Now that I have the prototype shafts built, I've been able to work some more on the counterweight design, and I have moved very close to finalizing the design.
I have discovered through this extensive testing/design that the amount of weight needed to achieve proper counterbalance is a bit more than I was originally thinking, after the preliminary, "rough" proof-of-concept testing. I would like to present the findings, and get some opinions -- from anyone who has been potentially interested in the counterbalance system -- as to whether these changes are acceptable, or if this would change your desire to possibly purchase the counterweights.
1. The weight needed to counterbalance the 12" x 15" coil, (based on an "average" lower rod extension length), is roughly 28 oz. This is a fairly substantial amount of weight -- BUT -- I must note that when the weight is applied, the machine swings BEAUTIFULLY. It FEELS lighter, even though the "absolute weight" -- i.e. according to measurement as provided by a scale -- is obviously greater. With my forearm in the arm in the arm cuff, swinging the machine normally, I was literally able to hold the handle of the machine with only my thumb and index finger -- and swing the machine effortlessly! The sensation is that the machine FLOATS across the ground! (For the 11" coil, the amount of counterweight needed is of course slightly less -- roughly 25 oz.)
2. To include this amount of weight in the tube extensions, and yet not have the extensions excessively long, I must use larger-diameter carbon-fiber tube than I planned -- I've decided on 31mm outside diameter tubes. I had intended to use the same diameter of tubing as used on the upper shaft (22.15mm outside diameter), but the extension length required was far too long.
3. Using the 31mm outside diameter tube for the counterweights, I calculate that length of the tube extending beyond the end of the shaft will be 7 1/2" for the 12" x 15" coil, and 6 1/2" for the 11" coil.
4. There would be no changes to the shaft design needed; anyone wanting the counterweight system in the future would still purchase a shaft with the same threaded female fitting installed in the butt end of the shaft, and the same threaded end cap that screws into the butt end. The only changes would be to the counterweights themselves (as comparted to what I had originally planned) -- i.e. larger diameter carbon-fiber tubing, and thus a larger end cap for the ends of the counterweights themselves.
SO, my questions are, with the counterweight lengths needed now a pretty-well "known quantity" -- i.e. 6 1/2" and 7 1/2" long (11" coil and 12" x 15" coil, respectively), and the weights to achieve balance being also a pretty-well "known quantity" -- i.e. 25 oz. and 28 oz., respectively, would those interested in the weights find these specs acceptable? Please offer your comments.
Preliminary/rough pricing info would be as follows. One counterweight, $22.50 plus shipping ($30 total). If an EQX user only wanted to order one weight, I would suggest the 6 1/2" long, 25 oz. weight, designed for the 11" coil; this amount of counterweight still achieves a degree of balance that feels GREAT with the 12" x 15" coil. I am of the opinion that no counterweight is needed, for the 6" coil. Two counterweights, one for the 11" coil and one for the 12" x 15" coil, $42.50 plus shipping ($50 total).
This weeks beach hunt was split between the GPX and Equinox. The GPX scored 5 deep silvers, but this item is the reason I love the way the Equinox ID's targets. To some, they may not like the jumpy numbers on mixed metal targets, but I appreciate the added information, as I always like to be the one making the final decision to dig or not. The GPX would have read this as Iron, especially at the depth it was. But the Equinox read the copper content as well as the iron. Since I run with no discrimination, the detector sees both metals and reports them as such. That is a good thing. But I also like to run my iron volume on zero, that way I am not swayed by the iron sound to possibly not dig it. The iron numbers still flash to give me that information, I just prefer not to hear it. That makes these type of targets easier to examine. If you have not tried you Equinox that way, give it a try. For me it is one of those perks of a well designed machine.
I am new to the forum and this is my first post. I have an Equinox 800 coming via the Brown Truck and I was wondering if anyone could tell me the approximate Target Id numbers for the following:
58. cal Minnie balls
Thanks!! I am really enjoying the wonderful post here.