Jump to content

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, IBMe said:

Even beats those wimps, Manticore and Deus 2.

I recognize this is a tongue-in-cheek statement (at least I hope so).  So, in that vein, let me beg to differ, based on my experience swinging all three of these detectors in various environments over the past several weeks.  I take it you have done the same and arrived at a  different conclusion.

1 hour ago, IBMe said:

When the Vortex goes over a tab, steel cap, aluminum cap or foil, the tone is wider than the object. (has to do with Laws of Physics) Zero mode, no notch and no filter.

What "law" is that, exactly?  Please explain the physics to me so I can better understand the claim.

Plus, whether or not it can actually do that, makes little difference if it can't detect keepers at depth when you need it to, and that has been my experience in many cases.

I still need to do some additional swinging with the new software, but unfortunately winter finally decided to show up, so my chance to test that out is going to have to wait.  

I can find stuff with Vortex, no doubt.  But I have to agree with others here that conclude that the value is lacking based on it's performance against similarly priced detectors.  There is a noticeable performance gap, long trash tones or not.

  • Like 4

43 minutes ago, IBMe said:

Easy win Vortex. Even beats those wimps, Manticore and Deus 2.
When the Vortex goes over a tab, steel cap, aluminum cap or foil, the tone is wider than the object. (has to do with Laws of Physics) Zero mode, no notch and no filter.
You immediately know that it can’t be a coin or ring.

Which other detector instantly eliminates tabs, steel caps, aluminum caps and foil?
Don’t be too quick to hand out the blue ribbon just yet.

Stan, I have tried to keep it real. I refrained from saying anything positive or negative about the Vortex until I had a chance to try one. I went to the trouble of borrowing a VX9 for a week, updating it and spending about 10 hours with it for testing and hunting with it. At this point I would not use it for any detecting that involves selective digging using Multi Frequency on targets at any reasonable depth or even shallow targets. In dig it all situations Multi Frequency is okay.

As for the rest of the VX9 search modes, I don’t live anywhere near a saltwater beach and due to high iron mineralization I don’t use single frequencies. I hunt extremely modern trashed parks for coins and jewelry. So for me the VX9’s Multi Frequency mode Is all I would hunt with if I owned a VX9 and that mode is such a mess that I don’t trust it for that kind of detecting. The VX9’s audio is decent but I was unable to hear the nuances that you are reporting.

I found the VX9 using Multi Frequency mode to have good target separation, good iron unmasking, good EMI mitigation and fairly good high iron mineralization ground handling. So that mode has some positive qualities and gives me some hope that Garrett might be able to salvage Multi Frequency mode someday. I am not waiting for that day.

  • Like 8
1 hour ago, IBMe said:

 

Which other detector instantly eliminates tabs, steel caps, aluminum caps and foil?
Don’t be too quick to hand out the blue ribbon just yet.

I only know a couple of competent Manticore users.  But, for us, steel caps are a complete non issue, like not worthy of discussion.  Aluminum caps, complete non issue.  Even the dreaded Corona cap, which the Nox 800 loved to make me hate, the Manticore dutifully reports as a mixed allow and definitely not a coin or good ring.  Digging caps is voluntary with the Manticore - if you don't want to dig any, then don't.   If the Vortex does this too, awesome.  But I'd really have to see it with my own eyes to believe that the Vortex does it better.

The only caps that are even a little bit troublesome with the Manticore are aluminum screw caps.  They report in the mid 70's typically.  No single US coins typically report in that range.  Zinc spills, mixed clad spills, junk jewelry, keys, dog tags, yes sometimes.  But no single coin.  Some small silver rings do report in the same ID range.  But, the strength and size of the signal tells the tale in my experience. Aluminum screw caps are highly identifiable with the Manticore.  Other, better targets that have the same TID range, have different size and strength of signal characteristics at a high enough rate of consistency to not worry about passing up the aluminum screw caps, while still finding plenty of small silver and mixed clad spills with the same TID.

Again, if the Vortex can do this too, awesome.  But it's not beating the Manticore.  Not unless I see it with my own eyes.  And, I have hunted alongside a Vortex in a park - and my Manticore kicked it's butt back to Texas. On everything.  Vortex absolutely could not call a nickel from a tab.  Easy peasy with the Manticore.  Vortex absolutely could not hit a 9" copper Memorial.  Easy peasy with the Manticore.

Simply put in just my opinion.  Maybe the Vortex can do these things as well as the Manticore.  But at this point, I do not believe the Vortex is better.  Really, I don't believe even nearly as good, but I'm open to the possibility.

At 7+" depth?  Forget about it. Vortex need not apply.

- Dave

  • Like 5
1 hour ago, Chase Goldman said:

I recognize this is a tongue-in-cheek statement (at least I hope so).  So, in that vein, let me beg to differ, based on my experience swinging all three of these detectors in various environments over the past several weeks.  I take it you have done the same and arrived at a  different conclusion.

What "law" is that, exactly?  Please explain the physics to me so I can better understand the claim.

Plus, whether or not it can actually do that, makes little difference if it can't detect keepers at depth when you need it to, and that has been my experience in many cases.

I still need to do some additional swinging with the new software, but unfortunately winter finally decided to show up, so my chance to test that out is going to have to wait.  

It can find stuff with Vortex, no doubt.  But I have to agree with others here that the conclude that the value is lacking based on it's performance against similarly priced detectors.  There is a noticeable performance gap, long trash tones or not.

I would rate it better than most for reactive audio and simplicity. I would rate it very bad for not having a modern notch scheme and iron tone break.

An object has two sound profiles, the size of the object and its presence in the tone. The tone chops quickly after going over a coin. It lingers after going over an aluminum cap. Newton’s Shell Theorem. The center of mass moves very little as the coil passes over a thicker and denser target. Moves more when it passes over a thinner and less dense object.

For my own use, nobody else, this might be the best detector for me. I’m just a fill-dirt park digger. The only thing I want to know is how big is the target. If it’s the size of a coin or ring, I will dig it. Otherwise, I’ll leave it.

Whatever its flaws, due to its highly reactive audio and unique tone sizing, I can stroll right through the trash. I do have to apply some other tricks in heavy masking conditions.

  • Like 1
1 hour ago, Jeff McClendon said:

Stan, I have tried to keep it real. I went to the trouble of borrowing a VX9, updating and spending about 10 hours with it. At this point I would not use it for any detecting that involves selective digging using Multi Frequency on targets at any reasonable depth or even shallow targets. In dig it all situations Multi Frequency is okay. As for the rest of the search modes, I don’t live anywhere near a saltwater beach and due to high iron mineralization I don’t use single frequencies. I hunt extremely modern trashed parks for coins and jewelry. So for me the VX9’s Multi Frequency mode Is all I would hunt with if I owned a VX9 and that mode is such a mess that I don’t trust it for that kind of detecting.

I found the VX9 using Multi Frequency mode to have good target separation, good iron unmasking, good EMI mitigation and fairly good high iron mineralization ground handling. So that mode has some positive qualities and gives me some hope that Garrett might be able to salvage Multi Frequency mode someday. I am not waiting for that day.

I’m just a fill-dirt park digger. Old timer, won’t hunt long, won’t dig deep. My simple use doesn’t say much.
However, that little tone trick it has is pretty neat. Immediately eliminate a lot of trash.

45 minutes ago, UT Dave said:

I only know a couple of competent Manticore users.  But, for us, steel caps are a complete non issue, like not worthy of discussion.  Aluminum caps, complete non issue.  Even the dreaded Corona cap, which the Nox 800 loved to make me hate, the Manticore dutifully reports as a mixed allow and definitely not a coin or good ring.  Digging caps is voluntary with the Manticore - if you don't want to dig any, then don't.   If the Vortex does this too, awesome.  But I'd really have to see it with my own eyes to believe that the Vortex does it better.

The only caps that are even a little bit troublesome with the Manticore are aluminum screw caps.  They report in the mid 70's typically.  No single US coins typically report in that range.  Zinc spills, mixed clad spills, junk jewelry, keys, dog tags, yes sometimes.  But no single coin.  Some small silver rings do report in the same ID range.  But, the strength and size of the signal tells the tale in my experience. Aluminum screw caps are highly identifiable with the Manticore.  Other, better targets that have the same TID range, have different size and strength of signal characteristics at a high enough rate of consistency to not worry about passing up the aluminum screw caps, while still finding plenty of small silver and mixed clad spills with the same TID.

Again, if the Vortex can do this too, awesome.  But it's not beating the Manticore.  Not unless I see it with my own eyes.  And, I have hunted alongside a Vortex in a park - and my Manticore kicked it's butt back to Texas. On everything.  Vortex absolutely could not call a nickel from a tab.  Easy peasy with the Manticore.  Vortex absolutely could not hit a 9" copper Memorial.  Easy peasy with the Manticore.

Simply put in just my opinion.  Maybe the Vortex can do these things as well as the Manticore.  But at this point, I do not believe the Vortex is better.  Really, I don't believe even nearly as good, but I'm open to the possibility.

At 7+" depth?  Forget about it. Vortex need not apply.

- Dave

I’m not seriously saying the Vortex is better than the Manticore.

2 hours ago, IBMe said:

Newton’s Shell Theorem. The center of mass moves very little as the coil passes over a thicker and denser target. Moves more when it passes over a thinner and less dense object.

Again, this is so outrageous that I have to believe you are just trying to yank my chain for a response.  So, against my better judgment, I'll bite. :smile:

First of all, the CM of an object at rest does not move.  If you are referring to the effective gravitational field in relation to the center of mass, Shell Theorem only provides a means to determine the gravitational force as measured at any point of reference either within the "shell" of an object of interest or outside the shell. 

What you are describing appears to be related the center of gravity changes if you consider a complex gravitational system comprised of the coil and the "in ground" target.  This has little to do with Shell Theorem, is flawed because you are ignoring the mass-gravitational effects of the ground, and has nothing whatsoever to do with the physical principle of magnetic induction (Faraday's Law) used by induction balance metal detectors, other than metal detectors have an affinity for symmetric magnetic fields generated by eddy currents flowing in symmetrically shaped objects, especially discs, rings, and spheres.  Whereas, Shell Theorem relies on the geometric symmetry of a spherical shell to determine gravitational effects. 

Target density can affect target signal strength, but target conductivity and reactance vs. resistivity have a bigger effect on detected target signal amplitude.  However, thin, assymetric targets such as can slaw can provide nuanced target responses that a trained ear can decode as likely non-ferrous trash and as Dave stated, higher end detectors such as Manticore and D2 have very effective filters and audio adjustments to make crown caps a non-issue and which give pretty good audible or visual "tells" on the other non-fertous trash items you mentioned.  However, you are paying A LOT for that capability vs. Vortex.

I don't dispute that Vortex, like many detectors, have subtle "tells" that help an astute detectorist with lots of swing time on Vortex differentiate trash from treasure either via audio nuances such as what you are describing or visual "target trace" type features built into detectors such as the Manticore, D2, and others.  But that has little if anything to to do with Classical Mechanics and numerical methods used to compute gravitational fields in spherical shells as far as I can tell. 

Interesting thoughts, I really had to work on providing you a thoughtful response, learned something new in the process, so thanks for that.

  • Like 4
2 hours ago, Chase Goldman said:

First of all, the CM of an object at rest does not move.

The detector is moving. Relative to the detector, the objects are moving. The center of mass between two objects is somewhere between the two objects depending on mass.

To put this another way, from Manticore manual:
“Targets that are adjacent or overlapping can influence one-another, resulting in misidentification. A common effect I that a weaker target will be 'dragged' closer to the stronger target, causing a different Target ID than if the targets were detected individually. Targets of a similar type and signal strength can move towards each-other, meeting halfway. Conversely, if one target is very dominant, then the weaker target may not be detected at all.”

It doesn’t matter if it’s the same object, it’s just mass. As the coil moves across the horizontal plane, there is less movement of center of mass of the thicker object because it has more depth.

The object isn’t moving, the coil is. At a point in time as the coil moves across the target, relative to the coil, the center of mass is changing, be it one object or many.

Not talking about gravity, the properties of mass are relative to the mass.

On 1/3/2025 at 2:39 AM, IBMe said:

The detector is moving. Relative to the detector, the objects are moving. The center of mass between two objects is somewhere between the two objects depending on mass.

To put this another way, from Manticore manual:
“Targets that are adjacent or overlapping can influence one-another, resulting in misidentification. A common effect I that a weaker target will be 'dragged' closer to the stronger target, causing a different Target ID than if the targets were detected individually. Targets of a similar type and signal strength can move towards each-other, meeting halfway. Conversely, if one target is very dominant, then the weaker target may not be detected at all.”

It doesn’t matter if it’s the same object, it’s just mass. As the coil moves across the horizontal plane, there is less movement of center of mass of the thicker object because it has more depth.

The object isn’t moving, the coil is. At a point in time as the coil moves across the target, relative to the coil, the center of mass is changing, be it one object or many.

Not talking about gravity, the properties of mass are relative to the mass.

You are the one who brought up Newton's Shell Theorem which is solely related to gravitational forces relative to an object's center of mass, for spherical objects.

As I stated in my response, I recognized that you might be talking about how the center of mass of the coil/target "system" as the coil moves but how the CM of that "system" moves has little to do with how a target is detected other than coil motion is required to create the induced magnetic field imbalance that results in target detection.  Furthermore, coil distance and angle affect how the transmit coil's magnetic field induces eddy currents in the target and how the receive coil senses the weak magnetic field that results from those eddy currents.  It's not a system center of mass thing it's a magnetic field strength and symmetry thing.

The context of the Manticore discussion you cite is relative to the "movement" of weaker target ID (along the conductive ID scale) due to interactions of the eddy-current-generated magnetic fields between adjacent targets (and ground response), not actual relative movement of the CM of the targets or the coil itself.  This is commonly referred to as TID upscaling or downscaling.  The only role the coil plays is creating the time variant magnetic field that induces the eddy currents in those targets.  While the coil itself can influence the magnetic field of a shallow objects, it has little to do with the mass of the coil, but is related to it's coil winding footprint (the mass of the coil comprises non-metallic materials abd other non-coil components that have no effect on the target signal).  Furthermore, that motion effect alone is not necessarily causing the elongation you are perceiving when swinging your Vortex over low density, isolated targets. 

I'm glad you've discovered a trash tell with the Vortex that makes your park hunting more enjoyable.  I don't dispute that. 

I only take issue with your theories on why it is happening, which appear to reflect that you may have some misperceptions of the physics principles involved.  No problem with that as no one needs to understand the physics behind the operation of metal detectors to either enjoy or be proficient at the hobby. 

I welcome any critique from the forum members here that I know who have a much, much better understanding of metal detector tech and physical principles than I will ever attain.  I welcome them to point out any errors I've made and will learn from those responses.  However, I don't plan on responding further on this as it appears to be devolving into a spiraling "last word" exchange and the potential to inadvertently disseminate technical misinformation.  Been there, done that and it benefits no one.  So for the sake of those reading this thread, I will put my shovel down and stop digging myself a deeper hole. :smile:

Happy Detecting in 2025

 

 

  • Like 4

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...