Jump to content

Recommended Posts

From my mostly uneducated view, you could have a threshold just detectable or quiet producing the same hit hum. Putting it another way, you will have identical notifications, just one with a threshold hum, the other without. Just keep the no threshold right at that line of no hum. You shouldnt loose anything compared with a little threshold hum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Simon, i wouldnt be concerned about any negativity directed at you or your posts/vids you may make. Ignore it if it may happen. Remember, their issues are just that...their issues, not yours. Ignore it like a trash target.

Hopefully i can get reasonable at using the PL2 to justify posting my findings. Theres not alot out there.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, AU_Solitude said:

Since a few people have breached the subject: 

I talked to a gentleman earlier in the year that was running the QED in Cal-Nevada grounds - he stated that in low mineral ground he thought the detector easily kept pace with the GPX for depth and SDC for sensitivity, with a bonus being the lightweight where he could cover ground quickly. He also said that the more mineralized the ground became, the less this was true, with high mineralization making it no more effective than the SD series, and some severe ground crippling it beyond use.

That's one users review stateside so take it for what you feel it's worth. I know if I were in an area with mild to fair ground, like Simon, I would certainly take a look at simply from a weight and ground coverage perspective. Everyone wants an easy-to-swing pulse machine instead of the existing tanks.

And the bolded section was also my findings, and those of at least 4 others, in Western Australia, when I tried to use the QED for patch hunting in heavily mineralised and variable ground. 

It needed to be re-ground balanced every two feet or so, making it unusable for the job ! Hot rocks also gave it hell.

Not that the QED sycophants will listen to these people about these problems, they would rather attack and denigrate the user, than admit that there is a problem !

Rick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, AU_Solitude said:

Since a few people have breached the subject: 

I talked to a gentleman earlier in the year that was running the QED in Cal-Nevada grounds - he stated that in low mineral ground he thought the detector easily kept pace with the GPX for depth and SDC for sensitivity, with a bonus being the lightweight where he could cover ground quickly. He also said that the more mineralized the ground became, the less this was true, with high mineralization making it no more effective than the SD series, and some severe ground crippling it beyond use.

That's one users review stateside so take it for what you feel it's worth. I know if I were in an area with mild to fair ground, like Simon, I would certainly take a look at simply from a weight and ground coverage perspective. Everyone wants an easy-to-swing pulse machine instead of the existing tanks.

Any idea of model? Updates?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Au_solitude, did the user mention if it tended to struggle just on ferrous type mineralization or also on salt (conductive) type hot ground too? The GPX is a lot better on salt than my GPZ and that's one reason I keep it around still.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, araratgold said:

And the bolded section was also my findings, and those of at least 4 others, in Western Australia, when I tried to use the QED for patch hunting in heavily mineralised and variable ground. 

It needed to be re-ground balanced every two feet or so, making it unusable for the job ! Hot rocks also gave it hell.

Not that the QED sycophants will listen to these people about these problems, they would rather attack and denigrate the user, than admit that there is a problem !

Rick

“Sycophants”? Geez Rick, classifying people as such will start a squable in its own right!

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, AussieDigs said:

“Sycophants”? Geez Rick, classifying people as such will start a squable in its own right!

Anyone who pointed out anything negative about the QED was labelled a Minelab sycophant by the QED crew.

As I said, they would rather attack the individuals than admit there was a problem. Most people were too afraid to publicly say anything negative, because of the public denigration they then received !

BTW, Howard has recently made an admission of sorts in regards to the problems I highlighted, by stating things he is trying to add to or fix on the QED. From AEGP forum :  " 1: Better GB ie ability to handle higher intensity ground variability without constant re Ground Balancing. " " 2: Ground Tracking. "

Rick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, phrunt said:

I didn't even realise there was some crazy history of it until very recently, but that's none of my business, I'm just a consumer buying a detector to look for gold 🙂  I know people seem to have arguments over the QED all the time, I haven't looked into why and frankly I don't care, if it works for me that's all I care about.

Likewise Simon. Came as a shock to me - and even got me banned from one forum.  Just ignore the knockers and reach your own conclusions. The QED is Howard's constantly evolving work in progress and most critics have not used the latest variants.

For me (as you probably know from reading my posts) it's the ideal cheap, lightweight, battery efficient, multi coil adaptable PI  prospecting machine - and has found many ozs at all depths and all soil conditions to prove it, ranging from over 2 oz to flys-it.

Look forward to reading more of your results - 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, fredmason said:

Boys, all I care about is any QED user’s experience and observations. I don’t think I need to hear about the mud slinging so common on other forums ... I certainly don’t care!

fred

Fred, that's exactly what I and a few others did, but we were labelled " knockers " ( per jrbeatty above ), and far worse  ! All we did was point out it's shortcomings in WA, and copped a whole lot of sh#t for our troubles !

Simon, I don't think you will have many problems at all in NZ with your crazily mild mineralisation, but I can assure you that that is not the " experience and observations " of a number of us who were trying to use it in WA, and at least one user from NSW !

Rick

  • Thanks 1

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 calabash digger
      What is this Deeptech VISTA X ???
    • By squirmingcoil77
      Hello all.  I was wondering if it's possible to customize the tones on the VX3.  I know you can assign tones to all the vdi #s on the V3i and even change the tone pitch on the XLT and DFX, but I did not see where you can alter the tones on the VX3.  Maybe i missed it in the manual.  Does anyone know?  thanks.
    • By Steve Herschbach
      Published on May 14, 2019
      “Hello all, hope you’ve all had a great weekend. We’ve just put a short video covering some of the aspects on the DeepTech Vista X together, some of the features that you’ll see in the video has been altered but we will be making a new video on these changes very soon. We’ve had so much interest in the Vista X, we put a video together as fast as possible to show some of these new features. Thank you for your patience, more information and update video on performance coming shortly. Recommended retail price: 580 Euro”

    • By Steve Herschbach
      Tarsacci MDT-8000 Data & User Reviews
       
    • By Steve Herschbach
      DeepTech is introducing a metal detector very similar to what Tesoro might have done if they had updated the Tejon - check out the new DeepTech Vista X. 16 kHz with fast switching dual discrimination controls.

×
×
  • Create New...