Iffy Testing The Deus 2 For Masking And Unmasking

[CPT_GhostLight]

Iffy is doing a series of tests of unmasking capabilities of several new detector. This one shows the Deus 2 unmasking and a few tips to help with that.

 

[ColonelDan]

Iffy always does a good job and I enjoy his videos.  Keep in mind however that these unmasking tests are “air tests” and the results you might expect with targets buried in a variety of soils may be/ most likely will be somewhat different.  Soil characteristics have a definite impact on any detectors ability to “see” and “distinguish” between targets.  What I can detect and how it is represented on my Florida beaches can be expected to be somewhat different in Virginia even if the same detector is used.

Ive always gone by the same philosophy as we used in my Army life…” train as you fight”

In other words, test under the same conditions and in the same environment as you actually hunt.

Having said all that, I sincerely salute Iffy for his informative contributions to our hobby!!!

just the view from my foxhole….

[Lodge Scent]

Agreed, Iffy knows his stuff. With both the Manticore and the Deus, there were certainly other strategies that he could have used in this test. The settings he used were not optimal for unmasking in my opinion. But he never said they were and that wasn't the point of his video anyway. He did a good job showing that Reactivity and various filter settings can make a big difference. 

[palzynski]

On 3/15/2023 at 4:58 PM, ColonelDan said:

Iffy always does a good job and I enjoy his videos.  Keep in mind however that these unmasking tests are “air tests” and the results you might expect with targets buried in a variety of soils may be/ most likely will be somewhat different.  Soil characteristics have a definite impact on any detectors ability to “see” and “distinguish” between targets.  What I can detect and how it is represented on my Florida beaches can be expected to be somewhat different in Virginia even if the same detector is used.

Ive always gone by the same philosophy as we used in my Army life…” train as you fight”

In other words, test under the same conditions and in the same environment as you actually hunt.

Having said all that, I sincerely salute Iffy for his informative contributions to our hobby!!!

just the view from my foxhole….

The pb with these tests is that they only show how the detector reacts ON targets . But they forget the most important , how the detector reacts on the irons BETWEEN targets . And BETWEEN targets is where most of the detecting time is spent ..

For example a Vanquish 540 has a better separation than a Deus1 on a static test with a coin + nail  , I have done this test several times . But it is an other story when you use it in the field on an iron infested site , it is very noisy and unstable . Ok it will work on a target but it is difficult to use in the irons ..

Then I agree with you colonelDan , air tests may be interesting but they are not the reality and you may have very different results between static air tests and in the field ...

 

[CPT_GhostLight]

I also agree about the problem with tests that are not buried in your specific hunting grounds, but there were some useful nuggets of information that I was able to test out in one of my worst hunting scenarios yesterday. I'll get more into that in another post.