Jump to content
Steve Herschbach

Fisher Impulse AQ (formerly Aqua Manta) Pulse Induction Metal Detector

Recommended Posts

If this is true

10. Price. It will cost approximately 2100-2500 US dollars. New technologies cost money, yes, but they also bring an advantage over all other metal detectors.

I won't bite, my TDI is more than sufficient at the moment.

Water proof is good but my Equinox will do for water hunting.

TDI for super bad ground

Equinox everything else

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am pretty interested in a nugget version of this AQ,  initial tests show this AQ is near on par with depth of a gpx with a 15" coil. Due to the 7 usec timing it would make a killer small nugget machine once setup with AUTO GROUND BALANCING for the desert. I want something like this to keep tuned just for small nugget hunting, its so lightweight compared to a minelab big gold machine I could see owning one maybe if it pans out.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I went out to my storage unit (we downsized last year - all the junk is in storage) and got out my crystal ball.  After dusting it off and giving it a dose of Barkeepers Friend, I rubbed it vigorously.

Misty figures appeared before my eyes - I saw someone seeking gold nuggets in Africa.  He looked like he was using a Teknetics T2, but as I looked closer - it was something else - it was a PI detector....but what kind?.  At that point the cat jumped off the couch and landed in my lap.  the crystal ball is on its way back to the manufacturer for recalibration.

Beach hunters are not a mass market, European relic hunters and “artisanal miners” are potential mass markets. Neither of these markets are currently served by a light, ergonomic PI detector offering the immunity from bad ground that GB PI’s offer.

Whose detector will I see when I get my device back from Madam Sara’s CB (Crystal Ball) shop?

  • Like 3
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, since you brought it up Rick I will chime in. I was not wanting to rain on your parade. 🙂

You are right, a beach PI is not going to move the needle at First Texas. It’s obvious that after years of work CZX went nowhere, and so FT was stuck in a “we need to find something quick” position. Thankfully for them this came along. But unless it can be leveraged into some sort of dry land detecting model it certainly at this point does not fill that desire by many for a new machine to replace the F75 as the flagship.

Still, for me personally I am ecstatic to see this. I have been beating on Minelab and Garrett for YEARS to just take either the SDC or ATX and put them into something other than an off the shelf expensive military housing. They have the circuits, but producing a PI like what we are seeing here.... they just won’t do it. At least they would not. Perhaps if FT succeeds in getting this off the ground with a dry land version in the wings we will see action on other fronts also.

I love competition! 😀

I guess one thing is settled. Fisher posting this info to their Facebook page makes Impulse AQ the probable official name.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Steve Herschbach said:

Still, for me personally I am ecstatic to see this. I have been beating on Minelab and Garrett for YEARS to just take either the SDC or ATX and put them into something other than an off the shelf expensive military housing. They have the circuits, but producing a PI like what we are seeing here.... they just won’t do it. At least they would not. Perhaps if FT succeeds in getting this off the ground with a dry land version in the wings we will see action on other fronts also.

Steve,

What if Garrett and Minelab were spurred to the action you note? Suppose they came in at all about the same price, which would you want the most? This is of course comparing two known and a not yet detector, but the Fisher looks to be a well engineered manual model that allows user control of most of the parameters of operation as they want.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since the Impulse AQ does not have the capability to handle extreme ground / hot rocks I would be happier with a Garrett ATX in a good ergonomic package. I only ever sold my ATX as sort of a protest move. It is a well behaved and versatile circuit. But they either make what I want or screw it. I’m done lending any degree of support to ergonomic nightmares.

SDC is a bit limited so if I had my wish from Minelab it would be a subset of the GPX circuit. Imagine a GPX 5000 in a package similar to the AQ.

I honestly am content with the Equinox for beach detecting so my interest lies in supporting what this could become as a inland unit. I just don’t get to the beaches enough really to sink a couple grand into a dedicated beach machine. But I will support any company making the moves I like and I like the direction here. I may therefore get one to, as I explained before, to try on milder inland situations. It is mostly a timing thing for me. Too late in the fall and I may as well wait through the winter to see what happens next.

Everyone but me wants more power. There is enough power for me out there already. It simply exists in packaging that I am now waging war on going forward. There is enough heat on now from various companies that we are finally getting real competition. As consumers we are in a good position to start DEMANDING proper ergonomic machines. The old “detecting is a niche market so we can’t afford it” excuse has long since gone by the wayside.

With FT finally making the first move in some ways it is actually Garrett’s and Minelab’s game to lose.

The hardcore beach hunters are going to love Impulse AQ, no doubt about it. If I lived nearer to saltwater it is a no brainer for me.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Steve Herschbach said:

Everyone but me wants more power. There is enough power for me out there already. It simply exists in packaging that I am now waging war on going forward. There is enough heat on now from various companies that we are finally getting real competition. As consumers we are in a good position to start DEMANDING proper ergonomic machines. The old “detecting is a niche market so we can’t afford it” excuse has long since gone by the wayside.

This is precisely the concept I am sorting out this year, opting to spend more time and energy on unmasking than raw depth. I like how you look at things Steve, and your generosity in sharing your knowledge. Thanks

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Steve Herschbach said:

Everyone but me wants more power. There is enough power for me out there already. It simply exists in packaging that I am now waging war on going forward. There is enough heat on now from various companies that we are finally getting real competition. As consumers we are in a good position to start DEMANDING proper ergonomic machines. The old “detecting is a niche market so we can’t afford it” excuse has long since gone by the wayside. 

My days of swinging a 3 pounds or more detector are over!  With modern materials, etc. there is very little need to continue to produce heavy, chunky machines IMO.  I would rather spend the day swinging a light, well balanced, stable machine.  I don't care how deep a new machine will go if I can't swing it all day without being strapped to the machine! 😀

I believe that I will find more with a good quality light machine that I can swing for 8 hours vs. a supercharged monster that I can only swing for 1 hour.  Not everyone is 25 years old and built like the Hulk. LOL

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, SLGuin said:

Steve,

What if Garrett and Minelab were spurred to the action you note?

 

Garrett’s response to these new machine rumors appears to have been sending the “HooverBoys” a few ATXs.  They have been releasing youTube vids the last 2-3 weeks with nothing but ATX relic hunting.  If they are pushing those machines it’s doubtful anything new is in the pipeline 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Steve Herschbach said:

Since the Impulse AQ does not have the capability to handle extreme ground / hot rocks I would be happier with a Garrett ATX in a good ergonomic package.

This has been circling in mind. Is it because it does not ground balance, or is there more to it? The ground is generally milder where I live, it is more discrete sites that make VLF work poorly. Trying to figure out the puzzle of this, and a decent strategy. Things like EMI, bad ground, extreme nails, nearby airports, and unknown factors make some sites challenging even in general geographic areas thought to be mild. 

Share this post


Link to post
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

  • Similar Content

    • By Rick Kempf
      The latest developments of the AQ pre-production platform continue to increase the utility of the ferrous discrimination capability of the machine. Steady refinement of the design have made the machine not only deeper overall but greatly narrowed the gap between sensitivity in all metal and sensitivity in the iron ID modes of mute and multi-tone. 

      I suspect that if no iron/steel trash existed at the beach, no serious beach hunter would use anything except a Pulse Induction machine - unless they were in dry sand, and maybe not then. The reason I say this is that the depth advantages of existing PI machines is well demonstrated since they can operate on most beaches without the penalty of using ground balance. Also, except for iron/steel, no other level of discrimination is useful since gold jewelry can appear almost anywhere in the ID range above iron. So of the iron wasn’t there - PI’s would likely dominate. 

      In the case of Phase shift discrimination systems like VLF IB detectors use, the strong iron signal dominates the audio output, either silencing the audio entirely in the case of a single tone VLF, by nulling like an FBS/BBS - or by giving a lower tone in a multi-tone Detector. Even in the case of the multitone VLF’s, hearing the non-ferrous target depends on the recovery speed of the processing hardware in the detector. 

      With the AQ’s PI time-based discrimination, The discrimination of iron is reported to the user either as silence (in the mute mode) or as a low tone (in the case of multi-tone). 

      In mute, not only do you not hear the iron, but you hear instead silence - unless there is a non-ferrous target, in that case you hear the target with no hint of the iron at all. In this mode, the AQ software simply makes the ferrous targets disappear - just disappear. 

      In the case of multitone, you hear a high tone for non-ferrous low and medium conductors and a high tone for ferrous targets - close or even superimposed, makes n difference you would hear both tones in any case. 

      This has several major advantages. 

      First, there is “zero recovery speed” - All targets produce an output signal if they return one - the ferrous is - by operator choice - either silenced or assigned a low tone. The low/medium conductors always return their characteristic high tone. This occurs 100% of the time - there is no “switching delay” from target to target based on processor speed limitations happening. 

      Separation distance between adjacent ferrous and non ferrous targets is ZERO. 

      By zero, I mean exactly that, even non-ferrous directly beneath ferrous gives a clear non-ferrous high tone and the iron simply “isn’t there” (in mute - in multi-tone it gives a low tone which you would hear along with the non ferrous high tone). 

      This means that “silent masking” that Tom wrote about long ago, where even a tiny bit if ferrous like a common staple can mask a deeper and larger valuable target, is largely eliminated. 

      Now this isn’t magic, it’s just that the iron is above the ground balance point (or at it) and you are hearing the signals below the GB point and the ones at or above the GB point are silenced (or give a low tone). 

      Is it perfect? - no. In discrim on the AQ some high conductor targets will be “above the GB point” and be treated as iron. If your idea of a good beach hunt is finding a bunch of dimes and quarters in dry sand, then stick with whatever light, cheap VLF you want, they can help you avoid all that aluminum and gold which would just slow you down - lol 

      All this is clearly demonstrated in the video I have linked to before. The machine in the video is the Manta prototype from 3-5 years ago. The system has gone through a lot of development since then, including the very latest gains in overall depth and depth in the iron ID modes which I reported in the first sentence in this post. 

      Will the AQ “obsolete” any other detectors? Depends on what you mean by obsolete. The gas turbine aircraft engine (the jet) quickly replaced the extremely complex, high maintenance multi cylinder reciprocating aircraft engines for heavy, fast and high aircraft, but lots of light aircraft are still piston powered. The piston engine is still undergoing development for some aircraft applications. 

      So I expect that IF the AQ in the hands of the early buyers lives up to its claimed capabilities, that serious beach gold hunters will adopt it quickly. When a new tool in the hands of early adopters proves to be superior at doing a specific job to the previous best tools for the job in question, those who are really serious about performance for economic or other reasons will adopt the new tool and stop using the old one. How many framing carpenters still use a hammer. Not many if the compressor/nail gun noise at any construction site is any guide. The framing hammer is not obsolete - it still works just fine - but for serious users the nail gun became “compelling”. 

      Time will tell how “compelling” the AQ will become for serious beach jewelry hunters.
       
    • By Steve Herschbach
      There is on-going field testing of the Fisher Impulse AQ in progress trying to improve the discrimination. This despite the machine getting ready to go to production at any moment.
      For those that do not know metal detector development never stops. It just gets to a point where it is good enough and you launch. Engineers can improve for eternity if you let them. This does raise a concern however. This machine is as far as I can tell using a new premise for what it does, and is obviously up against deadlines to get out the door. There is nothing here about internet update capability, and in fact it seems I recall somebody at FT saying there never would be such a feature on their machines. But given that nearly every serious platform released by FT sees software bugs and updates in the first year, including the recently released F-Pulse, the odds are this machine would benefit from an update once it gets into user hands and the inevitable bug is found. It really is a set up for having to mail machines back to be updated.
      I would like to be one of the first to jump on one of these but given the First Texas poor track record in this regard a lack of update facility does give me pause, especially in a detector that will likely be over $2000. I get a cheap detector having no update facility, but First Texas may end up regretting not putting the capability in this detector. Forget the unhappy customers - it costs the company money if it ends up having to physically reprocess every machine sold to perform some kind of software fix. In this day and age internet update capability is an expectation - every Nokta/Makro machine no matter the price has it, even the upcoming under $300 Simplex. I am a bit amazed that there is no mention of this capability on what appears to be the most expensive First Texas metal detector ever made. 
      Source thread at Dankowski Forum
      Fisher Impulse AQ Data & User Reviews

      Fisher Impulse AQ metal detector
    • By Steve Herschbach
      In a weird way I see this as good news. Apparently Fisher was ready to start producing the Impulse AQ. The reason I know that is there has been a publicly announced "production delay" over some sort of mechanical aspect of the detector. So I read that as meaning that as soon as this hardware bug gets addressed units will be rolling out the door. The only problem is we don't know how long it will take to fix the bug, but they must be on it 24/7 at this point. Management has to be cracking the whip hard by now to get it out the door. I have to assume we will see this before end of summer. Fingers crossed! 
      Source for the info at Dankowski Forum
      Fisher Impulse AQ Data & User Reviews

      Fisher Impulse AQ metal detector
    • By Steve Herschbach
      Demonstration of how the new Fisher Impulse AQ handles non-ferrous items surrounded by or under ferrous trash. ZTS® "Zero Target Separation" 3/19/2019 Official Fisher video.
      Fisher Impulse AQ Detector Data & User Reviews

      Fisher Impulse AQ ZTS® "Zero Target Separation"
    • By Steve Herschbach
      Explanation of new coil mounting system on the new Fisher Impulse AQ metal detector. ZPT® "Zero Pressure Technology" 3/19/2019 Official Fisher video.
      Fisher Impulse AQ Detector Data & User Reviews

      Fisher Impulse AQ ZPT® "Zero Pressure Technology"

      Fisher Impulse AQ ZPT® "Zero Pressure Technology" detail image
    • By Steve Herschbach
      Demonstration of the high speed responses for various objects waved under the coil of the new Fisher Impulse AQ metal detector. HRS® "Highly Reactive System" 3/19/2019 Official Fisher video.
      Fisher Impulse AQ Detector Data & User Reviews

      Fisher Impulse AQ HRS® "Highly Reactive System"
×
×
  • Create New...