Jump to content

Recommended Posts

19 hours ago, Chase Goldman said:

I’ve tested masking in F2 at default settings and it is not an issue.

Just for clarification, you are saying you've never noticed a downside for the F2 Iron Bias defaults?  Is this from field detecting, test garden, etc. investigation, or both?  And what ferrous targets have shown improvement, sheet metal scraps, nails,...?

Link to post
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, GB_Amateur said:

If you're more interested in old USA nickel coins than gold jewelry then it helps a lot.  Last year in 311 hours of park and school detecting I dug 1423 pull tabs (all types but half of those were beaver-only and half of the remainder were the smallest ring+beavertail).  Maybe 10% did I dig trying to clear the way for masked good targets.  Those 90% that I dug thinking they might be good were all centered somewhere in the 12-13 sweetspot (on the ML Equinox) for USA nickels, with some spillover to 11 and occasionally 14.  I probably ignored at least 5000 (not kidding) that were above USA nickels, where modern pulltabs and the larger ring-and-beavertails hit.

IMO, any detecting session needs to keep in mind both site and goal(s) of the hunt.  Around picnic shelters and tables the number of pulltabs can be daunting.  If I'm at a site which had activity in the 1800's (or earlier) then I definitely am not going to be so selective as many coins from that century ring up from about 6-7 to 19 (what I like to think of as the location of most aluminum trash, exception being the larger pieces, especially aluminum screw caps around 22-23).  And if there don't seem to be many pulltab hits I'm more likely to dig the 14-19 region to see what else might be there (e.g. gold ring if I'm really lucky).

What does this have to do with Iron Bias?  Not much, at least directly, from what I know about Iron Bias.

Wow, I can definitely see where some notching would help in that situation. I don't encounter many pull tabs or pull rings so I don't need deal with it much. As a relic hunter and beach hunter, I'm used digging anything non ferrous and never notch any specific targets. When I want discrimination, I just reject everything below 17.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Chase Goldman said:

I prefer F2 because the signal seems more crisp, don't see any significant downside to running at the default F2 setting, so I mainly just leave it there, and really like how it cleans up all types of falsing iron from small nail heads to large pieces of flat iron.

Thanks for your detailed post/response, Chase.  I just looked at the most recent Equinox Instruction Manual I have stored (which is a couple years old...).  It indicates that the Iron Bias F2 defaults for the 800 model are all set at 6, regardless of the Detecting Mode (and a value of 2 for all modes of the 600 model).  So that is what you are using?

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, GB_Amateur said:

Thanks for your detailed post/response, Chase.  I just looked at the most recent Equinox Instruction Manual I have stored (which is a couple years old...).  It indicates that the Iron Bias F2 defaults for the 800 model are all set at 6, regardless of the Detecting Mode (and a value of 2 for all modes of the 600 model).  So that is what you are using?

6  -  When I say I use the default, I mean I use the default.   I have been impressed where ML has set the defaults on Equinox and I honestly don't stray much from them in any search mode other than to set sensitivity appropriately and the number of tones to my liking (usually 50 when relic hunting, 5 at the beach or in a park), perhaps a tweak to recovery speed a tad to calm things down (meaning I usually increase recovery ABOVE the default) and ensure I always noise cancel and do an auto Ground Balance.  I either have a Gold Mode program or a single frequency variant of the mode I am searching with stored in the Custom Profile slot to enable quick target interrogation - single frequency target interrogation is where I really notice the comparative IB "ON"/"OFF" target response.  I personally do not think IB = 0 in either FE or F2 mode turns IB completely off when using Multi IQ - it simply minimizes the effect - so if you really want to know what the minimally filtered and processed target signal sounds like, you have to go to single frequency.  But that's really neither here nor there, I suppose. 

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

That’s a couple great posts Chase, we think much alike, and I have a similar attitude about getting too deep in the weeds. Despite all the tech, I will still lean on a good location, and getting my coil over the target. Sometimes we make it sound like metal detecting is rocket science, but my reality to this day still looks a lot like beep-dig! :laugh:

Lots of people really question and obsess over updates. But my training from prototype testing basically says “update good, load ASAP” and get on with it. The only question usually then is how to improve on that update... not on how to go backwards. If an update comes out, I wait just a couple days, then I load it up, learn it, and move on.

People sometimes forget the engineers actually are genuinely trying to make our lives better, and a lot of work goes into an update to make the detector better. They’d never release an update, unless they really believed it made the machine better at what it does. I work with these people, and I do trust that they are a million times smarter than I when it comes to this stuff. That trust tends to make me more comfortable just grabbing the latest updates I guess, as it really surprised me that anyone would feel differently about them. No detector is ever truly 100% done, and this ability to keep tweaking and tuning after release is one of the best things to ever happen in the industry. Twenty years ago, the only way to get any update was buy the next model, because that’s where all updates went

 In this industry, for a long time, the first genuine new model was often a finished prototype, and it was always the follow up model that was best tuned and tweaked. I saw this for ages with a Minelab in particular and still do. You can bet second generation Multi-IQ is to die for. Equinox just proved it has potential, and now the real work begins. Same with GPZ 7000. Just proving ZVT works. The next gen will be what we were really waiting for. That’s still the pattern but updates help smooth the process, and keep the first time efforts a little safer for purchasers. I feel way more comfortable getting something hot off the press if I know it can be updated. Knowing what I know now, I’ll not get another detector unless it can be updated. The cutting edge is too complex, and the chances of new machines getting to market and needing updates just too great. If the machine does not have an update facility, they won’t even be trying, and in fact are more prone to play down faults. A company with a good update facility has less to fear from a major bug, that would have the other company doing a recall.

Lotta blah blah blah to say I always thought original FE was deficient, and F2 is just what it should have been all along. That’s the power of being able to update.

  • Like 8
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have now done 2 short tests separation tests, namely 3D separation test and Monte performance nailboard test to compare the Iron bias FE and F2 settings.

In the first test-in the deep separation test, the nail is at a distance of 20 cm from the coin .. and Equinox is set in Program Park 2 at recovery speed 7.

 

The first test / 3D test / shows that equinox did quite well with the separation also on the setting of Iron Bias F2 -9 max .... which is a really good result .... while in my opinion the setting of Iron Bias FE is a safe setting somewhere at the level FE1-2 max ... and a higher setting of FE than 2 is already significantly signed on the significantly reduced 3D separation ....

However, this test evaluates only one of the two separation situations in detection well ..... I can now say that in another second test of the 2D surface separation type "Monte performance Nailboard Test" it will show how high we can move the Iron Bias F2 setting without so that we do not strongly limit the separation properties of the detector in this type of separation ...

I also did this test .. but tomorrow I will repeat it in daylight and load it from Gopro..and you will see the differences in the individual settings ..

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW - I consider the link below to be the definitive iron bias thread.  Some of it slightly contradicts my conclusions regarding whether IB can exacerbate masking non-ferrous in the presence of ferrous but it was the thread that opened my eyes on the usefulness of IB F2.  I am still trying not to over think it and just keep IB at 6 to simply balance the indisputable upside of IB against the debateable downside of using the feature.  IB 6 for me all the way.  As Steve said above, the best adjustment you can make when detecting is simply cranking up your ability to get yourself onto a primo site through research and people skills and then efficiently cover every inch of ground you can with your coil while you are there (tactics vary depending on whether it is a one off visit or have lifetime privileges).  Much more effective and valuable than any detector tweak.

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Chase,  I appreciate your thoughts on FE versus FE2 as I think we both hunt the same kind of soils with clay and hot rocks. I keep looking back to both Your and Steve's past threads on this. 

Steve you are right on the money with the thoughts on the software upgrades.  We're long past the days of hardware being the main method of getting newer better capabilities.  The 600/800 is a very capable hardware platform and I'm glad to see ML making adjustments to the software to enhance their capabilities. You wouldn't get these free enhancements in a hardware only environment. I suspect these are coming from ML's development of other similar platforms that they are developing.  Frankly you wouldn't generally spend cycles on further development of a stable platform and provide the SW updates for free, unless they had that post launch dev costs considered in their original business case for the platform.   I just hope they keep it up.     //R    

 

         

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Other tests for setting Iron bias F2 vs FE this time it's original Monte Performance Nailboard Test ..

 

 

  • Like 4
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 Gerry in Idaho
      I like detecting for a variety of gold and really enjoy finding the stuff many higher end detectors can't see.  I don't know yet, but feel the extra capabilities of the GPX-6000 will open up some of these areas I hunt with the VLF's to get even more of the gold and at greater depths or in worse soil conditions.  As long as I am getting more gold, I'm happy.  Will the new GPX-6000 see this kind of gold or act like all other PI's and the ZED and not see at all?
      I recently recovered this 4.2 gram speci with the EQ-800 while running the new CoilTek NOX 15" round.  My goal was to find a piece of gold with the 15" and I met that goal.
      Part of some other testing back at base proved why I still like to take 2 detector technologies in the field.  This particular beauty was found right in the middle of a GPZ-7000 grid area, along with 4 others while using different coils on the EQ-800.  All 5 pieces specimens have visible gold and a couple how quite a bit, but to the point.
      The reason I found them in that gridded area, is because the GPZ-7000 does not respond or on a couple right near 1" and that's it.  I teach folks this in my classes, as well as try to educate others on the goods and the bads of different detectors and technologies.  Sometimes I get detectorists who are good hunters with their detectors and have success, tell me I'm full of BS and their detector will find it.
      I made a post on my FB (Gerry McMullen) and shared a pic of the find along with the true comments of, the GPZ will not see it.  Between the private messages and or public posts, I was immediately informed by a few of BS and even told how I must not know the GPZ-7000.  One well known GP-3500 hunter even said he guaranteed his 3500 would hear it.  
      I know gold detectors and I know how to find gold with a variety of gold machines.  No I am not the best, but I most certainly can hold my own and I learn to adapt really fast to a new area.  Traveling to different states and countries to hunt for and find many different kinds of gold has helped elevate my detector knowledge and skill of many models of detectors and the differing Au rocks I have collected. 
      So here is hoping the GPX-6000 with it's GeoSensing can respond to this little beauty.  If it does, I know of some areas I'll be swinging the 6000.  If it is like the GP-3500, the GPX-5000 and the GPZ-7000 and misses it, that fine too, I know what they can't see and realize it,  I will also know where not to use the 6000.
      Bottom line for everyone.  Please learn the kinds of gold your detector is good at finding and what it is not, so you aren't wasting time  in those areas.  Or be sure you have at least 2 different detector technologies.

    • By dogodog
      My day started by taking my wife to breakfast and a trip to a local greenhouse. On our way back we drove by a place I have wanted to hunt for a while and couldn't because the owners were just not to friendly. But low and behold I noticed some new house development signs. I did a quick title search and found out it was sold and being developed very soon. So I grabbed my stuff and headed back to this 1830's house. Today was the first day since I got the 800 I could spend more than an hour and a half detecting. My first two hours were a pretty much a bust except a cool silver plate spoon and my wife texting me to see if I found anymore jewelry? (NO) I was getting a little frustrated and decided to focus on a small strip of grass (three feet wide) next to the driveway and an overgrown pasture. After five feet  I got an OK 28-29 signal that was kind of bouncy. First good coin popped out a 1905 barber quarter (yes) Things were looking up. I jumped across the driveway and hunted near a rather young pine tree. Two swings and boom a 24-26 and out comes a 1919 mercury. Things are getting interesting. I stood up after digging the merc, swung again got 23-24 at 9 inches out comes a coin that had me wondering what the hell is that. after a little quick cleaning I realized I had a 1832 classic head 1/2 cent. But this was no ordinary 1832 this has an over stamp with a cross and the initials FZ. It seems that it was stamped early in its life. I'm wanting to know if anyone has ever found a coin with stampings? I have found a lot of good coins, but this has now become my favorite. The day came to an end and I had to go and enjoy some burgers on the grill. 
      Almost forgot the spoon, Its an american airlines made in the 1930's with the shape of a dc-3 and the words flagship on it.








    • By dogodog
      Went to a local park today after work. Only had a couple of hours to detect and test out my new home made arm cuff. I wasn't a big fan of the plastic, and it was a little too wide and flexy for me. At this point I only have about 5 hours on the 800. The first hour today netted me a handful of clad and some misc. corroded zinc. The next hour was the same thing clad and junk. With only 15 minutes to chicken parm, I got a really nice 28-29, not expecting anything great, I proceeded to find out what it was. For a split second I thought it was another odd piece of stainless, But I quickly saw Tiffany and co. Wooooo Hoooooo. Now I had a good excuse for being a little late for dinner. My wife would never get mad for a Tiffany ring. It is about 6.16 grams and polished to like new. Oh and the cuff was a winner too. fits my arm and no slop. I made it out of an old no parking sign and the factory bottom section. It took me a few hours to create, but I'm happy with it. Have to give a shout out to Kac for the hand digger, Still works great and hasn't failed me yet.






    • By dogodog
      Well after a long frustrating wait for Nokta's  multi frequency machine, I could no longer wait or hold out. I received my new equinox 800 on the 19th and did some air tests and made a list of the VDI's and played with flipping the tones for my liking. After thinking the machine was just OK with some of my basic testing, It was time to run across the street to give it a run. I will tell you all that I have hunted this area to death with my MK. ( or so I thought) I only had 90 minutes to give its first test.  I decided to dig every target with an 18 or higher VDI.  Just trying to decifer my new sounds. First 5 min. netted some clad, but the next 85 broke all my records. first 3 coins after the clad were large cents, the next was a draped bust 1/2 cent (bucket 1) The next was a paper thin copper with a shield, could it be? Yes it was a New Jersey copper. I have been chasing this coin for years (bucket 2). Then a single button and an Israeli 1/2 shekel (not sure how that got there). I only had a few minutes left to hunt when I got a faint 18 on the nox and hit a button at 10 inches, But that wasn't all this hole had to give. It was like a button slot machine, 12 in all and total of 15 inches down. My wonderful wife called and I had to leave for dinner. I have to say the most impressive feature on the nox is the noise cancel, It made the site come back to life. As for settings, Park 1, sensitivity 17, and custom tone breaks and t1 - 1  t2- 25  t3 - 15  t4 - 10  t5 - 5  Tone sounds, I run them to get low tones on copper targets. Sounds odd I know, but it works for me. Have to say I'm impressed with the first 90 minutes I've run the 800.









    • By GB_Amateur
      Apparently these kinds of interviews have been occurring for a couple months with various detector experts (and dealers) around the world.  Except for a post buried in a thread (credit to Dances with Doves for calling my attention to these), which I didn't figure would reach the full audience, I think this is the first post of these four episodes with Gerry which were uploaded to YouTube on the 18th & 19th of April.  Basically each of the first three episodes covers the one of the new coils separately and sequentially:  5"x10" (~19 minutes), 9"x14" (~22 minutes), 15" round (~44 minutes) and a wrapup segment (~11 minutes).  I'm posting just the first one as each successive one is linked by Trevor at the end of the previous.  E.g. to see part 2 (9"x14" discussion) just move the video's scroll cursor to the end of part 1.  I watched episodes 1,2, and 4 in their entirety and the first 15 minutes of episode 3.  A lot of the general info is second nature to seasoned detectorists.  But there were a couple tidbits and I like being reminded now and then of the basic principles.
       
    • By bklein
      I am not liking my EQ600 with 15” coil and am wondering if it’s just my brain is too attached to my CTX, or if something is wrong with the coil or detector. I am noticing that the coil cable is being sensed if moved when I’m detecting so I did this little video test that uses my car as a ferrous background/target. If I move the cable with it in the background it senses the movement. But if I do it in air, no detection of the cable.  I’ve never seen this discussed or tried before so don’t know what to think about it.
       
×
×
  • Create New...