Jump to content

Video - Finds Made By Le Jag With Pulse Detectors


Recommended Posts

ok, indeed I did not understand
when i see the ring appear
we just see the slice

I call the guy who was with me
and to show him, I kick water
  on the ring which comes out better from the sand

Terry, I'm starting on video
I'm already having a hard time doing them, if in addition I had to fake them
I think I would be too bad to get there
😂

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites


Yes, but I understand what Terry is saying (I saw your mp)

my camera is fixed in ventral, on my case
and when I bend down each time to pick up the target
it leaves the field of vision ...

but, I prefer like that // in ventral
it's too complicated and heavy on the head

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

HI , it is always the same with detection measurements , they are very subjective if done on the field with approximate measurement tools. If you want to have an accurate idea of the performance of a machine , you must test it on static dedicated bed tests , with always the same conditions , and not on the field because the conditions ( hygrometry  ) can  change depending on the season. We have discussed on this with El Nino and Alexandre in an other discussion on this forum , see below  . On my own test ( a big box filled up with ground  )  I  think I have an accurate idea of the max depth  of a VLF machine.  I have tested a dozen of  VLF detectors  since several years using always the same bed tests  , and actually the max depth is always the same around 12 inches on a big coin say 10grams using  a 12inches coil size. This test is very reliable and repeatable.

It would be very easy for me to test the AQ on this bed test , I would evaluate  the difference between a VLF machine and the AQ in a few minutes ...

Oh yes I have also a box filled with sand mixed with salt water to reproduce the see beaches conditions , I mean the French ones, not the volcanic sands like in Hawai  ...

So if somebody wants to send me an AQ for measurements , do not hesitate …  😊

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suspect we will get a LOT of opinions on depth when this machine comes out.   Best gauge is what the guy using it feels....... not what someone else is telling you from a different location...... or country.   I say FEELS....... because there are a LOT of factors that play into depth.... settings, conditions, target..... and more times than not the user.    We have air tests, found targets, dug holes and test gardens.......most tests are designed to convince others you are right.    But i believe most experience hunters will know if the machine is fitting THEIR needs..... and might even get surprised at other ways the machine improves their hunting besides depth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just want to say that earth tests are fair...especially if you add other competitive detectors to the test to compare real-time performance...

... Do not forget that all the detectors are tested on various test fields during the development.
Never go straight from the lab to the field for detection ..
.And then these detectors are real tested in the terain. In different situations ... where the detector is still tuned ...

I consider both tests essential.

It shows the technical quality of the detector ...
   And ... Finally, the practice of satisfied users will decide on the success of the project ...
 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes I agree with you El Nino , static tests on bed tests are important , because you can compare with them different machines in the same conditions : same ground , same target … It is very important to keep the same conditions during the time , and not change the ground  or change the target . If you follow this rule then the depth measurements are very reliable and repeatable . And I finally ended to the conclusion that the VLF performances are very similar whatever the brand is, for a given coil size and frequency . For example 12inches max depth on a big coin in my local low / medium mineralized ground for an 11inches coil at 5 or 8khz.  Another thing I could see with these tests that the VLF detectors do not progress any more in terms of depth performance , this is why I am very interested by the new "AQ" technology.

Of course field tests are essential, Dewcon I agree with you . But be careful with user "feelings" , because this is a very subjective way to analyze the things , and I rather prefer a "scientific" approach by doing measurements , then field tests. For example once a seller asked me to test a detector , he told me that the machine could see a coin at 16inches or more depth. Finally I tested the machine on my "boxes" , and at the end the results were very similar to the other machines , no improvement at all. He was just "psychologically" convinced that his machine was better than the others , but in fact it was not the case ... 

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...