Who Makes The X-coils? Who Sells Them?

[jasong]

That's a good post JP.

2 hours ago, Jonathan Porter said:

• The coils are electronically inferior to the standards set by Minelab when they established the design parameters of the coils for the GPZ, I’ve used those same testing techniques when I’ve tested the X coils and gave feedback accordingly. This is FACT and NOT agenda driven.
• Secondly there is the major issue I have with the circumvention of Minelabs IP.

A couple general interest questions here - are these standards set by Minelab something you can share so we can have an idea which standards they haven't met?  If confidential, does falling short of these standards mean the coils are measurably different from a coil which complies with the standards? Or are the standards mostly related to quality control issues, something like FCC regulatory issues, and not performance issues?

I'm curious because I've worked in engineering and standards can be relative in the engineering world and don't necessarily mean a product has a flaw. But in other cases that can be exactly what it means. In engineering specs are often derated, like a rope/cable may support 2x it's rated weight, etc. Or the way Intel derates various chips of the same design from the same wafer depending on the frequency it fails at. I'm just trying to understand better what you mean by the standards not being met.

Is the issue with IP related to the chip patch or is the DOD design being used in the X Coil the issue? 

 

[flakmagnet]

JP that is about as well-said as anyone could wish for. Thank you for taking the time.

[madtuna]

I'll try it and If it scores me more gold be it because of size, placebo or what ever I'll use it. If it doesn't work I'll go back to the stock ML coils including the 19" which I had good success with.

I don't give a fig who makes it and who sells it, I just care if it scores me more gold as that is how I earn my income.

I'm still trying to get my head around the moral side of things? What's the big difference between using after market coils on any other machine? Nobody is altering the ML chip or counterfieting it and infact still using it.

We put after market chips in cars, computers and any number of other gadgets, we alter crap every day to make things work better that the way they come off the factory floor.

How come we suffer moral outrage about somethings and not others.

[araratgold]

33 minutes ago, madtuna said:

I'll try it and If it scores me more gold be it because of size, placebo or what ever I'll use it. If it doesn't work I'll go back to the stock ML coils including the 19" which I had good success with.

I don't give a fig who makes it and who sells it, I just care if it scores me more gold as that is how I earn my income.

I'm still trying to get my head around the moral side of things? What's the big difference between using after market coils on any other machine? Nobody is altering the ML chip or counterfieting it and infact still using it.

We put after market chips in cars, computers and any number of other gadgets, we alter crap every day to make things work better that the way they come off the factory floor.

How come we suffer moral outrage about somethings and not others.

You nailed it Steve. We alter things every day, such as the diesel tuning chip and modified suspension that I have added to my Triton.

We are not making fake copies of the GPZ, just altering it slightly to allow another brand of coil to run. 

The thing is, despite all the protestations, these Russian jobbies work, and they work well. I have already pulled numerous bits from my " dead " patches just with the 17 inch. I have had none of the " problems " that are supposed to plague these coils.

We now have choices, and that is what makes us all happy ! ?

Can't wait to see what the " big bertha " 22x21 can do, when it arrives " from Russia with love " !!  ?

Cheers, Rick

 

[Andyy]

5 hours ago, jasong said:

I'm curious because I've worked in engineering and standards can be relative in the engineering world and don't necessarily mean a product has a flaw.

Exactly.  Of course it is not going to meet Minelab standards.  I am also stuck in this engineering world where "standards" are considered a holy grail word to use.  Every company will have it's own design and test standards, Including this Russian maker.  When a new company starts out, this is usually all that they have.  Then they start building in quality standards, hopefully safety standards, and the list goes on. 

But to JP's point, testing and quality standards are extremely important.  For TV's, this would be drop tests, vibration tests, thermal cycling.  For smaller electrical components it might be a resistance test, HIPOT test, etc.  When you have one person doing it, the risk is less in my experience.  But if this Russian builder were to get a building and hire some people on an assembly line, I would be very afraid.  Quality is usually the first thing to go.  For now, this Russian guy is testing the waters.  He doesn't know if he has a great product.  He is probably looking for an investor.  It will be curious to see where this goes.

But isn't funny that this one Russian was able to do what Minelab engineers have been just trying so... so hard to do for like 4 or 5 years, now?  No, Minelab knows exactly how to make a smaller coil.  They just don't want to, yet.  So the Russian is first to market.  That is a big deal in any industry.

[Norvic]

MT, your 19 & 14 as good as they are will become redundant, in a few months I suspect the negatives towards the X coils will fall away in history, what I also suspect there will be other aftermarket manufactures following in X coils footprints. Maybe even ML will reverse engineer the X coils too, but no holding breaths on that happening.

[flakmagnet]

8 hours ago, Norvic said:

Maybe even ML will reverse engineer the X coils too, but no holding breaths on that happening.

I would bet that happened almost immediately. Can't see any way ML would just sit around when new coils are being lauded by their potential customers. 

[Norvic]

Aie bet they did, Flak. My comment was a posted with the tongue in the cheek just a wee bit. Talking tongue in cheek..... there`s a bit of a rumour circulating over here in OZ, that the next batch of X coils are being forced by the authorities to come out with a Wealth Hazard Warning. I guess they`ll have a big sticker on them that says something like "Use of this product could lead to the user waking one morning with a new 4WD Rolls parked in the carport" ?

[Jonathan Porter]

20 hours ago, jasong said:

That's a good post JP.

A couple general interest questions here - are these standards set by Minelab something you can share so we can have an idea which standards they haven't met?  If confidential, does falling short of these standards mean the coils are measurably different from a coil which complies with the standards? Or are the standards mostly related to quality control issues, something like FCC regulatory issues, and not performance issues?

I'm curious because I've worked in engineering and standards can be relative in the engineering world and don't necessarily mean a product has a flaw. But in other cases that can be exactly what it means. In engineering specs are often derated, like a rope/cable may support 2x it's rated weight, etc. Or the way Intel derates various chips of the same design from the same wafer depending on the frequency it fails at. I'm just trying to understand better what you mean by the standards not being met.

Is the issue with IP related to the chip patch or is the DOD design being used in the X Coil the issue? 

 

My main role with Minelab is to use equipment in the field, at that I am very experienced. Obviously there is an issue of confidentiality and I’m pretty sure I sail pretty close to the wind sometimes. Testing methods and feedback are hugely confidential but I can assure you they are exhaustive both in the lab and also in my role in the field. For instance the 19” so called “DOG” coil performs brilliantly and provides a depth increase from 1 gram and up, I know this because I exhaustively tested this in the field throughout Australia, but alas it is HEAVY!!! Weight kills the perception of depth improvement, it requires HUGE effort to run that coil effectively. My main focus during testing centred around coil behaviour in a variety of soil types and conditions, I have numerous test sites were I perform these tests, these tests sites bring out the worst electronically in any coil and even put the genuine coils through their paces.

I desperately wanted to get the X coils over the line so something could be arranged for the chip, testing methods were exhaustive and very time consuming, a lot of feedback was given to the manufacturer and also Minelab. Unfortunately you only get one shot at this type of thing, especially with a company as large as Minelab, so coils being sold prematurely before improvements could be finalised killed off that avenue. I see a lot of negative comment here on the forum about Minelab this and Minelab that, yet Minelab were open to the idea if it could have been demonstrated the coils were  better or on par, that was the criteria. My last 22x21 Coil was really problematic especially in General Difficult, if I presented a coil like this to Minelab saying it was OK imagine what this would do to the X coils credibility?

To put things into perspective I see a LOT of GPZ 7000s in my role at the shop, hundreds of them over the past 3 years. I have many times taken people on training sessions only to discover there detectors were below par, some of these people are “Experienced” and very “Successful” detector operators yet had no idea there was something wrong with their detector. I am amazed how many people present themselves to me with their understanding and use of GPZ seriously flawed, their machines were making such a racket I’m amazed they found anything!

I see comments about justifications for side slipping Minelabs IP, anyone looking at the GPZ very quickly knows the chip in the coil connector is there to protect Minelabs IP, modifying or circumventing that chip is in essence interfering with that prevention, yes it can be done but ethically it is wrong. How you go about justifying the circumvention of that IP then comes down to how felixible you are ethically and explains the constant comments on this forum about Minelab “deserving” this treatment because they have not delivered on a promise etc, this also explains the storm of comments I have suffered through when I’ve tried to keep people informed, obviously a lot of this is directed at Minelab through me. Don’t get me wrong I put myself out there so deserve a few tomatoes thrown at me.

I could see all this coming a long time ago, it was laid out in front of me, every bump and pothole in the road,  yet I still went ahead and did it anyway (stupid idiot)! I tried so damned hard and I came so close but alas it is what it is. Do not blame Minelab for everything, there is plenty of blame to share around for everyone to get a good taste! Blaming someone no matter how deserved does not justify even worse behaviour from yourself.

JP

 

 

[jasong]

Thanks for replying. The reason I asked originally was what several posters also commented on, except I was thinking specifically in terms of jailbreaking my Android phone and how it related pretty similarly to this issue with the chipped coils. This is what I considered before I bought my X Coils:

In the case of my phones, I never felt there was an ethical issue jailbreaking them. I paid for it and I paid for the service. The OS and hardware were both designed with features and upgradability which were later specifically disabled by Verizon, who themselves never released any software to access it, but then prevented 3rd party apps from using it. A similar (though not identical) parallel to the coils. The primary purpose I bought my phone was to get internet in the field, I paid for the service, and the only way to get that service they sold me was to bypass their security. 

Verizon fought this for a decade until they finally just allowed data tethering through their own service so they could at least make some money off what people were going to do no matter what, rather than try to prevent it and fight it.  I no longer have to jailbreak my phones, and Verizon makes more money off me too because I'm willing to pay for it. Perhaps another parallel there which Minelab might learn from. They could disable the chip authentication in the firmware, charge a small fee for a user to download this patch, and still make money off X Coils even now.

However, if the DOD design itself was patented and no other manufacturer was allowed to use it at all then that seemed like a seperate issue from the chip discussion. That's why I was curious about wether it was a concern with the chip or the DOD design.