Jump to content

Cell Phone On A Stick Detector Design


Recommended Posts

Rick - I hear what you are saying re: the ergonomics and the twist physics theory for straight shafts behind the criticism.  I think the conclusion, however, is not as cut and dried as making a blanket statement that it has lousy ergonomics because I too have no trouble swinging it all day yet one of my hunting buddies just can't stand it.  I think it is more of a 50 - 50 proposition.  I just happen to be able to adjust the arm cup to control pod to the optimal distance such that my wrist naturally and unconsciously compensates for the twist and does not result in fatigue on both the stock shaft and my favorite aftermarket CF shaft (shout out to Steve G).   Coil control and making a smooth level swing through the arc is something to which I pay a lot of attention.   I am short and perhaps my stature has something to do with it, though I know some short folks who have issues with it too.  So who knows why it works for some and not for others. All I know is that if it was a 100% flawed design, it seems there would be a lot more wailing about it and the manufacturers would quit coming out with new detectors that use basically that shaft design time and again.  Though I will note that that ML made a significant turn towards a Deus like stem and shaft design for Vanquish, and I have seen pics of a few home brew Equinox S Shaft systems out in the wild, too.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


Your basic premise Rick is that a detector with a straight shaft is an inherently flawed design. As I noted already I don’t argue with that premise personally. I prefer a balanced S shaft design, and have always held the T2/F75 up as my example of a near perfect detector from an ergonomic perspective. Many Whites models are also quite good. The big factor here is that to balance the coil requires an under elbow battery box to offset the coil weight. This in turn means limiting the detector to a minimum weight of about 3.5 lbs. It also creates a bulky upper rod and box assembly.

The only way to break under the 3.5 lb weight barrier is to lose the under elbow counterweight, and that means all detectors weighing under three pounds are inherently nose heavy and out of balance. The benefit is less actual weight and more compact designs.

Weight has become a key factor in marketing and getting under three pounds a goal to be attained, so I see this trend continuing. Explaining that a heavier detector may actually be more comfortable goes against “common sense” and salespeople generally don’t know better anyway. Moving the battery into the pod also lowers manufacturing costs adding fuel to the trend.

My observation is balance matters more than your rotational argument when it comes to design, especially in heavier models. This is born out by nearly all serious prospectors swinging pulse induction detectors with straight shafts. The Minelab Excalibur is another machine that comes with a S shaft that almost everyone immediately replaces with a balanced straight shaft.

The bottom line is my survey revealed that 60% of respondents prefer a S shaft and 40% a straight shaft. S shaft does win the day but it’s not a slam dunk. In my personal use I find that it is not the shaft that matters, but the balance and the hand grip. If a detector is balanced and has a good hand grip... that is my preference, with S shaft being third place as a factor. The CTX 3030 is remarkably good for a heavy detector due to perfect balance and a great grip even though it has a straight shaft.

And what to make of comments like this from the survey thread:

On 1/20/2016 at 5:12 AM, beardog said:

A straight shaft with an adjustable forward/back upright handle would be the ultimate for me.

BAN THE S shaft!

Some people hate S shaft designs, and designers do hear them also. It’s an issue that will never please everyone.

All detectors under three pounds are nose heavy, so it comes down to the hand grip. The fact is people in general love the ergonomics of the Deus even though it is nose heavy. While the S shaft contributes to that, I think it is the near perfect hand grip, literally a pistol grip, plus the light weight that really makes the difference. It sucks fast with larger coils.

My main complaint on the Equinox is that putting the battery in the grip makes for a rounded poor grip design, and this is what most people find uncomfortable about the unit. It appears to me the Simplex mimics the Deus molded grip and so will have a better shot at comfort in that regard.

Again, I do agree again with your assertion about S versus straight shaft as a generality, but I think balance plays a huge role to the point where a properly balanced straight shaft feels better than a nose heavy S shaft design. Hand grip design is also very important, but it is highly subjective due to people’s differing hand sizes. I love the F75 grip personally, and a large handed friend hated it.

While I agree with you that all the under three pound models and in particular the straight shaft models are “inherently flawed” from an ergonomics perspective, with all due respect to Dave Johnson, I have the benefit of having more real world experience with more people actually using the devices. The reality is simple. It’s a mixed bag. For every person that says they hate a particular design, Equinox for example, there are plenty that wonder what the other people are complaining about.

My assertion is that for most men with good upper body strength once you get under three pounds it’s simply not the issue for many that it would be if the detector were heavier. In my case, having swung 5 - 7 pound detectors for years, anything under three pounds is like swinging a feather all day. I find the grip matters a lot, and much prefer the Deus grip over the Equinox grip. I also found with use it mattered less and now I don’t have an issue holding the Equinox grip where I did initially. My hand actually adjusted to it. Balance is still an issue. I can swing the stock coil with no issue for an unlimited number of hours. But that 15” coil makes it more nose heavy, and my upper back muscle protested for four days in the U.K. before it broke in. I highly recommend steveg’s aftermarket rod with counterbalance for those swinging the Equinox with 15” coil for that reason.

To sum up I basically agree with you but real world experience and feedback from users tells me it’s more complex than just “S rod good, straight shaft bad”.

Out of the three detectors under consideration in the original post I would suspect Equinox falls at the bottom of the heap for perceived comfort purely because of the design of the hand grip. People with large hands tend to be fine with it while it hurts smaller handed people on initial use. I will hold out hope as proved to be the case with me that hand muscles can be exercised to adapt with extended use.

None of which entered my mind when I started this thread! It came about due to posts I saw about the Simplex being an Equinox copycat. The fact is Equinox copies designs that came before it, Quest specifically and Deus more generally, and I wanted to note that for the record.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice summary Steve. I also agree about hand chafing on the underside of the control box/top of the grip - That’s the main reason I got rid of my 600.

I am curious about the near universal preference of water hunters for straight shafts.  I never surf hunted with anything but a Whites DFPI, so I have no data as to why that seems to be a fact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guess where that started and the designers behind it. Here is one of the original “cell phone on a stick” models from 1985, and still in production! Fisher 1280-X, 5.8 top heavy pounds. Figure the rotational torque on that baby! :smile: You can hip mount it, but why no under elbow mount option? Garrett at least got that part right.

The Fisher 1280-X and CZ-21 may be a couple of the worst ergonomic nightmares on the market today. With that in mind I don’t see any company as being in a position to get all self-righteous about this sort of thing. They are all guilty of selling some very poor ergonomic designs to this very day.

fisher-1280x-metal-detector.jpg

garrett-infinium-ls-pulse-induction-diving-metal-detector.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Underwater units are a whole different ball game. If we are processing the design of underwater units through the lens of land ergonomics it's hard to make sense of them. Straight shafts make perfect sense where you want to have your body and your machine parallel to the sea or lake floor and also create as little drag as possible when swinging side to side. With machines like aquanaut and CZ20-21 weight is much less of an issue due to buoyancy. The aquanaut was pretty comfortable to use underwater for me. Initially I thought I'd like it under the cuff so I bought the adapter (3rd party I believe, but does exist). For whatever reason I couldn't get comfortable with it. I couldn't make adjustments comfortably, wasn't as parallel as I'd like, and I couldn't see the LED. I was also afraid to scrape the housing up or damage it under my arm. For an under the arm mount to work better for me it would require an S shaft (with unit mounted just below the hand grip) which I do prefer on land but don't care for underwater. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My first underwater detector was a 1280-X actually. Way back in the day, late 80's, and since I was one of if not the first guy to hit some local freshwater swimming holes in Anchorage, Alaska I did ridiculously well with that detector. Lots of silver including lots of silver half dollars (no silver dollars for some reason) and plenty of rings. At that super low 2.4 kHz frequency it was not especially hot on smaller gold but it was killer on silver and full size rings. As you note not bad at all in the water either. By today's standards the 1280-X and CZ-21 being the only First Texas offerings still as far as underwater machines is a bit of an embarrassment however. I get that they are SCUBA capable, but very few of us need machines good to 250 feet. I am constantly puzzled about why First Texas never converted the CZ to a digital format and put it in a smaller housing. They even have Dave Johnson, the original lead designer on board. A real head scratcher. The CZ-5 was a real favorite of mine, and I would have loved to get one in a T2/F75 type setup. They could have done a small waterproof to 10 feet multifrequency machine way before now and still have not. I just don't get it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/14/2019 at 12:25 PM, phrunt said:

I like how you say it how it is Steve, you are no doubt becoming a real thorn in the side of the manufacturers

There is also no doubt some that think I am too hard on the U.S. manufacturers... somebody is always complaining I am being mean to their favorite company! :laugh: Or maybe it's that I am in the pocket of "those other guys"!! :laugh::laugh:

The truth is simple. I more than anything want the U.S. manufacturers, First Texas, Garrett, and White's, to kick ass and succeed!!! I think I speak for many when I say my "complaining" is rooted in anger when I see this not happening. Perceptually they are just standing by while the foreign competition eats their lunch. They no doubt see things differently but I do not think I am alone on the outside looking in thinking that's what is happening.

I have been a business owner/entrepreneur my entire life. I have dealt with a very large number of manufacturers over the years as a dealer, most far larger than these detector companies. Almost all, with the rarest of exceptions, have been picture perfect examples of pride and arrogance. They always know better than their dealers and their customers. They want to design what they think is best, and then tell us why we should buy it. They start small and hungry but reach a point where they are doing well. They tell themselves it is all because they are so brilliant, and that's when they stop listening and start telling. They lose their way and soon the new hungry guy eats their lunch. It's so common it's like a life-cycle law of business.

"Sales are doing great"! "People love our stuff"! They only see the good and only listen to those who offer praise, and then wake up one day and wonder what happened, where did the customers and the business go?

Most of what we talk about on the forums does not reflect what goes on in the minds of Walmart, Amazon, and eBay shoppers buying their first detector. We do not represent the mass market. We are the educated ones, the nerds, and truthfully, not where the big money is. But I do think we are the canaries in the coal mine. When a guy like me who has been metal detecting for almost 50 years can't get excited by anything the U.S. manufacturers are doing something is wrong. So I bitch and complain because I hope somebody is listening, that somebody will do something to get the mojo back. I really do wish them well. :smile: But don't expect to get my business from brand loyalty or made in the U.S.A. appeals. It's lead the way or follow, and right now the U.S. manufacturers cannot be said to be leading the way anymore. That does make me kind of sad. :sad:

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is very frustrating and very hard to not sound like a broken record everytime this topic rears its ugly head, though we keep on keeping on in hope that US manufacturers will listen, cull their excessive detector line ups, and consolidate existing technology into a few new multi-use detectors to remain competitive and relevant to the market.  Why it is so hard to even come up with a selectable frequency detector to replace aging flagship models like the F75, T2 and AT Pro series is beyond me.

And that doesn't necessarily mean having to innovate with new tech or be in the form of a cell phone on a stick style detector which may take eons to develop, simply rework existing units into new weather/waterproof lightweight housings that offer the sorts of features that other manufacturers consider now to be standard offerings on their detector lineups.

The positive feedback from the Simplex+ so far from our European counterparts is proof that if you package existing tech into a new lightweight platform and market it at an attractive price, then it can be a recipe for a good financial success.

Sometimes I look at my trusty G2 and think of the possibilities if they were to rework it with a couple of extra frequencies, multi-tone options (including 99 tones with good modulation), with a refreshed weatherproof housing and maybe a boost mode for a bit more depth capability.  Probably just dreaming, though something that should be relatively easy to develop if the will is there, and if they are willing to listen to customer feedback.   

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I welcome!
 "Cell Phone On A Stick Detector Design"
This is the future of the georadars. When from the soil is removed with the help of a cheap sensor, and expensive decryption is carried out through a mobile phone online by subscription. With respect. 

Link to comment
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
×
×
  • Create New...