AlgoForce E1500 Vs The Rest

[Aureous]

Quite a few people have commented that it has near-6000 sensitivity and can sometimes hear specimen gold or flat, thin bits of gold better than the 6000.  Its when you get to larger, thicker gold that the Minelab's peel away in terms of sheer depth performance. It certainly has bang for your buck, versatility and light-weight. I'm sure that Alex and Co will bring more detector models to the market before too long. Or perhaps just software/firmware  changes....the higher-end ARM-7 processors are capable of so much by simply tweaking the code. Time will tell....

[phrunt]

That's why I think someone with an earlier model GPX could team it up with an Algoforce and have a great team of detectors, they complement each other perfectly and to top it off share coils.  Where one is weak the other excels, such as the pricky gold, the tiny gold and the Algo, or the really good EMI handling with mono coils it has, it leaves the old GPX for dead there.  A cheap boost for an early model GPX owner.  Then the GPX will find the bigger solid gold deeper, so they pair very well.

[Gold Catcher]

1 hour ago, Nedkelly said:

The stable ground balance is the most impressive thing for me. I'm certainly not ground balancing as much as I would have expected in hot variable ground with a sensitive detector. 

Is this not reason for concern though if true? I would expect a high-performance detector to be very sensitive to changing mineralization conditions, hence the need for frequent GB when run in manual. This was the reason why auto track was introduced (for those who like it). Unless the detector is less sensitive and does not need frequent fine tuning, of course, despite variable ground. I don't think you can have it both ways, something has to give.

GC

[Nedkelly]

52 minutes ago, Gold Catcher said:

Is this not reason for concern though if true? I would expect a high-performance detector to be very sensitive to changing mineralization conditions, hence the need for frequent GB when run in manual. This was the reason why auto track was introduced (for those who like it). Unless the detector is less sensitive and does not need frequent fine tuning, of course, despite variable ground. I don't think you can have it both ways, something has to give.

GC

Yes I still ground balance frequently, but it doesn't start screaming it's head off every few steps. It remains fairly stable and handles the ground changes remarkably well. 

[Norvic]

Ahhhh, going back last century... the first ML tracking PI had just hit the market, I joined for 4 weeks a pay for tag along tour operator in WA and NT OZ. On first camp fire 'yack' he asked us to keep any 'hot rocks' that interfered with our Pis GB ( SDs 2000, 2100 and 2200) he was collecting such for ML. It was such user collections ML relied/relies on for GBing advancements. That first tracking ML taught us tracking takes out gold, ML improved on that over the years with the SDC the first without fixed going close to not tracking out gold, the 6K improved again (and the Z but its not PI).

They still track out gold but improving, but above is just a litlle history, now my point those of us who still use fixed at times have also noticed in fixed detectors although evolving more sensitive do not need as much and as often adjustment, I`ve found not speculating the E1500 does not need as much or as often GB adjustment as say, to keep amongst the PIs as the GPX5000 and be assured the E1500 has sensitivity approaching the GB2 VLF. Hell with the GB2 (non tracking) and such you were continually adjusting manually ever swing almost.

5 minutes ago, Nedkelly said:

It remains fairly stable and handles the ground changes remarkably well.

 

[Lead Detector]

In another year or so, everyone will be itching to get there hands on the new e2500. I bet this is just the start of a successful line of detectors from algoforce. They seem promising for sure, as long as you keep realistic expectations/dollars spent. I still think they will be the best bang for the buck for many people.

 

[phrunt]

I think more the Gold Bug Pro sensitivity.

[Aureous]

Re the tracking versus fixed-ground grab GB, remember that Alex and co got a patent for a 'different method' of extracting the metal signal from the overall receive signal. I suspect this has a lot to do with the reduced need for tracking and that the ground grab GB is all thats required in most instances... Its all in the code.

[BigSkyGuy]

4 hours ago, phrunt said:

That's why I think someone with an earlier model GPX could team it up with an Algoforce and have a great team of detectors, they complement each other perfectly and to top it off share coils.  Where one is weak the other excels, such as the pricky gold, the tiny gold and the Algo, or the really good EMI handling with mono coils it has, it leaves the old GPX for dead there.  A cheap boost for an early model GPX owner.  Then the GPX will find the bigger solid gold deeper, so they pair very well.

Exactly why I am interested. I have a 5000 with lots of coils and no desire to drop several thousand for a ML PI gold detector.

[RONS DETECTORS MINELAB]

1 hour ago, BigSkyGuy said:

Exactly why I am interested. I have a 5000 with lots of coils and no desire to drop several thousand for a ML PI gold detector.

I really am hoping that the 5000 & E1500 cross over on their strengths and weaknesses so the need for a more expensive small gold detector will be not needed. It is really great the coils our interchangeable.
 

Someone on the forum once said coils our what sell detectors.