Jump to content

Vlf Smf And Pulse Induction


Recommended Posts

speculation please. what does the future hold? what advancements might happen? keith southern are you out there?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I really don't think there is to much more that the engineers can do with today's technology.

So give it another 5 years for them to come up with something new as they are only pushing the max on the current units.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look for BiPolar Pulse Induction (ZVT) units with changes to coil voltage/amperage and frequency/timing shift tech (similar to how the 6000 samples on-the-fly) to be the new benchmark in gold detector technology....from Minelab of course. I can see an opening for a 2300-beating small gold specialty detector using the above tech with fast sampling and CC coils, plus a big gold-big depth version with a wide-lobed DOD coil with slow-er sampling. Or maybe a killer 'one unit fits all' adjustable machine to get it all? But thats gonna be a $10K+ detector for sure, knowing ML's expenditure on R&D to get new tech on the board.... 

 

Don't quote it as gospel of course....I can just see the logic in this, now that ML have 'let the cat out of the bag' with the 6000. Seems logical to have a hybrid detector using both 7000 and 6000 tech.

  • Like 6
  • Oh my! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Steve Herschbach said:

As far as actual genuine additions in the form of real additional performance I expect little. GPZ was a genuine breakthrough, as was Equinox, but next generations are likely to be fine tuning of the original breakthrough. Back to what has been disparaged as drip feed, but reality is genuine advances in metal detecting only come once a decade. So I basically expect more of the same, plus other companies piling on with their versions of SMF and PI, all of which will add up to more of the same. More choices in style, feature mix, and price. But more capability that actually makes a real difference in what I can find in any given day? I’m not holding my breath at all. The good news is I’m very content with what I have now, light years beyond what I started with almost 50 years ago. I’ve personally experienced going from detectors with no ground balance, no discrimination, and no depth to speak of, to the fantastic options we have now.

I’m way more focused now on finding better ground than a better detector. That’s the ticket to success, not whatever new flavor of vanilla somebody is brewing to part me from my dollars. :smile:

Well said Steve. 

However, I wish I still had the same young body that swung those early detectors. Technology now is brilliant and plenty of potentially rich new ground just begging to be walked -

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One sometimes useful way to anticipate tech advances is to look at the extreme high-end hardware and software packages for big money uses like military, shallow ground investigations for engineering, and maybe archeology and geology.  I haven't looked at this stuff for several years, but the thing that did impress me was graphics especially map views and 3-D representation of the sub-surface.  As hardware become cheaper and the software more sophisticated, some of this will come our way.

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
  • Similar Content

    • By diggindaboot
      THIS !! All the people boo hooing will be in line to get one at that price point. It will also force the hand of ML with their price structure. ML raised their price on the 800 and NM absolutely crushed that price point. The Legend doesn't have to be better, just equal to turn the fortunes in their favor. ML and their arrogant "obsolete" charge is foolish. Obsolete by definition means no longer produced or used. Many detectorist and their single frequency machines are still out there making great finds and having fun. Furthermore, single frequency detectors are still being made and sold. NM build quality is far and away superior to the Nox detectors. 
       
       
    • By Gerry in Idaho
      I thought I was pretty damn good, but this technology has me beat.
      https://www.nbcnews.com/science/environment/mining-gap-companies-push-find-raw-materials-electric-vehicle-boom-rcna5077
      Might be time to invest?
    • By mcjtom
      Metal detectors often seem to have a 'Depth Gauge'.  How is it calculated? Is it the strength (or inverse of it) of the amplitude of the return signal?  So, for instance, everything else being equal, the 'deep' target would mean either a stronger target at greater depth or a weaker shallow target?
    • By GB_Amateur
      While we're all abuzz with the announcement and advertised feature and performance characteristics of the XP Deus II, I'm wondering about tests that distinguish between detectors' target separation abilities.  'Word on the street' is that in trashy iron sites, the original Deus is still the best available.  Presumably those reports are based upon in-field testing, which of course is the real proof.  But the downside is, (AFAIK) these are qualitative observations, not quantitative.  Subjectivity involved?  Unfortunately, yes.
      We do have Monte's Nail Board Test for a special case -- iron nails near a single coin, all in the same plane and typically all on the surface of the ground.  Add depth combined with some mineralization (burying the MNB) and you've included another real world dimension.  But in the field, multiple nearby targets are seldom in the same plane.
      So you hopefully see the purpose of this post.  Has anyone seen/tried other methods to better simulate actual in-field conditions to differentiate between competing detectors to best be able to handle trashy sites?
    • By Rick N. MI
      I mostly hunt in lakes and the bottoms are mostly all sand. A test on a sandy beach with the Equinox 800 and Xp Orx, both hit hard on a 14k 3.7 gram gold ring buried at 14". For mild ground I don't see a need for multi frequency. I do like the multiple frequencies on the Orx.
      Is there an advantage to multi frequency in mild ground?
×
×
  • Create New...