Anybody Seeing Depth Issues With The Manticore Update?

[Chase Goldman]

34 minutes ago, steveg said:

abenson -- OH, while I was typing my question, I think you may have just answered my question in your most recent post (that posted while I was typing).

SO -- to reiterate, EVEN IF you keep everything "new" turned off (stabilizer, stabilizer filter, whatever), it STILL performs worse for you than the original?  In other words, you can't "turn off" a setting and get it back to the performance you were used to with the old version?

Steve

An analogy would be the Original Equinox software variant of iron bias.  Even if you set Iron Bias to Zero, some level of iron bias filtering is still applied. The second gen iron bias on Equinox enabled users to lower the effect further, but still not fully disable it unless you went to single frequency.

[phrunt]

I for one won't be flashing back, in my mild soils the update is exactly what I was hoping for.  It's kept depth the same while improving target ID's.

[UT Dave]

Target ID's on deeper targets got noticeably worse, in my dirt.  Silver coins reporting as iron.

But, I had gotten used to the jumpy ID's and they don't bother me anymore.  For me, my targets and dirt, the big ID spread isn't across the whole range, either.  It's mostly limited to the US copper Memorial/clad dime range.  I can't reliably call a copper penny from a clad dime.  But below that, I can call a zinc.  Zincs are bouncy too, but they always have been with their range of corrosion - but they rarely cross into copper penny ID's.  Above clad dime, clad quarters are pretty solid and not too jumpy, typically not more than two numbers.  Going down to Jefferson nickels, the Manticore is rock solid for me, usually a single number.  Though that number isn't the same in all modes in all soil conditions.  But I can call nickels vs square tabs very, very well with the Manticore.

So, I dig copper penny/clad dime signals always, everywhere, anyway.  So have gotten to where I'm not bothered by the jumpy ID's in that range.

Silver, I don't find enough of it consistently, to be really claiming I can call it, but I have found about 15 silver coins and closer to 20 .925 items with the Manticore so far and they have been pretty solid ID's, relative to depth.

The other complaint I have heard most often is iron falseing.  And yes, I have experienced that with the Manticore since day one.  But, it's not any worse than I was used to with the Nox and I am not often fooled by it.  So, that has never bothered me.

I guess, the two big complaints, aren't ones that I have cared much about.  And it seems in my soil, the first stab at a cure is worse than the disease?

- Dave

[abenson]

Minelab called me this evening and I'm sending my Manticore in to have them look at it. The person I spoke to said the machine should act similar to the old software with the stabilizer off. So there maybe something else going on. I'll let everyone know what happens once I get a replacement machine. However, Dave is experiencing similar issues so hard to say what's reallt going on.

[Jeff McClendon]

Thanks for the topic, posts and video Andy.

Those medium depth US dime target IDs from the mid 60s to upper 90s you were showing on the 900 and Manticore were very similar to what I was seeing on my former 900 even in half to full bar Deus 2 mineralization dirt. Then you ran Deus 2 over the 5” and 6” dimes and it locked on with very stable IDs using a similar 106.4 target ID scale. Along with that Manticore/900 target ID instability the post update depth loss was disappointing. It sure seems like both the Manticore and 700/900 really need some tweaking by Minelab in order for them to detect well in more challenging soil conditions.

[Geordiedan]

@abenson did you see NASA Tom's comment in response to someone sharing your video over there?  I still can't post on his forum due to registration issues but I follow Tom's posts wherever I can

 

Quote

NASA-Tom Re: MINELAB MANTICORE: DATA & PERFORMANCE June 30, 2023 01:06AM

Registered: 17 years ago Posts: 9,885

I had no interest in watching a nearly 16-minute long video........... until I found out it was Andrew B. that did the video. He has VERY good skillset. 

First....... Andrew's test-garden mineralization is quite high! 
Second. Yes. Stabilizer is to only be utilized in nail-infested sites. 
A side-effect of Stabilizer is...... depth reduction. IF you are in carpets of nails.......... depth is nearly never a concern. What's important is....... iron see-thru........ AND.......mitigation of falsing from iron. 
Third. I would never use All Terrain - Low Conductors in a moderately salty environment!!! (((EQX equiv would be Field Mode-2))). In somewhat (or heavy) salty dirt........ I greatly recommend All Terrain - High Conductors. EVEN BETTER = I would recommend Beach - Seawater Mode. In Andrews case...... he has mineralization AND salt!!!

Reply Quote

NASA-Tom Re: MINELAB MANTICORE: DATA & PERFORMANCE June 30, 2023 01:10AM

Registered: 17 years ago Posts: 9,885

Two more things: 

Remember...................... when you are in any Beach Mode.........there is no Stabilizer function. 

I know Andrew had a Tarsacci. I would have loved to hear the Tarsacci on those test-garden (back yard) targets!!! Especially/because of that specific salt & mineralization type of dirt

 

[abenson]

2 hours ago, Geordiedan said:

@abenson did you see NASA Tom's comment in response to someone sharing your video over there?  I still can't post on his forum due to registration issues but I follow Tom's posts wherever I can

 

 

I looked at Tom's post and agree to some extent. As far as stabilization goes, I was only showing what effect it has on depth and I'm aware you would only want to use it in nail beds.

But as far as mode used, it really makes very little depth difference in my soil type which one is used. Except prospecting mode, which is far deeper than the others. I can and did switch between all the modes before I ever posted the video just to make sure I was really seeing issues with the Manticore. There is maybe a 1/4 to 1/2 inch difference between ATHC & ATLC and in this particular field I felt like ATLC was giving me the best results. Beach modes have a difficult time ground balancing for whatever reason. It usually takes 20 pumps to get it right. Some of the modes if I recall correctly it was ATHC and General are constantly giving a low tone grunt while going over the ground, so it's almost necessary to notch out some of the negative numbers or run with the iron mask on (Horseshoe I guess) to have a quiet hunt. The D2 on the other hand is the same way in High Conductor but very tame in General.

There are so many combinations of settings that can be used on these new machines, one can speculate all they want. I always get comments like you should have used a higher recovery speed, lower recovery speed, different mode, etc. So did I have the best combination of settings that would optimize the situation? Who knows. But it think it's apparent to me that somethings up when I can compare General mode with the exact same settings between the 2 software versions and get obvious differences in performance.

Is it my machine, or is it the update? Hopefully I can answer that question once I get a replacement. If the old version is better in my ground I'm fine with it.

[Dug D]

11 hours ago, Jeff McClendon said:

Those medium depth US dime target IDs from the mid 60s to upper 90s you were showing on the 900 and Manticore were very similar to what I was seeing on my former 900

Sounds a lot like what I have run into. It would be nice to have a  "test" to see if a machine was running correctly.  I know there are a lot of variables, but it is hard to use a machine, if you don't know that its running right. 

[steveg]

On 6/29/2023 at 9:00 PM, abenson said:

Minelab called me this evening and I'm sending my Manticore in to have them look at it. The person I spoke to said the machine should act similar to the old software with the stabilizer off. So there maybe something else going on. I'll let everyone know what happens once I get a replacement machine. However, Dave is experiencing similar issues so hard to say what's reallt going on.

THAT is what I would have HOPED -- if no stabilizer is being used, NOR the stabilizer filter, then I would have hoped that it would behave nearly identical to the "old version."  It's good that Minelab is implying that this is how it SHOULD work....

I'll be following this, to hear what Minelab has to say...

THANKS, abenson, for documenting this...

Steve

[Shelton]

Ok, no depth differences, but the ID of little hammered silver coins is very, very low. Starts from 7-8 ID. I understand that it is not possible to distinguish it from the little piece of foil... but is low. I was trying to work with stabilizer features switched on - value about 7 in dense iron but with enhanced audio it amplifies target audio... that is not bad but I'm not sure yet, I need more time to test it.