Jump to content

Could Not Make Eqx To See The Target


nordic

Recommended Posts

On ‎12‎/‎4‎/‎2019 at 5:20 PM, coinhunterseth said:

Test the Equinox on some signals the Deus gets before digging them.

You're dead on with this statement.  Not possible to do an accurate test without leaving the targets in the ground.  Approach each from the same direction and angle.  Key note, after one machine detects a target it must be turned off and removed from the area.

All this being said I made a return visit to my coke site today.  Determined to test the Equinix in this area, I searched until I located a target that might be good.  Took my time to rotate around the target and as I did the target became intermittent.  Then at one point, the machine went silent, nothing, no audio, completely silent.  Continued to rotate around the target and as in the beginning the audio came back to a some what good audio signal.  Pinpointed and dug a plug about 6" deep and noticed both the plug and hole had a huge amount of decaying coal slack (will attract to a magnet).  Another inch or so and out comes a penny.  Continued to hunt another hour and did the same to each target dug.  Conclusion, most cases the audio was not text book dig signals, but broken, very jumpy ID.  But remember, coal waste acts to partially mask even the best of targets with all detectors. 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites


Rotating and examining the target is probably the only way to go in difficult areas. To add to this, sometimes pumping coil over the target may give some clue as well. I totally agree with earlier assessment, that Deus and Equinox complement each other and this discussion was not another topic to compare the two. I also want to reiterate, I don't advocate to use any of the firmware version, but rather to use one that works best for you and the ground that you hunt. My aim is to gather information and share my own findings about strengths and weaknesses of each. In my case, I think 1.7.5 did better. By better I mean, it was not day and night, to put it into other words, the 1.7.5 was more optimistic and v2 rather pessimistic about how good targets were in difficult ground. By being optimistic I had to dig some rust, more than I would do on v2. I think v2 is more coin and larger target oriented than collecting shrapnel. But as mentioned earlier, I find coins carry little context and hence are not particularly interesting to me.

Something I recalled from this weekend. My friend had a lot of iffy signals on his Deus, he called me few times to swing over those targets and most of them were a No. And indeed, they were rust or, in fact, deep coke. Nox really shined.

Just to add. Settings were same as last week, Park2 or Field2, FE=0, Recovery 3/4, Sens 23, GB 0 (auto 1), Noise 0 (auto -8), 50 tones, T1=-9 to 2 in both Park2 and Field2 (default). Coke was ID 1, Rust ID was negative/13. Some buttons were coming at unusual ID 5, beer cans solid 22.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I might add one very important bit of information.  If the ground is in anyway saturated with water the coal waste (coke) will present an expounded amount of false signals in addition to increased masking issues.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the tip. I actually grabbed a piece of coke last time, for testing. I think minelab has a picture somewhere of various types of coke, I only see one kind usually here.

May come to this same field again to test the 15" coil.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Sorry to revive rather old topic, I'll be hitting this same test field once again this weekend with 1.5.0 and stock 11 coil. Both myself and my friend agreed we skipped a lot of iffy signals and should give it another go before trying adjacent field. It will then give me a fuller picture of how all 3 software versions work on same dirt and which one is best for me. I decided to do so after running few more tests of original firmware and finding it somewhat "sharper" or more "direct". An interesting detector response I was getting over a rusty iron piece - rather than giving a single tone (positive or negative), the 1.5.0 played a symphony as coil moved over it, as if vinyl player needle moving over the record track grooves. One other test I wanted to replicate, that a lot of people reported, is coin on edge. This is what is interesting. Reports are that the original software could not see coin on edge, especially if the surface of coin was in same plane of swinging direction. The later version 1.7.5 was reported to improve this situation to some degree. I don't quite understand why I was getting opposite results - 1.7.5 could not see the coin at all, while 1.5 was a lot better with it? There was no problem with coin on edge, but face perpendicular to coil motion direction in either version, however.

I want to test how it works in that field. If there is any interest, I can drop few lines about the experience.

I'm also awaiting 6" coil, can't wait to try it...

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What was the size and composition of the coin?  The issue typically cropped up or could be readily demonstrated with US silver or even clad dimes on edge.  Your results are unusual but frankly I think you are over thinking it.   Just go with the version that gives you the most confidence in the field, as all three behave similarly when it is all said and done. 

Putting too much stock in controlled test garden cases will always leave you second guessing yourself as you can never perfectly emulate every real world situation you will encounter.  Too many variables.  Pick a version and swing with confidence.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll just leave a note here on the 1.5.0 after visiting two places today including the field earlier in discussion, perhaps some people passing by will find it useful. In terms of separation, the original firmware beats 1.75 and v2 hands down. It felt as if recovery speed has been upped by a point or two. But the depth remained the same, or maybe even a bit better even. It is the only time when I felt GB actually makes some difference to how detector runs. The iron rust was a little sparky, but it was easy to identify by just checking the target from a different angle - in most cases TID would change with negative grunt or completely go negative. I always run iron volume high so I know I'm over an iron target. Other difference I've noticed, newer firmware was always trying to ID targets with rather stable weighted single ID, while on original, TID may change a lot, so a person would need to do the decision if it is good or bad target for them. In few words, original firmware lets you do the work and all decisions, rather than deciding for you. And I really enjoyed this today. But I understand how all this avalanche of feedback may be overwhelming for someone new to the machine or detecting. So as they say, as you get better, you may run lower FE/F2 values, I think it is also fair to say, one can downgrade the firmware to get more information as they advance with the detector.

On the negative side, all TID numbers are different on 1.5, so one would need to relearn what is what once again.

Ah yes, almost forgot. Today Nox was identifying targets, that Deus could not see. My friend could only see them in Deep mode. This has never happened before. He was the first to comment this difference today between us two.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really interested in how you are able to make these firmware comparison determinations in the field by running a single firmware version at a time.  Are you switching firmware versions in the field or just going by "memory" or feel from the last time out?  What is the control you are using to make determinations like the recovery speed assertion?  This is a very difficult thing to do when you have two detectors loaded up side by side with different firmwares, so I am impressed with your ability to do that over a period of days.  It is not possible for most but having two detectors out there at a time to do some real firmware side-by-side comparisons in the field would be ideal.  Applaud your determination and detailed feedback, nevertheless.  So do we have a winner on the firmware wars, then (I know that 2.0 seems to be the loser as far as you are concerned based on your reporting so far)?

Oh and it would also be helpful to compare the settings (sensitivity, Deus operating frequency, Equinox mode, recovery speed settings for each detector, etc.) between the Equinox and Deus and also the types of targets (high or low conductors) that were unable to be seen by Deus that were picked up by the Equinox, if possible.  I have both the Equinox and the Deus and am constantly vacillating back and forth between these detectors on what I decide to go with on a given outing - if there is thick iron, the Deus usually wins out (I guess that is telling me there is minimal difference in performance overall). Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the reply. I think it is fair to say that tests are not conclusive by all means, because I only use Park 1/2 and Field 1/2 modes, rarely I touch Beach modes and never Gold ones. I have very limited exposure the firmware 1.5, because I got the Nox with 1.7.5 and then updated to V2. Since updating to V2 I have noticed my finds became mostly coins and larger buttons, and my mind started wondering if I was doing something wrong and this is when I started vigorously researching the topic for the last 2 months, but information on youtube and Internet is very fragmented, rarely someone mentions the firmware they are running when testing things out, so I had to go figure it out somehow (by post or video date, for example). I agree, I do get sometimes obsessed to get to the bottom of things - my bad. I don't think there is another topic anywhere on forums, that attempts to compare all 3 versions of firmware, because, in essence, it is a very laborous task to do. More over, I perfectly see now how each of versions would suit different types of detecting, busy parks, beaches, fields and combine that with people aims, it becomes an infinite combination of preferences. So, of course, we are not talking about ML deliberately detuning the detector, they are merely trying to achieve the impossible - suit everyone (or larger audience). I'm very grateful to their farsightedness to allow to switch the firmware back and forth, thus expanding the flexibility of the firmware choice for different people and their unique aims. They could've made it one way upgradeable and it would be it, but they didn't - there is something here... I think with the original firmware the detector was not easy to learn, because it was giving more information than people wanted, especially those that did not run it in full metal mode were digging tons of iron. But it is also this very same firmware that sparked the interest to this MD and the rest was taken by achieved momentum. I have a feeling, that with further software revisions ML not only tried to fix 1.5 bugs, like VDI or user profile bugs, but also increase number of samples they take when processing signals to give more stable iron and TIDs. And they understand, that increasing sampling rate on relatively low frequency (40KHz) over a very small object (compared to the width of the swing) in real time does not come free (it is a very small "window"), I think they had to carefully adjust things at expense of others - this is my personal view only. In other words, on one hand there is responsiveness (see small items deep) and on other - accuracy (give stable TID).

Anyway, I had an opportunity to hit same field 4 times, spending in each software about 6-7 hours there. A week between each test may sound long, but somehow I could tell these differences. But I totally accept that it is far from A/B switching, of course. I have to say that I was flicking the firmware before, but I never tried same locations, so I had my own doubts and findings were inconclusive. Only now, taking this extra effort visiting same field (thanks to it having so much relic stuff enough for each visit), I feel certain that revision 1.5 is the sharpest firmware, it seems to see small things at depth, but it is not very stable with TID - one can almost tell the object under the coil is not flat, etc. You may observe it by trying the PP, the footprint of which under coil is a lot narrower. Other way to express this - is if the coil shrunk from 11" to, say, 9". 1.7.5 is a fix to 1.5 bugs with more accurate TID (I think it is just averaging more samples to achieve this), pin point surface is larger. I don't know what to think of v2, it feels overburdened with calculations that even switching between modes feels somewhat sluggish. I think it is so busy that it either does not see small items or drops them to iron side if not too sure.

As for Deus (Deus Lite is what my friend has), I have no experience with it, I never asked about settings, XP seem to have their own nomenclature. He doesn't run it in Deep mode for some reason, perhaps because of slow recovery. Perhaps on our next outing, we'll check each other targets more and also settings we use.

I have a feeling of accomplishment determining it is the original firmware is what I want to use, for now anyway. I can forgive these bugs with user profile and VDI if it does everything else well... It would be nice if people could share their experience too. It takes only 2 minutes to switch the firmware.

Sorry for the long response, again 🙂

  • Like 2
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...