Jump to content
Steve Herschbach

Fisher Impulse AQ Discrimination Explanation

Recommended Posts

Skate.... like me you are going to have to dig most on the high end and low end until u have confidence in what it maybe.   I just don’t want to be in AM then switch to disc .... and have the machine disc out a 24k 8 gram ring.... that may have been heard clearly in AM.   I’m assuming when the digital comes out we may have the ability to adjust the NOTCH 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Steve , back on your diagram page 6 ( the modified version of a Minelab Equinox chart for the AQ), there is something which is not clear to me with this chart :

In summary , this shows shows the PI detection scale like this, from left to right :

1. Small ferrous /     2. AQ detecting range /   3. Iron nails , screws  /  4. large ferrous

I do not understand why there is an "iron gap" between 1.small ferrous  and  3. iron nails, screws.

Why no ferrous in this 2. AQ detection range?

There should be some ferrous of intermediate sizes between 1.small ferrous and 3.iron nails,. And no void as it is indicated in the chart. And at end I think that the AQ will accept some ferrous , just my opinion … 

thanks for your answer , Alain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Alain,

I went ahead and deleted the post and the chart. I put several disclaimers in the post that the chart was for conceptual purposes and was not intended to create an absolutely detailed, accurate, and definitive target response chart. I was assuming some degree of interpretation/interpolation by the viewer. Part of the problem is it is being taken out of the context of everything I have posted on the subject in the last ten days. I explained previously in this thread ahead of the chart that ferrous covers the entire range so I obviously agree with your conclusion since I have explained that exact thing so people would know it to be the case. I included both ends of the ferrous range in the chart and did actually include a portion of the bottle cap range that you must have missed. Long story short since the chart is being taken as definitive instead of conceptual despite the disclaimers, leaving it up is misleading or confusing people, and so deleting it it is probably for the best. I halfway knew when I posted it this was going to happen.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Steve Herschbach said:

I went ahead and deleted the post and the chart.

too late that my screen saver on my PC and the screen is huuuuuuuge :fisher:

 

RR

  • Haha 1
  • Oh my! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok Steve but I think that your initial idea is good , such a detailed chart is very interesting because it is very simple to understand so I think that fisher labs should provide one in the AQ user manual , so that people know exactly what the AQ can do ( or not do ) . This will avoid a lot of misunderstandings and frustations . Also from what I read here the AQ is a new generation machine that works differently from the previous ones and everything must be very well explained. 

BTW unfortunately for me , it looks like the AQ is not adapted for moderated mineralization ground prospecting  ( I am a coin shooter, inland  ) , so I will have to wait the future Fisher RELIC machine , I hope it will come soon because the VLF machines do not evolve any more in terms of depth performance since several years and I need some extra depth    :-) ... 

Thanks for everything , Alain

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree Alain about a chart, and I have a good start on one, but without actually having a detector it's only educated guesswork on my part based on what Alexandre and LE.JAG have posted so far. The one I posted was just a quick and dirty illustration. Hopefully they or Fisher will do something official before release, otherwise you can be sure people will eventually construct some at a later date.

I was hoping for one detector that would do both land and sea, something I liked about my ATX. To be honest I think Fisher will have a hard time making a detector more powerful than a GPX 4500 or GPX 5000 let alone a GPZ 7000, and few people who already own those are willing to give up any power, even if the detector is lighter and costs less. Minelab means gold prospecting to a lot of people so Fisher has a tough road ahead there, and they have let Minelab have lots of advance notice what to expect.... I doubt the engineers down under are asleep at the wheel. The AQ model however has only a couple detectors, the Garrett ATX and Beachhunter TDI, that are truly equivalent product. For me at least, having none of the three at the moment, the choice is pretty clear. I am fed up with 7 lb detectors that have $500 coils, and the Impulse, using the TDI as a starting point, simply has to be better, or Fisher has wasted a lot of time and money. I sent Dave Johnson a TDI (big box version) years ago and Carl worked at White's so they know what they need to beat to succeed.

fisher-impulse-aq-vs-garrett-atx-vs-whites-tdi.jpg
Fisher Impulse AQ vs Garrett ATX vs White's TDI Beachhunter

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This discussion has been great, but just like the Equinox original threads, when you run out of new information, it gets a little repetitive. I'm hoping it will not be the same long wait that Minelab had. After reading everything about the machine, I am torn on, if it can do better than my GPX? If there are not enough deep rings available, than I would probably run it so it can pick up the widest range of targets (hopefully as high as silver too). I understand that I will be digging large and small iron, and also I understand that I will never get that small thin gold, (like chains and stamped charms) because of the locked salt setting. But I'm starting to worry that I will be digging a ton of deep pull tabs and very little gold. The deepest decent sized gold ring (14K) I have found with the GPX was around 12-14". A small woman's 10K ring was a wobbly reading at around 12" Can it do better than that, is what I am wondering now.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Note that the TDI PULSESCAN no longer exists

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, ALEXANDRE TARTAR said:

Note that the TDI PULSESCAN no longer exists

New anyway. Here is a used one for $700

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 dewcon4414
      I think it will also be interesting to see what an aftermarket company might do with the 7uS coils.   Will we see more if this machine catches on?   Better yet will we see 7uS become the standard?   OR... is that a non-issue toward depth and sensitivity?  
    • By JEKOS123
      Hello Guys,
      I'm new on this forum and like Alexandre Tartar, I live in north of France.
      I was a young prospector in the 90's and asked my father (electronic engineer with good knowledge in magnetic field theory) to build a PI to hunt the beaches. So we have made, in a few months, an home-made PI metal detector 25 years ago, based on the technology of the old White's Surfmaster PI (mono coil). I remember the use of FETs (Field Effects Transistors to make 200 volts pulses). It worked, but unfortunately, my father was afraid by a so powerful magnetic fields and has continued his research on VLF detectors, until today !
      After this short presentation, here's my question :
      Is the Impulse AQ a bipolar detector ?
      Le Jag has explained us on the french forum "detecteur.net"  this technology developped by Alexandre :
      Positive and Negative pulse are alternatively sent.
      The positive one light the gold ring but magnetize the soil.
      The negative one demagnetize the soil.
      What about it ?
    • By PPP
      HI guys!
      It feels very good that this nice forum is at high speed with all discussions about the AQ with all different subjects about the AQ.We are now in the middle of january and still nothing from the Fisher.No reports from any tester, no videos, no manual, nada...it feels kind of depressing without knowing any informations at all.I know that LE.JAG and Alexander can't say anything about these informations even though the know for sure.Is there any thought or any guesses about these questions? 
    • By PPP
      I think the Garrett ATX challenges the AQ most and maybe TDIBH come close after ATX only in raw depth.I have myself an ATX and hunt my beach with it. Max sensitivity givs me around 15 inches for a normal coin size object.My Garrett sea hunter is absolutly no match and even my Equinox has no chance.The fair comparisson is ATX (PI , almost same coil size,waterproof ) I think the AQ has only one tone for both high and low conductive targets and one for iron.The ATX has one tone for high and one tone for low conductive targets but you have no tone for iron which makes one to digg all.
    • By fredmason
      I may have missed this issue..you know I am not very smart.
      will the prospecting, nugget finding version be wireless?
       I could not, would not buy another detector that doesn’t have a module.
      thanks
      fred
       
×
×
  • Create New...