Issue With Axiom And Ground Noise

[Steve Herschbach]

56 minutes ago, HardPack said:

Wasn’t Gerry in Idaho using the Garrett Axiom with the 13x11 mono in the Basin without any detector/coil issues. Don’t know how hot the ground was at his detecting location but apparently he was able to hit on larger nuggets. Keep us posted.

I am confident in the Axiom ability to handle any ground out there with the right mode and coil combination. A DD and Normal Mode at 4-5 sensitivity should handle anything. I never could find ground that required Large, though I’m guessing I would need it with the 16” mono on some places I have been. Anyway,  given that more than one coil, and more than one mode has been tried, it does sound like the first defective Axiom I have heard of. 

[Gone Bush]

Not your fault mate, luck of the draw.
It is what it is. Can’t tell you how desperately I want Axiom to be my go to PI out here.
Still think it should come with WR-1 in the box or at least Garrett Australia stock it so I don’t have to order it from USA.
Sound quality is 100 times better through ZX pros.

Funnily enough the only PI I have not had issues with was the 7000 when the standard coils were dying.
Actually, not true. Garrett sea hunter mk II also has been perfect from day one but rarely used.
4500 (oz built) had bad pot, 4800 a nightmare and 6000’s you know about, 

Have CTX3030, Equinox 800, Original Deus, Whites something or other (yellow? 4 years old Never use it), Tesoro Vaquero Black, Tesoro Tejon, Nokta Impact, Makro Racer, Makro Racer 2, Nokta Makro Anfibio and a few more and have never had a failure with a VLF machine.

I know. Pills and injections haven’t worked so trying hypnotherapy next.

[HardPack]

Gone Bush,

Let us know the outcome with the Axiom. 

on a side note:
Have you tried the forum’s classified section, the therapy may help provided you can get past the night sweats. So far it ain’t working for me but fortunately I still drink. Perhaps Steve should start a new forum discussion section entitled “Compulsive Addictive Detector Pre-Order Disfunction”. He could shorten the title to CAD-POD for ease of locating while under the influence of the disorder. 

[Steve Herschbach]

Final note - in general noise will introduce at settings above 4. Four would be max on most detectors, and needing three should not cause anyone to freak out per se. If you want the machine to run really quiet, sensitivity 3-5 would be the normal range. Don't think it can't find gold at those settings.

[Gone Bush]

6 minutes ago, HardPack said:

Gone Bush,

Let us know the outcome with the Axiom. 

on a side note:
Have you tried the forum’s classified section, the therapy may help provided you can get past the night sweats. So far it ain’t working for me but fortunately I still drink. Perhaps Steve should start a new forum discussion section entitled “Compulsive Addictive Detector Pre-Order Disfunction”. He could shorten the title to CAD-POD for ease of locating while under the influence of the disorder. 

HardPack,

I’m ok with my dick not working but my detector has to work!

Believe it or not, I did trim down last year and sold half a dozen.
Home for me is a very historic area surrounded by literally hundreds of potential detecting locations, many being goldfields.

I travel all over Australia on the hunt and this year have been in every state, either on gold, artefacts or beach coins/jewellery so each detector gets a go.
Love them all. Each one has its own personality and strengths/weakness’s.
Frequently I will go over the same site (like a Cobb & Co. changeover station) with several detectors and get something new each time. 
Gold is fun but predominantly to pay the bills.
Relics and their history is what gets me excited.
Part of going to Axiom was to also go after relics.

‘Please don’t mention ‘that section’ of the forums again. The c word makes me cry.

‘Will post results of tomorrow. Might make a video if I can figure out how to put the film in.

[Steve Herschbach]

For people following this thread, I was offered this related tidbit from the engineers at Garrett. How to determine EMI versus ground noise using the stationary noise test. The stationary noise test is where the coil is held totally stationary, either in the air or more typically on clean ground, and then listen for noise. If the noise persists while stationary, then it’s EMI and not ground noise. If the noise disappears while stationary and then reappears only when moving the coil, then it’s ground noise and not EMI. This is an excellent test for any operator to help determine if noise/instability is caused by ground or EMI. 

[Norvic]

3 minutes ago, Steve Herschbach said:

Final note - in general noise will introduce at settings above 4. Four would be max on most detectors, and needing three should not cause anyone to freak out per se. If you want the machine to run really quiet, sensitivity 3-5 would be the normal range. Don't think it can't find gold at those settings.

Folks take note of the above and all the other threads Steve has posted in, he may be a dinosaur like me but he knows the go. Axiom has Hyer Mode sensitivity, it has many user settings not like the 6K which has auto sensitivity in its 2 Auto modes, also as Steve has pointed out Fine is roughly equivalent to normal on the 6K, Z etc and normal on the Axiom is roughly equivalent to difficult on the 6K, Z etc. (Note I said roughly). Without beating about the bush, what I`m saying, the Axiom is made by Garrett not by Minelab thus things may appear to be alien to you, spend time understanding Steves posts, experimenting with the settings of the Axiom and you`ll be rewarded. Take no notice and you`ll be disappointed, frustrated etc etc.

[Gone Bush]

7 minutes ago, Norvic said:

Folks take note of the above and all the other threads Steve has posted in, he may be a dinosaur like me but he knows the go. Axiom has Hyer Mode sensitivity, it has many user settings not like the 6K which has auto sensitivity in its 2 Auto modes, also as Steve has pointed out Fine is roughly equivalent to normal on the 6K, Z etc and normal on the Axiom is roughly equivalent to difficult on the 6K, Z etc. (Note I said roughly). Without beating about the bush, what I`m saying, the Axiom is made by Garrett not by Minelab thus things may appear to be alien to you, spend time understanding Steves posts, experimenting with the settings of the Axiom and you`ll be rewarded. Take no notice and you`ll be disappointed, frustrated etc etc.

Absolutely, totally agree.

If it wasn’t for Steve’s posts about the sensitivity change I would have introduced Axion to a sandlewood tree by now.

[jasong]

I read an article by Bruce Candy once that stated certain Australian laterite-derived soils in WA - while "less hot" than some magnetite laden American soils - can actually be more difficult to deal with for some reasons having to do with ferrite population or something like that (I forget, argh) which mimick targets and thus give ground reponses closer to target responses vs the hotter American ground that gives bigger ground responses, but not as close to target responses, so easier to balance? I wish I could remember what the article was or what the explanation was because I'm sure I'm getting it wrong now...

Anyways - while I know zero about the Axiom and can't comment there. It may be worth trying it out in some totally different soil types before you spend the time sending it off first. Just as a data point if nothing else. There could be places where some specific soils just have a "bad mixture" of ferrite or something particularly difficult to deal with for some detectors and not others?

[Steve Herschbach]

42 minutes ago, jasong said:

I read an article by Bruce Candy once that stated certain Australian laterite-derived soils in WA - while "less hot" than some magnetite laden American soils - can actually be more difficult to deal with for some reasons having to do with ferrite population or something like that (I forget, argh) which mimick targets and thus give ground reponses closer to target responses vs the hotter American ground that gives bigger ground responses, but not as close to target responses, so easier to balance? I wish I could remember what the article was or what the explanation was because I'm sure I'm getting it wrong now...

Anyways - while I know zero about the Axiom and can't comment there. It may be worth trying it out in some totally different soil types before you spend the time sending it off first. Just as a data point if nothing else. There could be places where some specific soils just have a "bad mixture" of ferrite or something particularly difficult to deal with for some detectors and not others?

I reference the Bruce Candy article and more on this thread. I don’t want to get into any arguments about which ground is worse, but Bruce does not say that Oz specifically is worse, just different. If anything, I have found our heavy magnetite soils to be more problematic than anything I have experienced in Oz.

The consensus on review is this is not a ground issue, but a defective detector. Step 2 is seeing what getting one serviced in Oz is like. It would also be interesting to know what the issue was, but that may or may not be revealed if they simply replace a circuit board or the entire detector.