New Fisher Manta

it's me, and I'm not as serious as that,

comparison test / which dates from 2017
we were already better on the beach than the GP

but, we must recognize that the GPZ
was not designed for the beach / unlike the manta ...

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Detector used : Fisher Aquamanta /

Pulsepower Goldscan 5c / Aquastar / Goldquest SSV3 / Nexus Coronado / Vista Gold

If you are looking for a suitable test site in the United States I recommend the Florida Treasure Coast.

One reason is you will be in Tom Dankowski's neighborhood.

Another reason is the 1715 Spanish Treasure Fleet beaches have artifacts buried for over 300 years.

Serious detectorists with the best equipment have hunted these beaches.

I have friends who regularly hunt these beaches with GPX 5000's, Garrett ATX, White's TDI, Detector Pro Pulses, CTX 3030, Excals etc.

Beach conditions, erosion are key but great finds have been made when conditions are nominal.

Old deep artifacts develop a halo and I have personally dug targets at 19".

ROBOCOP

I already have also dig very deep targets
with a halo / Roman coin in bronze

and if you notice / just when the tide goes down (when there is one of course)
you are more efficient / the sand still wet
increase conductivity = saves a few centimeters

useful to know, on certain hunting

Tom will certainly have a pre-series
he will make reports / unless he is too busy digging gold coins

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Detector used : Fisher Aquamanta /

Pulsepower Goldscan 5c / Aquastar / Goldquest SSV3 / Nexus Coronado / Vista Gold

There ya go...... Tom Finally will have a voice. Me being on the other side of the island.... I watch and read carefully his reviews.

After lengthy observation...…..and on many threads throughout the years...……... it appears the common-ground is: Beach Hunters quest for a (all-metal/auto-tune) wet-salt prospecting mode.

Seems everything finds it way to the shore line..... yet that wet sand can be very difficult to hunt. Most hunters dont realize how much stuff may be there that we just cant find because of mineralization, black sand, and the detectors lack of ability to see thru it. No one wants to dig a lot of iron either. Its difficult transitioning from the wet sand to the water as well.... i think the Nox is a good example of that having to go from beach 1 to beach 2. A PI has the depth...... now we just need it to give us the sensitivity and ability to easily move between the two areas. Another thing........... dang guys give us a pair of headphones that arent cheaply made with good sound that can get seriously wet. Headphone and coils IMO moved detecting forward...... now maybe detectors are catching up. Its a leap frog event...... time to take a serious look at the phones with this machine. They really need the ability to respond to weak targets.

Dew

For Decades......…. we've always analyzed wet-salt in a very conventional way. And this (current) methodology shares (and compromises) the detection of gold jewelry...…. due to similar conductivity.

It may be time to re-think...…. and analyze wet-salt in such a fashion so as to not infringe upon the detection of solid jewelry/gold items.


(What if...…. unsuspectingly...….. there's more than one way to analyze/handle wet-salt).

a plate of salt, say 3 cm thick
it's like a volcanic sand plate / same thickness
or as foundry slag / same thickness

there is very little detector able to cross the 3 plates
and even less, to take a gold ring underneath

soon available at all good detector merchants
there is one who can do it

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Detector used : Fisher Aquamanta /

Pulsepower Goldscan 5c / Aquastar / Goldquest SSV3 / Nexus Coronado / Vista Gold

If.... unsuspectingly.... you come across that method Tom ....make two buddy lol. That is the obvious glaring need. Having it ignore the salt and see small low conductors.... we seem to conc more on the salt than the target.

Probably already asked......What would be the ballpark price to purchase the Fisher Manta?? Thanks

No price has been announced or hinted. In today’s detector market, silly prices like the CTX and such seem unlikely.

If I had to guess - about one Troy ounce of gold - 31 grams - 5 - 6 men’s wedding bands. Easy to make back! Here’s what LE JAG found on one tide..



Rick Kempf
Gold Canyon AZ- where there is no gold



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 06/13/2018 12:38AM by lytle78.

I wont expect ...... nor will most hunters, those kind of days no matter what machine comes out. But ...... i have to agree most of us water hunters will pay for a good machine rather quickly. Im hoping for a machine with the wow factor..... something to raise an eyebrow. Finds that dont leave you saying........ my other machines would have found that.

Just wondering with all the fuss about the new Manta Pi. How many will buy and part with it soon afterwards. Like many now do, after buying their first Pi and finding it operates differently than a VLF and just can't get on with it?
Like they say Pi's are not for everyone. Or will the Manta be a seamless adjustment for those that always just used a VLF?

DeepTech Vista X with 3 search coils.
Works for me

Sven, good question.

I think the answer is some will love it, some won’t. Pretty much like any other detector. You build PI machines which a lot of folks have used and most really love, but they are clearly not for everyone.

Beach hunting is hard work and unless you live near the beach it is a thing you can only do when you infrequently travel to the beach. PI beach detectors have been on the market for decades. They are niche machines in beach detecting and beach machines are a niche within the overall detector market.

Fisher’s primary challenge is to produce a machine which is light and elegant and lives up to the picture painted by enthusiastic folks on the forums.Their next challenge is to present it correctly. I am pretty sure that they don’t want every hunter who goes to the beach to buy one. FT are busy developing new platforms which will address the challenge posed by the latest crop of “go anywhere” detectors - water resistant VLF’s with salt beach capability (mostly but not exclusively multifrequency).

If we look at existing PI water machines we see detectors with depth on low mineral beaches equal to or superior to machines like the Excal, CTX and CZ21 (on black sand or other mineralized beaches they clearly beat the VLF’s). The current machines lack any practical means of identifying iron. The result is that users often find that they end up digging more and deeper holes without increasing their finds. They also are no more sensitive to small gold than VLF’s which can operate in Salt. A lot of them end up being sold on or put in the closet, and the user either giving up beach detecting or reverting to a VLF. Some dedicated hunters, especially where mineralized beaches prevail continue to use them and get super results.

The new Fisher PI will be a specialized tool. It’s for gold, just like a Minelab GPZ which costs $7000. The difference is that finding an ounce of gold nuggets is really, really hard. Lots of folks try for a year to find their first tiny one. Head to the beach with a good beach detector and the odds of finding gold are nowhere so remote - and the gold you find is in bigger chunks than the average nugget hunter will ever find.

The Manta has two key characteristics which aim to make it a deadly gold hunter. First and most important, it claims to be more sensitive to ALL gold than any previous salt water detector. It does this by having an adjustable pulse delay control which goes down below 10 microseconds pulse delay - this has two effects, it enables finding smaller gold than any current detector in salt water and second Manta has more depth on all gold. All this sensitivity would be no good if weak target signals were swamped by circuit and ground noise. The Manta’s design has been refined and every design trade off made in the direction of extremely low noise, letting weak signal be heard.

So, folks might say - OK maybe it will find more gold, but PI’s also hear every tiny flake of metal and drive me nuts and wear me out digging deep holes for nails, hairpins and aluminum trash.

The feature of the Manta which has probably gotten the most attention is its ability to ID or eliminate ferrous targets. The iron ID/elimination capability of the Manta is based on the operation of its ground balance system. This function puts iron and high conductors into the excluded “bucket” (it has two modes, no return or multitone) and puts low conductors - gold jewelry and aluminum - into another “bucket”. The degree of operation of this feature is variable from “all metal” level through increasing amounts of rejection. Use of this will greatly reduce or eliminate digging ferrous junk. Unlike the primitive iron ID of the Minelab GPX machines, this feature works to nearly full detecting depth of the machine. Since it works on the strength of the return signal, vs. its phase shift, it will likely eliminate those dreaded smashed and ripped deep aluminum cans.

At high levels, the largest ferrous targets and other targets with high conductivity are rejected. With use of the ferrous rejection feature clad and silver coins are excluded. Not so great for “clad stabbing” The testing so far has concentrated on finding gold in the water and France doesn’t have recent high conductor coinage. The use of iron ID when silver is the target may work fine by adjusting the pulse delay to a higher value and choosing a lower level of iron exclusion, or it may be necessary to hunt in all metal with a high pulse delay value to eliminate small ferrous and all aluminum. In any event, LE JAG has reported that in his 3 years or so of testing and using successive Manta prototypes he has mainly operated in all metal - stating that most iron gives a double “blip” especially if the coil is lifted slightly. In this mode, silver and clad are detected, just like everything else.

Using the Manta for gold in salt will be just like any other beach machine in one way - the user will have to adapt control settings and search techniques to extract the maximum information from the ground and to make effective use of his time and energy. Fisher’s argument is that between the gold finding power of the Manta and it’s abilities to avoid digging ferrous junk, it will obsolete all previous PI beach machines and outperform any current beach machine of any type - tall order, we will see if it measures up.

The upcoming testing of pre-production machines here in North America will no doubt clearly reveal the best use of the machine’s capabilities - When that data is in, I’m pretty sure Fisher’s advertising and social media information on the PI will reflect its strengths and limitations. They are well aware this is not a mass-market machine. I suspect also that they are putting off setting a price target for this until they have a firmer grasp on the scope of its usefulness and appeal. The GPZ costs $7000 - why? - because it finds gold nuggets better than any other detector in the world and gold is valuable - Minelab charges a kind of tax on gold. If the Manta can demonstrate that it really finds gold jewelry in salt water better than any machine in the world it will totally dominate an admittedly niche market - fortunately, I doubt that Fisher is interested in “taxing gold” - so I’m sure the price will be much more reasonable.

Rick Kempf
Gold Canyon AZ- where there is no gold



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 06/13/2018 01:11PM by lytle78.

I'm willing to bet Fisher could charge a hefty price and still do fairly well in sales; from those who live and hunt beaches, to just occasional vacationing beach hunters like me.

I say that because look at what Minelab has done with the GPX in relic hunting. The organized DIV hunts are just 2 hunts a year, and now, nearly 90% of the participants have a GPX. Think about that. The majority of them only use the GPX for those hunts, and happily spent $2,000 for the chance to dig a few Civil War relics. The majority of them will just find a half dozen bullets, a button or two, and if extremely lucky, a plate. All totaled together...probably not even $100 worth of relics.

A beach hunter stands a good chance at finding way more than $100 worth of gold on any given trip out.

Daniel...... dont let the cat out of the bag about us beach hunters and our occasional finds lol.

Seems to me...... there is a small gap from where salt water affects SMALL gold. The PI already handles the salt/black sand better than VLF. So ..... maybe Tom and others are looking at that small window differently?

Rick.....beach hunting in all honesty becomes hard work because we spend much more time out there i think digging. I mean ..... ill spent 7 hours.... its not hard digging, but it can be hot. I never spent nearly that much time field and park hunting in a days hunt. Now dirt hunting to me ..... thats work if you do it right and take special care. You are also right...... it will be for a limited number of people..... much like the expensive dive machines. Those ML gold machines had to EARN that price..... over several upgrades. A good many dont like the Nox ...... why they dont want to dig small targets even gold. What they fail to realize......not all those targets are that small...... they are just beyond the current sensitivity range..... and that could be but a few inches. NO one likes digging a lot of worthless iron targets either....... now thats work. Even us beach hunters hunt differently...... some want coverage...... some sensitivity..... some if it falls thru the scoop move on.......some want to cover a lot of sand..... some like to grid..... some like to work trash......and some (after watching them) have to just be out there for exercise. So the machine has to be attractive to the majority. IMO....... thats in the wet sand or water.... not the dry sand.

There's probably going to be a 'need' for training...…. due to some unsuspecting reasons. I'll try to do some of this specialized-training on this forum.

Then dont get to involved Tom...... id really like you to be able to express your opinions and be able to give us some real feed back that apparently ML didnt allow. Hopefully Carl and some of the others involved will chime in for some good insight.

Daniel Tn Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'm willing to bet Fisher could charge a hefty pri
> ce and still do fairly well in sales; from those w
> ho live and hunt beaches, to just occasional vacat
> ioning beach hunters like me.
>

Looking at the trends - <$1000 detectors sell many more. The market for high end prices is not there. Fisher just had to lower the MSRP of the CZ21. The learning curve on a PI is usually higher than most VLF machines. If they want to sell a lot, this machine needs to be sub $1000. The biggest selling metal detectors, owned by Fisher, is the bounty hunter brand. Why? Cost. Of course those are much cheaper entry level detectors but...The biggest selling detector among beach (well all) detectorists right now - the equinox. Why? Cost, waterproof, light, and just as good as the more expensive models. If Fisher wants this to sell well they need to price it correctly. $799/$899 for a PI that discs iron, is waterproof, and light - it will sell as well if not more than the equinox. Price it at $1500 and it will not. It prices too many of the hobbyists out. Hobbyists make up a much larger proportion of sales then the guys we see on these forums and they need to keep selling this machine as the months and years go by, not just an initial rush. Too many people would rather spend $650 on an equinox for their week beach trip than $1500-$2000 plus. Its just my gut but this needs to be sub $1000 to capture the market.

_________________________________

Nox600, CTX, CZ21, Excal II and White's DF with 920i stealthscoop...I live and hunt at the beach in Wilm NC



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/13/2018 03:52PM by adamBomb.

Really? Id give $1500 for a machine that could compete with an Eric Foster..... especially with the ability to disc iron. Thats a huge advancement to me. Take a look at the fisher dive machine price. We gave $1400 willing for the Xcals .....it took some time but many upgraded now to the pricy CTX. Tru PIs have been for the most part cheaper than a VLFwater machine..... nut try and buy a Foster machine.... and it dont disc and who repairs them. Warranty to me will be important too.

Having used the Aquastar, starting with the first prototype and knowing that the Manta is deeper and more sensitive. I would be happy to pay as much as $3,000.00 for it.

First Texas doesn’t play games with strange names for detectors’ features like some folks - and has a long history of engineering staff engaging on the forums - Dave Johnson, Carl Moreland and Jorge Anton Saad. Now their “EuroTeam” is represented by LE JAG who has tested all the versions of the Manta which have led to the production model.

As far as muzzling Tom, I am morally certain that he wouldn’t had made the post he just dod if he wasn’t sure he would have license to say what de thinks.

Rick Kempf
Gold Canyon AZ- where there is no gold

This new offering from 1st Texas does sound like a very good machine with some major game changing features for a PI machine,it wont be cheap but if it performs with the depth that we associate withe a Pulse machine but have that all important discrimination then it could have tremendous potential......but the bottom line is it will still just be a fancy detector,the real skill on taking it too its full potential will be the operators skillset and experience that is when it all comes together.....just by buying this new Manta machine does not mean you will the best on the beach alas it does not work like that.

A skilled beach detectorist that has been doing this for years and has the vast amount of knowledge of beach detecting and the new Manta then that will become a winning combination.

The Aqua-Manta is a hybrid advanced Gold Scan-5 (AquaStar-II with some Disc). The Gold Scan-5 sold for approx. $3000.00. Both GS-5 & AquaStar shared the same transmitter. Both units are/were the most powerful PI in the industry.

Yes, Carl will probably 'cut-me-loose' to speak about the Manta...……… Knowing my past decades track record of persona & prudence.

Since the conductivity range of gold jewelry can be any anywhere above iron depending on size and purity why not just have an iron discrimination / all metal switch? I see me screwing myself with a dial. Volume is important. Don't pull a Nox. With the constant beach replenishment system used on most east shore beaches now depth is more important than ever. I look forward to the field tests by good beach hunters like Tom.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/14/2018 12:01AM by goodmore.

In Fl we find most times when we are sanded in theres been little even a pI can do. Just a couple of inches more than a CTX. Now we may just be on the verge of hitting those deeper ..... or smaller gold we couldnt. Who dont want a machine with a lot more capability that you have to grow into? Sounds like we could have a learning curve...... but thats the fun part.

lytle78 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
.......
> If we look at existing PI water machines we see de
> tectors with depth on low mineral beaches equal to
> or superior to machines like the Excal, CTX and CZ
> 21 (on black sand or other mineralized beaches the
> y clearly beat the VLF’s). The current machines la
> ck any practical means of identifying iron......

Rick, good post as you usually do. Re.: the Manta :

I'm willing to bet there's going to be "gotchas" in the supposed iron rejection ability. You say yourself :

".... this feature works to nearly full detecting depth of the machine..."

So too was the claim for the TDI. But the moment anyone went to utilize this ability, they could kiss the fabled depth goodbye. The outside limits of depth (the last few inches?) that you seem to be alluding to, are going to have guys digging a bunch "just to make sure".

Same for this quote of yours :

"Manta prototypes he has mainly operated in all metal - stating that most iron gives a double “blip” especially if the coil is lifted slightly."

Hmmm, where have I heard that before ? Oh yeah! It was from all the pulse guys who are gleeful they can cut nasty black sand and get fabled depth. And when you ask them "what about nails?", they say "I can tell them apart by the double beep". But those become famous last words, as we see them leave nail riddled beaches in disgust.

So something tells me this is just going to be another incarnation of all the "gotchas" of previous attempts to make a true discriminating pulse. Sorry to be a kill-joy.

As a land based nugget shooter, I'm hopeful that the TerraManta will be as powerful as a GPX with (even slightly) better iron disc than the "primative" iron disc that the GPX offers.
Even as primative as the iron disc is on the GPX is it can be an effective tool in the right hands. I believe the race is on between manufacturers of PI machines to take PI technology to the next level with some sort of effective discrimination circuitry. The first company to bring it to the market will win big. Perhaps I'm wrong, but I think developing the first effective discriminating land based PI would be a bigger seller (bigger market) than developing one for such a niche market as the beach/salt water
market. So, I wonder why FT is putting all their eggs in to the beach PI machine first and risking that a company like ML beat them to the larger land based PI market?

Dean

Adam -- We will agree to disagree on the price. If it truly turns out to be something innovative, there will be plenty of people that wont hesitate to plop down the funds for it. I will be one of them and I'm 8 hours drive from the nearest salt water beach. I saw this happen over and over again in relic hunting when the pulse machines first started catching fire. I remember when people would openly ridicule you on the forums because you were even considering buying a $1,500 pulse machine....and then they would down right heckle you if you mentioned buying a GPX, because back then, they were $5,000. Once the people started seeing what they could do, and having people with them dig hundreds of bullets, dozens of buttons, and belt plates, etc out of where they had just walked over that they never heard....it started to turn the hamster wheel in their head. They began to see if they could get a leg up on the other hunters, then they too could find more, and find stuff others without those machines were missing. Now pert near everybody has a GPX. The last DIV I went to, at the BBQ dinner on the last day, there was a wood rail fence that people were using to prop their detectors up on. I remember looking at it and seeing over 300 GPXs and TDIs, headphones, etc leaned up on that rail and thinking to myself "there's over 2 million dollars worth of equipment sitting right there on that fence".

In other hobbies, $2,000 - $3,000 is cheap for equipment. I had over $2 grand in my archery tournament setup. Recreational air rifles are about that price now. For those that need the latest and greatest phone, they start about $1,000.

Minelab doesn't have a PI for the water market, they already have land unit Pi's. Water market appears wide open to get a foothold in. Capture the market with performance proof positive. Then go in for the kill with a matching prospecting land unit. Just my thoughts, could be right or wrong. Its all in the marketing, which is already has been started, just by talking about the Manta.


bado1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> As a land based nugget shooter, I'm hopeful that t
> he TerraManta will be as powerful as a GPX with (e
> ven slightly) better iron disc than the "primative
> " iron disc that the GPX offers.
> Even as primative as the iron disc is on the GPX i
> s it can be an effective tool in the right hands.
> I believe the race is on between manufacturers of
> PI machines to take PI technology to the next leve
> l with some sort of effective discrimination circu
> itry. The first company to bring it to the market
> will win big. Perhaps I'm wrong, but I think devel
> oping the first effective discriminating land base
> d PI would be a bigger seller (bigger market) than
> developing one for such a niche market as the beac
> h/salt water
> market. So, I wonder why FT is putting all their e
> ggs in to the beach PI machine first and risking t
> hat a company like ML beat them to the larger land
> based PI market?
>
> Dean

DeepTech Vista X with 3 search coils.
Works for me