New Minelab Manticore

[Steve Herschbach]

If salt is 0, then the negative numbers can't be the ferrous range, since salt reads higher than a lot of small non-ferrous. So either salt reads higher than 0, or you better be digging down to around -20 minimum to be recovering small non-ferrous.

[Dan(NM)]

4 minutes ago, Steve Herschbach said:

If salt is 0, then the negative numbers can't be the ferrous range, since salt reads higher than a lot of small non-ferrous. So wither salt reads higher than 0, or you better be digging down to around -20 minimum to be recovering small non-ferrous.

What would be the advantage to having a negative 99 ID range? I've never hunted a saltwater beach with the Nox,  where does salt read or does it?

[Steve Herschbach]

The advantage would be to have a ferrous range. Salt overlaps with low non-ferrous. White's put both salt and small non-ferrous as negative. Note that the small gold nugget range goes lower than the salt range. You could shift salt up to zero, and that's fine, but I would still expect the tiniest non-ferrous to come in lower. I pulled -20 out of my posterior though. Anyway, Tom may very well be right. I'm just a guy that lives on the ferrous/non-ferrous divide, and I obsess over little details that don't matter to lots of people. The actual fact of the matter, in highly mineralized ground any and all targets can read ferrous, on the edge of detection depth.

 

 

[Dan(NM)]

8 minutes ago, Steve Herschbach said:

The advantage would be to have a ferrous range. Salt overlaps with low non-ferrous. White's put both salt and small non-ferrous as negative. Note that the small gold nugget range goes lower than the salt range. You could shift salt up to zero, and that's fine, but I would still expect the tiniest non-ferrous to come in lower. I pulled -20 out of my posterior though. Anyway, Tom may very well be right. I'm just a guy that lives on the ferrous/non-ferrous divide, and I obsess over little details that don't matter to lots of people. The actual fact of the matter, in highly mineralized ground any and all targets can read ferrous, on the edge of detection depth.

 

 

Thanks for the explanation Steve.

[phrunt]

I would think a large iron range would be awesome, the guys in Europe would likely appreciate it.  Imagine in a field if there was one particular bit of junk, lets say a type of nail, this nail on the large iron range came in for example at -22, but you wanted to dig iron relics but avoid that particular nail that's everywhere, you could ignore -22 and get most of the good iron targets you wanted to get.  I could also see small gold hunters using the larger iron range to their advantage as on the Equinox small gold at depth can come up bouncing as low as -7 even with the occasional flick to -8, with the big iron and -8 and -9, having that larger iron range would give more information.

[midalake]

54 minutes ago, phrunt said:

lets say a type of nail, this nail on the large iron range came in for example at -22, but you wanted to dig iron relics but avoid that particular nail that's everywhere, you could ignore -22 and get most of the good iron targets you wanted to get.

I see a Horseshoe mode on the Manticore. I hunt with the horseshoe mode ON with the Equinox. This is the only way the ferrous mode is accepted.

Minelab is going to have to come up with some special sauce on that iron range stuff, Because: I find iron targets on the Equinox bounce all over the place. Rarely do I EVER see a ferrous target lock. This will be interesting to watch!

[dsb]

phrunt+  You are one of the best posters ever!  Your real  time experience is the best, thanks.

[strick]

1 hour ago, Chase Goldman said:

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.

It would make a 6000 go nuts 100 miles away...

strick 

[Erik Oostra]

6 hours ago, Steve Herschbach said:

What will this be. I'm already seeing Beast.

Maybe this 1605 woodcarving of the Manticore will make you unsee Beast.. Mongrel might be a better name..