Steve Herschbach

Previous thread with links to even more previous threads... Best Methods For Cleaning Unrecognizable Coins

Your post hit the nail on the head Lackey. The “more depth” hook has been a red herring for ages. Single frequency detectors get no more depth now than my old Compass Gold Scanner Pro did back in the 80s and that’s a fact. I’ve seen a lot of neat features and ease of use added since then, but more depth in single frequency VLF... not really. People who genuinely need real depth do not use VLF detectors, they use a high power PI or a GPZ. Single frequency VLF is old, mature tech and any company with even minor engineering chops can make a good one. The ONLY thing that can be offered in single frequency VLF now is VALUE in the form of better packaging and lower prices. The high end future belongs to multifrequency/hybrid detectors now. And with that I really am getting off my soapbox!

I thought it was just a great discussion where one idea leads to another and some great commentary that actually all does relate back to your original question. I appreciate it Chuck as it was kind of my last shot at getting up on a soapbox and pontificating about an industry in which I have had a near life-long interest. It’s been a lot of fun over the years being a gadfly trying to push and nudge things when the opportunity arose. There are a few places along the way where I was able to make a difference and I am happy about that. Going forward I am content to just sit back and watch what happens, more observer than involved party. For years we were caught in this place where companies thought a new coat of paint, a new decal, and a different coil made for a new detector. It was making me kind of crazy watching other tech industries make huge gains while the detector industry offered this lame excuse about being a niche industry where expecting that kind of progress was unrealistic. The only thing that can fix that kind of thinking is real competition, and thankfully I think we have now entered a new phase where that actually exists. Individual companies may suffer but it can only be good for us, the metal detector users. The irony is some people liked getting what they decided was “the best” metal detector and then being able to feel comfortable for years they had the best machine. Now I have actually seen complaints of too many new models coming too quickly for them to keep up! Might as well get used to it as times have finally changed in this quiet little backwater of an industry. Personally, I could not be happier with where we are as consumers and end users right now. Happy Days!

Hmmmm, on reading it all again myself I see nothing at all being said about the Simplex being a “mega-performance metal detector”. How about a decent 12 kHz detector with performance in line with the last half dozen single frequency machines this company has already produced? With more features than other single frequency detectors selling for twice as much.

Since you can buy them new for $3.49 each I’d say not worth melting. The neat thing about gold is you can plate it in remarkably thin layers. Think for instance about the value of gold leaf. http://www.steelcitycopper.com/store/page20.html

Welcome to the forum Joe If the machine is going to be used 99% of the time doing other things, why do you need it? The machines you have are fine for such minimal use. Your Equinox 600 with 6” coil in Field Mode 2 and all metal/horseshoe engaged will be very close to the Gold Bug Pro in performance. Both are just slightly better than a properly tuned T2 with small coil. Basically you have three detectors that are very close in performance and you are just splitting hairs as to which may be the best. Everyone has favorites and you can collect opinions all week long, but the truth is I personally could use any one of them or a dozen other VLF detectors and go find gold. It’s not the tiny difference between this hot VLF or that hot VLF that will make the difference, it is your access to good gold bearing ground and your knowledge of the machine you use that will make the difference between success or failure. Bottom line is the Gold Bug Pro is a very simple to use and very well proven detector. If you can’t find gold with it, find better ground and work on your detecting skills. But I could say the same of the other two machines you already own also. As far as Equinox goes, the 600 is nearly as good as the 800 for nugget detecting. I advise either Park 2 or Field 2, not Park 1 as mentioned by the earlier poster. I am sure I am one of the few that’s actually put it to the test and most people just assume the 600 is not near the gold finding machine as the 800 simply because the 800 has a “Gold Mode” and the 600 does not. From my article at https://www.detectorprospector.com/forums/topic/6799-equinox-800-gold-nugget-detecting-tips/ Note: the following works as well on both Equinox 600 and Equinox 800. Since Gold Mode lacks target tones, going to Field 2 and using the solutions above plus the additional possibility of tones is another alternative. Instead of using Gold Mode and blocking the lowest target id numbers they can be left open to signal as ferrous or mixed ferrous targets. And you now have 5, 10, and 15 kHz options that Gold Mode lacks. Be very careful because the default rejection pattern for Field 2 rejects target id 1 and 2. This will reject most small gold nugget readings and reduce signal strength on larger gold by blocking part of the signal. Field 2 set up properly is quite close to Gold Mode performance and a perfectly acceptable nugget detecting alternative. Field Mode 2 Frequency: Multi Ground Balance: Auto (Ground pump method) Sensitivity: 18 - 23 Recovery Speed: 4 - 6 (default is 7) Iron Bias: 0 Accept/Reject: Everything accepted, rely on tones (alternative reject -9, -8, and -7 if too much ground feedback) There are so many decent VLF detectors you can use now it’s like asking which computer you can get to best run Microsoft Word. I see minimal difference in actual gold found between a 1995 Fisher Gold Bug 2 and any competitive machine made since. The VLF tech flatlined some time ago and from my perspective everything since is just different flavors of ice cream. All tasty but none all that much superior to the others. The operator in my opinion makes the difference in all the ways that matter. Best of luck to you no matter what detector you choose to use. Steve's Guide to Gold Nugget Detectors

I’m sorry, but it appears the part is no longer available. You will have to make something yourself.

Lower frequency weighting in Field 1 is less sensitive to coke. Also less sensitive to weak gold targets than Field 2. Notching out target id numbers 1 & 2 will eliminate most thin gold chains.

I assume you are referring to the coil support bracket? The link I posted in 2017 was no good so I deleted it. I am unable to locate a source for these now so they may not be available any longer.

Hazmat Warning!!! Rope off that beach quick!!

Actually I am not saying it is not true. I am saying the source is unreliable and I pay no attention to stuff from them as being anything more than click bait in most cases. They also do post lots of accurate stuff after the fact, but the track record on early release information is very poor. So make what you want of that. I try to keep information on this website as accurate as possible. That means I only trust official sources for any information I post on the site as the last thing I ever want to do is spread inaccurate information. It flies directly in the face of why I created the site. That’s why I have a knee jerk reaction about this sort of stuff. It’s click bait and I understand why they do it because click bait pays. But I don’t like engaging in that sort of thing personally and really don’t like spreading it via this website. Note I don’t care per se if other people post it as you have, but I will 99% of the time speak up to let other people know that in my opinion it is unreliable information. In this case if it’s not coming right from Minelab, I would ignore it and wait until they decide to let the cat out of the bag. The bottom line is I work hard to make this website one of the very first places people will ever find accurate information as it appears.

I agree. If you announce give up the specs. I am not a fan of the endless tease whether it's from a girlfriend or a detector company. Seriously, all metal detector companies are working on something that will come out someday. So announcing "we are working on something that will come out someday" is just a given. Or should be anyway if a company intends on staying in business. Hey everyone! Garrett is working on something that will come out someday!! Stop the presses!!! And better wait and see what it is before you buy anything else!!!! Especially that detector White's is working on that they will come out with someday!!!!! You heard it here first!!!!!!

What experts? Most of the information you are quoting originated from a Russian website that regularly makes things up out of thin air and I personally place no value in it’s accuracy. So hoax information? Probably. Minelab created? No. I repeat over and over unless it comes direct from Minelab somebody is making it up. The ONLY information you will ever see from me you can absolutely know I have officially verified. In other words, if I don’t post it, official confirmation can not be found and it’s rumor. I may as well toss in the towel though. Once the Russians post it spreads everywhere like gospel and it’s spitting in the wind trying to keep it at bay. I suppose it really does not matter anyway if people want to believe it all. Once Minelab reveals the facts we will know for sure. What’s annoying to me I guess is these guys get proven wrong time after time but it never matters. On the next go around they will do it again and nobody will question it. So if the Russians make stuff up and Minelab does not deliver on the made up stuff it’s a disaster? If Minelab actually cared about that they could clear it up with official information, but they let it ride. I suspect just this discussion is a marketing plus. That being the case I think I really will just let it go. So far the only reliable information is from two Minelab videos and a company annual report. The videos state clearly the machine has Multi-IQ. The annual report information states the machine falls above X-Terra and below Equinox in the lineup. Most everything else is conjecture but we can place some safe bets. A display? You think?

In general lower than AZ but that really does not mean anything. I have been in low mineral ground here and moved a mile and been in bad hot rocks. It simply depends exactly where you are. People also forget salt mineralization can mess you up even more than magnetic sand and plenty of NV locations are loaded with salt. Ok when bone dry and near undetectable when wet.

The GPX 4500 was long ago superseded by the GPX 5000. In fact the 4500 was officially discontinued but then later reintroduced as a lower price alternative to the 5000 and perhaps as a counter to the Garrett ATX which came out around then. If you want a 4500 new with warranty, it would be time to buy before they are gone. I assume the GPX 5000 will continue to be available. I would not expect prices on remaining 4500s to change but once they are gone perhaps the GPX 5000 will be reduced in price. Or not. With Minelab you never know, they may increase the price! https://www.detectorprospector.com/forums/topic/5765-4500-vs-5000/

There was no reason to put the ATX in the Recon housing. The option existed up front to use the Infinium housing and they went with the Recon housing instead. My theory is the Recon never was a real winner either so they wanted to try and get the sunk costs out of the housing development by sticking a consumer detector in a military housing. Even the water hunters have lost enthusiasm for the ATX due to never ending issues with the rods locking up from sand intrusion and cable deterioration issues that Garrett seems to never address. I actually loved mine for saltwater use since it is stout and is nearly neutral in weight underwater but when my last one flooded (was replaced under warranty) I lost faith in the unit. I am convinced the ATX packaged properly could actually have given Minelab some decent low end competition and would have sold much better in the nugget detecting world, where it has now all but been forgotten. For the company that really helped launch electronic prospecting Garrett’s complete lack of interest in getting serious about gold detecting has always puzzled me. I tried to work with them but when it came to the area they most need to listen to someone like me about (practical prospecting ergonomics) they completely ignored me. When asked I said the Infinium housing, even with it’s own issues that need work (the rod sucks) would be preferable for the ATX. Not what they wanted to hear obviously, and to this day one of my greatest failures as a consumer advocate. Garrett so far refuses to make the Garrett LTX and until they do I will never touch another Garrett detector with a ten foot pole. It does not need to look like the unit below but under 4 lbs and under $2K should be no challenge at all for Garrett... if they simply cared to try. Garrett LTX Prototype 4.73 perfectly balanced pounds including 8 AA NiMH batteries Control box can be moved forward and back to re-balance for larger coils Control box removable and can be chest or hip mounted Employs standard inexpensive cable type coil options PBSRP* $1999 Construction thread with more rod options here *PBSRP - Prototype Builder Suggested Retail Price before discounts. No, I'm not building any more and not selling these!

Well, we do have a detector now that beats the price part of the challenge and comes close on the weight. The Interfacion QED PL2 at 4.4 lbs and under US$2000. And potentially in the running the upcoming Fisher Impulse that will beat on weight at an estimated 3.9 lbs but may be slightly over in price. First up is a beach hunting version but a dry land nugget hunter is supposed to follow soon after. So a short list of possible options now or in the near future: White’s TDI SL Special Edition 3.3 lbs $1049 Interfacion QED PL2 4.4 lbs AUD$1850 Fisher Impulse 3.9 lbs? $2500? I am seriously irritated with Garrett now and swear I will never buy another Garrett metal detector unless they come out with a light weight version of the ATX. To continue to hobble a very good PI circuit with a waterproof 7 lb housing (for desert use?) and the overpriced heavy rod/coil combos borders on “metal detector criminal negligence” at this point. Whoever is running the show at Garrett these days needs to get a clue.

See the link I added to my post above. Bottom line good general purpose machine, very good modern park and beach machine for coins and especially jewelry. Weakest area is nugget detecting... don’t bother. The unit is always locked into dual frequency saltwater mode and it’s “single frequency” modes are achieved by ignoring half the signal, making them weaker than the V3i in that respect, which has true single frequency modes in addition to the multifrequency mode. That’s all fine except when chasing small gold nuggets or micro jewelry.

Personally I really liked the DFX and it still is a decent detector, but not as “hot” as the modern crop of machines. The plus side is that means it is well behaved, and the target id system is still superior to most machines even by today’s standards. I always was a SignaGraph fan and still am. I own a White’s detector still for the sole purpose of running my Bigfoot coil. The coil was specifically designed for the DFX and runs best with it. I currently have the coil mounted on a V3i, but there are times I want to go back to the DFX as it was a smoother operator in the ground and EMI here in Reno. The V3i is chatty by comparison. You should be able to get a good condition DFX for under $400.

From the Minelab Knowledge Base Article at https://www.minelab.com/__files/f/254884/KBA_26-1 GPZ 7000 Tips for Better Ground Balance.pdf "A ‘dust iron’ toroid suitable for the HF frequency band (e.g.1–30MHz with an initial permeability of between 6 and 10) has been carefully selected. It is recommended to use this specific Minelab accessory, only. Alternate ferrites may significantly degrade ground balance quality." Note the words "recommended" and "may". Not trying to knock Doc but I would only use the Minelab ferrite personally.

I am sorry to hear that but good to know. Unfortunately nothing is 100% these days. Though by the way you are wording it you seem to be saying you paid with money orders and got ripped off? That I can see easily happening and I would not expect the Post Office to do anything about that. I mean that if you take a Postal Money Order they are generally safer than, for instance, a certified bank check. I still do not and won’t worry about taking Postal Money Orders, just did this week as a matter of fact. But mailing them as payment is no safer than mailing cash and I did not mean to imply otherwise. I still prefer PayPal overall as long as you don’t purposefully override the built in protections by opting for family and friends to save a few bucks. Completely defeats the purpose of using PayPal in my opinion.

Deteknix/Quest mistepped early on but they are adjusting and moving forward. Another company quietly sneaking up to eat the low end market. Single frequency is in a race to the bottom now and it all boils down to low cost manufacturing.

I would never offer the critique if White’s was in the position you describe by any reason but their own hand. Just ten short years ago they were on top of the game. It’s called not investing profits for the future and instead opting for new paint jobs and decals for too long, plain and simple. Trying to resist the internet via draconian dealer restrictions that ironically were sold as trying to protect dealers hurt a lot also. Can they do it now? Doubtful unless there is a rabbit that has been worked on the last ten years that they pull out of the hat and wow everyone with, recapturing the lead. They have patents in place that in theory could do the trick. As far as I am concerned however when Carl Moreland left White’s to go to First Texas, the writing was on the wall. I actually hope they prove me wrong. I am more than willing to eat crow on this issue.

Nokta/Makro has flat out said multifrequency is next and that it will be in the Simplex housing. So far they have been doing single frequency and doing it well, but it will take the leap to multifrequency and PI to take them to the next level. At that point lots of people who are still ignoring them will have to perk up and pay attention. To a certain extent they have simply been doing what I expected the Chinese to do for a long time. Ground balancing PI and multifrequency are higher level product though. Garrett has no multifrequency and First Texas has been years without any PI at all. That is what makes White's more disappointing from my perspective - they have had both TDI and V3i for a long time but instead of doing the OBVIOUS and taking the existing tech and making it into the smaller 21st type units we crave, they stood pat with their big box design far past the time when those designs have gone by the wayside. There are sound reasons why the big box White's makes sense from a certain perspective. I mean heck, I liked my old rotary dial phone because I always knew where it was! But times change and expectations with them, and the fact is those big box designs are starting to really look like dinosaurs compared to something like an Equinox or Simplex. I cannot imagine a younger person used to a cell phone wanting to show his friends a new MXT. The part many people miss is that these new detector in a sealed pod designs are easy to crank out at low cost in a modern production facility. White's is still essentially hand building detectors in a very old facility. That one thing alone means they are in a real bind right now compared to outfits leveraging 21st century designs and manufacturing processes. I've got a real soft spot for White's so people may mistake my words as criticism... it really is frustration on my part for wanting U.S. companies to succeed and feeling like they are clueless. Typical arrogance more likely; they have always thought they have known better than their customers what their customers want. Fisher and CZ is another example of sitting pat with an ancient analog design instead of translating to a new digital version. I very much like DigsAlot comment as regards Minelab and their arrogance for the same reason. They have had the tech lead for so long it has let them build some amazingly clunky product and basically just expect people to not only suck it up but praise them for it. There is not a serious water user out there that does not almost completely rebuild an Excalibur into what it needs to be instead of what it is out of the box. That's just one example in a long list of ergonomic nightmares from down under. But Equinox at least shows that maybe that tide has turned. We will see.