome and so this is the place for whatever opinions you may have about any detector manufacturer or their products. I am not going to get involved as long as people do not get personal.

      This in no way is my relenting on my overall expectations for the forum as a whole. There is a time and a place for everything however and going forward this is the thread on which to air suggestions, complaints, issues, or just plain gripes. Again, all I ask is keep it civil. Thank you.

      Just to get you going here are some new metal detector bumper stickers for you....

      First Texas - Even we don't know how many we make or what they're for!

      Garrett - We already made a flagship detector so quit asking for one.

      Minelab - The most hated name in detecting!

      Tesoro - Search for the past with detectors from the past.

      White's - Anything happen while we were sleeping?
    • By Steve Herschbach
      What we are discussing is usually called "Recovery Speed" by most manufacturers. From the White's XLT User Manual:
      "Recovery Speed - Speeds target responses, so several targets that are close together can each respond.
      When a metal is detected, it takes a fraction of a second for the detector to process the signal before it can respond to another metal target nearby. The time it takes to process the first metal target signal so that the second metal target signal can respond is called RECOVERY SPEED.
      There are advantages and disadvantages to fast (high numbers) and slow (low numbers) RECOVERY SPEEDS. Faster RECOVERY SPEEDs work well in high trash areas. However, they will have some difficulties with very deep targets as well as double responses on shallow targets. Slower RECOVERY SPEEDs do not work very well in high trash areas. However, they will have better responses on very deep targets. Slower speeds also have more definitive discrimination sounds. A custom setting needs to be found that suits the preferences of the individual and the conditions in the area. As a general rule, the closer together the metal targets are in an area, the faster the recovery speed should be. The more spacing between targets, the slower the speed should be. Don't use the fast speed if you don't need to.
      In very trashy areas it is recommended to switch to a loop smaller in size than the standard 9.5 inch black loop. Smaller loops offer better separation between targets. However, larger loops detect deeper and cover more area with each pass. RECOVERY SPEED combined with a smaller loop can be used to search severely trashy areas."
      Just to confuse people White's decided to call it "Recovery Delay" on the V3i. A low recovery delay equates to a fast recovery speed.
      From the White's V3i User Manual:
      "Recovery Delay - 1 – 200 200 = slowest. Additional and separate (beyond filtration) selection for the signal response time. Short response time benefits performance in high trash by providing better target separation. A longer response time allows a larger window to detect deeper targets. Ideal Recovery Delay is dependent on Ground Filter selection, ground mineralization, trash density, and your average sweep speed (how quickly you move the search coil)."
      It would seem detector manufacturers abhor standard terminology, even the same manufacturer! XP has decided to call Recovery Speed by an even newer term - Reactivity. From the Deus User Manual:

    • By Decanfrost
      Hi,
      Regarding the VLF detectors.Can someone answer for me what constitutes a VLF with good discrimination?.I feel to discriminate that speed is a factor as well.Otherwise no matter how good,if a target is next to iron it will read off a good hit.
      The Deus has fast reactivity,so is this now a good discriminator.Between ferrous and non ferrous?. How does this compare to say the Nokta Impact for speed discrimination.
      Thanks in advance
      Ash
    • By mn90403
      While looking around on the Minelab site I came across this article by Bruce Candy.  It will certainly be a re-read for some but for me it was a first.
      There is much more than just Minelab in the article.  It included ground balancing, discrimination, gold detectors, coin detectors and a host of other related issues with knowing some of the technology about target detecting.
      It doesn't yet include ZED technology but does explain why it is so hard to have a gold detector that discriminates.  (When you discriminate you lose targets!)
       
      http://www.minelab.com/__files/f/11043/KBA_METAL_DETECTOR_BASICS_&_THEORY.pdf
    • By Steve Herschbach
      This is an informal survey, just out of curiosity. For those of you who have been out prospecting in the last year (back to Sept 2014) and actually have found gold nuggets, what detector or detectors did you find the gold with? The poll is not meant to prove anything. I am just wondering what detectors are most commonly in use now for finding gold nuggets by those who are actually finding the gold.
       
      I am posting this on the most of the active US forums so please do not post your answer in more than one place. In a week I will compile all the answers from all the forums and post the results back to each one. Thanks in advance for you participation.
       
      I own a number of units but so far in the last year my gold was found with the Minelab GPZ 7000, SDC 2300, and a few nuggets in trashy areas with the Makro Racer.
×