AlgoForce E1500

[Steve Herschbach]

11 minutes ago, DSMITH said:

Reading through this thread and all the replies, I can almost see this as a replacement detector for the VLF's I use, am I wrong in my Thinking on this ???, I could see using this new detector instead of a VLF

Gonna keep  an eye on this and @phrunt  and @Steve Herschbach reviews on this one

I doubt it is a VLF replacement for most people. The target id system is nothing like a VLF and does not separate ferrous from non-ferrous. See my prior post and links as regards that. This is for the PI enthusiast. I almost never use a VLF and prefer a PI for almost everything I do, including park detecting for coins. The applications where a PI is just no good I simply don't do, as I'd rather go use a PI. So if you have used PI a lot and know what that entails then this may be right up your alley. But if you are someone who has mostly used VLF (not saying that is you) then thinking this replaces VLF is not really the way it is. It is more like different strokes for different folks.

Simple question. Could you ditch all your detectors but the Axiom and be happy? If not, then this will not be all that different.

AlgoForce E1500 Database Entry

[DSMITH]

2 minutes ago, Steve Herschbach said:

I doubt it is a VLF replacement for most people. The target id system is nothing like a VLF and does not separate ferrous from non-ferrous. See my prior post and links as regards that. This is for the PI enthusiast. I almost never use a VLF and prefer a PI for almost everything I do, including park detecting for coins. The applications where a PI is just no good I simply don't do, as I'd rather go use a PI. So if you have used PI a lot and know what that entails then this may be right up your alley. But if you are someone who has mostly used VLF (not saying that is you) then thinking this replaces VLF is not really the way it is. It is more like different strokes for different folks.

Simple question. Could you ditch all your detectors but the Axiom and be happy? If not, then this will not be all that different.

Since I am so new to using a PI Steve at this time I would have to say no I could not ditch my VLF's and turn to only using the Axiom for everything I would be totally lost doing that at this point, so I see your point

It does seem this new PI is very interesting though, thank you for clearing this up in my mind

[phrunt]

They sell a reenforced carry case for it, it would actually be a good detector for travel with airlines as the USB powerbanks can go on planes easily in carry-on luggage.   It's so light and compact too.  The Sadies in the case with it. 

It looks like it pulls apart easily for transport.  I like the look of the full carbon telescopic shaft.

The standard package contents is pretty awesome though, with a carry bag included.

[HardPack]

2 hours ago, Steve Herschbach said:

I also want a water neutral 8” or 11” coil for wading

… for the black sands of Tahoe?  Now that would be exciting. 

[HardPack]

1 hour ago, Joe D. said:

Wonder if my Miner Johns would work on it too!!🤔 Can't wait for some real testing to commence! Hurry up you all!!😆🍀👍👍

Miner John TDI folded mono coil… I have one of those. Wouldn’t that be something if it works on the Algoforce. Yeah, hurry you guys and keep us updated on those tonal nuances. 

[Chase Goldman]

10 hours ago, phrunt said:

It might be quite good with EMI.

I have been in several broadband common mode noise situations near airports and electrical transformers with the GPX where channel scan is worthless and the only solution is using a DD and going to cancel.  And for those of us who built up a collection comprised solely of DD GPX compatible Coils to facilitate the ferrous blanking and Cancel mode features  of the GPX, we're SOL.  So I'm with Jeff McClendon wrt the disappointment that DD Coils or noise cancelling coils are not compatible.  Not a complete showstopper, but something that relic, coin, and Beach hunters that relied on features facilitated by DD coils need to consider.

[phrunt]

3 minutes ago, Chase Goldman said:

I have been in several broadband common mode noise situations near airports and electrical transformers with the GPX where channel scan is worthless and the only solution is using a DD and going to cancel.  And for those of us who built up a collection comprised solely of DD GPX compatible Coils to facilitate the ferrous blanking and Cancel mode features  of the GPX, we're SOL.  So I'm with Jeff McClendon wrt the disappointment that DD Coils or noise cancelling coils are not compatible.  Not a complete showstopper, but something that relic, coin, and Beach hunters that relied on features facilitated by DD coils need to consider.

Sounds like you need a Coiltek or Detech AI coil. No need for cancel! 

I'll be sure to put mine into high EMI environments and see how I go, we don't have major EMI issues here, just high voltage powerlines and residential areas will be the best I can do.  I do often detect very close to an international airport for gold, however our little airports will be no match for the US ones. 🙂

[Chase Goldman]

55 minutes ago, phrunt said:

Sounds like you need a Coiltek or Detech AI coil. No need for cancel! 

I'll be sure to put mine into high EMI environments and see how I go, we don't have major EMI issues here, just high voltage powerlines and residential areas will be the best I can do.

With the GPX DD cancel feature, I never encountered an economically sound use case for investing in an AI coil while relic detecting.  The stock 11" DD Commander did exactly what I needed it to do in DD or Cancel mode (recognizing the depth limitations in the latter it silenced a nasty aeronautical  transmitter beacon and enabled me to recover targets at depth that would have been impossible to recover if I was only rocking a mono coil).  As a result, I had no need for the extra expense of a special AI coil even if it performed deeper than a DD in cancel, nor be continuously depth limited while having an AI coil attached or to go to the extra effort to switch back to my standard DD with ferrous blanking when I was out of the EMI field to get back to full performance capability.  I just flipped the GPX toggle back to DD and was good to go with full DD capability. 

Besides, correct me if I am wrong, but I don't believe AI's are Mono coils therefore would also not be compatible with this rig.  So even if I had owned AI coils in my arsenal, I wouldn't be able to use them with this detector.

I guess all I am saying is E1500 simple compatibility with DD (fully recognizing they would be suboptimal to mono coils for maximum depth) would have been nice for those already invested in GPX DD coil.  Furthermore, the E1500 being able to optionally utilize the inherent noise cancellation capability (recognizing the tradeoff in depth, etc) and/or ferrous check capabilities could have been the icing on the cake for those intending to use this rig for non-prospecting detecting in high EMI and or hot ground or salt.  Again, not a showstopper, just would have been a nice to have as long as those features did not have a significant impact on price point.

All the points regarding DD coil advantages with respect to EMI, ground handling, and ferrous disc (because the E1500 TID and audio features might be sufficient to aid in reliably differentiating ferrous from non-ferrous) might be moot once the real world capabilities of the Algo are known.  With the exception that those of us with only DD GPX coils (primarily relic and beach hunters) are in the same boat as those with no coils and will have to purchase some compatible coils, increasing the required investment vs. those who already have mono coils (i.e., gold detectorists).

And to be clear, I am not raining on this parade whatsoever.  I am still excited to see what this detector has to offer to both the gold and relic/beach detectorist communities.  DD compatibility would have been a nice but not necessary capability for the reasons already stated.

[phrunt]

Yes, the AI coils require DD, they're virtually the same sensitivity as a DD coil though on small gold, at least that is what I found with my 11" AI Coiltek vs the 11" Commander DD, depth I'm not so sure but I am betting they beat Cancel by a significant margin.  The GPX purrs so nicely with an AI coil on it, even in super high EMI environments.  If only it was always like that with a mono or even a DD, so many missed targets would be found with its super stable threshold, like everything metal detecting though, it's give and take, that stable threshold comes with a cost.  The genius behind this detector will know all about this far more than we can imagine, he was involved with the Minelab MDS-10 countermine detector, and I believe they used a type of figure 8 (AI) coils on countermine detectors.

I'm sorry I don't share your enthusiasm for discrimination on a PI, to me the Target ID conductivity is more useful than blanking out suspected iron, not near as crude so the fact it works with Mono coils not even requiring a DD is a massive plus.  I believe the Axiom does an iron tone, that's better than blanking, still I'd rather numbers.  The more information the better, a little tidbit from the manual, The target ID is also useful for assessing the target's shape. If the target ID fluctuates significantly when the coil is moved slightly off but still above the target, it likely indicates an irregularly shaped target, such as a bottle cap or a nail with a large head

Perhaps one day Algoforce will incorporate DD support, the QED didn't always use DD and it was added although I doubt many use DD's on that detector due to performance issues, and Algoforce are very open to suggestions.

From the manual, 

Bug Report and Feature Request - AlgoForce highly values customer feedback as a crucial means of enhancing our products. To ensure a seamless feedback process, we encourage you to reach out to us directly via email at admin@algoforce.com.au. If you come across any bugs or have ideas for new features that could enhance your metal detecting experience, please send us an email with a detailed description of the issue or requested feature. Kindly include the hardware serial number and firmware version of your detector (located in the Miscellaneous setting) in your email. Our dedicated team of developers will promptly review your feedback and respond to you accordingly. We appreciate your contribution and look forward to working together to improve our products.

[Chase Goldman]

8 hours ago, phrunt said:

I believe the Axiom does an iron tone, that's better than blanking, still I'd rather numbers. 

I don't want to derail this thread into a debate on the pros and cons of having some means of iron identification on a PI.  As as a gold detectorist, your lack of enthusiasm for the feature vs. mine or other relic detectorists is totally understandable.  I can see where it can be perceived as a low value feature that is not worth paying extra for or adding to the complexity of operating the detector.

I'm not trying to change your position, just trying to better explain my POV and to re-emphasize a point made by Steve H. regarding the E1500's ID numbers in this context.

In relic detecting in hot to very hot ground (the sole logical use case for most relic hunters to consider a PI over a vlf), the ability to invoke iron check or blanking with a DD is a useful feature provided the detectorist understands its limitations (it is depth limited, far from foolproof as it is subject to both false positives and false negatives, and practically useless in iron patches, at least in the Minelab GPX iron blanking implementation).

For the latter reason, I too prefer the Axiom "on demand" implementation as it enables iron patches to be managed - though most are likely better off just trying to sift through them with a VLF regardless of ground conditions.  That being said, with 7 years of GPX experience and just under 1 year of Axiom experience under my belt, I would have to say the GPX iron blanking implementation is slightly more reliable at depth than Axiom's in correctly signaling iron.  But not enough that I prefer it over Axiom's on demand iron grunt feature.   

All that being said, I know very experienced detectorists like Steve and Andrew Benson who can manipulate controls on the fly on the GPX 6000 (which has no explicit iron check features) to derive ferrous telltale responses. I believe this does require a DD coil to be attached, but Steve or Andrew can set the record straight on that.

The other thing to note about the GPX and Axiom iron check features is that they work (with varying reliability) on both big iron (which typically manifests as high conductive low tones) and most iron bits (which manifest as high tones).  They routinely get fooled by barbed wire, small circular iron, and bent square nails but those targets can also have audio tell tales that an experienced PI user can identify to make an informed dig judgment call.

Now regarding E1500's numerical ID.  That is a fascinating feature and I am excited to see it in action, but I just want to point out (and Steve has already done this) that since it is just going to be a number corresponding to the relative conductivity of the target derived from it's time constant, it is going to be limited in providing a positive iron ID because iron (just as some other metals like aluminum, gold and lead) have derived conductivities that vary widely with the mass and shape of the target.  Iron and to a lesser extent lead and gold can show up as either high or low conductors.  Sophisticated frequency domain signal processing algorithms benefitting from simultaneous multifrequency operation in vlf induction balance Detectors with DD coils have resulted in some very sophisticated iron filters that go beyond simple TID discrimination.

Excited to see how the E1500 integrates its on demand TID feature with its audio to help a detectorist make an informed call on the nature of the target under a mono coil.  If it proves out to be a breakthrough combo that obviates the need to have heavy DD coils or pseudo reliable iron check features, then Win-Win.  

If DD compatibility can be added to further enhance the E1500's capabilities down the road enabling detectorists additional options and choices, that would be great as well.

Overall, all the other boxes the E1500 checks on paper (price point, light weight, relative ease of use, coil optimization, dual channel GB, bring your own power and coil, and visual target signal feedback) makes this a very compelling detector regardless of your use case.