AQ Owners, How Stable Is Your Machine In Salt Water?

[cjc]

Mr. Goldmaster is an example of a highly successful hunter who only uses a small coil--so it can be done.   I ran the Cuda with an 8" coil for years and did really well with it too.  However you run a pulse for depth--no way to sugar coat that either--and an oceangoing pulse needs to be designed with stability as a first consideration--not an afterthought to any other performance features.  This is why I"m afraid to post here--or on the FB--my opinion is viewed as either good copy or potential detraction when the simple fact is that the "jury is still out."  Besides, I sell books, not detectors--books about those machines that sell a lot.  Not by coincidence--these tend to be machines that are versatile.   Based upon my experience with various pulse machines --I would say that a 10" coil would be more manageable in fast salt--and still accomplish some coverage.  The SMPI Diver is that size and one of the most stable and effective coils made.   I'm glad to see Jim doing well with this machine--he's a pulse "master" and I respect his opinion greatly.  If this detector (in its present form) is adequate for his needs--it's more than adequate for mine.  How his experience will translate to the wider, less skilled general market remains to be seen.  We are already seeing examples of "average" hunters who are not sure how to apply this machine to (their specific) fast salt conditions.  I will say that these machines tend to be more stable in deep water--as Jim alluded to.  Accommodating the market's needs falls to the manufacturer--not the other way round.   cjc

[cudamark]

The surf will definitely "talk" to you with the AQ. It doesn't sound like a target, more like a siren, so, not a big issue with me. My problem with the AQ is manifold, but, the salinity reaction is nothing much different than other surf machines I've used. I went out with it last night (actually 2am this morning) to hit the minus tide. Hunted a popular area from high slope to thigh deep in moderate surf. Still not finding any good deep targets that my other machines wouldn't find, and without the annoyance of a PI. machine. Deep iron? Sure, it's great for that, but, who cares? I pulled the battery off the charger as I walked out the door. Got 2 hours and 45 minutes on it before it went dead. Just pitiful. I guess I'm still not a PI guy, at least not an AQ guy. This is about the 5th PI machine I've tried, and don't find it any better overall than the others. Too much work and not enough fun.

[cjc]

Different PI machines do different things.  The right one in the right conditions will make a believer of you.   Where I hunt--competing with pros who work 10 hours a day and hike 5 miles each way to do so--VLF depth is the surface I operate on.   Swinging an Excal--or even the CTX would be pointless.   Keep working testing and practicing--don't give up. cjc

[Steve Herschbach]

PI detectors are for when a VLF won't produce. If a VLF produces... why use a PI? To dig extra junk? I tell people all the time - use a VLF when you can, and a PI when you have to. There comes a point where you either go PI or quit detecting because the VLF is not producing any more. If you've not got to that point, may as well stick with the VLF.

[Skull diver]

I like to analyze hunting trips where I am not successful and last Sunday was one of them.I visited a small cove, one year later, where I collected discreetly in the past with my Ctx.Unfortunately the rocks around the small beach cause really bad sand grains. I was there with Tdi believing I could have depth advantage.This place is far from home and I was going there to try something different without great expectations..Guess what?

Eroded!All the fuc....g sand was gone somewhere else and I couldn't believe it.

Was probably the first time I've seen that place in so good conditions since I know it.

Long story short is that I was losing time over small iron signals, avidly looking for high pitch beauties and in the same time I spent digging no more than 10" at the deepest hole, my Ctx was the right gun to use and cover all the possible space in minutes. I left the beach when people was swimming almost over my head and very pissed I called it quit after two hours of useless holes every 20 cm one from each other.

Fact number one

Someone is already been there...

Fact number two

This is my fault..

 

[cjc]

That's a good example, Rick.  I see it in terms of "values" and each site and machine have specific ones.  These include: depth, coverage, accuracy--sometimes you need all three...I will say that there's no question that the AQ has this kind of potential.

On a good day we are able to "match the hatch"...

cjc

[okara gold]

 

4 hours ago, Steve Herschbach said:

PI detectors are for when a VLF won't produce. If a VLF produces... why use a PI? To dig extra junk? I tell people all the time - use a VLF when you can, and a PI when you have to. There comes a point where you either go PI or quit detecting because the VLF is not producing any more. If you've not got to that point, may as well stick with the VLF.

It is not uncommon (at least for me) to go to a popular beach, hunt in the water and not get a target for 20 minutes. A lot of other hunters pound these places day and night.

I'm using a VLF and so are the other hunters. In this case a PI would be very helpful. 

[Rick K - First Member]

I like that - “match the hatch” Of course I know as much about fly fishing as I do about quantum physics, but I do know what it means!!!

[okara gold]

9 hours ago, dewcon4414 said:

pushing a large coil can get tuff and is really hard on equipment like cuff and shaft.  

Not to mention coil ears! lol