Chase Goldman

From the Munchausen detailed specs page, below are the two upper/lower Ferrous Limit settings ranges and another related setting (ferrous limits custom) that we are going to need the manual to decipher but from the video previously posted by Luis, it appears you can set up to 4 custom ferrous limit profiles. What was interesting from that video is that it appears that the various large "falsing" ferrous items differed as to whether they showed up in the upper region (horseshoe-shaped thing) or the lower region (wedge), so you might have to do some in situ/in the field yesting to see how you might want to set up your custom ferrous limits profile for your site.

Welcome to the forum IB. vf, here.

Yes soil conditions will affect the test. But I agree that at some point it is important to see, even if it is under ideal soil conditions. Not to ascertain raw depth but to determine at what point the 2D discrimination/target trace breaks down for deep non-ferrous, mid-conductive targets that start looking more ferrous to the Mutilator. And then, ultimately, how useful the 2D target trace is in mineralized soils. I see the FBS-like 2D disc (but Multi-IQ responsiveness) as a boon for relic detectorists who are also looking for desirable ferrous artifacts such as axe heads, iron tools, and projectiles. This is what Tom D was getting at regarding the -99 to 0 ferrous TID but it appears he was off base on the final implementation. Strange, if he was so integral to the project design team as he claims. Or maybe I am missing something as I don't quite understand how the ferrous and salt TID "underscore" symbols described below on the Markymark QS guide should be interpreted in conjunction with the 2D target trace (see below).

The chart below lifted from Steve's post on technology product early adopters.

This answer is the stock Treasure Talk discussion from 4 years ago for Multi-IQ on the Nox. Sheds no light on what Multi-IQ+ brings to the table for the Mumblemouth. SMH. In other words, Minelab is not providing the information to the dealers to answer such questions. Dealers are on their own...Good Luck trying to explain the premium pricing over Nox.

Eh, 4+ years is kind of a long time… But they did deliver, finally.

Wow. Now I ‘m really disappointed because it doesn’t appear that Man-enuff incorporates “Active EMI” jamming, incapacitating all other detectors within a 5-mile range. Could have sworn I heard someone wearing a Minelab hat and hot pants yelling out that it had this feature on some shaky video I saw posted on DD.

Cal thanks for asking this because I knew it was going to come up eventually and here we are 4+ years later trying to put to bed a huge misconception that Minelab initiated with their original pseudo tech Equinox Multi-IQ marketing. The 5 (now 6 on Equinox with the addition of 4 kHz)) single frequency set points have no relationship to the Multi-IQ SMF frequency spectrum for the various modes either in terms of frequency range or in the number of simultaneously transmitted frequencies. Minelab continues to remain mum about which specific frequencies comprise the constituents of the SMF spectra and the absolute range covered. As noted by Pimento previously, similar to Equinox and XP’s D2, it is likely that only two or three waveforms of different frequencies are being combined during transmission (certainly not 5, as many mistakenly believe). But until we can hook a spectrum analyzer up to Molybdicore, we are not going to know and ML is probably not going to say. I will say this. Just because FullMontycore is utilizing the standard 5 “Nox” single frequencies, doesn’t contradict the ML claim of an expanded SMF range or higher upper end frequency simply because the 5 SF settings have nothing to do with the SMF range, so Goldfield in Multi-IQ could still conceivably have a top end of 80 kHz and be heavily weighted to favor the target response from the 80kHz waveform.

True. Which is why I think Miralax is more of an Equinox on a very mild dose of steroids than even a CTX light. We'll see once the hype machine calms down and we get real world user results months from now, as to how much speed it sacrifices for the "deep TID accuracy" modes, but I also suspect that the power increase may be feeding some sort of signal processing to regain response (vs. CTX) and to feed the rudimentary 2D display graphics beast.

Steve - that's the point. Who knows who's correct. This stuff is just being thrown out there without any substantiation. I agree with your point on context. In context, that statement is not necessarily ridiculous but really kind of irrelevant to the point of coil compatibility. Folks (including Tom D himself as he now has a self-admitted stake in M-core's success (his reputation) and is now explicitly part of the marketing machine rather than an objective subject matter expert) are taking such statements and conflating them with the 50% power stuff and other breathless proclamations and throwing it out there with little concrete technical specificity and that just adds to the self-hype factor. This is just the grumpy engineer in me talking (I like documented specs and real world results vs. hype and bloviation) with the subtext that we basically have a significantly improved Equinox here in the M-core, nothing more, nothing less. And that's OK. In fact, it's great. But it's also not a game changer simply because of more power, better submergence, better menu navigation, CF shafts, vibrating handles, light sensors, big batteries, or even 2D target trace. Speaking of context, in contrast, Equinox itself was truly groundbreaking for detecting at the time of launch in the sense that it broke several of Minelab's own paradigms (let alone the detecting industry's) associated with SMF performance (speed), situational all-terrain versatility (truly a detectorist's swiss army knife), ergonomics, weight, and cost...and it took about 4.5 years for the competition to catch up to Equinox. Equinox's performance and features were also being compared to detectors that cost 2 to 3 times as much as Nox at the time. That was worth all the late 2017/early 2018 hype. It was a game changer for detecting at the time and that was exemplified by its popularity and was a motivating factor for the other manufacturers that brought us Legend, D2, and even Apex for that matter (i.e., positive rippling effects that were good for detector users). The irony is, in the latter half of 2022, M-core appears to be an incrementally better machine than Equinox (and costs about a Nokta Legend's more than Nox) in terms of performance and has some great features add ons, but that in and of itself, is not a groundbreaking proposition compared to what Equinox was in 2018. Not trying to suppress the excitement, just tempering the over-the-top hype and unrealistic expectations.

Cal, I know this is a somewhat tongue in cheek sensationalist statement, but Tom D as an engineer should know that from an engineering fundamentals standpoint regarding a coil (not talking the interface chip), this is just a ridiculous take and also what’s the point of making it? Was he trying the explain away ML’s propensity to not provide cross platform coil compatibility or were we supposed to be impressed from the imagined visual of Nox coils exploding when they are connected to the M-core’s 2.4 gigawatt flux capacitor? As someone who also “enjoys the technology behind all this” because I am an electrical engineer and a detectorist, I CAN say ludicrous statements like this are literally blowing smoke and NOT moving the ball forward. Tom D should know better. I’m not worried about you drinking the M-core Kool Aid (it should be a great evolutionary step up from Equinox - I’m liking what I’m seeing as ML feeds us more info), but definitely watch out for whatever Tom is spiking that Kool Aid with.

Thanks, Dan. Taking Tom’s comments with a grain of salt at this point because some of what he has been stating is not borne out by the info ML has actually published. (I still don’t fully understand the -99 to 99 TID implementation claim based on the panel layout and explanations provided in the QS Guide other than the “negative” target TID underline symbol). No doubt there is some level of transmit power boost under some mode settings but I suspect there is also a lot of powerful stuff under the signal processing hood as well. Even the rudimentary target trace graphics take some horsepower to generate. It’s definitely a compelling detector, but the intelligence-insulting marketing spin and self-hype (that comes with the territory lately for all new release detectors not just ML) is a big turnoff to me personally.

Yep. They clarified that over their previous marketing statement. Glad they got their story straight now. But still, all we know is that it has a bigger battery than Equinox (7 hour charge time) because their new marketing statement doesn't clearly state how the 50% more power is used vs. Equinox (transmit power, processing power or simply its need to keep the lights on as it has a lot of lights (backlight, keypad light, flashlight) ). Other than they also allude to It being connected to Multi-IQ+. But yeah, all that is great stuff on paper. Can't wait to see how it performs in the field, in the hands of competent detectorists.

Performance is not just DEPTH. Tarsacci blows away every VLF I have ever used on raw depth, but is it a nail or a coin, who knows - the TID is bouncy, nonferrous audio is suspect, and disc adjustments are limited? Accurate ID at depth, unmasking/speed, precise disc patterns, accurate ferrous probabilities are attributes that M-core may bring to bear. Need to also know whether 2x supplied power over Equinox is a blessing or a curse. Need more real world, in the field feedback.

Yes, I simply stated an irrefutable fact the Manticore costs more than Equinox as a tongue-in-cheek add on to Chuck's statement that ML appeared to separate Manticore from Equinox by giving it a completely different name. I wasn't arguing "value" or cost premium reasonableness at all, which is really what you are driving at in your post above. Value is the "benefit" you get for a given cost and when talking detecting equipment, it gets subjective really fast. No one can really argue there aren't tangible and intangible anticipated improvements with Manticore vs. Equinox such as higher ID accuracy at depth, target trace graphics, 2D disc, improved audio, improved shaft system, and deeper submergence specs to name but a few. But whether the cost premium for those benefits is "reasonable" can be debated endlessly. More on that later. Let's talk again about objective cost/expense vs. Equinox: If you really do want to to talk "cost" or "expense" in apples-to-apples terms, even after you did "the math" it seems you basically verified my statement that it "costs" more. However, your math also had an omission. Namely, let's also not forget the Equinox 800 is provided with a proprietary low latency wireless WM08 receiver to enable you to detect untethered using your favorite set of wired headphones. It does not appear that a similar accessory is provided with Manticore - whether the Manticore is strictly BT or proprietary wireless is still a question mark. Regardless of how useful you think that item is, ML sells it as a standalone accessory at the ridiculously eye watering price of $259, so you can keep it if you find it useful or sell it to further defray the cost of the Equinox. Let's say you sell it for half price, $125, so just add $125 to your $429 cost delta (note I'm not adding back the actual full "cost" of that accessory) and you're back to a $654 cost difference even after adding a CF shaft. So to answer your own question, "But is it really that more expensive in the end?" The answer is still, objectively, yes if you consider selling the WM08. But is that $654 premium "reasonable" compared to the cost of Equinox? Well even ignoring the fact that I was able to purchase a Legend for that much, that's a completely different question. Even considering the tangible and intangible "on paper" specs and verbal claims of improvements over Equinox, the jury is still out on whether that is a reasonable premium to pay until we get real world user feedback. But every user will define "reasonable" very differently, especially when considering the "value" of other very capable detectors available now. I was willing to pay similar dollars for the D2 but I also rationalized that as a VERY significant upgrade to SMF over the non-SMF D1, as well as addressing some long standing D1 shortcomings, for an even smaller delta in price than exists between Equinox and Manticore, which both use variants of Multi-IQ SMF tech. After 7 years of great success with D1 (and 4 years with great success with Nox), D2 was a "no brainer" acquisition, and where XP has taken D2 so far with subsequent updates, I have no complaints. It works great for what I do most, hunting Colonial and CW relics and old coins in and around historic Virginia with its full spectrum of soil and trash conditions and occasional beach hunting and coin shooting. Will Manticore ultimately replace my Nox? Presuming it lives up to its specs and simply delivers the stated additional features and incremental performance based on real world reports and results (not the rampant post-launch marketing hype nonsense), I would say it's probably a yes. I definitely plan to check it out eventually, but frankly I have all my VLF "gaps" filled with Nox and D2 and will have an Axiom, so I am in no hurry. Jury is still out for me on Legend. No arguing with the value statement with Legend, but for me question was whether I keep Legend or my Nox (at this point, Legend has not gotten enough swing time to decide) - D2 is not going anywhere. Manticore launch just means Nox ultimately has another competitor for its spot in my arsenal.

And price. 😉

I know what he said and what Minelab wrote as both Steve and I quoted it above. Plenty of room for interpretation. What I find interesting is in the written ML statement of Beast features including the ambiguous power statement, not once do they mention anything about depth performance or even ambiguous "deeper than whatever" statements.

Yes this 50% power thing is out there now and we'll be debunking it for months just like the misconception that Nox Multi-IQ is comprised of the 5 single frequencies and the additional misconception that FBS2 was comprised of 25 frequencies. SMH the ML spin machine is really annoying and frankly insulting.

If they had called it the Beast then they could have included Beast Mode and at the flip of a switch 50% more power and 100% more depth plus it would also jam all other detectors within a 1 mile radius. It would be glorious.

The key is 50% more compared to what. Context matters and in their own Manicow literature they say the following: Which means it has 50% more power than single frequency detectors but some unstated amount greater than Nox or other SMF detectors. The fact is SMF detectors have to pump more power to the coil to enable them to simultaneously transmit multiple waveforms into the ground and get the same depth as single frequency detectors. So in true ML marketing fashion, it really is unclear what's really going on here. We'll know more when it gets into the hands of users. Also, more power does not necessarily translate into greater depth performance in high mineralization or black sand. Remember that Nox intentionally reduces coil power in Beach modes and even further when black sand is detected. All that being said, there is no doubt that the Beast will bring it compared to Nox in terms of performance, especially in mild soils. Steve has similar comments on this 50% more power claim here.

Seriously - Why didn't they just call it The Beast? Are they that disconnected and non-self-aware they had to go with this Mardigras thing their nutty consultant came up with?

Yep, they replaced the entire Nox shaft system with CF on the Mandible and manged to shave an ounce. I replaced the shaft on my Nox with a Steveg CF system and saved about 3 oz. Hopefully, the additional non-shaft weight on the Manitorque was utilized to shore up the control pod and handle watertight integrity giving it an impressive 2 meters of additional depth capabilty. The Beast should truly be a beast in the water now.

From this video and Minelab's Product Page - several features come to light - some mentioned above: 4-way menu navigation Location Keyed mode designations (e.g., All Terrain, Beach, Goldfield) with multiple variants of each mode. 5 for All Terrain, 4 for Beach, and 1 for Goldfield equals a total of ten Multi-IQ+ modes. Standard Equinox Single Frequency Selections - 5, 10, 15, 20, and 40 khz (no 4 khz that was added to Equinox in a subsequent update), but unclear whether these choices are mode specific like on the Equinox, they appear to be independent of mode. Confirmation of 2 Digit/2D Target ID, Target Trace, and what appears to be customizable 2D discrimination patterns. "Ferrous Limits" feature which looks like a more sophisticated version of Equinox's "Iron Bias" but goes to 2D target trace disc (wraps around non-ferrous conductive range). Multiple audio selections appear to be fully customizable across modes including normal, enhanced, and "continuous pitch" VCO-like audio (i.e., you are not locked-in to mode-specific audio types like difference between Goldfield and Non-Gold mode audio). Noise Cancel is quick, hopefully it is also effective. Also has a "Continuous Auto" noise cancel feature.

Bingo about the deeper statement. Mandymoore is definitely going to improve on the Nox, perhaps with more than just bells and whistles. The CTX/eTrac FeCo type target ID and Target Trace will improve the ability to ID deeper than the Nox and 2D disc patterns coupled with Multi-iQ+'s speed (vs. FBS2) will defintely improve performance to a degree. But is it actually "deeper" in terms of raw depth vs. any other VLF out there? Who knows? Frankly, more depth from my perspective is overrated, I will take the more accurate ID at depth and, hopefully, further improved ground and ferrous handling which aligns well with my objective, to pick out treasure from trash and avoid digging deep plugs and simply praying for a good outcome.