HardPack

Chase, Okay, in either of the Field search mode 5-Tone Volume ranges from 4, 25,25,25,25 but the tone pitch ranges is 1, 6, 12, 18, 25. For 'blanking" over discriminated targets I set the Threshold Level to "11" but left the Threshold Pitch at the default "4". I started out with the Sensitivity at "28" but back down to "18" which calm the sparky audio down but did not eliminate it. The ground "auto-tracking" seemed to help but I just have to remember not to track out a desired target. Originally, I jacked the target volume to 25 but settled on 22. ( I wasn't not using headphones). I recall in a past discussion regarding transmitting power into mineralized ground and the effect on the return signal. I'll start by gradually moving up the iron bias setting; then set the recovery as required by a specific site. I think my individual problem may be with the ferrous "tone pitch" setting of 1 as related to the Ferrous Tone Volume setting of 4. I'll adjust the pitch range to see see what fits my hearing. Mining sites are loaded with iron of all shapes and sizes, there needs to be a method to calm the Equinox 900 "sparky-ness without getting into a VLF vs PI "dig it all" discussion. Perhaps Steve could change the title of this post to: "ML Equinox 900 Big Iron Edge Falsing" Thanks for the input, here's another photo of big iron: Oliver 19.C ( plow shares?)

I have been attempting to getting my ears wrapped around the Equinox 900 “multi-frequency” using modified search modes Field #1 and Field #2. I changed both field search modes to 5-tone, recovery “1”, iron bias “0”, reference threshold volume “11”, multi-freq. The practice search location is an old ranch, the ranchers grew feed for the stock plus there is an abandoned railroad track. The train transported to and from the local quartz mines and lumber mills. The base rock is granitic and the soil is clay. (The east belt of the mode is within a mile to the east, in some of the mines the quartz stringers occur in granitic rock.) The ground balances at “40”, originally I ground balanced by pumping the coil but found it best to use ground tracking. The practice targets are widely spaced, primarily deep iron surrounded by a halo of rust. Knowing that the majority of targets were iron, the detector’s low volume target response to threw me a curve. In one of the field discrimination modes passing the coil over a iron target the TID jumped from around 5 to the mid to upper teens. Switching to the horseshoe “all metal’ mode verified the targets were iron. Upon review of the manual default settings for the search modes the “tone volume” settings are “4,25” for both field #1 and field #2 search modes. This is what I am assuming: the low tone and lower positive TID response is caused by the non-ferrous components within the larger ferrous target(s); the low volume response is due to the default tone level of “4” of the Tone Volume setting “4,25”. The why? This is what is confusing me: with a single frequency detector a low tone may indicate a deeper target, the TID may change as the hole grows deeper. Attempting to understand what the detector was telling me, I switched through all the Equinox 900 frequencies 4, 5, 10, 15, 20, 40. The audio and TID response were all close to the multi-frequency response. I found myself switching by to “all metal” and “dig it all” mode. What am I am not seeing, hearing and doing? Here’s a photo for your entertainment: McCord March 1897 (outer fire door(s) steam powered equipment?)

Hard to believe the winter of 2023/24 winter is headed down upon us already. The winter of 2022/23 dropped enough snowpack for a massive spring runoff for all us gold seekers. The photos are of a cabin located on the western side of the Sierra Nevada divide. By December of 2022 the season snowfall totals had reached 366 inches. By April 2023 another 302 inches of snow had fallen for a season total of 668 inches. We didn't have much time to sniff out the placers this past season with the chainsaw replacing the pan and the metal detector. And here it is November 2023 already. These old granite boulders where dropped by a glacier that also deposited a few quartz pebbles rounded by some ancient river. Well, ain't no flakes a falling' yet, time to grab the pan and shovel before they freeze to the wall and get to diggin'. Let me how you made out down stream this past season...and don't forget to write.

Manufacturers typically rate a Li Ion battery at 1000 cycles of full discharge and full recharge or three (3) years. If daily battery drawdown and recharge is reduced to 60 per cent the battery life would be extended out to approximately five years. During this time period the battery capacity will drop from the initial 100 per cent. Per Garrett the Axiom battery is stated to be 16 hours, daily drawdown and recharge appears to be built in, the life of the battery will depend on daily usage. The advantage of a external mounted battery is the ability of the end user to replace the battery after the capacity drops below 80 per cent or more. Another advantage is if two batteries are rotated such as one is in use while the second battery is recharging extends the life of both batteries. Garrett Metal Detectors will need to address the cost and complexity of replacing the Axiom internal battery by the end user and the effect, if any, on the two warranty period.

Thanks for all the input, picked the Minelab SDC 2300. Got some old stacked tailings buried in vines & thorns that need a good raking.

Nokta Makro, Fisher and Minelab may demonstrate differently within the next couple of years. If I remember correctly, didn’t Fisher recruit some of the key people working for White MD during a critical analog to digital transition period for White MD prior to Garrett’s purchase White MD. Wasn’t White MD TDI series at $1195 and the Garrett ATX at $2150 competing for market shares during this period. Is the Impulse AQ a Fisher.

Me too!

Many of you may have already viewed this video by the The Hoover Boys detecting an old picnic area with the Garrett ATX. If I recall correctly Garrett released the ATX in 2013 then added the 11x13 closed coils around 2017-18. Per one of the 842 comments of this three year old video they are detecting with both the original 10x12 DD open coil and the 11x13 closed DD. There are also a few videos on YouTube that addressed the ATX ability to handle EMI with both the DD & mono coils. In this video The Hoover Boys refer to the Garrett ATX as a nickel machine and as “the brick”.

The Garrett ATX price point keeps bringing me back for another look as opposed to the Minelab SDC and the Axiom. I have been looking at the 11x13 closed mono coil for the edge sensitivity in addition to ground coverage. If I can avoid it, I don’t want to purchased a DD coil plus the 8” mono coil. However, it is not a given that the coil will not be submersed under water. I realize the 10x12 has a center sweet spot that does not fit into tight areas. Has anyone used the Garrett ATX with the 11x13 closed mono coil? How does the 11x13 closed mono compared to the 10x12 opened DD with a full scuff cover plate?

There is an outstanding article in the December 2016 issue of ICMJ’s Prospecting and Mining Journal entitled “ Detecting Strategies for Heavily Forested Areas”. I do not intend to republished the article here without permission. Steve H. or Reno Chris may decide otherwise. What I want to get across is pointed directly at all the detector manufacturers’ engineers and R&D Departments. There is a segment of prospectors in the California Mother Lode gold belt, throughout the Rocky Mountains and elsewhere that you have overlooked with both the ML GPX 6000 and Garrett Axiom. With the old technology of the White TDI, Garrett ATX and ML SDC 2300 slipping down slope there is a glaring price gap that can be filled by a mid range priced “Pulse Induction” metal detector equipped with a waterproof elliptical both Double D & mono search coil. After reading this article if you still think you can wait us out, you are wrong. I served with a lot of marines from Texas, folks referred to us as “jarheads” not hammerheads, get it done.

There’s is an outstanding article in the ICMJ December 2016 issue “ Detecting Strategies for Heavily Forested Areas”. I’ll start a separate topic for R&D so it does not get buried in an older posts. Keep up the fight.

How difficult would it be for Garrett to put their ATX technology into either an AT or Apex body/shaft assembly. Adding a simple ground balance number to the display and 11” DD with an optional 10x5 mono search coil. Priced somewhere between $1500 to $2500. Those wanting or needing more could still upgrade to the Axiom. You think Garrett is waiting until the ATX warehouse stocks are sold off or Fisher or Nokta/Makro fill this gap. Either way I can wait.

Steve, Fast forward… In light of the release of the Garrett Axiom at $3995 along with the current price of the ML SDC 2300 at $3399 a new opportunity may have opened for the ATX equipped with the 13”x11” DD or Mono “closed” search coil at $2380. Add the ATX 8” mono coil for another $473 the price is still worth a look at $2853. After reading your original reviews and several posts I am considering the ATX for prospecting. The weight is still a concern even today.

Specifications for the Garrett ATX list the total weight for either the 10x12 (open) search coil or the 11x13 (closed) search coil as 6.9 pounds. The 10x12 weighting 3 lbs 7 oz and the 11x13 at 3 lbs 7.5 oz. Does anyone know the total weight of the ATX with the 8 inch mono coil?

How about a mid range PI built on either the Nokta/Makro Gold Racer or the Kruzer chassis combined with a XP Deus telescoping shaft system improved with a carbon fiber shaft, quality wireless headphones, rechargeable Li Ion battery, waterproof coils selection including a 10x5 DD plus mono, submersible in frigid water down to 16 feet plus a control unit face mounted “iron honking” button.

Let us keep NM and their engineers motivated and competitive for those of us interested in a mid range pulse induction detector for relic, beach and gold prospecting.

Any new or old updates or rumors stirrings of a suspected or pending “Nokta Makro Pulse Induction Metal Detector” release in the near future? There are definitely several gaps between the out of production White TDI plus the still in production Garrett ATX, ML SDC 2300 and Garrett Axiom for a mid range PI detector.

Hit the ground between storms to get mud on the EQ900. The ground was mild & moist, used the 11 DD coil; recovery at 3; iron bias at O. Didn’t focus on depth but more on tones and target ID. Used all the same settings on Field 2, User Field 2 & Gold 1 except for target tones: Field 2 At, User Field 2 dP & Gold 1 to 1. User Field 2 in dP had an odd echo like audio quality, need to explore further. Dug several rusted steel beer cans at depth both whole and flattened pieces; good target separation among rusted iron. In the field noticed aluminum pull tabs ID and tones varied by shape & size; and ID varied by search mode. Later performed a table air test using the three search modes above with a flat tab with ring & tail, folded tab with tail folded over ring, melted wire shape 1/2” tab without ring or tail and a narrow melted flat 1/2” tab without tail or ring. Target ID per search mode: Flat tab: Field2 35 to 37, User Field2 34 to 35, Gold1 30 to 32. Folded tab: Field2 41 to 43, User Field2 40 to 42, Gold1 42 to 43. Melted wire tab: Field2 9 to 10, User Field2 10 to 11, Gold1 10 to 11. Melted flat tab: Field2 14 to 16, User Field2 13 to 14, Gold1 12 to 13.

The next logical step for me is the find a local shop then test each unit for myself. Meanwhile, the EQ900 is going to get a work out. Thank for the input.

The above question may have been buried in a prior post. Any AGT issues?

Has anyone had an issue with the SDC 2300 feature “Automatic Ground Tracking” balancing out a target after multiple passes? Plenty of information to think about, especially how I plan or actually use a detector. Looking around, with the detectors I use the larger stock coils are sitting on a shelf after being replaced by some version of a 10x5 coil. From a wall hook hangs a detector backpack. “Built like a tank and reliable” …similar to a crew of a M48 A3 medium battle tank. Here is another owner’s take on the ML SDC 2300.

No doubt Minelab knows they currently fill the gap between the ATX and Axiom with the SDC 2300. Even if they decide to upgrade the SDC and we won’t be posting about until this time next year or the year after. I can see the appeal of the utility of the detector but at this point, with the Axiom collapsing to a packable 25”, Garrett could fill that gap with a single 10x5 coil offering.

The SDC just dropped as an option. Unless I hit a pocket the GPX 6000 plus 10x5 coil is way beyond my budget. Hopefully, someone with an Axiom 11x7 mono coil can test the tip & edges 90 degrees out with a nickel and give us some feedback. Thanks

Encouraging results, need to digest this for awhile. I pickup a Coiltek Nox 10x5 DD from Gerry along with EQ 900. Time to hit the brush, mud or not. Thanks

At times I detect while crawling under dense brush on the sides of steep ravines often with seasonal drainage with a 10x5 coil mounted on either a VLF or PI detector. At times the Axiom 13x11 DD or mono would work in open terrain but would be difficult to maneuver while on my knees in the confines of the brush. The Axiom 11x7 mono may get me by until an after market 10x5 mono comes online for the Axiom. Provided the coil sensitivity extends out from the front tip and side edges for detecting crevices with the coil on edge. If not the current Axiom coil selection and perhaps the after market would remain in the box. That would really “suck” after paying $3995 for the Axiom then another $ 350 plus for an insensitive aftermarket 10x5. The SDC 2300 fits the tight space, shallow, small nugget requirement but is restricted to the 8 “ mono coil unless I am willing to void the ML warranty. However, the “hot tipped” SDC 2300 would see plenty of action until the snakes leave the den and I head for the flats needing a Axiom 13x11 DD. Thanks for the feed back.