Steve Herschbach

Fisher CZX Metal Detector "Ground Breaking Technology"

31 posts in this topic

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!

3 people like this

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

1 person likes this

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.

1 person likes this

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:  

1 person likes this

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!

2 people like this

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....

2 people like this

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?

2 people like this

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. 

4 people like this

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 Condor
      I know this topic has appeared off and on over the years, but I'd like to better understanding on the theory and principle of using one over the other, ie. depth, and target id and what compromises do I induce.  The reason I ask is the new V4 for XP Deus has the ability to set a minus discrimination.  It kills the ability to use the "horseshoe" screen for ferrous target ID, but VID numbers are tolerable.  What theoretically happens if I set a negative discrimination, but use Notch to handle ordinary ferrous trash? 
    • By Rege-PA
      As a rule do the lower vlf frequencies punch deeper than the higher ones, say 4.8 verses 14khz?
      But what is the trade off? Are some frequencies better for silver coins? How does iron enter into this?
      Need to understand how this all fits together!
      Thanks for any and all answers.
       
    • By DSMITH
      Can someone please explain the differences in a PI machine and a VLF machine in layman's terms or point me in a direction on the site if it has already been posted up some where 
      just trying to learn
    • By Steve Herschbach
      When I posted the video showing the Makro Gold Racer recovery speed using two nails and a gold ring, it caused me to reflect on the various internet nail tests. Nearly all employ modern round nails, when these items rarely present issues.
      The common VDI (visual discrimination scale) puts ferrous items at the low end of the scale, and items with progressively increasing conductivity higher on the scale. The problem is the size of items also matters. Small gold is low on the scale, and the larger the gold, the higher it reads on the scale. A silver quarter reads higher than a silver dime, etc.
      All manner of ferrous trash including medium and smaller nails fall where they should when using discrimination and are easily tuned out. The problem is large iron and steel items, and ferrous but non-magnetic materials like stainless steel. Steel plates, large bolts, broken large square nails, axe heads, hammer heads, broken pry bar and pick tips, etc. all tend to read as high conductive targets. Usually it is just the sheer size pushing it higher up the scale.
      Detectors also love things with holes, which makes for a perfect target by enabling and enhancing near perfect eddy currents, making items appear larger than they really are. Steel washers and nuts are a big problem in this regard, often reading as non-ferrous targets.
      Oddball shapes cause problems, particularly in flat sheet steel. Old rusted cans often separate into irregular shaped flat pieces, and roofing tin (plated steel) and other sheet steel items are my number one nemesis around old camp sites. Bottle caps present a similar issue in modern areas. These items produce complex "sparky" eddy currents with both ferrous and non-ferrous indications. Many thin flat steel items produce remarkably good gold nugget type signals in old camp areas.
      Two general tips. Concentric coils often handle ferrous trash better than DD coils. A DD coil is often the culprit when dealing with bottle caps where a concentric coil often makes them easy to identify. Another thing is to use full tones. Many ferrous items are producing both ferrous and non-ferrous tones. Blocking ferrous tones allows only the non-ferrous tone to be heard, giving a clear "dig me" signal. This was the real bane of single tone machines with a simple disc knob to eliminate ferrous objects. You still heard the non-ferrous portion of the signal. Multi tones allows you to hear the dual ferrous/non-ferrous reports from these troublesome items, helping eliminate most of them.
      Certain detectors can also show multiple target responses on screen at once, like the White's models featuring the SignaGraph (XLT, DFX, etc.) and CTX with target trace. These displays show target "smearing" that stands out differently from the clean VDI responses produced by most good items. A machine with a simple VDI numeric readout can only show you one number at a time and the only indication you might get is "dancing" numbers that refuse to lock on. Usually though the predominate response overrides and fakes you out. This is where a good high end visual display capable of putting all VDI response on screen simultaneously can really help out.
      I have been collecting these odd iron and steel items to practice with and to help me evaluate which machines might do best in ferrous trash. The main thing I wanted to note here is contrived internet videos with common round nails often present a misleading picture. Many machines do very well on nails yet fail miserably on flat steel.


    • By Tnsharpshooter
      Is Minelab the only one that uses electronic noise cancel feature??
      Do they have patents associate with this feature?
      Would like to see other manufacturers use some thing similar on their detectors.
      Or a manufacturer should provide actual visual indication of emi levels depending on frequency used to include offsetting.
      Not have the user have to use their ears to decide or even try comparing on buried targets.
      Should not be trial and error.
      And maybe even a system were the operator is warned,,say if emi changes and the current selected frequency is possibly not operating at optimum.
      I do realize with a coil being swept over the ground, this could be difficult to do.
    • By Steve Herschbach
      I am going through one of those periods where I load up a bit on new detectors and let it all sort out. Darwin's Survival Of The Fittest Detectors! This winter a number will not survive and will be looking for new home. This is the only way I have found that works for me. Detectors that serve a good purpose for me get used, others end up sitting. If they sit long enough, they are no longer needed.
      I have my nugget detecting fairly well sorted out. The GPZ 7000 gets used 90% of the time. I might pull out a VLF for a really trashy place, or for where the gold is smaller than the GPZ can hit (really small!). I do keep a Garrett ATX around to handle salt ground or oddball hot rocks the GPZ has trouble with but those situations have proven quite rare so far.
      So the GPZ is an obvious keeper. The ATX does double duty as my favorite water hunting machine so there is another.
      In the land of VLF however it is more complicated. I have this idea that a good selectable frequency detector might really do the trick in replacing two or more other models. The key there however is what I am going to go ahead and call "frequency spread" for lack of a better term.
      What do I mean by frequency spread? Simply put, the number of kHz between the lowest and highest frequency the detector can operate at. The lowest frequency is basically the "large item" frequency that more easily handles bad ground, and the high frequency is the "small item" frequency that tends to have more issues with mineralized ground or hot rocks.
      The high frequency option is critical for a person like me who nugget hunts. To really be able to replace machines like the 45 kHz Minelab Gold Monster 1000, 48 kHz White's GMT, 56 kHz Makro Gold Racer, or 71 kHz Fisher Gold Bug 2, the highest frequency option of the detector needs to be 30 kHz or higher or as close to that as is possible. Low frequencies in the single digits are great for coin hunting or very large gold nuggets in bad ground. Frequencies in the teens are a great compromise.
      Some examples:
      Nokta Impact 5 kHz, 14 kHz, and 20 kHz (15 kHz lowest to highest)
      XP DEUS Low Frequency Coil 4 kHz, 8 kHz, 12 kHz, and 18 kHz (14 kHz lowest to highest)
      Rutus Alter 4.4 kHz to 18 kHz in 0.2 kHz steps (13.6 kHz lowest to highest)
      White's V3i 2.5 kHz, 7.5 kHz, 22.5 kHz (20 kHz lowest to highest - bonus - runs in multifrequency mode)
      I am still waiting on the XP DEUS High Frequency Elliptical Coil 14 kHz, 30 kHz, and 81 kHz (67 khz lowest to highest). The XP HF 9" round running at 14 kHz, 30 khz, and 59 khz (45 kHz lowest to highest) is currently available.
      In theory the White's V3i is a real winner here but I have just never really taken to the V3i as a prospecting detector. I have to be honest and say that so far the Impact floats my boat more in that regard due to its more traditional approach to a detector interface, all metal modes, and ground balancing. The problem with all of them though is they just don't reach high enough to be used both as coin and jewelry machines and yet still be capable of retiring the high frequency nugget detectors. And that is why I am still patiently waiting for that XP Deus V4 high frequency elliptical coil. At 81 kHz (or 59 kHz in 9" round version) the Deus HF coils on paper at least could in theory make the high frequency nugget detectors redundant. I have to admit I still have doubts however. So far dedicated specifically tuned single frequency detectors have always won the day. For a lot of people however, a selectable frequency machine might prove to be "good enough".
      The downside with the Deus is that to get the deeper seeking lower frequency large coil option you have to wrap up quite a bit of money into two coils. The 9.5" elliptical is just not going to reach real deep due to its small size. I have the 11" round low frequency coil which can run as low as 4 kHz, so together the two coils make a pretty formidable package. The other machines however can run both much smaller and much larger coils, and at considerably less cost than what DEUS coils cost due to each one being a self contained metal detector. It may be that the XP HF 9" round running at 14 kHz, 30 khz, and 59 khz (45 kHz lowest to highest) is the better compromise option for most people than the 5.5" x 9.5" elliptical.
      The Impact does suit me as far as the way it functions and I like the excellent inexpensive coil selection. It is a shame it weighs twice as much as the DEUS, but that may actually be a benefit when it comes to balancing large coils. Overall at the moment I am really liking the Impact - I just wish the frequency had topped out higher. I really wanted more like 5 - 15 - 30 kHz. Going from 14 kHz to 20 kHz is not quite providing the extra "pop" on tiny gold I would like to see.