Search the Community

Are all losers in the 21st century. Why are prospectors stuck with large bulky tip over devices when we know at this point the manufacturers can do better? Why have this? When we could now have something like this? 2.5 lbs, built in wireless headphone capability, fully rechargeable and runs for days on a single charge, completely dirt and water sealed, good range of coils at a decent price. The closest you can get to this is a Gold Bug Pro, which honestly is not half bad, but it's not as good at hitting gold as the other three up top, and the control box is still three times larger than the one at bottom. So how about it manufacturers, anyone interested in building a genuine 21st century VLF nugget hunter instead of continuing to sell us old boxes that really are so last century as to be sort of embarrassing at this point?

Its 32 degrees F with north winds blowing 15 to 20 mph so I gave up on detecting today. Anyone thinking of buying a current or newer model Simplex, ORX, Deus 1 or X-Terra Pro who has tough soil or saltwater/black sand beach conditions might want to pay attention to these results assuming that the selectable single frequency tech in the Equinox, Legend and Deus 2 is similar to their single/selectable single frequency only model counterparts. I did decide to do some outdoor test garden target ID comparisons between the simultaneous multi frequency technology and the selectable single frequency technology of the Equinox 800, Equinox 900, Legend and Deus 2. I have moderate to high iron mineralization in my test garden so these results will be on the extreme side. Check the Multi results for each detector to see what the target IDs should be relatively speaking. A US nickel 6" deep, US clad dime 6" deep and a US clad quarter 6" deep were the targets. They have been in the ground, undisturbed for 3 years at least. The 6" clad dime is a really tough target in these soil conditions. All four detectors even in their Multi setting up averaged the clad dime quite a bit. These are just my test results on a cold windy day. They may not be the same for you. So, just some information....nothing more.

Friends good morning or good afternoon or good night to all detectorist friends. NOKTA has already arrived in Brazil, the prices of its products started to be cheaper than in the past, when all were imported and taxes here in Brazil are very high. I found this device Nokta Pulse Dive 2 in 1 - Pulse Induction, Operating Frequency: 3 kHz, Frequency Shift: Yes, Waterproof up to 60m. Plus it makes it possible to look for gold because it's a PI or it's just for diving. Because I have a gold monster VLF, it is better than gold monster penetrates deeper into mineralized ground. If you've heard about this Nokta Pulse Dive 2 in 1 device, please leave a comment, here in Brazil we don't have much information about IP technology. Another question about this pulse induction device (PI) does it have an Operation Frequency, VLF type. Example: Fisher GOLD BUG-2 71KHZ, GOLDMASTER 24K 48KHZ Now the PI: GPX 5000, GPX 6000, SDC 2300, what frequency do they work? I'm using Google translator, if it's not correct I apologize.

Hello Dears, I am planning to buy the Titan GER 1000 device for gold research and I need your opinion before proceeding. I opted for this machine because of its 45M depth. Thank you in advance for your understanding and support

It would be informative for an out of the box zero adjustment head to head comparison on the Legend, E900 , Deus II and Manticore and any other machine you choose. Run each detector in the closest stock program with just a ground balance. We'll see how good the stone stock factory setup is for a beginner. None of this "If I do this it equals that stuff". Real targets in the ground, no air testing, same targets for each obviously. No headphones. A stock car drag race!

My Air Metal Detector. Very nice construction. I will load the old ap and give it a play this weekend.

I am also hoping for better small gold discrimination on a PI detector, but as Steve has described in the below article this is a hard thing to accomplish. Even the GPX-6000, GPZ, SDC have all dropped discrimination from it's features probably due to the smaller disseminated gold capabilities it's after and the fact that these latest Minelab detectors are more of a true gold detector vs. a multipurpose gold and relic/coin detector such as the GPX-5000. Even though the Axiom has small gold capabilities and offers partial discrimination, it is also very limited at separating out two foot deep 3" nails. Please read the following note from the Garret Axiom owner's manual below: Note: Iron Check is a conservative function. To help ensure Axiom does not misidentify a good target as iron, the iron tone (buzz) will only activate on strong signals. Therefore, small/weak iron targets may not identify as iron. In addition, due to their large, flat surface area and relatively high conductivity, steel bottle caps will typically not identify as iron. Examples of iron targets that will produce the iron tone (buzz) are: a 3-inch nail to a depth of about 5 inches; and a ¾-inch boot nail to a depth of about 2 inches. In highly mineralized areas, Iron Check accuracy may be affected. And in the comparison chart from the GP-3000 located below nothing has really changed in this regard over a 20 plus years timeframe. Miracles can happen, so maybe in the future we will see some new breakthroughs in PI's discrimination capabilities, but so far just some more dig it all.

One day we're going to have a really smart chip in a detector. Until then we can read about some of the progress of the chips in phones and other applications. This article is about a chip in a Google Pixel phone. It doesn't need an internet connection to do its machine learning tricks. It adapts/learns on its own they say. It can take a blurry picture and make it clear. Isn't that what we want to happen to our detector sounds? I think some of us can live with fuzzy better than others. How Google Tensor Helps Google Pixel Phones Do More Look at magic eraser. It removes unwanted images in your photos. This makes me think of noise cancelling headphones or maybe a signal processing device which has nothing to do with the way the detector 'works.' Magic Eraser & Photo Unblur fix your photos on Pixel - Google Store Depleted detecting sites ... watch out!

Quest has acquired a company called Air Metal Detectors, Quest is going to be coming out with another detector that is completely wireless which will utilize your Cell phone as the control pod, scuttle butt from Facebook, Quest also is showing this wireless detector at some metal detecting event in Europe, it will be called Quest Air and by the looks of it will be quite lite hey who doesn't carry a so called smart phone on them any more LOL just thought I would share on DP and yes I have to much time on my hands rite now as we have snow setting on the ground in Oracle AZ so I am just sitting here reading LOL

Hello everyone, I would like to know your experiences regarding PI devices because I noticed that there are many people here on the forum who use this technology. We know that VLF detectors pick up shallower and have more discrimination to indicate ferrous or not. Uitlizam 2 coils one to send another to receive. Now regarding the PI (Pulse Induction) they use a coil winding, have less interference in mineralized soil and go deeper. They have an excellent depth range, but they have a problem: they don't have the ability to discriminate different types of metals? Share your experience in finding gold, how these PI devices behave in mineralized soil in hot stones and iron from the earth. I have the Gold monster 1000 it discriminates everything, but in mineralized soil the device is over a lot.

Hello. In my area, I don't have salt, magnetite, or any other type of mineralized ground. But, I still like to learn about all aspects of metal defecting and ground conditions. So, here is my question with some preamble: Those that I know that have highly mineralized ground, aren't anywhere near maxing out the recovery speed. Yet, a You Tuber that I occasionally watch, claims that because of the mineralization in his ground, he has to run maximum recovery speed, or he loses depth. This is seemingly despite the fact that maximum recovery speed suffers a great deal of depth loss. Does he have some sort of unique mineralization in which that can be true?

I was wondering how comparable the Recovery speed adjustment is to an ISAT(Intelligent Self Adjusting Threshold) setting. As an example the Legend, Equinox 800/900, Deus/D2 have a Recovery/Reactivity adjustment. I understand it's purpose & application. The Anfibio Multi & I assume Multi Kruzer have an ISAT(IMASK on Anfibio 19) Are they basically the same? The Users Manual hints there is some difference.

I wasn't sure what forum to post this in. Anyway, I found out that synthetic fertilizers contain not only salt, but metals. Can fertilizer contain enough salt and metals to affect ground balancing and/or performance?

I met Carter for the first time when he met me in Virginia too do this test with the then new Blisstool. It passed and I still have the Tool to be my Pulses Wing Man when I go up the road.

Full disclosure here, I'm a data junkie, but whenever I see reference to hot ground I wonder if anyone has ever put together a simple method of measuring hotness? I guess that would be in WA if anywhere? I realize that there's many factors involved as Minelab's great introduction below discusses. If you set aside salt beaches and wet clay and just consider dry-land detecting would the percentage of magnetite, or whatever a magnet picks up (ilmenite, maghemite) be a reasonable measure of hotness? If so, what percentages would constitute low mineralization thru hot mineralization ? https://www.minelab.com/__files/f/11043/KBA_METAL_DETECTOR_BASICS_&_THEORY.pdf

I was doing a search between or VLF detectors prices are much cheaper. Now when it comes to the device PULSE INDUCTION GPZ 7000 or ULTRA-PULSE AXIOM GARRETT. These PULSE INDUCTION devices they do more object discrimination, they penetrate deeper into mineralized ground or they are quieter than VLF detectors. Is it still worth buying a professional PULSE INDUCTION device in 2023? Why don't they manufacture a device like Makro GOLD KRUZER, Fisher Gold Bug Pro, GOLD MONSTER 1000 with PULSE INDUCTION. I'm using Google translator, maybe some word has some error.

This topic seems to come up about everytime a new detector is released. E.g. "did I get a lemon?" I don't recall much more than ridicule responses although maybe I missed something. Reality leads me to a common question I ask (myself, but also you) and will continue to do so until I'm booted from this site 😁: "How do you know?" This question relates to Quality Control (QC) which is (hopefully) done by manufacturers at the component level and at the final (macro) product level. I know almost nothing about digital electronics and just enough about analog to qualify for the old "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing." But I think back when detectors were purely analog the individual unit consistency was a bigger deal, possibly getting more attention. The components (capacitors, resistors, inductors) for sure had rather wide tolerance ranges back then and many were sensitive to temperature differences. I think there was more use of adjustable components (e.g. variable resistors) to fine tune an individual unit before shipping. (Of course I could be wrong on that....) I recall stories here about the coil QC at White's and the extremes their coils (prior to selection at the facility) could exhibit. And I think this continued there into the digital detector age. So what about today? There still are some analog components of the design but I think that's held to it's basic minimum, now letting the digital back end do the heavy lifting. And we've all seen the results in terms of useful features. (More raw depth? Well apparently not much if at all, but more usable/meaningful depth -- definitely.) I also think modern analog components have much tighter tolerances than typical from the old days. Voltage regulation is another area of improvement, I think, and there likely are many others. But with all those improvements, what's the bottom line? Time for a thought experiment. I go to Gerry's place and get 100 brand new 'identical' detectors. (I know he has that many Manticores sitting there, getting a laugh out of it watching us on his waiting list. 😄) Stay in factory presets, ground balance to the same channel on all, set to the same gain, etc. (and keep them far enough separated that they don't interfere with each other). Each one is subjected to the same test target with some consistent specification as to max distance ('depth') that is detectable. What is the spread in those distances? IDK. Do you? I (and probably you) would like to think that something similar, maybe even more rigorous, is done at the factory for every unit prior to release. I have a feeling that is extremely naive. Often in QC, spot checking is used but do they even do that? When I see the sloppy glue job that phrunt showed a couple weeks back I don't get a warm fuzzy that the Manticore (for example) is getting sufficient attention post assembly. (It's just cosmetic right? What's the big deal? No really....????) Would it be feasible for detectorists like we here to actually create a reliable/repeatable (at a distance) test whose shared results would be meaningful? One thing I'm pretty sure of is that it would be difficult to match that key 'yes/no' decision on where the signal disappears with target distance. For sure you can't depend upon everyone's hearing!! I thought about using the disappearing VDI as an indicator, and maybe that would work for some detectors (Deus 2?) but it wouldn't work for *my* Equinox, for example. Then there's the dreaded and variable EMI degradation of signal.... Uniform test target? People following instructions to a tee?? Starting to look tough and maybe that's why we're left wondering. Anyone else (who's read this far) think of a solution?

I've been wondering about this for quite a while and finally got around to looking into it. Let's start with the answer before proceding to the rant. 😏 From Wikipedia: Magnetometers can be used as metal detectors: they can detect only magnetic (ferrous) metals,... Note in particular "only magnetic (ferrous) metals". I can't remember the number of times I've seen people (particularly on TV shows) say that magnetometers detect gold. Well, maybe if it's in an iron/steel box. Most shipwrecks, even the old (16th-18th Century) ones contain iron/steel in moderately large quantities so getting an anomalous signal on a magnetometer could indicate a shipwreck. It doesn't indicate precious metals. Similarly for mineral exploration -- if a ferromagnetic mineral is associated with a desired metal/mineral then a magnetometer can give an indication of a spot that more investigation is warranted.

I recently sent one of my White's detectors to Centreville Electronics for repair. It is a TDI BeachHunter which has a waterproof case but condensation built up in the control box during a hunt in the cold rain and surf this past month and it stopped working. I believe that if I had taken the time to waterproof the circuit board in my TDIBH that I could have avoided the failure of the detector despite the condensation problem. I have been reading up on PCB waterproofing and have found out that it seems to be a growing practice in many do-it-yourself hobby applications such as waterproofing drone controls for wet weather use. There are several specialized products available but even a simple coating of nail polish was mentioned in a number of articles as being a cost effective method. Has anyone here tried this? It seems like cheap enough insurance to minimize the risk of damage to a detector if it gets dropped in the water, splashed on, spilled on or rained on. I am considering using the product in the attached picture.

Hello. I don't plan on purchasing a Manticore, but I still like to learn about the new detectors. With that said, I have two questions about the Manti: 1) Isn't Tr power regulated, and haven't detectors reached the maximum allowed power output a long time ago? If so, what does the Manti's "More power" even mean? Could it be that it doesn't transmit any more than the regulated power at any given time, but rather, each sequential frequency pulse is transmitted at full power? For example, in a SMF mode, both or more frequencies are all transmitted at full power, instead of 1 or more of those frequencies transmitted at low power? 2) If you own a Manti, what sensitivity level can you usually run at without noise, and how often are you able to get even close to 35?

I want To know that for the multi IQ . I suspect park 1 ,field 1 , beach 1 and 2 . To no run in 40khz in his multi. So i dont understand why minelab tell the 5 frequency run in multi ? I wonder what are the combination? 2? 3 ? 4 ? Frequency? And wich frequency? Now i think some people must know that. It can be helpful for choosing the good mode. Anyone have an idea ?

Hello. What kind of time frame are we looking at before component degradation causes performance issues, and what kind of issues would they be? Sensitivity loss? Choppy audio? I guess it would be hard to give a time frame due to many conditions, but I would think the old analog detectors have a lot more components such as resistors and capacitors that could degrade, compared to more chip based digital detectors.

Seems like everyone will never ground balance in the videos. My hot soil will actually get rid of small iron during the GB process. I have also noticed on many videos that ground mineral noise is mistaken for actual iron targets. Just some thoughts. What say you.

The mod I did like on the Gold Bug 2 was Gary Hudson's sensitivity modification, unfortunately though I lost contact with Gary years ago and this modified one needs fixed. I do not have the paper work either or I would try to fix it. Gerry McMullen had one when we went detecting together about 20 years ago and he did really good with it, so I finally broke down and got one. Anyone remember what all the switches did?

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.