How Much Would You Pay For VLF Type Discrimination At PI Type Depths?

[Jackpine]

$3000.00+ for a machine that will beat the better single freq machines by an inch or two on a dime? I would not pay it!  The cost benefit ratio just doesn't  add up in my ole noggin.

If you want to dominate the market with such a machine, IMO you have to take the opposite approach that ML has,  $2400.00 for the CTX has always been a huge joke to me. I don't hunt salt water beaches or trashy city parks, I just want a machine that punches deeper in my mild to medium ground.  It would not have to be waterproof to 3 meters either since I use single freq machines for fresh water hunting.

Current multi freq tech has dominated the market for a lot of years.  The return on investment to develop the tech must be huge for the manufacturers.    I do not know how detector makers calculate ROI, is it 5 yrs or 7yrs, to break even? Or would looking long term to dominate the market with a price tag that beats ML style pricing be better? FTP, I'm looking at you.

All this talk of be willing to pay 3 grand is silly!  I would not pay a penny over $1500.00 for a better next generation coin machine.

The ole Jackpine

[Steve Herschbach]

Amazons Best Selling Metal Detectors are models that sell for under $100. The first model I own in the list comes in at #50, the CTX 3030.

That in itself is interesting however. Not one so-called "flagship detector" by any other manufacturer even makes it into the Amazon top 100.

[GB_Amateur]

Made me look!

To be fair, much of that top 100 aren't metal detectors (e.g. pinpointers and diggers).  #99 was S-hooks for bird-feeders when I checked it out.  And your CTX3030 has already dropped to #53. 

But your point is well taken -- the low priced (Bounty Hunters, Garrett Aces, and especially the multitude of kiddie detectors) dominate in terms of quantity at Amazon.  Another indicator comes from brick-and-mortar stores like WalMart, Bass Pro Shops, and Cabellas.  Their inventories tend to be the under $500 units and I suspect their sales are heaviest in the low end of that.

Does this mean we on this site are among the (detector) elite?  The "top 1%"?  The jetsetters of 2017?  I think a group photo is in order, but even the gullible social media drones wouldn't believe this bunch could be at the top of any list, except maybe the waiting list at the local psychiatric hospital. 

[johnedoe]

On 4/7/2017 at 5:36 AM, Steve Herschbach said:

Amazons Best Selling Metal Detectors are models that sell for under $100. The first model I own in the list comes in at #50, the CTX 3030.

That in itself is interesting however. Not one so-called "flagship detector" by any other manufacturer even makes it into the Amazon top 100.

I like that.... They buy the cheap detectors and get soon discouraged....

However the only problem I see is this.... These rank amateurs are lacking the digging ethics we have adopted and are probably leaveing unfilled holes..... 

[Mark Gillespie]

I'll have to have a machine that has that capabilities.

Can't imagine a machine with performance like a pulse combined with target ID and discrimination to boot.

 

[FlyFish]

Claim
1. The detector, containing the generator, the gauge of the metal detector, the first unit
allocation of quadrature components( BVKS), the second BVKS, the microprocessor and
display unit, characterized in that the metal detector sensor contains the first
a coil unit consisting of the first exciting coil excited by the first
the frequency of excitation, and the first signal coil, and the first mentioned
the exciting coil and the first signal coil are located on the same plane
and are partially combined, and the size of the zone of combination of the first exciting
the coil and the first signal coil is selected such that the
minimum induction flow through the first signal coil, and the second unit
a coil consisting of a second exciting coil excited by a second frequency
and the second signal coil, and the said second exciting
the coil and the second signal coil are located on the same plane and partially
are combined, and the size of the zone of combination of the second exciting coil and
the second signal coil is selected such that the minimum flow is provided
induction through a second signal coil, with geometric dimensions and shape
first coil unit and second coil unit and spatial arrangement
the first coil unit and the second coil unit in relation to each other, and
geometric dimensions and shape of coils and their spatial arrangement by
in relation to each other are chosen such as to provide a minimum flow
induction through the mentioned signal coils and ensure the induction balance
according to the signal coils of the metal detector sensor, namely:
the coil alignment zone of the second coil unit is completely superimposed on the zone
matching coils of the first coil unit;
the plane of the second exciting coil is parallel superimposed on the plane
the first exciting coil, and the plane of the second signal coil is parallel
superimposed on the plane of the first signal coil.

 

) METAL DETECTOR (57) Abstract: FIELD: instrumentation. SUBSTANCE: invention relates to the field of introscopy, more specifically to metal detectors, and may be used for solving the task of metal objects detection, which are in different covering media, in particular, in low and high mineralized soil, building walls, etc. Substance: a metal detector comprises a generator, a metal detector sensor, the first quadrature components identification (FQCI), the second FQCI, a microprocessor and an indication unit. The metal detector sensor comprises the first unit of coils, comprising the first exciting coil, excited by the first excitation frequency, and the first signal coil, and the second unit of coils, comprising the second exciting coil, excited by the second excitation frequency, and the second signal coil. The first exciting coil and the first signal coil are placed in a single plane and are partially matched. The value of the matching zone of the first exciting coil and the first signal coil is selected so that there is minimum flow of induction via the first signal coil. The second exciting coil and the second signal coil are placed in a single plane and are partially matched. The value of the matching zone of the second exciting coil and the second signal coil is selected so that there is minimum flow of induction via the second signal coil. The plane of the second exciting coil is applied onto the plane of the first exciting coil. The plane of the second signal coilis applied onto the plane of the first signal coil. At the same time the zone of matching of coils in the second unit of coils is fully applied onto the zone of matching of coils of the first unit of coils. EFFECT: simplified design of a metal detector sensor, increased information value of metal object search, expansion of functional capabilities of a metal detector.

[Chase Goldman]

8 hours ago, FlyFish said:

The first exciting coil and the first signal coil are placed in a single plane and are partially matched. The value of the matching zone of the first exciting coil and the first signal coil is selected so that there is minimum flow of induction via the first signal coil. The second exciting coil and the second signal coil are placed in a single plane and are partially matched. The value of the matching zone of the second exciting coil and the second signal coil is selected so that there is minimum flow of induction via the second signal coil.

Induction doesn't "flow".   Induction is something that happens to a magnetic or electric field.  Electric current flows,  Magnetic flux, flows.  Force can be induced in a wire through time varying electro magnetic fields in another.  The degree to which that happens is a function of inductive properties in system, but induction does not "flow".

 

[Ridge Runner]

 Why should I be willing to pay more!

i just put 254.15 that will do more than lots of detectors I’ve had in the past. 

This detector company is not in love with me but they do want my business. So if said company comes up with something cross between a VLF and PI so be it . A product not moving is a product not making money. 

You will find that not one company is in business for their health. But they do have move what they make.

 Just look at one detector that first came out a dollar less than ten thousand. Then it took a dip in price and that was done because something sitting dead in the water is not a good thing.

 When anyone starts giving away something free it’s great for us but at the same time it’s to get that product moving.

 I know I’ve used the word move lots but that’s why I’m not willing to pay more.

 Chuck 

[Chase Goldman]

5 hours ago, FlyFish said:

the first quadrature components identification (FQCI), the second FQCI, a microprocessor and an indication unit.

Then should that have more correctly said, "the first First Quadrature Components Identification (FQCI), the second FQCI,..."

[Chase Goldman]

38 minutes ago, Ridge Runner said:

 Why should I be willing to pay more!

i just put 254.15 that will do more than lots of detectors I’ve had in the past. 

This detector company is not in love with me but they do want my business. So if said company comes up with something cross between a VLF and PI so be it . A product not moving is a product not making money. 

You will find that not one company is in business for their health. But they do have move what they make.

 Just look at one detector that first came out a dollar less than ten thousand. Then it took a dip in price and that was done because something sitting dead in the water is not a good thing.

 When anyone starts giving away something free it’s great for us but at the same time it’s to get that product moving.

 I know I’ve used the word move lots but that’s why I’m not willing to pay more.

 Chuck 

Chuck hope you noticed that this thread started in 2017 (i.e., before ML and Nokta started to their recent push to detector value and affordability) and until FlyFish posted the barely comprehensible patent like language above, had been dormant since then.  But you make a good point.  The fact is that no one is really innovating much on the VLF technology itself.  Other than ML's evolution of simultaneous multifrequency detection and processing (and the other features that it enables regarding salt balance, sophisticated Fe discrimination, and ability to efficiently couple with a broader range of metals for a given search profile), no one else is doing much with VLFs other than making them cheaper, lighter, easier to operate, and improving how information is conveyed to the operator.  Performance wise, we are at somewhat of a standstill.  Unless someone makes a true breakthrough with a hybrid between VLF and PI, as Steve described at the top of the thread, there is really no reason to be paying more for a VLF.