Jump to content

steveg

Member
  • Posts

    913
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

steveg last won the day on May 16 2018

steveg had the most liked content!

2 Followers

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location:
    Norman, OK
  • Interests:
    Sports, Metal Detecting, Hunting/Fishing
  • Gear Used:
    Minelab CTX 3030
    Minelab Equinox 800
    Minelab Equinox 600

Recent Profile Visitors

5,465 profile views

steveg's Achievements

Gold Contributor

Gold Contributor (5/6)

1.4k

Reputation

  1. dogodog -- Thanks for your interest! My 3-piece travel shafts are custom builds; with mine, the upper shaft section detaches, via one of my clamp-type cam locks, and then the lower rod collapses inside the middle section. So, when transporting/travelling with the shaft, you will actually have two pieces -- the detached upper, and then the middle section with lower rod collapsed inside. Being custom built, these shaft sections can be tailored to fit whatever bag or case you plan to transport them in. The only limitation is that they need to be long enough to allow whatever extension length you use, when detecting. So, the first thing needed when I build a custom travel shaft, is that length -- from butt end to the bottom of the lower rod -- that is your comfortable detecting length. Once I know that length, I know the minimum length each section can be built to, and still achieve that extension length. From there, I can tailor those lengths as needed. Often, with 22 inches being the maximum length allowed by the airlines for carry-on bags, I try to keep all the sections at or below 21 1/2". However, I can often go shorter (customer dependent), and have even built the sections to very specific lengths, to fit into a particular hard case that a customer may wish to use. I'll attach a picture of one such custom build, below; I'd be glad to work with you on a travel shaft, if you are interested. If so, send me an email at steve@stevesdetectorrods.com, and we can chat about it. Thank you! Steve
  2. Hi all! Just an update that special introductory pricing on CarbonPro shafts for the Minelab Equinox continues, with shafts in stock and ready to ship. Thanks! Steve www.stevesdetectorrods.com email:steve@stevesdetectorrods.com
  3. Hi all! Just a note that shafts and scoop handles are in stock and ready to ship. Work continues on the Deus 2 shaft, while two-piece lower shaft assemblies for White's MX Sport and MX 7 will also be available soon! Thanks, Steve
  4. Wheeler, Thanks for your reply. So far, the field testers have found the grip to be quite comfortable; my thought is that if anyone wants anything rubbery or padded, it can be added via "grip tape" or other similar options (such as used with sporting equipment, etc.) I use a "fishing rod grip wrap" on my Equinox, and really like it. Unfortunately, my lower rods will not be compatible with the stock shaft. The XP shaft uses "trapezoidal" tubes, and mine uses round tubes, so the two are not compatible. My apologies on that... Thank you! Steve
  5. To add to this, I've never had a one of my shaft users report a broken shaft while ocean detecting, and I have LOTS of dedicated beach hunters using my shafts in the surf... Carbon fiber -- given its strength-to-weight ratio and the fact that it won't rust/corrode/deteriorate -- should be among the very BEST materials to use, for a shaft -- whether dry land hunting, OR beach/surf hunting... Steve
  6. It's being worked on as we speak; the measurements/specs are in the hands of my producer now, and they are working on the drawing... Thanks! Steve
  7. A bit late, but wanted to thank everyone who chimed into answer some of my questions about PI vs. VLF, time domain and frequency domain, etc. I am on a vacation now, and so little time to post, but I've been reading all replies and I greatly appreciate the time taken to help further my understanding... A sincere thank you! Steve
  8. Carl and Steve THANKS for the further information. VERY good stuff. Steve, I know you explained alot of this to me, before, but it's challenging information, so please excuse me that you had to repeat yourself, again! And Carl, I'll look forward VERY much to reading your new/upcoming book. Please announce it "far and wide," when it's ready... OK -- so, then, since BOTH VLF and PI units CAN, if engineered to do so, use "processing in the time domain" to extract information, then is it correct to say that when this is being discussed and it is said that there cannot be a PI/VLF-IB "hybrid," or that a VLF does NOT use "PI" methods, what is REALLY the differentiator is that VLF constantly transmits, whereas a PI transmits, followed by a period of nothing, and then receives, and then another transmit? In other words, the "differentiator" is continuous transmission coming from the coil, versus sequential/periodic transmission coming from the coil? I'm still fuzzy about how, with a continuous transmission, a VLF-IB unit can still get some sense of decay/hysteresis -- i.e. how it can extract that information from in-ground targets since you have continuous transmisson occurring, and therefore -- I'd think -- continuous maintenance of induced current in the target, and thus no "decay" of the eddy currents over time, allowed to occur. It seems that the explanation lies, Carl, in your "ramped exponential decays vs. sinusoids" statement, but this starts to become where my lack of enough EE knowledge becomes my enemy. I think I understand that VLF-IB uses phase shifts/changes of the EM waves being transmitted. But the "ramped exponential decays" part puzzles me, as I don't know how there can BE a "decay" if there is no "break" in the transmit EMI, and thus presumably no opportunity for "decay" in a target's EM field to occur. Steve
  9. Carl, Would it be possible for you to help me understand a bit more. My simplistic, non electrical-engineering-trained mind thinks in terms of VLF being "frequency domain" and PI being "time domain." And I THINK that is correct, right? And I have a very basic understand of the "trasmit, wait while hysteresis occurs, and then receive" idea of how PI units function... BUT -- what I have a hard time understanding is if FBS2 utilizes "time-domain sampling and processing," why is that not considered at least "PI-like?" I would really like to understand this better... Steve
  10. Yes, I do think it is a "big deal" that this "FBS-like" capability is now a part of the Multi-IQ+ platform. Clearly, Minelab has found a way to extract FE info on targets with Manticore, and I'd presume it's being done in some similar way to how it is done in FBS units (as Geotech/Carl alluded may be the case, with his very interesting take on things, earlier in this thread). As for how the 2D ability could help, specifically at 1800s sites infested with rusty tin, well, that's a great question, and one I'm not sure of for a couple of reasons... 1. That "rusty tin infestation" seems to be a "western" thing, more than an "eastern" thing, and so -- with 99% of my detecting of 1800s sites being "back East," I'm not nearly as familiar with that "rusty tin" issue you mention. I think this somewhat west vs. east disparity is due to the types of containers that food, and other such necessities, were packed into, for folks traveling long distances (often westward) back in the 1800s. The only time I experienced any of what you are talking about, in terms of that rusty tin issue, has been during the few times I've hunted old miner's camps/cabins, etc. in Colorado. And when there, I was using a Gold Bug Pro, not FBS. But, yes, I did experience how those pieces would ID as conductive, and were very "troublesome." 2. I think the answer to how the Manticore will handle this, and how much 2D ID/discrimation might help, will depend on just HOW WELL the iron handling has been engineered by Minelab for this particular detector release. I do think, from some of NASA-Tom's posts about iron over the past several years, that iron was a BIG focus, with this machine. I recall a post he made several years back about meeting this one specific detectorist who hunts nothing BUT iron. Tom talked about how this particular person spent ALL of his time on the "ferrous" side of a machine's capabilities, as his interest was in finding iron RELICS, from amongst the iron trash. And I recall that this was a real "lightbulb moment" for Tom, as this particular detectorist's passion for finding iron relics, and the things he had to do to learn to target specific types of iron targets from amongst "junk" iron targets, really sparked Tom's mind in a seemingly profound way. I recall Tom talking about how this guy had become an "expert" iron hunter, and how much Tom learned from the guy's unique perspective. And so, adding this triggering of Tom's mind, regarding iron ID, to the posts he made recently about Manticore and the iron capabilities of the machine (before going temporarily "dark" on posting until we get closer to release and he feels more free to share), it seems clear to me that however his mind has been working over the past several years with respect to iron, as sparked by that time he spent with that "iron-focused" detectorist, that some of that has been worked into the Manticore to at least some degree. AND SO -- I think the answer to your question, while unknown at this point, may be at least somewhat hopeful/favorable once we get our hands on the machine. My guess is that since a "good bit" of focus was made on IRON, with the development of this unit, that the Manticore will be able to do some things in iron, BEYOND just the "recovery speed" approach of dealing with unmasking -- i.e. improved ability to ID iron -- that may prove helpful to those of us seeking non-ferrous treasure hiding amongst ferrous trash. I'm hopeful, in this regard. After all, my nemesis when hunting 1800s sites "back East" is not the "tin" issue, but the "square nails" issue. While there are often clues provided by the machines I've used to date, that allow SOME of those nails to be recognized, and thus avoided, there are some more pesky ones, that simply do an OUTSTANDING job of masquerading as deep copper/silver coins. And so, for me, if any iron ID improvements are to be had with this machine, as I suspect there may be, and if these improvements include better handling of the square nail issue, I'll be as happy as you will be, if the unit proves more capable of handling the rusty tin issue. Let's both hope! 🙂 Steve
  11. Hmm.... Thanks for providing this, Chase. The numbers (0 to 9, and 0 to 14) are not an issue; the principle that I was describing stays the same, but...the issue is, WHERE DOES THE 99 IRON ID SEGMENTS THING COME IN, that Tom D. talked about (which is what you asked, earlier)? Guess we will have to wait for the manual, as you said... The other thing I'm wondering about, as you said you also are, is -- what the meaning of the red underline is, under the CO number (that Minelab is calling a "Ferrous Indicator"). Hopefully we'll get to see a manual, sooner rather than later, but I bet we don't see it until very close to product release... Steve
  12. GB_Amateur -- ON the CTX, E-Trac, and Explorer series, the Ferrous scale WAS "monotonic" as you put it. BUT -- it seems it's not, on Manticore. SO -- it appears that in some way, instead of that horizontal line being a "12-line," it really looks like it may be a "zero ferrous line" of sorts, with FE numbers increasing BOTH in the "up" direction on the Y-axis, AND in the "down" direction. Or maybe it is sort of a "-50-line," so to speak, on a scale of 0 to -99. In other words, FE ID of 0 to -49 on the "bottom half" of the screen, and -50 to -99 on the top half...(or vice versa). This is very interesting, and it somehow, I think, relates to Tom's assertions about the "99 bins" of Ferrous ID. Some are obviously ABOVE the horizontal "zero line," or "-50-line," or whatever it may be, and some BELOW. At THIS point, from what I've seen, SMALL iron appears to fall on the top half of the screen, in terms of Ferrous ID, and BIG iron appears to fall on the bottom half of the screen, in terms of Ferrous ID... Hmm... Steve
  13. I liked that part of the video very much. That was very FBS-like, in that the reason the wedge was not detected was because he adjusted the FERROUS discrimination. If you noticed, the coin he swung over was mid 30s for its conductive ID, which was very similar to the "conductive" ID of the wedge (the conductive ID for the wedge ranged up as high as mid 30s also, see my picture, below). On the Equinox, the only way to discriminate the wedge, if you wanted to (since there is only conductive information, and no "2-D" ability) would be to set disc up in the mid teens -- which discriminates NOT ONLY the wedge, but also a nickel (or the coin shown in the video). BUT -- with 2-D (ferrous AND conductive) information available for each target, you can discriminate based on the FERROUS information, only, if you choose. And in that way, while both targets ID in the mid 30s on the CONDUCTIVE side, the FERROUS ID of each target is much different. So, proper setup of your discrimination -- with your discrimination based off of the FERROUS ID, means you can discriminate the wedge, but still detect a coin that, from the "conductive" perspective, would ID very similar to the wedge. There's no way to discriminate the wedge from the coin, on an Equinox; on the Manticore however, just like on the CTX, E-Trac, or an Explorer, you can EASILY discriminate the wedge, and NOT a coin that has a similar conductive ID. For anyone familiar with FBS, what I just said is very basic. But, for those, like GB_Amateur, who are not familiar with FBS machines, hopefully this helps, in that this is a good illustration of what having 2D target information (FE as well as CO) allows you to do, in terms of setting up the machine. NOTE -- of COURSE the primary discriminator needs to be the one "between our ears," with audio being "where it's at," in terms of discerning targets. We all know this. But, all I am trying to illustrate is that having the ability to discriminate based on FE ID is a tool that is helpful, and it's a tool I really missed on the EQX... Steve
×
×
  • Create New...