Mf Machines On Mineralized Black Sand Salt Beach. Update 4/8 Legend, Manticore, Nox 900.

[midalake]

OK, back to testing. We were out for 14 days straight for Easter. Legend, Manticore and Equinox 900 were the new machines worked this trip.  Comparisions will be made to long time machines I run here, being the D2 and Equinox 800.  

Legend. Testing was done in Multi Wet as we always hunt in wet and water contact.  If anyone has setting questions, ask.    

1.  It was difficult to work the legend in ANY moving water. The rod has way too much flex.
2. The Legend was really stable on the wet sand with black sand. Water contact was quiet and what little testing we did, it appeared that recoveries with moving water would work. 
3. We accomplish 30 sensitivity on the wet sand. HOWEVER, 4 different tests on different days and locations, Showed the Legend could not hear a buried gold ring set at a fringe depth.  Every other detector we tested could hear the gold ring and identify it. We even had recovery speed down to 1. ** The Legend is VERY recovery sensitive.  Caution should be given to swing speed.  Because of the major failure of the Legend in buried ring testing we never really hunted it for more than an hour session. 

Equinox 900. Testing was done in Beach 2, one tone, horseshoe on.

We did not find any big changes one way or another from the 800 in operating on this beach. The 900 was stable and maybe you could run a little more sensitivity in the wet sand EMI seemed to be good. Water contact was close to the same with maybe a little more sensitivity issue. Water recoveries could be done. Gold ring testing on multiple days had the 900 on par with the Manticore and 800.  We did not find stability issues like others found. 

Manticore: While I only hunted it for about an hour. My friend and I spent days looking at each other's targets and ring testing. Many different modes were tried, and settings.
At the end of the day, we did not find one target that the other person could not identify or hear. Direct buried ring testing showed there were better settings to use as several times the 800 and 900 surpassed the Manticore. 
Oddly enough, with this updated unit we found Surf and Seawater to be unstable for its purpose. Last year we found Surf and Seawater to be our favorite. 

In summary: We found all of the Minelab machines, 800,900, and Manticore to be very close salt water and black sand beach tools. The only drawback was if the Manticore was not set properly the Equinox 800 and 900 could beat it. 😎

 

 
               

[midalake]

On 3/3/2024 at 8:15 AM, JCR said:

I wish I could let you try the Rutus Versa in your conditions

Hopefully soon.....maybe two-three weeks. 😎

[Bill (S. CA)]

Yet another good write up by you.  Any thoughts to doing the Legend Update to see if DT and Beast mode improve performance?

[midalake]

1 hour ago, Bill (S. CA) said:

Yet another good write up by you.  Any thoughts to doing the Legend Update to see if DT and Beast mode improve performance?

This was a fully updated Legend. We used Gigamasters settings and with limited time just stayed with those. I don't think Beast mode is for beach hunting.  Not sure what your "DT" reference is? 
We did release any setting that might upset depth performance and tested from all metal to discrimination of 10. Even experimenting with recovery speed. 

Our surprise and confusion was, the Legend could run at full sensitivity yet not obtain the depth of the other machines on the beach.  

To be honest, this was not even close. Maybe the Black Sand? Don't know?  

[Lynk]

@midalake thank you for your writeup. Great color on your testing. I am glad to hear your positive take on the 900.

Sorry if I missed it, but did you use the 11" coil for the 800 and 900?

[midalake]

Just now, Lynk said:

@midalake thank you for your writeup. Great color on your testing. I am glad to hear your positive take on the 900.

Sorry if I missed it, but did you use the 11" coil for the 800 and 900?

Yes, coils sizes were all 11" that were tested. 

[Digalicious]

Thanks for all that Midalake.

The Legend should be getting about the same depth as the 800. Well, that's what I've seen in the beach depth comparisons between the two 🙂

The default salt stability control on the Legend is set at maximum. That setting should have a notable effect on depth. I believe you mentioned that the Legend was running very quiet...perhaps too quiet as the salt stability level was overcompensating? Kind of like a ground balance setting that is set way too positive?

That's the first I've heard of any water hunter say the shaft has too much flex. Nor have I experienced that in my water hunting. Are you certain the cam locks were locking properly?

 

[midalake]

Just now, Digalicious said:

The default salt stability control on the Legend is set at maximum.

Still have the unit, will double check the setting.

Just now, Digalicious said:

That's the first I've heard of any water hunter say the shaft has too much flex. Nor have I experienced that in my water hunting. Are you certain the cam locks were locking properly?

I am tall and had to have the shaft extended to its limits. The lower rod is not CF and the shaft is junk. 

[Jeff McClendon]

1 hour ago, midalake said:

Still have the unit, will double check the setting.

I am tall and had to have the shaft extended to its limits. The lower rod is not CF and the shaft is junk. 

The stock lower rods on all Legends are carbon fiber. They make a tall man carbon fiber lower shaft. Yours must have been altered if it doesn’t have a CF lower shaft.
 

Did you adjust the iron filter settings to a lower value than default 8? Same for bottle cap reject. Gigmaster’s beaches have very mild black sand levels. I think he uses IF 5 and Bottle Cap 1. That may be too much iron bias for your beach. Same with recovery speed 1.  You may have to raise it a bit to work better on a highly iron mineralized beach

[mcjtom]

On 1/12/2024 at 5:43 PM, midalake said:

With the Horseshoe mode on telling the difference between Ferrous and nonferrous is MUCH easier and quicker. The unmistakable double ring of iron is clear and smooth. Target investigation time is cut down.

Could you describe the 'double ring' of iron at depth (as opposed to nonferrous single ring as iron at depth)?  Near-surface ferrous targets could double (or triple) ring for different reasons - does it sound different than the 'double ferrous ring' at depth?

 

p.s. A question probably for @Geotech: does it make sense to explain the 'double ring' of iron target at depth as:

1) the Tx magnetic field magnetizing the ferromagnetic target by induction and the target returning the signal immediately, in phase,

2) the same alternating Tx field inducing eddy currents in the target which in turn produce Rx magnetic field, but this time the return is delayed.

The delay between the two returns changes the way how a target sounds?

I don't know how it sounds on the Equinox (and possibly on Vanquish by association), but I tried to imagine why deep iron should 'double beep' but deep nonferrous could show like iron but not 'double beep'...