Jump to content

Tele-knox Detecting Innovations Equinox S-stem Telescopic Carbon Stem


Glenn in CO

Recommended Posts

I have the Tele Nox collapsible shaft on my "backup" Equinox and keep my 6" coil on that shaft which I like.  Makes a great packable detector.  Can't wait to get that Coiktek 10x5 on it.  Great little back woods packable setup.  Point being is I like the Telenox brand, just not sure about this design from both a price and looks standpoint. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


10 hours ago, steveg said:

The fact is, I'm nowhere near convinced scientifically that an S-shaft would solve the Equinox's ergonomic deficiencies, nor even "improve" the situation substantially.  At the end of the day, you have a relatively heavy coil out at the end of a long shaft (a long "lever," from a physics perspective), and very, very little compensating weight at the other end of the shaft.

First off, I commend you for your ethics -- not wanting to market a product as a solution to a problem if it's not a solution at all.  Secondly, apparently I'm the one who prompted you to answer.  I didn't ask a direct question but hoped you would see this and respond, and you did so thanks for that.

My understanding of the argument for an S-shaft is shown in an over-simplified and exaggerated fashion in this sketch:

S-shaft_concept.thumb.jpg.872ad0ad42f3db12dae1c2c63a349856.jpg

(I would have made this on a drafting table but it's not 1980 anymore.  But as you can see I did find a vintage bottle of White Out!)  The purple squiggle is a hand gripping the detector backbone structure.  The arm cuff is shown rotated 90 degrees (I'm even worse at 3d drawing than thus made this 2d attempt).  It's a bit easier to think of the shaft as massless although even with mass I think the point I'm trying to illustrate still holds.  (See comment at end of this post.)

Imagine moving these stick-detectors into and out of the page as a simulated swing.  Consider the forces that need be applied (by your arm+hand, etc.)  The first drawing is an unrealistic view of a perfect(?) shaft and grip.  The second one is the more realistic straight shaft with pistol grip.  Third is S-shaft with pistol grip and fourth is standard S-shaft.

Pretty sure in the second case there is a torsion (twisting force) that occurs at the two ends of the swing which requires an offsetting torsion be applied by the  human hand.  It's that repeated torsion that is alleviated but the S-shafts (lower two models in drawing) which leads to less stress on wrists and elbows.  If the shaft (including pistol grip section) has no mass then the first, third, and fourth models are conceptually identical.  (When you account for the mass of the shaft there will be some torsion of the upper shaft part in the lower two [S-shaft] models, but it is less than the torsion caused by the shafts' masses alone in the second -- straight shaft model.)

P.S. (to steveg):  I do like to support members here for the products they fabricate and sell.  But I don't tend to do that when the product replaces something I'm already satisfied with.  I've already made my own S-shaft by modifying the X-Terra S-shaft so don't count me on your list of potential buyers, although I wouldn't completely rule that out.  Your shafts are lighter and that alone is enough to lead to my consideration.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

GB_Amateur -- first of all, to address your last point, first.  I appreciate the sentiment, that you desire to support members here.  But, I hope it goes without saying that I would NEVER ask nor want someone to spend money on something, when in their mind it doesn't offer any improvement (or, not enough of an improvement to justify the cost).  That's a personal decision and I of course fully respect that!  I am glad that you've been able to make a shaft that works well for your needs; I applaud the effort and the ingenuity!

Now, as far as your drawings, and what you are describing, I must admit to you that I don't sense, and thus can't figure, the "torsional" forces you refer to.  Perhaps it's differences in our styles of swinging?  For me, having been a LONG-time Minelab user, going back to Explorer days, "low and slow" is the name of the game.  For that reason, I've learned to do two things...one, I swing VERY slowly/methodically, and two, I actually DO "turn my wrist" ON PURPOSE, as I near the end of the swing.  It's not a "torsional force" caused by the detector in my case, but instead it's a purposeful attempt to keep the coil as close to, and as level to, the ground as is possible.  Many "new" detectorists, which we've all seen, will swing in a "pendulum-like" manner, with the coil ONLY close to the ground right at the center of their swing (i.e. in front of their feet).  But the farther out toward the edges of their swing they get, the more the coil raises off the ground.  NOT good, if you hope to detect a target out there at the edge of your swing arc!  To combat this, I turn my wrist gradually "outward" as I move toward the end of my swing arc (and then "inward," as I move back toward the opposite end of the swing arc), and this "turning" of my wrist helps to offset the desire of the coil to rise away from the ground, and thus it allows me to keep the coil "flat," close to -- and level to -- the ground.

So, when swinging VERY slowly, and using that slight turning of my wrist intentionally, I have never experienced any "torsional" force induced by my detector, that I'm having to oppose.  My GUESS, and this is just a GUESS, is that any such forces would have to be stemming from a "fast" sweep speed, and a rather "abrupt" change of direction at the ends of each sweep.  I can't imagine, with my slow, deliberate, methodical way of swinging the machine, there being any of these "torsional" forces occurring for me, to any appreciable degree at all.  It's just not something I feel, sense, or experience.

On the other hand, what I DO feel, is a constant "forwards" torsional force on my wrist, that I must then counter with a "backwards" torsional force.  In other words, imagine holding a fishing pole, and making a cast using ONLY your wrist (no arm motion at all).  You'd first draw your wrist back toward you, to "load" the pole, and then you'd flip your wrist forward to cast the bait/lure.  That "backward twist" of your wrist, while "loading" the pole in preparation to cast, is a similar force to what you are applying with your wrist the whole time you are swinging your machine, as that is the force required to oppose gravity, and "lift" the coil off the ground.  You are "fighting gravity" so to speak, through application that type of force, using your wrist.  And the heavier the coil, and the longer the "lever" (shaft), the more that gravity is working against you, in a multiplied/leveraged manner -- and thus the need for more application of that force, using your wrist.  And for most folks, THIS is where the issues arise with the Equinox.  THIS is why swinging the 6" coil is so much easier than swinging the 12" x 15" coil; the big coil -- weighing substantially more -- requires MUCH MORE application of force, by your hand/wrist/forearm.

Fighting "gravity," as we are discussing here, will cause you to tend to grip the handle tightly (and prolonged, tight grip is a known contributor to elbow tendonitis, aka "tennis elbow.")  Additionally, the negative effects of that constant "backwards torsional force" that is required, are felt most substantially in your wrist (especially for those with a bit of carpal tunnel already at play), and in your forearm muscles.  

And so, counterweighting -- which acts to assist you in lifting the coil off the ground (and thus less work for your hand/wrist/forearm) -- is a BIG help, with respect to comfort.  For each ounce of counterweighting applied to the butt end of the shaft, in opposition to the force of gravity acting on the coil, the less effort you are having to exert to offset the coil weight with your hand/wrist/forearm.  And I am certain that for a large majority of folks, it is this effort that they are having to exert to fight gravity, that is the source of most of the fatigue/discomfort when swinging the Equinox.

To return briefly to your thoughts about "torsional forces..."  If you feel "torsional forces" that cause you fatigue or discomfort, and an S-bend shaft relieves that, then you should absolutely utilize an S-bend shaft!  Obviously, we are all built differently, have different swing mechanics, swing at different speeds, etc.  And so you may experience things that I don't, or vice-versa.  Each of us obviously needs to find what works best for us, to make detecting as enjoyable and pleasant as possible.  However, I can say that for me, I'm not sensing any "torsional" forces at all, so I can't relate to what you are describing (which is probably why I also can't imagine an S-shaft being substantially more comfortable than a straight shaft with pistol grip).

Anyway, I'm enjoying the discussion, GB_Amateur, and again, I hope that none of my words come across in a negative or confrontational way.  I like a good discussion/debate, but it's all with good intent, and I hope not to come across in any negative way.

Thanks!

Steve

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Steve, thanks for your thoughtful and detailed response.  I think this might be the case where we agree to disagree, and that's certainly fine with me.  I don't know that I can come up with a better way to illustrate this torsion, but I do think it occurs even with the description of the way you swing (although your method/technique should make it much less stressful than the way many others swing).  My original analogy (which I shelved) was the torsion that can occur with a golf shaft when the ball is struck off the club face's sweetspot (e.g. towards the toe of the club) but I think that might introduce complications or physical processes that aren't really applicable to swinging a metal detector.  It also is likely less valuable of an analogy to someone who isn't familiar with the game of golf.

I certainly agree that the torque on your wrist from the toe-heavy imbalance is an issue (a different issue, but certainly probably a much more severe one).

I can tell that you think of these things way more than most people and use those ideas and experiences in your designs.  I do wonder, though, about your conclusion that you haven't noticed any torsion means there isn't a (imperceptible) torsion present.  I remember talking to my doctor about athletic injuries (which metal detecting certainly can cause, as you note) and that small, seemingly insignificant (unnoticed?) forces which are repeated hundreds of times can lead to problems.  In my case (and I'm sure I don't think about it and thus am less aware than you), I've gone out swinging away not noticing any forces the elbow of my detecting arm and then get home (or wake up the next morning) with pain there.  That's an extreme example compared to the torsional effect I hypothesize.

I'm certainly not 100% convinced myself that what I've tried to illustrate is real, let alone a problem.  If it were important enough to me I'd think up and then attempt experiments to see if it's real.  However, I'm really not that dedicated to this topic. In the end I respect your decision not to pursue fabricating S-shafts and look forward to your future innovations.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have straight shafts I love, and S shafts I love. It's not either / or. I tend to favor S shafts on detectors under 4 lbs, and straight shafts on detectors over four pounds. In theory I'd like an Equinox S shaft, but under three pounds I just don't care. I can swing an Equinox with 15" coil all day with the stock shaft when out of shape with some back strain, get in shape or use Steve's counterweight, no issue. The stock coil I can swing forever no matter what, so for me it's a pretty low level problem.

Really great posts guys. :smile:

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

GB_Amateur -- in thinking through the forces you are trying to describe, and your golf club analogy, I think I can envision what you are trying to get at.  If I understand what you are thinking of, it would be something that could occur at the very end of your swing, as you change direction with your sweep.  If you are sweeping quickly, and if you change direction abruptly, then with the coil on a "lower" plane than the plane your hand is on (as it would be if using a straight shaft with pistol grip), then the "momentum" of the coil going in one direction, while you are quickly switching direction to swing your machine back in the other direction, could "turn" your wrist/forearm slightly.  It's a momentum argument (which increases, of course, with swing speed and how abruptly one changes direction), and the fact that the coil/shaft is on a different plane than your hand is.   

But, if such a slight turn of your wrist does cause issues, then the only REAL way to "fix it" (besides slowing down and swinging much more "deliberately," which in my opinion is VERY important from a "finds" perspective, especially with Minelab machines) would be to have -- as you drew in your first drawing -- your hand, the shaft, and the coil all moving in the same plane.  But, it wouldn't seem that changing to an S-shaft accomplishes that, as you still have your hand and your coil on different planes -- it just reverses things.  In other words, with the S-shaft, your coil (and shaft) are now in a HIGHER plane than your hand, instead of the opposite situation with straight shaft and pistol grip (where your coil/shaft would be in a LOWER plane as compared to your hand).  So, even if you are a "fast swinger," that changes directions quickly, such that the momentum of the coil moving in one direction is momentarily in opposition to the direction you begin exerting your muscles (in trying to reverse your swing direction and get everything moving in the other direction), I'm not sure why, theoretically, an S-bend shaft would help; you'd still be working in two different planes -- your "hand plane," and your "shaft/coil plane."  While in your fourth drawing you show the S-shaft, and the hand "in line" with the shaft and coil, in reality your hand would sit much farther down the S-shaft handle than what you drew it -- in other words, a similar distance BELOW the shaft, as it would be ABOVE the shaft if using a straight shaft/pistol grip.

Anyway, just wanted to say that I think I can see what you are trying to describe.  I'm sure this discussion is getting way too esoteric -- in other words, boring, LOL -- for most folks at this point.  But, the bottom line is this...you feel more comfort in swinging an S-shaft, and I think that's great.  Again, we are all built a little differently, and have different amounts of strength in different muscle groups, and each of us swing our machines a little different, with different swing mechanics, and at different speeds.  And so, from that perspective, "comfort" can be a somewhat relative term, dependent upon the individual.  

Thanks for the discussion; while this type of conversation quickly becomes boring to many, as a scientist I find focus and examination of details like this fascinating!  🙂

Chase -- you make a good point; I've considered other materials for the "S-bend/handle portion" of such a shaft.  Kac -- a user here -- and I have had many discussions on this issue.  It's something I'll continue to explore.  The other issue you quickly get into with an "S-shaft" discussion is -- what is the "right" angle, for the handle?  Again, that becomes an individual thing, with lots of different opinions.  Interestingly, though, something that I think might surprise people is that the "right" angle is at least in part a bit of a red herring; again, a big part if the issue boils down to BALANCE.  In other words, when a machine is imbalanced, one tends to grip it tighter (as they fight to keep the coil floating, as I described in an earlier post).  And a tight grip is a primary contributor to the development of elbow tendonitis.  Combine that with the fact that much of the "fatigue" or "pain" that is felt when swinging a nose-heavy machine is focused in the wrist/forearm, and what you end up with is folks saying "the handle angle is wrong, and is hurting my wrist/elbow," when actually the issue is that the machine's IMBALANCE is causing most of that pain, NOT the handle angle itself.  I recall back when users were swinging Explorers and E-Tracs, and people complaining about "handle angle."  I remain convinced that the MAIN issue there was nose-heaviness/shaft imbalance, being to some degree mistakenly blamed on "handle angle."  But, I digress...bottom line is, I'll continue to explore the possibilities of an "S-bend" shaft, including the possibility that it may be more cost-effective to use an alternate material as the "S-portion" (handle portion) of the shaft...

Steve --  it's interesting that you like one or the other type of shaft, at different times, with different machines, but that you'd vote for a S-shaft for the Equinox if you had your druthers.  Interesting, and an interesting discussion (at least for my admittedly odd mind!)


Steve

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, steveg said:

Thanks for the discussion; while this type of conversation quickly becomes boring to many, as a scientist I find focus and examination of details like this fascinating!  🙂

You're welcome but it's mutually beneficial.  From a scientific standpoint, these thought experiments can only take us so far.  They tend to be (as this one is) purely qualitative.  Theoretically you need to get into the (quantitative) weighting of the different effects.  Best is to experiment because mother nature never forgets to include a component,... ever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, GB_Amateur said:

You're welcome but it's mutually beneficial.  From a scientific standpoint, these thought experiments can only take us so far.  They tend to be (as this one is) purely qualitative.  Theoretically you need to get into the (quantitative) weighting of the different effects.  Best is to experiment because mother nature never forgets to include a component,... ever.

GB -- precisely correct.  Our conjecturing here is qualitative, not quantitative.  And you are right -- mother nature has the qualitative answer key!  😉 

Thanks!

Steve

  • Like 1
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...