Jump to content

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Rivers rat said:

I think all metal detector should be waterproof by now.......

Waterproofing is a good thing as long as it doesn't add to the cost of the detector or inhibit my choice of headphones and the ability to change coils.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites


And lack of coils like the Equinox.

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Badger-NH said:

It's funny how many people seem to automatically think that everyone will be using the AQ for water hunting.

Nobody water hunts the beaches north of Cape Cod.  That's because our large tides leave so much wet sand that the water beyond that is too insignificant to bother with.  Even that is accessible without getting wet on the monthly negative tides.

We have no need for detectors to be waterproof at our beaches.

You're right and yet this is where it is most powerful! And where he shows his full potential ...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/27/2020 at 1:33 AM, Steve Herschbach said:

Well, for starters I can do a ton of wading where the detector is in two feet or less water, and control box high and dry. Plus there is all that beach out of the water. And for me nugget detecting and coin detecting. I’m not worried about a $29 module getting exposed to damp air. A ziplock baggie is should fix that, and if the module eventually dies there will be new ones for half the price by then. No, a patch cable won’t weigh 100 pounds and will be a trivial project. :smile:

Yeah, "practical" wasn't the right term, as it is certainly doable. What I was driving at was that the configuration of the rear section of the detector and associated thick jumper would make the solution using a trond-like dongle a kludgy proposition and not very secure/robust because it would be hard to tuck away and protect like what I do when I use the Trond with my GPX - but I suppose anyone who is determined can make anything work as Rivers Rat contraption shows, function over form.  What I was primarily driving at (and as I discussed in my subsequent exchange with Alexandre) was that wireless is a desirable feature even in a water detector and I see no harm in asking the designers to figure out a way to overcome any obstacles (e.g., EMI) to integrate wireless audio directly into even an "AQ" detector as a future standard feature rather than having users have to figure out how to jury rig it.

Would be interested in details and parts once you fabricate your BT solution for the AQ, so please post them if able. Thanks, Steve.

On 6/27/2020 at 7:17 AM, Badger-NH said:

It's funny how many people seem to automatically think that everyone will be using the AQ for water hunting.

Nobody water hunts the beaches north of Cape Cod.  That's because our large tides leave so much wet sand that the water beyond that is too insignificant to bother with.  Even that is accessible without getting wet on the monthly negative tides.

We have no need for detectors to be waterproof at our beaches.

Yeah, why do you think that is?  Perhaps people get confused because of the "AQ" in the detector's name and the fact that it IS waterproof.  :wink:  Seriously though,  I personally don't automatically think anything when it comes to detector usage.  I know people find ways to use detectors well beyond their intended design envelope.  I try to look at all the possible ways I might want to use a detector in a manner not envisioned by the designer.  Versatility is key.  Not sure if your comment was directed at me or not, but In the case of the AQ, I was only talking about not exposing the third-party Trond module to the elements IF one decided to take the Impulse "AQ"into the water since the AQ is marketed and designed for submerged wading as well as wet beach use - that doesn't presume it would ONLY be used in the water or even EVER be used in the water by anyone who purchases an AQ.  Furthermore, that was why I was advocating integrating BT or wireless audio into the detector itself, so the need for an external module would be unnecessary.  If I automatically assumed EVERYONE would be using the AQ for [submerged] water hunting, I wouldn't even bother making that suggestion as wireless doesn't work when submerged.  If I do get an AQ or a future iteration, like you, most of my detecting will be in wet sand or a couple feet of water at most due to the physical limitations brought on by being on this planet for so long. 

Quote

Waterproofing is a good thing as long as it doesn't add to the cost of the detector or inhibit my choice of headphones and the ability to change coils.

Guess the jury is still out on AQ - we'll have to see if third party coils and headphones with the requisite non-standard connectors start showing up from third parties so you can at least get two out of three.  But yeah, at least they are not hard-wired like the Excal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Chase Goldman said:

associated thick jumper

They are only using M8 (8mm) connectors and the cable itself is thinner yet. Way smaller and daintier than what you seem to be imagining. That's the whole problem with the power cable in general - too small and dainty, not thick and robust.

I have all the required parts on order and will probably have something to post and look at in a week.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Steve Herschbach said:

They are only using M8 (8mm) connectors and the cable itself is thinner yet. Way smaller and daintier than what you seem to be imagining. That's the whole problem with the power cable in general - too small and dainty, not thick and robust.

I have all the required parts on order and will probably have something to post and look at in a week.

Got it.  I don't have one in front of me, just see all that stuff poking out of the back of the rear pod and it is hard to grasp the scale, it looks thicker than 8 mm which is just 1 mm more than a standard 3.5 mm plug assembly (the cable itself probably being 4 to 6 mm).  That IS dainty and I now remember your comment about the cables being more supple and less rigid flex than expected.  I should have remembered your broken power cable saga.  I just have the Garrett waterproof headphone jack/plug stuck in my head and thick stuff like that used on the Excal.  Anyway, looking forward to seeing your BT setup configuration.  Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/28/2020 at 9:12 PM, Steve Herschbach said:

They are only using M8 (8mm) connectors and the cable itself is thinner yet. Way smaller and daintier than what you seem to be imagining. That's the whole problem with the power cable in general - too small and dainty, not thick and robust.

I have all the required parts on order and will probably have something to post and look at in a week.

It was smaller than I expected. When I first got the unit, I went to plug in the cables and could hardly align them with my tired eyes 😄 Good that the next generation release will eliminate those issues. I'm leaning toward a very, overly cautious, attitude toward this machine which takes some of the fun away from it. I'm sure I will settle into a more normal routine soon enough. So if I break a cable? I guess I just wait for a replacement for it, that's all. The world will still continue I think. 🙄

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...