My Thoughts On Detector Technology

[jjm861]

Well, it is that time of year that I always get the itch to by a new detector.  I am primarily a beach hunter here in So. Cal., so I have owned most of the latest and greatest detectors that are suitable for wet sand.  The CTX 3030, E-trac, CZ 21, Dual Field, ATX, TDI SL just to name a few.

Here are my thoughts....regardless of brand, there is little discernible difference between high end multi frequency machines.  The same goes for pulse machines, no real performance difference say between a TDI SL and a Dual field.  

With that said, I am going to hold off buying any new detectors for a awhile.  It is my opinion only that current pulse and VLF technology has reach its limits. Again, I am referencing technology for beach hunting and maybe even coin shooting.  I will be in the new detector market only when new technology offers one of two things:

1. When a multi-frequency (discriminating) machine can cut through black sand like a pulse (or)

2. When and if a true discriminating pulse detector becomes available.

What are your thoughts? 

 

[PhaseTech]

For wet sand if I want depth, I use my GPX5000 in Salt-Gold timing with an appropriate coil.

If I want jewellery I'll use the SDC2300. 

If I want to reject iron I'll use my old Sovereign (Or 3030 if I'm going deeper than shallow pools). With the Detech 13" I get plenty of depth still. 

I think it's about finding the best application for what's already out there. I'll worry about new technology when it comes, but yes full (reliable) discrim on a PI would be the bees knees, even if it was just on iron targets. That would be a beach hunters dream machine. 

[Rivers rat]

Does the GPX5000 work on beaches for coins and jewellery hunt???

 

 

RR

[filthylucre]

I have a Whites Dual Field Surf PI, a Tesoro Sand Shark and a Whites MX Sport.This seems to be all I need for beach and water hunting in Florida for now, but for all out comfortable water / surf hunting the old Fisher CZ-20 was the best....perfectly weighted and balanced in the water.The Dual Field's entire unit floats like a cork which doesn't make sense for a dedicated water detector and the Sand Sharks coil like to flop around in the surf and is not as deep as a Dual Field.Take the raw power of a Dual Field and stick it in the same control box and same shaft and coil of a CZ20 or 21 and that would be the perfect set-up for surf hunting.I could go out and buy a new CZ-21 but it can't match the depth and sensitivity of a Dual Field  or Sand Shark.The MXSport I use on windy days and is perfect for the beach especially soaked with fresh rain.The MXSport is waterproof and the most sensitive and deepest single frequency VLF unit I've ever used so I'm very happy with it.I don't wanna become a detector collector so I'll stick with these 3 for now until someone builds something much better .If a company could engineer and build a negatively weighted pulse unit, in a waterproof control box the same size as the Tesoro land units, that would be the ultimate in a water/ surf/ beach hunting detector.

 

[Des D]

jjm861,

 

I'd have to disagree with your Statement:"there is little discernible difference between high end multi frequency machines"

In my humble opinion, there is a huge difference between them.

To single out just 2 brands, the Explorer is far better than the V3.

Then, you have other detectors that do not use a true 'multi-frequency' as the Minelab's utilise and to date, no maker has been able to reproduce that?

Agree, disagree?

 

[Steve Herschbach]

Define better. A V3i hits small gold better than an Explorer. Fisher did multi-frequency with the CZ detectors before Minelab got around to it. And of course the V3i has a true multi-frequency mode. Minelab used a different method and few would dispute that is has proven superior overall, at least in terms of both sales and observable results in the field. But they certainly are not the only company that has done multi frequency.

[Des D]

"I was coming at it from a C & T point of view"

[Steve Herschbach]

Just giving you a hard time Des . There can be no doubt at all that Minelab has dominated the market when it comes to multi frequency detectors. The CZ models have really stood the test of time also however and it is a real shame we have not seen a smaller, more compact CZ model developed yet. Of course we can say the same thing about Minelab and everyone's desire for a more compact, lighter weight version of their machines also.

I can't argue with the basic premise of the thread however. Raw depth in many ways maxed out in the 1990's. What we have got since outside of nugget detecting is better discrimination and better ability to separate targets in dense trash. Raw depth however, I have not seen any VLF type detector that will go deeper than my old Compass Gold Scanner Pro back in the last century! And the beach detecting market moves slower yet with old models lasting forever on the market.

[Guest Tnsharpshooter]

I have give this here a lot of thought.

It seems maybe the goal has been to get more depth,,and tell whether it's ferrous or nonferrous and even give a more accurate indication of the targets conductivity.

Wonder if we instead keyed on a target's shape,,,for example we could devise a detector that would give way based on shape to tell if target is a nail or not.

Or a way just to tell if target is round(er) or not,,,not cylindrically shaped.

Could a detector be devised,,,if sweep speed was kept ideal,,,to indeed sweep and paint a picture of target shape based on returns.

Could it be done using either PI concept or Vlf concept.

If this indeed could be done,,and at the same time keep what we have now (good platform btw),,, we would be money ahead.

We do have GPS now,,,we didn't have before,,,,could this indeed be used to creat/perform??

Realizing this device,,,would have to give way to alert user at least to start investigating suspect target,,,and granted many sweeps(controlled) would likely need to be done from many angles,,,to paint this picture.

Also,,,when compared to the older detectors,,,graphics capabilities have significantly increased.

Could both PI and Vlf used in conjunction do this task???

Or another way signal transmit and return wise to ge this painted picture.

Maybe,,just maybe the way detectors have been engineered now and in the past,,,and slight improvements have been made,,,but this has caused some to turn a blind eye to other ways to approach detecting.

All metal is deeper,,,usually,,,so a signal is being transmitted,,,and the detector is indeed getting something back,,,,,,this what is coming back,,,,what else can be done with it,,,to give us better odds to dig more worthy targets.

Or what can be done to transmit signal as opposed to coil sweep speed and coil position,,to give more info here.

I wonder for example,,,even on a Vlf detector used today,,could I say cut the transmit freq of more (time wise) on a quarter vs a dime and still detect,,,since it has bigger diameter ( realizing ideal coin position here).

Yes,,,a detector that has capabilities disc wise for shape or combo of shape and size.

User could dial in for example quarter,,and the detectors parameters are all set,,,,,it looks for things that satisfies the equation set forth internally doing whatever is necessary.

I mean,,,just how accurate percentage wise would this device have to be,,,,from about 10" - 14"??? Even as low as 30% count me in.

I would dig anything round coin sized between 10" and  14".  Even not knowing if it was ferrous or not.

I could see this device as part of a rover unit,,,where coil movement is tightly controlled speed wise and position wise, height wise above ground.

 

[Rick K - First Member]

A really good introduction to how metal detectors actually work is ...

"Inside the Metal Detector" by George Overton and Carl Moreland.

also have a look at some stuff on the Geotec Forum.

Designing a totally new device, utilizing new approaches for signal generation and signal processing takes years - and doesn't leave a lot of change from 10 million bucks.

Not many companies have the appetite for that challange and those that do are pretty careful to make sure that they know their target market really well.