steveg

John, I've found several of these, though it's been awhile. Always gives me a chuckle when I dig one! Steve

OK, I'm now officially spooked about updating... I do NOT have enough hours on my Manticore to feel comfortable with it, and its performance. And my concern is that until I DO, I may not notice, as abenson did, a degradation of performance. I'm still at the stage where I don't get the performance from the Manticore that I did from my Equinox (which I know is largely if not entirely due to knowing my Equinox so well), and so I'm thinking it would not be wise to update to the new version, until I'm fully comfortable with the ORIGINAL version... I will be following this thread closely, to see abenson's continued reports, and to see if anyone else has issues with the update... Steve

Jamie -- my apologies that you were not aware of something you would have preferred! I'm always happy to do "custom" shafts, and I try to make it known that this is something I do rather frequently. I have considered the 3-piece shafts "custom" shafts, as opposed to advertising them as a "standard" offering particularly because of the need for the customer to file down that "nipple" on the shaft. But, perhaps I need to do a better job getting the word out that it's definitely "do-able" (the fully telescopic 3-piece shaft). In any case, I'll be happy to help, if you'd like one! Thanks, Steve

OH MY WORD! You have to be kidding me. A detectorist found this cache? I would have had a coronary, on the spot... Steve

Thank YOU, Max! The very kind words/praise are very much appreciated! Steve

CPT -- you are too kind! I appreciate it! And thanks for sharing the great picture! Steve

THANK YOU for the kind words, CPT! I'm glad you are pleased with it! Steve

THANK YOU for the very kind words! I'm so glad that you are pleased, and I enjoyed making the shaft for you! Steve

Chuck, Sounds good! Thank you for the kind words! Steve

Cheddar, Carbon fiber tubes are weakly conductive, and touching a pinpointer on the shaft will confirm that. However, with the shaft not "in motion" relative to the coil, it is not "detected" by the coil on a VLF-IB detector. As such, it would not be the genesis of any "chatter" that you may be hearing. Further, the consensus is that any "alteration" to the coil's magnetic field itself, that would occur as a result of the weakly conductive carbon fiber residing within the coil's magnetic field, is minimal at best. Thus, using carbon fiber as the shaft material results in no deleterious effects on the detector's "detection capability," unlike what might be possible with a much more conductive (metal) lower rod (hence why so many detector manufacturers use carbon-fiber shafts on their high-end machines, but NONE use aluminum, for instance)... Steve

I'm glad to hear this. I've heard some rumblings that suggest there may be an update planned... Steve

Chuck, Long story short, but I can build you that type of shaft, for your 800 -- EXCEPT -- you'd have to be willing to "file down" that "nipple" on the bottom/inside of the lower part of the handle assembly. That "nipple" fits through a hole in the shaft, and as such, it "blocks" a middle shaft from being able to telescope/collapse fully into the upper. Any shaft made to allow for full telescopy of an Equinox 600/800 has to deal with that "nipple" in some way. One way it is achieved, is by sanding it down -- which then allows the middle shaft to slide unobstructed into the upper shaft. The only issue is that the purpose of that "nipple," fitting into a hole in the shaft, is to ensure that the handle assembly can't turn/twist. The solution, if you sand off that "nipple," is to apply a single layer of tape (two-sided tape, or a rubbery tape like electrical tape) underneath that area where you wish to install the handle. This -- via friction -- prevents any chance for the handle assembly to turn or twist on the shaft (i.e. it effectively does the job of the nipple/hole). Send me a PM or email (steve@stevesdetectorrods.com) if you are interested in a fully collapsible 3-piece shaft for your EQX 600/800. Thanks! Steve

Dave, THANK YOU for the very kind words, and I'm so glad you are liking the shafts! I love hearing from satisfied customers, who are pleased with their purchase and experiencing some benefits "in the field," as a result... Thank you! Steve

Hunterjunk, that is some CRAZY-bad dirt. With your magnet picking up a "ball of ironstone pebbles" when you touch the ground with it, I'm not surprised that you can't find a mode that works well. Steve

Steelheader, Thanks for providing that information! Steve

strick -- I think this is true. It shouldn't be surprising, but just to confirm this...my buddy in Pennsylvania struggled a bit with his at first, but is really settling in with it now; not sure how many hours, but I would guess he's well up over 50 now. He's been fairly impressed with the unit, as of late. Meanwhile, I finished my 5th hunt today, which puts me at around 25 hours. The site I hit today has milder soil, and I ran it in ATHC. I feel like I just started to get a feel for it today. NOT a "lightbulb" moment, but some real progress in terms of understanding it; I turned a bit of a corner through the last half of the hunt. I am looking forward to continuing the progress. One thing I will note, is that I want to reiterate this...the "falsy" tendencies I've noted with the machine are -- I believe -- related to DIRT conditions. But the "falsing" from nails is NOT, in my opinion, a problem. I don't have much issue figuring out what is a falsing nail, and what is a deep high-toning non-ferrous, in most cases. It's no harder, NOR any more frequent, than on the Equinox, AT ALL, in my opinion. And that's after only 25 or so hours. I think, in time, it is going to be even EASIER to figure out what's a nail false, and what's a "legitimate" high tone, on the Manticore, as compared to the EQX, as the language is SO much more "rich" and "full." It's ONLY the "falsiness" in the hot dirt, that is somewhat problematic with the MC, and I didn't have much of that at all today. Here are my old coin finds, from the past 3 hunts (about 12 to 14 hours of hunt time)...

phrunt, Thank you for the kind words! I am working on it... Thanks! John, I'll be interested to hear your results... Steve

Rattlehead, Thanks for tossing in your experience. This is really good to hear, and it suggests that what I'm experiencing here is also repeatable in some other places/dirt types. Hopefully, this information is making its way to Minelab, in the event that there is something they may be able to "tweak" to allow a quieter experience when running ATHC... Steve

Dan, THANK YOU for the very kind words, I am so glad you are pleased! And thanks to everyone else who had such nice things to say about the shaft! I really appreciate it! Phrunt, just FYI, while shipping is expensive to New Zealand, I WILL ship there, and the shaft WILL work with the D1. I'm even working on an attachment to the locking mechanism, so that you can "lock" the D1 remote onto the "mount" also... 🙂 Capp -- yes, it will. I've had a couple of customers confirm it...as Doc Bach noted... THANK YOU everyone, and THANKS, Dan! Steve

Hunterjunk -- Thanks for the feedback. I'm glad you had a similar experience, when switching to ATLC. On my last hunt (just a couple of hours hunting), I also tried ATG, and found it a bit noisier than ATLC, but not TOO bad, and certainly NOT as falsy as ATHC. So, it was manageable, and I did find one fairly deep silver coin, so I consider that a positive. That said, I got a silver the prior hunt in ATLC also, and while it wasn't quite as deep, I did dig a pretty deep wheat cent, so I don't think ATLC is a COMPLETE slouch on depth, in my dirt. Your site sounds MUCH more challenging, though... I need to make some time to do some thorough testing in my test garden... With that said, I'm just hoping that Minelab tweaks things a bit, in an "update," that tames the falsing somewhat in ATHC, because that's the mode I'd prefer to be using, as a deep coin hunter, if at all possible... Steve

afreak -- Outstanding! Great to hear! Steve

relicmeister, I'd obviously be glad to help, if at some point you wish to consider. Thanks! Steve

Sometimes that "machine-gunning" is your clue that your ground balance is slightly off... Steve

Just for those who may be interested, relicmeister is right, which is why I do offer the option of making my carbon-fiber D2 shafts "counterweight-ready," for anyone interested. Generally, the 4 1/2" counterweight is what I suggest for the D2. This counterweight maxes out at 17 oz. -- more than needed for the 11", but in the ballpark for what some may find comfortable for the 13". Of course, the weight inside can be adjusted, by removing one of the two weight bags (one weighs 8 oz. and one 4 oz.) I suggest trying just the 4 oz. bag first, when swinging the lighter 11" coil. That would be a total of about 9 oz. weight (given the 5 oz. weight of the empty tube). If that feels a bit insufficient, the 4 oz. can be swapped with the 8 oz., bumping it up to 13 total ounces -- which should be PLENTY for the 11" coil. Steve

You ARE remembering correctly, BUT, I'm not sure there is a way to "un-combine" the location that iron targets report, and the location that most ground noise tends to report. Reason being, at least in my mind, is that since the source of the "ground noise" often IS the background irony composition of many types of soil, the ground IS essentially an "iron target," and thus why it tends to "ID" as "iron." Steve