Iffy Tests Manticore Vs Deus 2 On Gold With Iron

[Digalicious]

11 minutes ago, midalake said:

Pretty impressive the Manticore can confirm 3 different targets on the coil sweep. Clearly the Manticore won that test. 

The Manti only did better than the D2 because XP hasn't released the update that fixes that weird ID issue. Well, either that, or the D2's Silencer was set too high.

The audio and TID on the Manti, clearly indicated a nonferrous and ferrous targets. In other words, anyone with good experience hunting in iron infested sites, would have been immediately digging regardless of Target Trace. Although showing that there is 3 targets, is kind of cool.

[Digalicious]

20 minutes ago, PSPR said:

Detector manufacturers don't want to create the ultimate metal detector.  They want to create a detector that is just good enough to be a little better than the last guy - or the last iteration.  That way they can hold back on any breakthrough technology and release it a little bit at a time to keep detectorists buying the next 'best detector' brought to market.

Sorry, but that's not the way it works.

If any metal detecting company had breakthrough technology, they would release it, put all the other metal detecting companies out of business, then have the whole market to themselves.

Useability and the laws of physics limit depth and recovery speed. Again, both those limitations were reached many years ago. It's like what Steve Herschbach said in his article from about 5 years ago. He said, "There are limits on detector depth imposed by physics, and we are already quite near those limits".

https://www.minelab.com/usa/community/treasure-talk/recovery-speed-target-masking

[PSPR]

10 minutes ago, Digalicious said:

Sorry, but that's not the way it works.

You haven't seen the improvements in the ground radar devices lately.

[Digalicious]

1 hour ago, PSPR said:

You haven't seen the improvements in the ground radar devices lately.

How does "improvements in ground radar" refute what I said?

Is there ground penetrating radar that will blow away induction balance metal detectors, and do so at a price people can afford? If so, that company would release it, put everyone else out of business, and rake in the millions. That's "Basic Business Practices" 101.

[Chase Goldman]

2 hours ago, PSPR said:

You haven't seen the improvements in the ground radar devices lately.

GPR can ID large targets at extreme depth but still can't resolve small, closely spaced discrete targets like an induction balance detector can and certainly cannot be obtained at the same price point as IB detectors.  But like others have said, from a depth standpoint, IB detectors have basically hit the wall as dictated by the physics of the detection principle being used.  Now it's about user interface improvements (ID, Audio, Graphics) and increasing reliable IDs at depth and fast signal processing to improve unmasking, iron discrimation, and to reduce large iron falsing.  However, the holy grail is unlikely to happen using IB - being able to reliably differentiate gold from aluminum.

[phrunt]

56 minutes ago, Digalicious said:

Sorry, but that's not the way it works.

If any metal detecting company had breakthrough technology, they would release it, put all the other metal detecting companies out of business, then have the whole market to themselves.
 

The GPZ is a perfect example of this, using coils that are not controlled by Minelab gives it a quite dramatic performance boost, doing anything official and sanctioned doesn't give the same boost.  They are clearly holding it back, only by cutting the end off a coil to bypass the security chip can you realise the benefits. 

[Digalicious]

15 minutes ago, phrunt said:

The GPZ is a perfect example of this, using coils that are not controlled by Minelab gives it a quite dramatic performance boost, doing anything official and sanctioned doesn't give the same boost.  They are clearly holding it back, only by cutting the end off a coil to bypass the security chip can you realise the benefits. 

Hi Phrunt.

I don't know anything about Minelab's market share at that time, but I can see a company doing that if they had the majority of the market share. The more of a monopoly a company has, the more they can get away with such tactics.

With that said, my point was referring to breakthrough technology that would put all the competition out of business. For example, if a metal detecting company had technology that could distinguish between gold jewelry and trash, it would be profoundly asinine for them not to release it.

[Digalicious]

59 minutes ago, Chase Goldman said:

  However, the holy grail is unlikely to happen using IB - being able to reliably differentiate gold from aluminum.

I've said almost the exact same thing many times. I say "almost" because I didn't say it was unlikely to happen with IB, but rather, I said it can't happen with IB?

With new technology, either that will be the next breakthrough, or a true imaging detector with enough resolution to show the shape difference between for example, a pull tab and a ring.

[Jeff McClendon]

3 hours ago, Digalicious said:

What would be impressive, is if the Manti and 900 were directly compared to a Legend or original Nox (or a working D2 lol), and seeing the Manti or 900 unmasking and separating significantly better.
 

The premise behind Iffy’s recent low conductor/iron separation videos featuring Manticore/Deus 2 and Nox 900/Deus 2, was to show how these three detectors perform on the same scenario. Using Deus 2 was not done to show it’s well known and thoroughly documented target ID issue in that scenario. It was used because it is the standard by which other detectors are measured by anyone that has owned and learned how to use a Deus 1 or Deus 2. They really are currently considered to be the best detectors for audibly picking out non-ferrous in co-mingled iron trash. Obviously Deus 2 has some room for improvement as far as its VDIs as illustrated in those videos using the 14K ring on edge and the very thin ingot, whereas the Manticore and Nox 900 did extremely well both in tone IDs and numerical IDs. Deus 2 did extremely well with the ring laying flat.

I have done this kind of testing recently using a scenario very much like Iffy’s with two nails, a similar VDI 14K ring and an 1853 USA one dollar gold coin using Deus 2, Equinox 800 and the Legend. For numerical ID and tone ID using 2 tones, on the 14K ring laying flat, Deus 2 was the clear winner, followed by the Legend and Nox 800. Using the 1853 one dollar gold coin, Deus 2 was the clear winner as far as tone ID. It's numerical IDs were just like Iffy’s video results. The Legend again was a distant second as far as tone ID and its numerical IDs mirrored Deus 2. The Equinox 800 came in third again. All three let me know there was probably a non-ferrous target surrounded by iron. Deus 2 let me know the best in both scenarios I used.

The target trace feature on the Manticore worked very well in that video.

I will have a Nox 900 very soon and will redo those tests using the same targets.