Jump to content
phrunt

Qed Major Upgrade Announced

Recommended Posts

Some people may see the need to ship the detector back every once in a while to get updates a disadvantage to it, I see it as a massive positive.  I know my detector will be upgraded and improved over the years for no cost other than some shipping, how rare is that in this world? At least 5 years of being able to have the latest model, and even if new hardware is required Howard does it at a discounted price, or in this current upgrade he's doing it for no charge! 

A detector that's constantly being improved.  Pretty impressive.  For those that don't want to ship it back they don't have to, it's still the same detector they purchased, or they could wait until an update they want badly enough is out and gather up the previous updates at the same time. 

Fortunately it's only the little control box that needs sent back, mine was 500 grams to send back and I packed it well in cardboard and plenty of bubble wrap which would be a good part of that weight.

I look forward to hearing more of your results Reg and JR and your views on the updates.  I hope to get some results myself soon, warmer better weather is going to kick in at some point soon and the ground defrost up in the hills of gold country 🙂

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm out of it for awhile Simon. Life now revolves around feeding cattle and drenching sheep.

Victoria already seems like months ago - but "I'll Be Back - - - " 

Hopefully picking up an 18" Detech co-planar in a couple of days, from Stinky Pete on his way back from Queensland 👍

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, you've got to leave some for everybody else I guess, no need to be greedy.

Every time I hear Stinky Pete's name I have a little laugh, the man must like his baked beans.

I only have one Detech coil and that's my Ultimate 13" VLF coil for my GBP, it's a great coil and one of my all time favourite coils, I am guessing the 18" Detech co-planar will be a treat to swing.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

18" coils have always been my favourites. 

Found a lot of deep gold with the old green "Dustbin Lid" and for many years, the red Coiltek 18" DD coupled to an SD2200, my current favourite is the Elite flat 18" and I'm certain next it will be the 18" Detech CC. 👌

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately an 18" maybe over kill for me here, although I'm sure if the ground was easier to cover and access there would be gold for it to find, we aren't a big wide open area here, mountain after mountain, a majority of it never detected or even explored by foot I'm certain...  This goes from the bottom of the Island to the top, photo recently taken at the start of winter from my wife on take off on a plane on a trip to OZ.

1356358647_fromplane.jpg.9407126dd6be75141c0d586b28f8cd18.jpg

 

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, phrunt said:

Unfortunately an 18" maybe over kill for me here - - -

Indeed Simon.

Horses for courses -

Share this post


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

Unfortunately an 18" maybe over kill for me here, although I'm sure if the ground was easier to cover and access there would be gold for it to find, we aren't a big wide open area here, mountain after mountain, a majority of it never detected or even explored by foot I'm certain...  This goes from the bottom of the Island to the top, photo recently taken at the start of winter from my wife on take off on a plane on a trip to OZ.

1356358647_fromplane.jpg.9407126dd6be75141c0d586b28f8cd18.jpg

 

 

I dont know, the places here that the old timers got into looking for gold never stops amazing me. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I received my QED back after it's update today,  the manufacturer was very quick getting it back to me, a majority of it's time away was my fault as I accidentally selected the incorrect shipping method to get it over there, I thought $14 NZD seemed very cheap, it should of been about $20NZD... I blame the girl at the post shop as she was new :laugh:

There is a new design battery cover now too as mine came back with the new revision and my old one, Awesome.  The new one fits really snug, much tighter fit than the old one and is nicer to get on and off than the old one even thought it's tighter as it has nice edges to grip onto.  I like that it's got QED written on it too.

IMG_20190911_161510.jpg.21309baa6992f395f495a06af09230b4.jpg

IMG_20190911_162252.jpg.309ebfb3eb361aa7693b69880f27ed4f.jpg

Some people in the past had problems with their battery cover falling off sometimes, I really doubt that will happen with this new one.

As I was skiing today I didn't have a lot of time to test it out with it's new ground balance method along with the DD coil compatibility but I was desperate to give it a try so I took it out for a spin in the local area with a couple of test nuggets.

I took with me a tiny nugget which I left on the ground and a slightly bigger flat nugget that I buried, I thought the flat nugget would weigh more so it was the one I picked to bury leaving the other nugget sitting on the ground to wave over to test as I was messing with settings.

Steve H said some time ago I should test out the QED in our mild soils with ground balance disabled so that's exactly what I did today, I cranked the QED up to the highest gain, mode 11 (no ground balance).  And set the threshold to my preferred settings and filmed this short video.

From the results of this video I assume I can run the QED with ground balance disabled fine in our local soils.  I wasn't sure what I set the ground balance to in Mode 11 (NO GB Mode) so I set it to 1, 150 is default out of 300 I believe.  I first had it set to 1 as I was testing with the ground balance enabled in Mode 1 which is the QED's most sensitive Mode other than Mode 11 and I was able to run the QED fine without ground balancing when I turned it on so I kept lowering the ground balance numbers and testing and it went all the way down to 1 without any response from the soil.  This is what prompted me to try in the Mode 11 which was added as a beach mode initially.  Please correct me if I'm wrong with any of this.  I am guessing with Mode 11 the Ground balance numbers don't do anything?

I pumped the coil a bit to show I'm getting no feedback from the ground with GB disabled.

On the previous firmware beach mode was Mode 16 but as this new firmware handles soil types better they were able to drop the numbers of Modes to 1 to 10 for ground balanced modes and Mode 11 to No GB Beach mode.

This is the two test nuggets I used

IMG_20190911_160247.jpg.d1fe10e0ec2a1a7a8438748c2f48390e.jpg

The buried nugget

IMG_20190911_160334.jpg.3cfef09a748e0c72c7c796b2e8e8b9ed.jpg

The ground nugget.

I am looking forward to testing it properly and connecting up my X-coil and NF Evo on it.  It's the first time I'd really given my Coiltek Joey 10x5" Mono a chance on it, it clearly worked well.

I'm very new on the QED so QEDspert's may find my settings not optimal.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very interested project you are working on " Phrunt " I am watching it closely and keep up the good work in testing the QED, we all can learn of your testing project . Want to thank you for all the work you put into it!

 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I only own two DD GPX coils so I tried them both, the 11" Commander and 15x12" Commander, both worked fine on the new firmware version QED.  It seemed weird just putting the coil on and off I go, not having to flick a switch to tell the detector what coil is connected.

I was able to have my gain and mode set the same flat out settings as with the Mono's.

It appeared to be using the coil properly too, not just as a DD in mono mode.

I'm used to using small mono coils so there was a sensitivity drop on tiny gold, the bits like 0.0X of a gram now needed to almost touch the 15x12" coil, an inch at most, in saying that on my GPX with the DD coil I wasn't even able to detect these bits even touching the coil.

Once the bits got into the 0.X of a gram range depth increased quite well and a coin had crazy depth.  I'm thinking I may take the QED with the15x12" Commander to the football field I've been finding all the coins to see if I've missed any deep ones.  It's my biggest coil for the GPX.  It will be interesting to see if it can find anything the Equinox 15x12" missed.  I'll just have to be sure the area doesn't have too much junk first.

Also for those interested, I asked about the best thing to do with my QED seeing I'm able to run in some locations without any issues with running in No ground balance mode 11 (Beach mode) and Howard the manufacturer and Goldman responded with this information so it looks like I was on the right track.  It looks like with the new firmware the QED is going to be deadly on small gold in locations where I can get away with this, I look forward to testing in more locations, two so far work with no ground balance.  Here was their reply.

Well I’ve had a chat with Howard and together we believe that you would be better off running in beach mode given what you have written below. This would be for two main reasons:

1) you do get more depth in beach mode
2) in beach mode you do not have a detection hole, so therefore you will definitely not miss any gold. Not that the chance of missing gold in modes 1-10 is high as the detection hole with the latest upgrades has narrowed from the pre-upgrade model.

in beach mode,
1) all target responses will be rising pitch
2) you can and should still use the MGB to minimise any noise keeping MGB as low as possible. So best to start at MGB=150, then keep reducing until you get unwanted noise, then go up until quiet. If no noise at all, run at MGB=1.

  • Like 4

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 Reg Wilson
      The new compact, super light PI from Ballarat, Australia. This machine uses any Minelab PI compatible mono coil and is dynamite on small as well as larger gold. It is almost totally unaffected by  EMI enabling it to be used near or practically beneath power lines. All hand built, on a limited production scale, this little beauty is creating great interest in Australia, where it can handle the highly mineralized soils.

    • By Steve Herschbach
      I wonder how it would do on Florida beaches? Very light weight, super hot on small stuff, can use Minelab compatible coils.
       
    • By Steve Herschbach
      AussieMatt pointed out on another thread that lo and behold, the QED has appeared. I am not going to mess with all the long back history. Instead, it looks like we may finally have a new detector model from an independent designer after so many false starts over the years. If nothing happens to upset the cart reports should be coming in from Australia in the near future.
      Anyway, congrats to bugwhiskers and company. I truly do wish for it to go well for all involved.
    • By Steve Herschbach
      "Righto, this is based on my last 4 or 5 trips combined. Today was the 2nd time I've been able have 2 QED,s on the ground as well as a GPX 4500 and a souped up GP 3000 to compare."
      https://www.prospectingaustralia.com.au/forum/viewtopic.php?pid=341762#p341762
      https://www.prospectingaustralia.com.au/forum/viewtopic.php?pid=341951#p341951
      QED Thread On This Forum
    • By Reg Wilson
      Lanny, there is a super light weight PI built here in Australia, at a good price. I use one and love it. Unfortunately it is not yet available in the USA. It is called the QED. It is being constantly improved by the dedicated inventor. Hope one day you will be able to get one.
    • By Jonathan Porter
      So far there has been no real “direct” reviews of the QED, in effect just innuendo clouded by politics, which is not helpful. 
       
      With the help of a friend I've just finished some testing of the QED and want to share our impressions here in the hopes of getting the ball rolling for some quality discussions (but maybe this is being too optimistic?) We hope and believe our tests were rigorously objective, the QED was used for general gold hunting and also comprehensively tested on buried real gold pieces of various sizes in a variety of soils, considerable care was taken to ensure no placebo/bias.*
       
      We deliberately tested on only frequently detected but historically very productive public fields, not private property in which it can be relatively easy to find gold using any technology due to only ever seeing a few detectorists.
       
      First and foremost, important details of the QED's method of operation that are different to other detectors which needs to be clearly understood:
       
      Unlike Minelab detectors, the QED has a “dead zone” that can be varied using the Volume control. The threshold is set using the Bias control and has 2 different audio threshold settings, an upper and a lower value. When the Bias is turned down in number below the threshold lower value, OR, turned up in number above the upper threshold value, the “Threshold” audio increases as per usual.
       
      Suppose for example, the lower audio threshold bias value of the Bias control happens to be 50 and the upper threshold bias number happens to be 60. Then if the Bias is turned down below 50 OR turned up above 60, the audio “threshold” level increases as per usual. For these threshold examples, 50 and 60, small gold (fast time constant targets) “in effect” produce signals less than 55 (half way between 50 and 60), and larger gold “in effect” produce signals more than 55.
       
      If the Bias is set at the lower threshold limit, 50 for example, then the detection of small gold will give the usual INCREASE in audio level response, and larger gold will give a BELOW threshold level response,
       
      OR
       
      If Bias is set at the higher threshold limit, 60 for example, then the detection of larger gold will give the usual INCREASE in audio level response, and smaller gold will give a BELOW audio threshold level response.
       
      Similarly with ground noise; some ground noise will in effect produce signals below 55, so that if the Bias is set at 50, this ground noise will give an increase in audio sound, but if the Bias is set at 60, this ground noise will give a below threshold audio response. Conversely, if the ground noise is in effect above 55, then if the Bias is set at 50, this ground noise will give a below threshold audio, but if Bias is set at 60, this ground noise will give an increase in audio level.
       
      Signals in effect BETWEEN 50 and 60 are in the “dead-zone,” for which the audio is below threshold. Signals in effect below 50 OR above 60 give an increase in audio.
       
      So if threshold is set at the lower threshold of 50, then faint signals from small gold will give an above threshold audio, and large targets a below threshold audio. Whereas its the opposite for the upper threshold of 60, faint signals from large gold will give an above threshold audio, and small targets below threshold audio. So for shallow small gold select the lower threshold limit, for big deeper gold select the upper threshold limit. Bigger target signals will produce above threshold signals regardless of whether they are small or larger targets.
       
      However the Volume control controls the dead-zone width; the gap between the upper and lower threshold Bias settings, that is, the dead zone gap is increased by turning the Volume down, or decreased by turning the Volume up.
       
      In fact the QED can be set to operate with NO dead-zone (like the usual Minelab PI audio).
       
      To do this:
       
      a.    Vary the Bias between the upper and lower threshold. Note the gap.
      b.     Increase volume a bit.
      c.    Re-do a. and note the decrease in the gap.
      d.    Continue to repeat a, b, c until there is no gap.
      (This will allow some feel for true ground noise etc.)
       
      However the QED audio has a very low level signal EVEN if below threshold, This below threshold faint audio signal is just the pitch signal only, and detects all signals, ground noise, target signals, whether long time constant or short, and EMI. But this below threshold pitch sensitivity is not as acute as the audio set at threshold per point 2 below, and it is very soft.
       
      Yet even further, if a target or ground noise (or EMI) does drive the audio below threshold, the nature of the audio is that it has the usual “re-bound” response once the coil has moved over and past the target or ground noise. I refer to the lower pitch audio following the initial target higher pitch audio (“high-low”) or the opposite; the higher pitch audio following the initial target lower pitch audio (“low-high”) effect known from Minelab PI's. So for moderately weak target signals that cause the audio to dip below threshold once the coil moves beyond the target and the audio then rebounds above threshold. To recap; for these targets, as the coil passes over the target the audio goes first below threshold THEN above the threshold. 
       
      However for the fainter of these target signals (the important signals one listens for in thrashed ground), this rebound signal is hard to discern compared to the same signal that would occur if the Bias had been set at the alternative threshold setting for which the audio signal then would have given an initial increase in threshold as the coil passes over it and then a below threshold rebound. Therefore, it is important to understand that you EITHER need to set the Bias to chase the faint small targets in shallow ground (Bias at the lower number setting), but lose out a bit on the faint large target signals OR set the Bias to chase the faint larger targets in deeper ground (Bias at the higher number threshold setting) but lose out a bit on the smaller targets.
       
      The QED has a “motion” audio response; meaning the coil has to be moved to hear a signal. It can be operated both quickly, and also, remarkably slowly. If the coil is moved “remarkably” slowly it is possible to hear the average audio detect a very faint target above the audio “background random chatter”, considerably more readily than if the coil was moved at a typical realistic operational speed. When depth testing and when you know where the target is, beware that you do not slow down the coil swing to an artificial unnatural swing speed to enable the detection of a deep target at its known location.*
       
      Important recommendations:
       
      1.     It's very important to get the threshold (Bias) spot on for optimal results, If the threshold level is too high, then faint signals get drowned out, but if the audio threshold level is too low then only the residual very faint pitch signal remains, but this faint pitch only signal is less sensitive to target signals than the audio set optimally as per point 2 immediately following.
       
      2.     The threshold must be set so that it is just audible; in effect just immediately below the “real” audio threshold signal, so that what you are hearing is just between only the pitch signal and actual above threshold audio.
       
      3.     Note that the effective principal threshold control (Bias) is temperature dependent and requires reasonably frequent adjustment over time as the ambient temperature changes to get best results. Therefore there is NO actual specific optimal Bias number setting, rather it entirely depends on temperature. It can be as high as 70 in very hot conditions 
       
      4.  Once 2. and 3. are optimally achieved, you will find that the GB setting has to be spot on for best results. If you find that it is not critical, you really need to re-address points 2. and 3.
       
      5.  The QED does produce ground noise that sounds on occasion like a target. If you aren't digging some ground noise you do not have it set up properly, especially in variable soils. With ANY detector (automatic GB or Manual) altering the GB setting slightly to eliminate a faint “deep target-like signal” will result in eliminating the faint signal whether it is ground noise OR in fact a deep real metal target.
       
      6.  You need to listen to the soft “subliminal” threshold of the QED very carefully, quality headphones are a must.
       
      7.  “Gain” acts as a sensitivity control as you would expect.
       
      I suggest that the QED is best used as a specialist very fine (Small) gold detector. It produced a reasonably clear but quiet response to the extreme small gold (of the order of 0.1 g), we managed to find 5 tiny pieces in well-worked ground in all totaling 1 gram, although the SDC would have picked 5 of the 5, but not so well in one location due to power line noise (This could be remedied somewhat by lowering the Gain of the SDC and using minimal threshold). However, we purposely went over exactly the same ground with the SDC with the SDC set at a lower threshold and 3 on the gain, and then found 3 more pieces of gold; we are 100% sure we had already passed the QED exactly over the target locations so we put this down to QED ground noise masking targets. The QED struggles compared to the SDC in the more mineralised soils, however the QED does seem superior to the ATX.
       
      To get the most out of the QED, use a small coil such as an 8” Commander mono, and set the Mode as low as possible so long as the ground signals do not become too intrusive. Usually 1 or 2 is OK for Minelab coils, but some other coils may produce too much ground noise at this setting so you may need to increase the Mode to 3 or above dependent on the ground.
       
      Further, we got some very thin aluminium foil and very gradually trimmed it down until the SDC could no longer detect it. This represents particularly fast time constant targets (“extremely” small gold), and found that the QED did still detect it, but only within several mm of the coil surface, not further. But this does mean that the QED will detect extremely small shallow pieces that the SDC will not.
       
      Alternatively we suggest the QED is also a suitable lightweight low-cost patch hunter when used with a large coil with the Mode turned up so that there is less ground noise.
       
      For the sake of completion, to answer questions posed of the QED depth for an Australian 5 cent piece compared to the Zed  both using the same sized coils. We measured this carefully and we are not prepared to give exact figures to avoid any trivial arguments, other than to say that the QED detected between 60% to 2/3rd of the depth of the Z. 
       
      The QED susceptibility to EMI in areas remote from mains compared to the 5k on EMI noisy days? In one word: “Good.
       
      The QED susceptibility to mains in urban areas compared to the SDC or Zed? In two words: “Typically Bad.”
       
      The QED’s main strength is its cost, light weight, ergonomics, and simplicity of use, and yes it IS definitely simple to use, but a bit “fiddly.” It has no “magic settings” once you understand exactly how it operates as described above. Going back to the SDC really highlighted the difference a light weight detector can have on general comfort and enjoyment of detecting, and our experiences with the QED underscored Minelab's poor ergonomics.
       
      In our opinion the QED fits a market where people are looking for a cheap detector capable of finding small gold in thrashed areas, and are wanting more coil choices without the specialised "one size fits all" approach of the SDC. Good value for money.
       
      Its main weakness is its underlying ground noise, which although having the advantage of being “hidden” in the dead zone, nevertheless limits depth compared to lower ground noise capable detectors, for targets other than the very fast time constant targets. In summary it works relatively best in the less mineralised soils for small gold.
       
      Beyond the scope of the above suggested prospecting (very small gold & patch hunting mainly in relatively unmineralised soils), I choose not to comment further, other than we will not be using the QED for purposes other than secondary activities, and still intend to use other well-known detectors for primary prospecting activities because of their other advantages. 
       
      No doubt others with QED's will disagree with us. We welcome this, and would be happy to be proved wrong.
       
      Ultimately, time tells the truth by substantial gold finds or lack thereof in well-worked ground.
       
      *Note: because of the subtle audio, it is easy to imagine you are “hearing” a target above the general background ground noise when you know where it is. We endeavoured to avoid this tendency.




×
×
  • Create New...