Jump to content
Steve Herschbach

Things Metal Detector Manufacturers Could Do Better

Recommended Posts


Pisses me off but it appears true Minelab is the most hated, yet their gold detectors come up with the goods and always have. True that when you have trouble with a Toyota vehicle or whatever and send them a email you`ll get a customer relation email reply, wheras Minelab doesn`t, economy of scale I guess. Grudgingly I`d rather see their resources go into R & D rather than "fickle" email replies. But this is my view and I`m proud of them, they helped make my life the magic journey it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nokta/Fors - The Turkish lira may be crap, but our detectors aren't!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have used Whites, Tesoro, and Minelab.................to me they are tools, just like any other tool that we buy in order to get a task or job done. I do have curiosities why for example Whites and Tesoro have not updated and produced some new detectors...to compete with Garret or Fisher who in my opinion have done a good job in R&D and have brought new products to us the consumers. Minelab I am extremely happy with because I do believe they have of all companies given us a true leap forward and given us the consumer a superior product. My 4500 has produced and continues too, so why would I BASH Minelab? They have given us a TOOL that  produces more gold than their competitors. I have questioned and had my doubts about the GPZ ,but I don't own one, my opinion is based upon what I have read when it was first introduced. It appears that it produces and does a great job, is it worth 10 grand? Well it all depends on the individual. If your a full timer I am sure they would say yes, but if your a part timer perhaps a cheaper vlf is the answer for you. As we all know, regardless of price of your detector..its the effort and the individual that makes it happen, the detector alone won't make it happen. For now, I am sticking with my 4500, but that said...I can very well change my mind and become a ZEDHEAD. I don't think Minelab deserves that rating of #1 for being the most hated, they gave us the ability to be successful, the rest is up to us.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's just be glad I didn't photoshop the first thing I had in mind...the....erm...uh..."prophylactically" inspired names of a couple GPX timings.  :lol: I'm dying to post another one but after further review I'm fairly certain only Wyomingites/Texans would understand it.

 

I'm sure the design will grow on me, but all I can think of when I look at it is.... :lol:

 

post-569-0-09372300-1443310122_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

jasong,

I Love the gag, but If you mean detectors well suited to OZ conditions, maybe

Otherwise

Gold Bug Pro and T2 - the best selling gold detectors on earth - they OWN the African market, by far the world's biggest gold detector market.

Whites TDI - a competent machine.

Garrett ATX - an excellent detector hampered only by it's silly packaging.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right, I'm not being literal in any sense. Just pointing out some issues of greater or lesser importance in mood that is a bit more uplifting since it's been pretty somber around here lately.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Point taken, thanks.

In any event I think I'll forward it to First Texas and tell them that they should get their finger out!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe US company's care more about the business "bottom line" over bragging rights  to best nugget detector currently in the field.  First Texas and White's are making plenty of money selling their existing (dated?) gold machines to the african miners. An old tech detector here is all new there where what counts most is low cost, availability, ease of use and proven to find the gold. Since africa hasn't seen the pressure like north america or australia, these machines are producing just fine. Research and development is very expensive with uncertain outcomes so If you can still sell whats already on the shelf you do it.......Just business

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 nugget hunter
      can anyone  give me a idea on what ratio or scale  there is between different metals and depth with the same detector ....say  made out of  6 different metals ...  US nickel  size coins    .... silver , gold , alum , nickel , platinum ,steel and stainless steel ......
    • By Steve Herschbach
      The World's First Smart Detector & Imaging System that can display the shape, depth and dimensions of underground metals in real time. Ideal for Deep Treasure Hunters, Archaeologists, Municipalities, Utility Companies, CSI and Law Enforcement Agencies.
      http://noktadetectors.com/invenio-metal-detector.asp

    • By Steve Herschbach
      Which metal detectors have the most reliable target ID numbers?
      Target ID is a function of depth - the deeper the target, the more difficult it is to get a clean target ID as the ground signal interferes. Other items directly adjacent to the desired target can also cause inaccurate numbers. The more conductive the item, the higher the resulting ID number, but also the larger the item the higher the number. Silver is more conductive than gold, so a gold item will give a lower number than the same size silver item. But a very large gold item can give a higher number than a small silver item, so numbers do not identify types of metal. Gold and aluminum read the same and vary in size so to dig one you dig the other. Only mass produced items like coins produce numbers that are more or less the same over the years but a zinc penny will read lower than a copper penny due to the change in composition.
      In general iron or ferrous targets produce negative numbers or low numbers. Aluminum, gold, and US nickels produce mid-range numbers. And most other US coins produce high numbers. Other countries coins, like Canadian coins with ferrous content, can read all over the place.
      The scale applied varies according to manufacturer so the number produced by each detector will vary according to the scale used. The 0-100 range for non-ferrous targets is most common but there are others. Minelab employs a dual number system on a 2D scale with thousands of possible numbers, but they are now normalizing the results produced to conform more closely to the linear scale used by other manufacturers.

      Increasing ground mineralization has a huge effect on the ability to get a good target ID. Ground mineralization is nearly always from iron mineralization, and this tends to make weak targets, whether very small targets or very deep targets, misidentify. The target numbers get dragged lower, and many non-ferrous targets will eventually be identified as iron if buried deep enough. Small non-ferrous readings and iron readings actually overlap. That is why any discrimination at all is particularly risky for gold nugget hunters.
      If you want target ID numbers to settle down, lower sensitivity and practice consistent coil control. The target number will often vary depending on how well the target is centered and how fast the coil moves.
      Higher sensitivity settings lead to jumpier numbers as the detectors become less stable at higher levels. The interference from the ground signal increases and interference from outside electrical sources also increases, leading to less stable numbers.
      Higher frequency detectors are inherently more sensitive and are jumpier. So lean lower frequency for more solid results. Multi frequency detectors act like low frequency detectors and tend to have more solid target numbers due to the ability to analyze a target with different frequencies.
      Another issue is the number of target categories, or ID segments, or VDIs, or notches, or bins (all names for the same thing) that a detector offers.
      For instance here are the number of possible target id categories or segments each detector below offers:
      Fisher CZ-3D = 7
      Garrett Ace 250 = 12
      Minelab X-Terra 305 = 12
      Minelab X-Terra 505 = 19
      Minelab X-Terra 705 = 28
      Minelab Equinox = 50
      Fisher F75 (and many other models) = 99
      White's MXT (and many other models) = 190
      Minelab CTX 3030 = 1750
      Fewer target categories means more possible items get lumped together under a single reading, but that the reading is more stable. Many detectors will tell you the difference between a dime and a quarter. The Fisher CZ assumes you want to dig both so puts them under one segment along with most other coins.
      People who use detectors with many target numbers usually just watch the numbers jump around and mentally average the results. Some high end detectors can actually do this averaging for you! But I think there is something to be said for owning a detector that simplifies things and offers less possible numbers to start with. The old Fisher CZ method still appeals to me, especially for coin detecting. So do detectors like the Garrett Ace 250 or Minelab X-Terra 505 for the same reason.
      The problem is that as people strive to dig deeper targets or smaller targets the numbers will always get less reliable. But if you want to have a quiet performing metal detecting with solid, reliable target numbers look more for coin type detectors running at lower frequencies under 10 kHz or at multiple frequencies and possibly consider getting a detector with fewer possible target segments. And with any detector no matter what just back that sensitivity setting off and you will get more reliable target numbers.
      ads by Amazon...
      Detectors often use tones to identify targets and often use far fewer tones than indicated by the possible visual target id numbers. The X-Terra 705 for instance can use 28 tones, one for each segment. However, most people find this too busy, and so simple tone schemes of two, three, or four tones may be selected. I think it is instructive that many people often end up ignoring screen readings and hunting by ear, using just a few tones. This ends up just being an ultra simple target id system much like the simpler units offer. Reality is that most people do not need or care about huge numbers of target numbers. For many just three ranges suffice, low tone for iron, mid tone for most gold items, and high tone for most US coins. The meter could do the same thing, but for marketing purposes more is better and so we get sold on detectors with hundreds of possible target ID numbers. Perhaps that represents a digital representation of an old analog meter with its nearly infinite range of response but the reality is we do not need that level of differentiation to make a simple dig or no dig decision.
      Finally, a picture often says it all. Below we have a shot of the White's M6 meter. I like it because the decal below illustrates a lot. You see the possible numerical range of -95 to 95 laid out in the middle. Over it is the simplified iron/gold/silver range. Note the slants where they overlap to indicate the readings really do overlap. Then you get the probable target icons. -95 is noted as "hot rock" because many do read there.

      The M6 can generate 7 tones depending on the target category. I have added red lines to the image to show where these tones sit in relation to the scale. It breaks down as follows:
      -95 = 57 Hz (Very Low) Hot Rock
      -94 to -6 = 128 Hz (Low) Iron Junk
      -5 to 7 = 145 Hz (Med Low) Gold Earrings, Chains - Foil
      8 to 26 = 182 Hz (Medium) Women's Gold Rings/Nickel - Small Pull Tabs
      27 to 49 = 259 Hz (Med Hi) Men's Gold Rings - Large Pull Tabs
      50 to 70 = 411 Hz (High) Zinc Penny/Indian Head Penny - Screw Caps
      71 to 95 = 900 Hz (Very High) Copper Penny/Dime/Quarter/Dollar
      Note that the screen reading of +14 is noted as being a nickel or ring but it can also be the "beaver tail" part of an aluminum pull tab or the aluminum ring that holds an eraser on a pencil, among other things.
      The best book ever written on the subject of discrimination is "Taking A Closer Look At Metal Detector Discrimination" by Robert C. Brockett. It is out of print but if you find a copy grab it, assuming the topic interests you.
      Always remember - when in doubt, dig it out! Your eyes are the best target ID method available.


    • By Steve Herschbach
      Our cup runneth over!
      Just a few years ago the market for "over 30 kHz nugget detectors" was quite limited. For a long time there were only a few options:
      Fisher Gold Bug 2 (71 kHz) $764 with one coil
      Minelab Eureka Gold (6.4, 20, & 60 kHz) Discontinued $1049 when new with one coil
      White's GMZ (50 kHz) Discontinued $499 when new with one coil
      White's GMT (48 khz) $729 with one coil
      Things were that way for over a decade. Then in 2015 Makro introduced the Gold Racer (56 kHz) $599 with one coil. Sister company Nokta released the AU Gold Finder (56 kHz) $799 with two coils
      Then in 2017 we see the Minelab Gold Monster 1000 (45 khz) at $799 with two coils. And although not a dedicated nugget detector, the Deus high frequency coil options (up to 80 kHz) were also released, $1520 for complete detector with one HF coil.
      Now in 2018 we get another general purpose machine, the Equinox 800, that can hit 40 khz, $899 with one coil. And just announced...
      the Makro Gold Kruzer (61 kHz) $749 with two coils and
      the White's Goldmaster 24K (48 khz) $749 with two coils
      These last two announcements have made barely a ripple in the prospecting world, or at least going by other forums that seems to be the case. There are various reason for that (forums not being prospecting oriented or being Minelab centric) but still the lack of buzz is interesting. I do believe people are both burned out by all the new introductions and that the market is saturated with high frequency models. Leaving out the general purpose machines to sum up the current options it looks like the current "sweet spot" for pricing is a high frequency model at $749 with two coils.
      Makro Gold Racer 56 kHz - $599 one coil
      White's Goldmaster 24K 48 kHz - $649 one coil
      White's GMT 48 khz - $729 one coil
      White's Goldmaster 24K 48 kHz - $749 two coils
      Makro Gold Kruzer 61 kHz - $749 two coils
      Fisher Gold Bug 2 71 kHz - $764 one coil
      Minelab Gold Monster 1000 45 kHz - $799 two coils
      Nokta AU Gold Finder 56 kHz - $799 two coils
      High Frequency Gold Nugget Detector Roundup

    • By MikeM
      Hi, I am looking to purchase a gold finding metal detector that can handle mineralized soil well, but also locates smaller gold.   I live in southern Nevada and it seems that the more I read, the more confused I am getting.  I guess I'm looking for a detector that does well with tiny and larger gold.  I had the Gold Bug 2 for a while and it was way too sensitive for me and not rain-proof.  The Makro Gold Kruzer,  The Gold Monster and others on that level are all within my price range, so I am having trouble making a decision.  I understand that the right detector for someone may not be the right detector for someone else, but I do believe the right input is valuable.   I haven't seen any head to head videos using the Gold Kruzer yet (still too new) but it looks promising so far.  The reviews of these detectors are great, but nothing beats real world testing under various conditions and soil types.   I am not one for air testing due to it's controlled nature,  so the confusion grows.   I know many of these detectors can locate tiny gold due to their higher kHz, but there is a trade off.   I appreciate any suggestions.  Thank you, Mike  
    • By phrunt
      I don't know if I'm right on this but I've found my Teknetics T2 to be a good guide to mineralisation at an area, I use its Fe3O4 meter as a guide.
       Would I be right in using that as a guide?
×