Chase Goldman

Yup. Agree. Some good perspective here. I agree the Manticore is overpriced for what it is (I think the D2 is also similarly overpriced), compared to the incredible bang for your buck that is Nokta Legend. The Mantocore should be priced where the 900 is now and the 900 should be reduced to the 700 price point and so on, consistent with ML's Xterra Pro newly established low price point anchor. Of course, none of that is going to happen as long as people are willing to pay the asking price for the Manticore and Nox Mark II. However, that all being said, I do believe the Manticore is more refined than the 900 and has things to offer over and above the Nox 900. I too have the 10x5 almost permanently bolted to the 900, the 6" on the 800, and will be looking for a "gently used" Manticore from a future "box of chocolates sampler".

Thanks. Working on resolving it...

Been thinking about your Auto Recovery Speed feature from the perspective of your "simultaneous" multi recovery speed concept. When I happen upon an iffy target that is not a clear dig me signal I go into manual "interrogation" mode which consists of swinging over and turning on the target while shifting detection modes to see if that resolves the target further or clearly indicates falsing. On the Deus 2 (D2), I search in pitch tones where a hit readily stops me in my tracks, but full tones audio provides a more nuanced and expressive audio which can help on identifying distortions associated with non-symmetric targets like can slaw. Relic mode on D2 uses Iron Audio Reject vice Discrimination so it is useful for differentiating iron falsing. So I engage those modes sequentially over the targets as I see fit based on the continuous feedback I am receiving as I interrogate. If I am swinging over possible co-located targets I waggle the coil (fast, small amplitude swings) while switching to a mode with a higher recovery speed and/or a different SMF profile or frequency. Engaging pinpoint mode also provides clues in terms of target footprint. On D2 this "interrogation" technique is accomplished quickly by manually switching through custom "interrogation" programs I have set up adjacent to my main "search" program(s) using the plus/minus program navigation keys. This UI feature is implemented best on the D2 IMO and is one of the reasons why D2 is my preferred detector over similar high performing models such as the Nox 900 and Legend (I don't own a Manticore). All of this is a long-winded way of saying that perhaps a feature expanding beyond your "auto/simultaneous" recovery speed feature into a customizable/automated/AI sequential target interrogation mode in contrast to and in addition to the standard search and pinpoint modes that exist on all IB detectors today might have merit. That might be the ticket if done intelligently and with customizable parameters. Just a thought...

That WOULD be the Holy Grail but perhaps a different physical detection principle beside induction balance would be needed.

Don't know how many hunt like that, but that's what I do. More precisely, I use discrimination WITH iron volume on D2 because Disc as implemented on D2 is not just a ferrous signal silencer, it helps to better differentiate ferrous vs. Non-ferrous targets in proximity to one another and mitigates ferrous down averaging of non-ferrous IDs. I use iron volume to tell me where concentrations of ferrous targets exist because that tells me where human habitation existed (when the visual clues have been erased by time). FWIW. Well, there are no free lunches in detecting. It's a constant struggle of managing tradeoffs. So, in reality you can't have best depth AND best separation simultaneously because one parameter works in opposition to the other, automated or otherwise. There may be an optimal balance point, but what criteria would you use to determine that (like you said, too many variables)? In high target density I am utilizing high recovery speed to find the shallower keeper targets that are hiding amongst the iron and that have hopefully been left behind by previous detectorists with slower machine. Selecting that recovery speed is a trial and error process that relies on "feel". It's imprecise and somewhat subjective. I have no expectation of depth. Also, when I'm in "machine gun" target density situations, my swing tempo and amplitude is highly variable as I try to lock in on keeper targets in the " muck", so auto recovery might be a hindrance and counterproductive. If I want depth, auto recovery speed is not going to do it, removing the iron and trash piece by piece is necessary and tedious to achieve that end. However, great strides in AI and machine learning have been made of late, so I'm not saying we'll never have a machine learn in real time based on the detectorist's manual adjustments someday that is able to emulate what we do by intuition and experience today. Might be ways off and detector manufacturers are going to have to decide whether the return on investment and cost passed on to consumers for that effort is going to be worth it. Frankly, in the mean time, just give me accurate target ID at depth under a wide range of soil conditions and give me on demand fast recovery for proximity trash targets and I'm good.

Doc - If Garrett wasn't selling only Axiom dual-coil packages I would expect the cover to be included or available for separate purchase (for the 13" and 11" standalone accessory coils) but since I already have a coil with the same form-factor I have no issue swapping the cover between the Mono and DD variants and would prefer that option to save on the cost of a forced buy of a second unneeded cover. If the 16" coils are only being sold as standalone accessories, the I would expect the the cover to be included. It's not a big deal as long as I know up front what is going on, regardless of the magnitude of the coil cost.

Frankly, the Quest implementation of sensed coil pumping to initiate GB makes more sense to me (than an automatic recovery speed adjustment feature) as I often encounter areas where I need to do frequent manual ground rebalancing due to shortcomings or downsides to automatic (ground mineralization sensing based) ground tracking that either can't keep up with ground phase variations or that can cause weak target signals to be missed. In fact, I could make a similar statement regarding implementing automated adjustment of recovery speed. That is, how hard is it to simply manually bump the recovery speed up or down based on the number of targets encountered in in a single sweep. Also, the perceived change in target density (sudden machine gun effect) with constant manual sweep and machine recovery speed is the thing that alerts me that I am in an area where I need to concentrate on the target signals and also alerts me to the boundaries of the high density target patch. The key to that perception is keeping recovery speed and sweep speed constant but high enough to not significantly affect depth while being able to perceive high density situations. I personally would rather be making the conscious decision myself on trading off depth vs. recovery speed, for the reason stated. Not sure whether my routine would be adversely impacted by an automated recovery speed adjustment, having a little trouble visualizing how it would change things for better or worse, TBH. Note also, having the ability to adjust recovery speed manually or otherwise as a basic feature is a relatively recent trend. For the longest time the ability to change recovery speed independent of other features with the range of adjustability that is commonplace now, was a feature present only on the Deus (yes, there were limited fast process, mode-based recovery speed adjustments available on Fisher, Whites, Nokta/Makro and other machines over the years, but they were much more limited than the implementation you see on Equinox, D2, Legend, Quest V series, and Manticore today). I agree that it should be a relatively simple feature to implement utilizing coil accelerometers as swing sweep sensors and counters. But I think the real reason we are not seeing it that it is just not something users are clamoring for, so manufacturers are not inclined to go to the trouble to implement it. I may be a Luddite, but I personally see the feature as a solution looking for a real problem statement. I am not really seeing a compelling use case, but then again, I am also in the camp of detectorists that like a wide range of manual parameter adjustability but less automation of that adjustability whether it has to do with ground tracking, gain (transmit power or sensitivity) adjustments, noise elimination, dynamic adjustments in target signal volume, or the suggested auto recovery speed feature. I may come around on this particular feature suggestion but just not yet seeing how it can significantly enhance my detecting experience. That's just me.

Exactly, that is why you should not be considering the Deus 1. No advantage to Deus 2 in that regard.

Don’t hold your breath on that elliptical coil and am starting to feel like I can do just fine with the 9” round even in restricted swing and high target density areas. As I have no need for chasing microscopic gold, Deus 2 is the obvious choice between those two detectors. It has A LOT more versatility and capability than the Deus 1. If you need to primarily chase microscopic gold and want an XP detector, get an Orx which has some enhancements in the Gold program over the Deus 1. No need to waste the additional money on the Deus 1 at this point.

That's the way to do it. Looking forward to what else might pop up as you re-imagine where past people activities took place on the island that are less than obvious now because of the changes in landscape and structures. Beyond the tourists and holiday goers, that island has a rich Aboriginal, European Settler, and WW2 history from what I have heard from you and read about. There are more surprises and treasures to be found.

I'm not a tree expert, Erik, but do you think those trees have been around a hundred years or could the landscape have changed to be less inviting for hanging out over the years? Just thinking out loud.

Thanks. (and Thanks 67GTA). When I suspect falsing in Deep HC or General (my two main search programs), I just switch on over to Relic with IAR on 5 to see if it resolves to a ferrous tone. That plus turning on the target pretty much solves falsing. As far as iron VDI and non-ferrous tone, fine, I'll take my chances on that one. Again, the shifting over to relic resolves it one way or the other. If it sill rings non-ferrous regardless of vdi, then I will dig it.

I have almost no idea what he said (caught the "Naught 8, Naught 9 in full tones" thing but I really don't know what issue he was conveying). I also seriously hope they are not calling it "0.72".

Can you discern any backmarks?

Interesting. Looks like an issue with how a batch of the screens were manufactured for the faceplate and it slipped by QC before being put into production assembly. If that's the case, another black eye for ML. The quality and/or production managers have some explaining to do. Hopefully Mark Gillespie will come back too and give us an update.

So that scratch went through and underneath the screen protector?

What headphones are you using with your Xterra Pro?

Possiby. Though I seriously doubt the software is held hostage by the coil designs or vice versa at this point, especially for "off nominal" accessory coils. If a coil design is impacted by a SW tweak at this stage, what chance does it have to perform adequately in the infinite variability of environmental conditions. Conversely, if the detector (signal processing) requires exacting coil dimensional tolerances as ML has claimed to explain the extra ribbing on the stock coil, then I shudder to think of the product performance variability resulting from Minelab's production vendor's demonstrated shoddy production quality. The deal is probably that ML (unlike XP) outsources production and they simply haven't made the investment needed with their production subcontractor to spool up the assembly lines for the Manticore coils yet, probably because they are prioritizing the new Nox and Xterra Pro production lines because they will sell more of those cheaper units than Manticore coils.

At this point, I would just get a BT APTX-LL dongle ($20) for the Xterra Pro and re-purpose APTX-LL phones (or buy new ones for less than $40) to go wireless with the Xterra to save on the $140 phones that ML won’t even let you purchase as an accessory yet.

Would have cost all of $30 and perhaps additional shipping one way to send it in to the repair center to have the battery replacement done and even after you broke it, they probably would have repaired your damage too for little if any additional cost. You cost yourself the $300+ replacement by getting frustrated and throwing it away. SMH.

Never met him but did have forum discussions with him. Was impressed by his assessments of recently released detectors like the Ace Apex and Vanquish. He quickly identified the flawed implementation of fixed ground balance on the Vanquish (each mode responded to the same patch of ground differently) and gave advice on how to work around it. I was also amused by his tendency (with lower cost detectors) to buy a detector for each accessory coil that he owned instead of buying just the accessory coils so he didn’t have to futz with changing out the coils in the field, just grab the detector with the coil he wanted out of the vehicle. His Nail Board test has worldwide recognition and that legacy will live on. RIP Monte.

Yeah, and then Garrett immediately came out with the Ace Apex with a great, modernized and ergonomic form factor, multi frequency, and selectable single frequency (at the time, the lowest priced detector anywhere with that feature) that satisfied the Garrett fan base that may have started to feel technologically left behind and immediately made the Vanquish feel like a retro toy detector in comparison (that despite its feature flaws, was not a toy). So ML IMO made a classic blunder by competing with “old news” (the Ace 400) while making real head scratchingly bizarre decisions on feature omissions (e.g., fixed ground balance??) to lower the price point and other decisions to limit it from competing with its own Nox 600 (eliminating coil cross compatibility). I think ML got greedy and misjudged both Garrett and Nokta with the Vanquish misfire…and then sat on their laurels and watched XP and Nokta bypass Nox in performance and value with the Deus 2 and Legend, respectively forcing them to announce the Manticore earlier than they planned. I think ML is on the right track now by trying to focus on the gaps in their lineup while trying to emulate their own with high value detectors that look and feel like their flagships but come in at a great price point. Now folks who can only afford and Ace or Simplex can get a taste of ML and swing a detector that is almost visually indistinguishable from a Manticore. Great move and what Vanquish should have been.

Xterra Pro appears to do well on the beach even without Multi IQ which is probably the main benefit of multifrequency (it's no Equinox or Manticore on the beach, but it holds its own as a single frequency machine and it's added user features and adjustments probably make it better than Vanquish overall on the beach). Xterra is also no slouch as a terra detector. With the multiple coil choices and numerous user interface and controls for Xterra Pro and updated ergonomics/user interface that aligns with Nox and Manticore plus the Xterra Pro price point, the operational shortcomings of Vanquish (fixed ground balance, does not retain user adjusted settings, no recovery speed adjustment, lack of an anti-EMI single frequency mode) become stark. Also, Vanquish's retro looks and old-school NiCads make it seem very dated even though it was released more recently than the Nox 600/800. It now literally looks like a red-headed step child in the line of succession compared to Xterra Pro, Nox, and Manticore and I wouldn't be surprised if ML discontinued it. If they start trying to make a "Multi IQ" Xterra variant as a value replacement for Vanquish that starts to eat away at both Xterra Pro AND Nox 600 sales. I don't see the business case for it and it would be good for ML to just discontinue the Vanquish line and save on manufacturing, parts, and support costs. JMO

Yep, that was a consistent junk tell there and in sharp contrast to the Northern Neck mild dirt farmland. One thing that I found interesting is how Deus 2 does ground handling. When you and I were out there, Bob, I went with the 9" coil because "conventional wisdom" would say it "sees less ground" meaning that it would be masked less by ground feedback. You on the other hand went with the 13x12 which afforded better coverage. I was glad that we could compare and contrast targets and it showed that with the Deus 2 there did not appear to be a masking penalty associated with going with the big coil. That is key. We are talking fully pegged D2 mineralization meter soil here when pumping the coil. It does not get any hotter than that magnitude wise. So that is something I will consider under similar circumstances when coverage is key. In the woods, the smaller coil may afford some maneuverability, but coverage was the order of the day when you have limited site access time.

Great find Bob. You worked hard for that one and it's a beauty. I got skunked for the first time ever there and that did not feel good at all (decided not to just remain static and dig bullets in the well known CW camp firing range - been there, done that a few years back and came away with over 80 minies in one day). But that's the nature of the detecting "biz". But learned A LOT about how that Axiom behaves near Culpeper with the small 7x11 DD (had already made a couple runs with the larger stock DD) and different settings. Hopefully, that knowledge, plus a little better luck, will serve me well at DIV this week. But you never know. It's typically boom or bust at these events as the CW finds diminish with every visit.