New Minelab Manticore

[TedinVT]

2 hours ago, NAGANT said:

No full manual and weird marketing points to pressure to get this in the buyers head now to stall buying other makes.   The manual isn't available due to software tweaking I'm thinking, the basic start up guide isn't affected.  Depending how anal  or conflicted the engineering team is will determine release date.  New Minelab releases crank up used classifieds everytime.

You nailed it!

[Erik Oostra]

The Mongrel's search mode settings seem simple enough.. 

[Cal_Cobra]

20 hours ago, steveg said:

I liked that part of the video very much.  That was very FBS-like, in that the reason the wedge was not detected was because he adjusted the FERROUS discrimination.  If you noticed, the coin he swung over was mid 30s for its conductive ID, which was very similar to the "conductive" ID of the wedge (the conductive ID for the wedge ranged up as high as mid 30s also, see my picture, below).  On the Equinox, the only way to discriminate the wedge, if you wanted to (since there is only conductive information, and no "2-D" ability) would be to set disc up in the mid teens -- which discriminates NOT ONLY the wedge, but also a nickel (or the coin shown in the video).  BUT -- with 2-D (ferrous AND conductive) information available for each target, you can discriminate based on the FERROUS information, only, if you choose.  And in that way, while both targets ID in the mid 30s on the CONDUCTIVE side, the FERROUS ID of each target is much different.  So, proper setup of your discrimination -- with your discrimination based off of the FERROUS ID, means you can discriminate the wedge, but still detect a coin that, from the "conductive" perspective, would ID very similar to the wedge.  There's no way to discriminate the wedge from the coin, on an Equinox; on the Manticore however, just like on the CTX, E-Trac, or an Explorer, you can EASILY discriminate the wedge, and NOT a coin that has a similar conductive ID.

For anyone familiar with FBS, what I just said is very basic.  But, for those, like GB_Amateur, who are not familiar with FBS machines, hopefully this helps, in that this is a good illustration of what having 2D target information (FE as well as CO) allows you to do, in terms of setting up the machine.  

NOTE -- of COURSE the primary discriminator needs to be the one "between our ears," with audio being "where it's at," in terms of discerning targets.  We all know this.  But, all I am trying to illustrate is that having the ability to discriminate based on FE ID is a tool that is helpful, and it's a tool I really missed on the EQX...

Steve

 

Thanks Steve, that really is a game changer for the Equinox lineage isn't it.

I used an Etrace a decade ago for deep silver turn hunting, but never used it for relic hunting.  What's your opinion on how the 2D ability could help at 1800's sites infested with that rusty tin that comes in as conductive on every detector I've ever used at these sites, but I've never had a FBS/FBS2 detector there.  Tom_CA uses his Explorer2 there, and I believe he's had as many challenges with that stuff as I have with machines like the F75 LTD, Racers, Impact, MMK, EQX800, etc. 

[dsb]

Cal that is a great Q.  That rusty debris must be right up there with gold discrimination in tech ability.  Love to see a in the wild dig vid of M-core showing screen ID and dig results of about ten targets, iffy signals and deep silver ID's.  The EQ 800 has helped me  a lot but i cant put the time in lately to stay up on it like i want.  When i do get a chance i shallow water hunt and just enjoy the day.

[steveg]

7 hours ago, Cal_Cobra said:

Thanks Steve, that really is a game changer for the Equinox lineage isn't it.

I used an Etrace a decade ago for deep silver turn hunting, but never used it for relic hunting.  What's your opinion on how the 2D ability could help at 1800's sites infested with that rusty tin that comes in as conductive on every detector I've ever used at these sites, but I've never had a FBS/FBS2 detector there.  Tom_CA uses his Explorer2 there, and I believe he's had as many challenges with that stuff as I have with machines like the F75 LTD, Racers, Impact, MMK, EQX800, etc. 

Yes, I do think it is a "big deal" that this "FBS-like" capability is now a part of the Multi-IQ+ platform.  Clearly, Minelab has found a way to extract FE info on targets with Manticore, and I'd presume it's being done in some similar way to how it is done in FBS units (as Geotech/Carl alluded may be the case, with his very interesting take on things, earlier in this thread).

As for how the 2D ability could help, specifically at 1800s sites infested with rusty tin, well, that's a great question, and one I'm not sure of for a couple of reasons...

1.  That "rusty tin infestation" seems to be a "western" thing, more than an "eastern" thing, and so -- with 99% of my detecting of 1800s sites being "back East," I'm not nearly as familiar with that "rusty tin" issue you mention.  I think this somewhat west vs. east disparity is due to the types of containers that food, and other such necessities, were packed into, for folks traveling long distances (often westward) back in the 1800s.  The only time I experienced any of what you are talking about, in terms of that rusty tin issue, has been during the few times I've hunted old miner's camps/cabins, etc. in Colorado.  And when there, I was using a Gold Bug Pro, not FBS.  But, yes, I did experience how those pieces would ID as conductive, and were very "troublesome."

2.  I think the answer to how the Manticore will handle this, and how much 2D ID/discrimation might help, will depend on just HOW WELL the iron handling has been engineered by Minelab for this particular detector release.  I do think, from some of NASA-Tom's posts about iron over the past several years, that iron was a BIG focus, with this machine. 

I recall a post he made several years back about meeting this one specific detectorist who hunts nothing BUT iron.  Tom talked about how this particular person spent ALL of his time on the "ferrous" side of a machine's capabilities, as his interest was in finding iron RELICS, from amongst the iron trash.  And I recall that this was a real "lightbulb moment" for Tom, as this particular detectorist's passion for finding iron relics, and the things he had to do to learn to target specific types of iron targets from amongst "junk" iron targets, really sparked Tom's mind in a seemingly profound way.  I recall Tom talking about how this guy had become an "expert" iron hunter, and how much Tom learned from the guy's unique perspective. 

And so, adding this triggering of Tom's mind, regarding iron ID, to the posts he made recently about Manticore and the iron capabilities of the machine (before going temporarily "dark" on posting until we get closer to release and he feels more free to share), it seems clear to me that however his mind has been working over the past several years with respect to iron, as sparked by that time he spent with that "iron-focused" detectorist, that some of that has been worked into the Manticore to at least some degree.

AND SO -- I think the answer to your question, while unknown at this point, may be at least somewhat hopeful/favorable once we get our hands on the machine.  My guess is that since a "good bit" of focus was made on IRON, with the development of this unit, that the Manticore will be able to do some things in iron, BEYOND just the "recovery speed" approach of dealing with unmasking -- i.e. improved ability to ID iron -- that may prove helpful to those of us seeking non-ferrous treasure hiding amongst ferrous trash.

I'm hopeful, in this regard.  After all, my nemesis when hunting 1800s sites "back East" is not the "tin" issue, but the "square nails" issue.  While there are often clues provided by the machines I've used to date, that allow SOME of those nails to be recognized, and thus avoided, there are some more pesky ones, that simply do an OUTSTANDING job of masquerading as deep copper/silver coins.  And so, for me, if any iron ID improvements are to be had with this machine, as I suspect there may be, and if these improvements include better handling of the square nail issue, I'll be as happy as you will be, if the unit proves more capable of handling the rusty tin issue.  Let's both hope!  🙂

Steve

 

[dewcon4414]

“It's build quality and waterproofing has been improved, significantly”

This is yet to be determined IMO.   I honestly don’t think the Nox was tested in the water… it was assumed the sealed casing and universal IP ratings made it waterproof.  If it’s being made in the same factory using the same mode process with the same quality control…. Then it’s a wait and see for the water guys.

ML has very good marketing staff.  Well played on waiting hoping to do the same thing the Nox did…. Stall all sales of other detectors.  But this times …. I’m not sure it will work with the quality of machines out there.

[scoopjohnb]

17 hours ago, Chase Goldman said:

????

That’s about the easiest way I can describe it.

The PI-s I’ve used are slow units that tend to cancel out local ground and signal on targets above and below that value.

The VLF machines non gold prospecting have an absolute ground discriminator signaling on everything above that value.

Hands on experience indicates a bit of both in FBS2. Slow, deep unit, great ground handling and reports on changes of signal rather than absolute value’s. And somehow seems to generate target ID. Hates fluffy airy ground just like a PI. It seems to need that ground signal to work it’s magic.

[Johnnysalami1957]

Could have just named it the Equinox 1000. Or 1500 according to its price tag. 

[GB_Amateur]

8 hours ago, steveg said:

1.  That "rusty tin infestation" seems to be a "western" thing, more than an "eastern" thing, and so -- with 99% of my detecting of 1800s sites being "back East," I'm not nearly as familiar with that "rusty tin" issue you mention.  I think this somewhat west vs. east disparity is due to the types of containers that food, and other such necessities, were packed into, for folks traveling long distances (often westward) back in the 1800s.  The only time I experienced any of what you are talking about, in terms of that rusty tin issue, has been during the few times I've hunted old miner's camps/cabins, etc. in Colorado.  And when there, I was using a Gold Bug Pro, not FBS.  But, yes, I did experience how those pieces would ID as conductive, and were very "troublesome."

In my limited experience in Western ghost towns it's not just the rusty cans (and worse, pieces of them), although those do play a roll.  Even worse in some places are the pieces of sheet metal (iron composition but possibly originally zinc coated by the galvanizing method).  Sheet metal was quite common in construction, particularly for roofs.  (Sometimes copper was used, but that seems less frequent.)  In some ways these are similar to old crown caps, except for the dimensionality (flat or 2-d for sheet metal and unless severely decomposed, 3-d for crown caps with that raised rim).  Also it seems that rust preferentially attacks edges and maybe this is where a ferrous+non-ferrous readout can really help.  Small pieces have a higher percentage of edge compared to large pieces.

8 hours ago, steveg said:

...My nemesis when hunting 1800s sites "back East" is not the "tin" issue, but the "square nails" issue.

(Note:  The following paragraph is just my impressions; not carefully studied so may be way off.)  For me often the modern rusty nails are worse and I think those might be easier to distinguish.  There seems to be a misconception among many that 'ferrous' and 'iron' are equivalent.  From an historical (and chemical) standpoint that is understandable.  But in metal detecting (as in many pursuits) the lingo that develops and becomes standard isn't particularly conforming to historical or scientific usage.  I think 'ferrous' refers to the magnetic properties if ferromagetic materials.  Iron (and its common alloy -- steel) also has conductive properties and those can dominate the response of a detector.  Where we win is for thin, rusty materials when the ferromagnetic part of the signal can dominate the conductive part.  My hope is that with rusty bits of sheet metal (as found scattered thickly in many Western ghost towns) will give a 'tell' on the new ML Manticore.

As far as the Manticore being an improvement over FBS/FBS2, one possibility is that its better separation when combined with the ferrous+non-ferrous readout (which those earlier detectors perfected) will give it the edge.  Again, just wishful thinking at this time AFAIC.  The Equinox has better separation (from what I've been told -- never had an FBS) but lacks the ferrous discrimination properites of those earlier models.

 

[Geotech]

21 hours ago, scoopjohnb said:

FBS2 is VLF with a bit of PI for ferrous discrimination thrown in.

FBS2 is VLF with time-domain sampling & processing. There is no PI going on.