Jump to content

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, Reg Wilson said:

The new compact, super light PI from Ballarat, Australia. This machine uses any Minelab PI compatible mono coil and is dynamite on small as well as larger gold. It is almost totally unaffected by  EMI enabling it to be used near or practically beneath power lines. All hand built, on a limited production scale, this little beauty is creating great interest in Australia, where it can handle the highly mineralized soils. The outlet for this detector is Goldsearch, in Dunolly, Victoria, Australia.

Reg will you be posting a report here at all. Warts & all? The above seems more of a sales pitch. Do you know of any issues with the ground balance that has been reported elsewhere. One user on AEGPF said he couldn't ground balance until he tried a NF 12 X 7 coil? Do you have a production model or is it the prototype for testers? 

On the training videos you can clearly hear some EMI spikes that the QED user acknowledges. Other users have indicated that it does get some spikes but not as bad as the GPX. One user indicated he couldn't get to within 50m of powerlines with the QED or a GPX he had. How is yours set up to dampen EMI further i.e. What setting is the SMF (6) set to & do you use the ferrite rings on the coil lead?

I have seen some small gold found with it but was wondering what size/depth is the larger gold your finding?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I have no intention of starting a big fight like has been seen on other forums (please remove if out of line Steve). But the first post looks like a cut and copy from a glossy advert.  How does someone expect us all to believe this thing is the greatest since sliced bread with not a single bad point or niggle?  It just doesnt sound independant and unbiased to me.  Also I just cant see what new technology this detector is using that hasnt been seen before?

Please try not to get offended by my questions as it is not what I mean, just trying to point out how it looks to an outside observer, and hopefully get some finer detail on the new machine.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everyone needs to leave their baggage at the door as regards this subject and start fresh. Reg need only speak to his own experiences with the machine if he wishes, and certainly has no obligation to defend the QED from every second hand claim made elsewhere by parties not present in this discussion.

I am watching this subject and all involved harder than I have watched anything on this forum in the past, and just the mere fact I am commenting again here should be taken as warning of just how serious I am that the respect and decorum expected of all visitors to this forum shall not be violated. It's just a rather simple metal detector yet one would swear world peace were involved with all the passion it has stirred up. A very large and unusual mix of people have suddenly shown up on this forum after fleeing fights elsewhere over this subject.

I refuse to pick sides and I refuse to let this get out of hand. I consider my base forum rules and everything I have said so far to be fair and final warning to all. Anyone that levels personal attacks and accustations at others regarding character or impugning motives may be subject to being banned from this forum with no further warning. I do not reinstate people once they have been banned, ever.

JP has offered what in my opinion was a fair review, which I referenced in my first post on this thread. It answers the key question of whether this is a basically functional detector that can find gold in the positive. It does appear the machine offers some decent functionality at a decent price. There is no need for it to use new technology in the process. At the price it is being offered for, there is no requirement it outperform every other detector made, especially ones that cost far more. The QED need simply offer decent value for the money and fill a useful niche for some users, nothing more, nothing less. It probably can use some improvement like nearly every new machine that appears these days. That also should not surprise.

Anyone who has concerns about the performance or long term prospects of the QED can simply sit back and wait. There need be no rush to judgement - time and more reports from more users will sort it all out. Were I reporting on the machine I would say take it all with a grain of salt, and consider the reports of many as a whole. No undue attention need be given any individual report. Those who make excessive claims will be outed in the long run, at risk of their own future credibility.

This has been by my own standards a rant of my own. I value this forum and the comraderie shown here by my long time members above all else. New members are warned to tread lightly. This is a chance for all involved in this subject to start fresh, lay aside old accusations, forgive past slights, and move on. Show everyone that Australians (and others) can conduct a sane and reasonable discussion of something as simple and unimportant as a metal detector. That can't really be that hard. Nobody should be made to hurt personally over a discussion of a metal detector.

Thank you everyone. The floor is yours. Please don't let me down.

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry if my post sounded like a sales pitch, but after adapting to this machine I've really got to like it. I wouldn't say it's the easiest detector I've ever used, as it has manual ground balance, and does play up a bit on very changeable ground, but so do my other detectors. (GPX and GPZ)

My machine is a prototype, but is in every way identical to the production model, except in the internal layout. It is not a 'souped up' version in any way.

On a recent patch of small colors it was more responsive and easier to use than my other machines, cleaning up faster and easier. Tiny pieces were recovered at depths that really surprised me. At the other end of the scale, a 25" Nuggetfinder ran as smooth as silk, and pulled up deep targets. (no big colors yet)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

AussieMatt,

Don't wish to hijack Reg Wilson's post
But as the owner of the first Production QED serial number 001
and the user that reported
"One user indicated he couldn't get to within 50m of powerlines with the QED or a GPX he had"

I thought I would join up here and at least answer that question for you.

So to clarify,

I was conducting head to head testing with my QED and my GPX 5000 on a private property near Orange, NSW, Australia.
Initially testing was performed looking for gold on the property, later in the day due to heat we packed up and went back towards the homestead, that is transversed by 500KVA high voltage transmission line towers.
Both my QED and my GPX 5000 were unusable within 50m of these transmission lines.

It should be noted that Mobile (Cell) phone, TV, radio and other electronics are also effected by these lines, and according to the property owner, the severity of interference is dictated by many factors, Weather, long periods of dry weather causes issues, as does fog, rain, and the condition of the insulators.

Also of note was the detexnix wireless used on my QED and my Mobile (cell) phone gave up well before the detectors.

“One user on AEGPF said he couldn't ground balance until he tried a NF 12 X 7 coil?”
I believe this issue was resolved via QED settings

I've not suffered any GB issues over some pretty nasty ground in Central Victoria.
but then I'm an old school techo, that's used to manual GB.

“SMF (6) set to”

My SMF was default at 050 and I use the supplied Ferrite on the coil lead of all my coils.

Cheers,

Mal

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Welcome to the forum Mal. Thank you for the direct report. Far from hijacking Reg's thread it would be great in anyone with first hand knowledge of the QED would report here. There is no need for multiple threads on the subject.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the reply Mal. 

I hadn't seen Oldhand say that he had been able to get GB with the other coils & thought settings may have been the issue.

Have you tried the ferrite rings on the coil lead whilst on your GPX. Any difference on it if so?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the welcome Steve, lots of good information over here.

AussieMatt,

Howard posted some information on Mode settings to assist Oldhand, but after rereading on AEGPF
your right, I don't see oldhand say he can GB with the other coils.

All my coils have the ferrite fitted, and all my head to head testing between the QED and 5000 were with both boxes on the same stick.
So just a case of unpluging the coil from the QED and plugging it into the 5000 and firing it up.
Can't really say I noticed any difference having the ferrite on the 5000.

Mal

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My thanks to other QED owners for their input. In regard to various coils, changing the mode to suit the coil seems to iron out any GB problems except for the occasional extreme ground.

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...