Jump to content

Reliable Test For Comparing Target Separation Capabilities?


Recommended Posts

In addition to my modified Monte Nail Board, I will do 2 other tests.

One, I will bury 1 clad dime about 6 inches or so in my clay soil...maybe next to a nail. Then I'll see how well all my detectors do with that.

Two, I will get some bamboo skewers, put flags with different numbers or colors to tell them apart, then head to one of my parks and use them to mark potential targets with my Equinox 600 in Park 1 mode. These will be "definitely dig" or "yeah, I'd probably dig it" signals. Then, I will go back with my Garrett AT Max and scan each target and see if I'd still dig those targets using that machine. Then I'll dig the signals and see which machine was right...or "most" right. 

I'll probably do this test twice, one time with the Equinox 600 being used first and one time with the AT Max being used first.

No, this isn't a perfect battery of tests, but I think it'll be enough to decide which metal detector gets listed for sale: the AT Max or the Equinox 600.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites


1 hour ago, Chase Goldman said:

Why do you have sell one?

Two reasons.

One, I don't like having two "primary" detectors.

Two, I could use the cash for accessories, like a 5x8 coil if keeping the AT Max or a 6" coil (or Steve's CF shaft, pod cover, coil stiffener, etc.) if keeping the Equinox 600

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, mh9162013 said:

Two reasons.

One, I don't like having two "primary" detectors.

Two, I could use the cash for accessories, like a 5x8 coil if keeping the AT Max or a 6" coil (or Steve's CF shaft, pod cover, coil stiffener, etc.) if keeping the Equinox 600

Are you comparing the detectors using similar coil footprints?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/3/2021 at 1:15 PM, CPT_GhostLight said:

You could make a depth test bucket which could also function as a 3D separation test bucket and fill it with whatever sand or soil you need to test in to try multiple different scenarios.

 

Depth-Separation-Test-Bucket.jpg

That's a great design (and you have considerable mechanical drawing skills -- I'm impressed!).    A couple years ago I built an in-ground double barrel shotgun style test setup using PVC pipe with wooden pistons for holding tagets.  I can use those pistons for this and I probably already have plenty of the small pipe in my garage.  I just need to buy the large pipe and maybe a hole saw to drill the holes.  I'm on it!  (Do I owe you a design fee?  😄)

Although the edge effects will not give quite the full 3-d ground coverage of the real world, results from this setup are going to quite informative.  Thanks!

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, GB_Amateur said:

That's a great design (and you have considerable mechanical drawing skills -- I'm impressed!).    A couple years ago I built an in-ground double barrel shotgun style test setup using PVC pipe with wooden pistons for holding tagets.  I can use those pistons for this and I probably already have plenty of the small pipe in my garage.  I just need to buy the large pipe and maybe a Forstner bit to drill the holes.  I'm on it!  (Do I owe you a design fee?  😄)

Although the edge affects will not give quite the full 3-d ground coverage of the real world, results from this setup are going to quite informative.  Thanks!

 

I saw a similar design mentioned on this site that consisted of a large slop bucket with slits cut into the side of it where multiple targets attached to paint stirring sticks could be inserted via the slits at various heights and orientations.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

2 hours ago, mh9162013 said:

Yes, they'll both be using their stock coils (8.5x11 and 11)

That’s not apples to apples if you are focused on determining separation.  You are going to great pains to standardize the target setup, you should try to match coil footprint also for this purpose.  Also, getting adept at how to “handle” the detector to wiggle into a partially masked target with coil control is skill-based assisted by a detector’s recovery speed capabilities.  Some detectors are suited to this zero in method, some are not.  Using equivalent sweep speeds and spans may not bear this out.  

Also, make sure you test all Equinox mode combinations, variable settings (primarily recovery speed), and single frequency setups to gather your info.  

BTW - If you want max funding for accessories, simply sell off the Equinox. :smile:

Hope it works out such that you get a clear winner.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Chase Goldman said:

 

That’s not apples to apples if you are focused on determining separation.  You are going to great pains to standardize the target setup, you should try to match coil footprint also for this purpose.  Also, getting adept at how to “handle” the detector to wiggle into a partially masked target with coil control is skill-based assisted by a detector’s recovery speed capabilities.  Some detectors are suited to this zero in method, some are not.  Using equivalent sweep speeds and spans may not bear this out.  

Also, make sure you test all Equinox mode combinations, variable settings (primarily recovery speed), and single frequency setups to gather your info.  

BTW - If you want max funding for accessories, simply sell off the Equinox. :smile:

Hope it works out such that you get a clear winner.

Out of curiosity, what coils could I use on the Equinox 600 and AT Max so they have the same coil footprints? I'm not aware of any coils that would offer this.

But regardless, it makes little difference to me, as I'm comparing the two using setups that I would actually use. 

I'm not doing these tests to decide which machine is better. I'm doing these tests to decide which machine works better for me given my soil, hunting style and current equipment/set up.

For instance, the AT Max with the 4.5 inch puck coil might hold its own compared to the Equinox 600 using the stock coil in regards to target separation abilities. But I would never use the puck coil on the AT Max as my primary set up.

So I need to compare these machines using equipment that I would actually use. I suppose this means I need to do this test with the AT Max and the 5x8 coil. I don't have that coil, but it would become my primary coil for the AT Max should I decide to keep the AT Max. However, if I decide to sell the AT Max, I'll be lucky if I get back 60 cents on the dollar when I sell the 5x8 with my AT Max (or sell them separately). 

Also, even if the AT Max with the 5x8 performs better than the Equinox 600 in terms of target masking and target separation, if I keep the Equinox 600, I'll probably be getting the 6 inch coil eventually. Then there's the almost guaranteed fact that the Equinox will give more accurate VDIs at depth than the AT Max will. The only question is how big of a difference will it be in my soil.

Thank you for the insight...and I hope I find a clear winner, too. 🙂

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mh9162013 said:

Thank you for the insight...and I hope I find a clear winner, too. 🙂

 

You have a detector in the AT Max with 1 fixed preset frequency along with a few offsets, with preset audio tones and with 3 different modes: All metal mode, Custom/Coins/Zero (which are all the same mode) and Pinpoint mode, which also has block notching, iron audio on or off and a threshold tone. Those are the adjustable features so you basically have a detector which has approximately 3 different detectors living inside of it. Taming its extreme high gain is definitely daunting for many. This is a detector that you are just getting acquainted with and it is the flagship Garrett single frequency VLF.

The Vanquish 540 is very different. The differences in the iron bias settings and the possible different recovery speeds do change things a bit but basically you have 1 search mode with slightly different preset recovery speeds that can be substantially changed by changing the iron bias from low to high and doing some notching. Getting to know what the Vanquish has under the hood is doable fairly quickly.

You have a detector in the Equinox 600 that is on a completely different planet even though it seems "just like the Vanquish" (I hear this a lot!). Definitely NOPE. It has 7 different modes including Pinpoint mode. The 6 main modes if using the multi frequency setting have 4 different tone options, 3 different recovery speed options, 6 different iron bias options and 50 different single digit notching options just for starters. I don't feel like doing the math on that right now but changing any of those features (just ground balancing the Nox does this too by the way) creates a slightly to drastically different detector. Then you factor in the 4 different single frequencies for the Park and Field modes and do the math all over again..........suffice it to say that just on the basic surface with 6 multi modes, pinpoint mode and 16 single frequency modes, there is definitely more than 1 detector inside the Equinox 600

Spending 50 hours or so learning most VLF detectors will definitely tell you all you need to know. Spending 50 hours with an Equinox, Deus, Tarsacci, Fisher F75/T2, Whites V3i/Vx3, N/M Anfibio just for a few examples, one is barely on a first name basis.

Testing the Equinox in default Park 1 is a bit like seeing the world through a front door security peep hole.

  • Like 8
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...