New Fisher Manta

We've heard so much now about this machine over the last few years I don't know what to believe. I'm definitely not buying one until I see it used by the public and we get some reports comparing it to other detectors on the market. And if it's not priced under 2K, chances are I'll never make the purchase.

I really hope they don't wait until Christmas to release it either. Would they seriously wait another 7 months to release it?

They didn't say what year Christmas it will be out,...... I'm only partially kidding.

Man you guys are "hyper critical". In 2015 Clive sold a used Eric Foster Aquastar with one coil, running smooth threshold at full power of 14.7V / 10 uSec for $1,800. Now Le Jag, who has used Eric Foster's fantastic detectors that are no longer available, is testing cutting-edge new technology, higher voltage, faster pulse delay at 7 uSec, showing fantastic gold jewelry finds at incredible depths and it's...not good enough, too expensive, and hard to dig that deep!

We have a saying in Colorado that I use all the time, "It will never be good enough for some people"!

I still want to buy one,

Bill

dewcon4414 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> A BBS...... VLF.... noisy in iron??? Have you use
> d an Xcal in PP mode? Iron hasnt been a noise iss
> ue .. its been a recovery speed/deep target ID, is
> sue for VLF. AND you are now trying to lead us t
> o believe the AQ is going to disc iron BETTER than
> a VLF??? I look forward to using a quiet machine
> ...... but the MDT is pretty darn quiet.
>
> I wouldnt buy one for that price nor would most of
> us average beach hunters. That much gold in a mo
> nth....... ill have what you are smoking. Almost
> no one i know makes $60,000 a year on the beach ..
> ... well unless they are appraising their own stuf
> f...... and you were talking MELT value. Those k
> ind of statements dont do much for your credibilit
> y IMO. This is a hobby..... very few make a livi
> ng at it here in the states. Most make less than
> that in a year melt. MOST.... would be happy to
> double or at least increase their gold finds. J
> oe (ole beach nut) how much would you say you had
> in melt for last years finds? You had to be joki
> ng or day dreaming with that post. Maybe thats
> why we MAY see the machine by Christmas...... loft
> y goals arent easily being met.

Dew, I think I may average just under a pound of gold a year. Most 10k, some 14k and very rare to see Higher "K". (A quick guess on melt, 8300.00 per year). I know the beach's I hunt very well and how they change. I see it getting harder each year and depth is in great need. Will the "AQ" be my main machine? At this point, just put me at the front of the line so we can end this "thread".

Blood Member of RingKeepers
2020......Gold Rings....73....Misc Gold 1 .......Silvers ...110

OK maybe I'll pay $2500 that's what my GPX costs. But it works on the beach and inland.

OBN you know this thread won't end.......Once it's out it will be just like the Tarsacci thread with users reporting......Or maybe not, might be so good nobody will say anything hoping to keep the competition down. LOL

This is just the tip of the iceberg (that is - if you find diamond rings - lol) - but no kidding, these guys never sleep - LR.JAG has told us that the depth and discrimination have both been improved VERY recently.

You want the good stuff, you have to dig - dig 20” for a diamond ring - piece of cake - in South Africa they have diamond mines which are over 13.000 feet deep - want diamonds - dig for them! Lol

Rick Kempf
Gold Canyon AZ- where there is no gold



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/09/2019 07:21PM by lytle78.

and again, I could tell if you are going to Dubai for two months
you can retire, lol

there will be no more debate
AQ Impulse system fully operational

we go to Terra
we will come back to AQ when the first will be distributed
well before Christmas and will cost you less than $ 5000

and he exceeds all our hopes
I will come back

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

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

Dude, what’s up with this “he” stuff? We normally don’t usually refer to inanimate objects as “he” over here. Sometimes we say “she’s a beauty” in reference to a car or whatever. C’mon man it’s only a metal detector.

Yeah, I hope “he” exceeds all our hopes too, or there’s gonna be a lot of disappointed folks...

.

TARSACCI - “Digging deeper, BEHIND the competition!”
[forums.tarsaccisales.com]

Aaron Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Dude, what’s up with this “he” stuff? We normally
> don’t usually refer to inanimate objects as “he” o
> ver here. Sometimes we say “she’s a beauty” in ref
> erence to a car or whatever. C’mon man it’s only a
> metal detector.
>
> Yeah, I hope “he” exceeds all our hopes too, or th
> ere’s gonna be a lot of disappointed folks...
>
> .

chill out. LE JAG is French, and everything in French (as well as many other languages) is either masculine or feminine.

======================================================

You can see my videos here: [www.youtube.com]
My blog is here: [thesilverfiend.com]

======================================================

silverfiend Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Aaron Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Dude, what’s up with this “he” stuff? We normall
> y
> > don’t usually refer to inanimate objects as “he”
> o
> > ver here. Sometimes we say “she’s a beauty” in r
> ef
> > erence to a car or whatever. C’mon man it’s only
> a
> > metal detector.
> >
> > Yeah, I hope “he” exceeds all our hopes too, or
> th
> > ere’s gonna be a lot of disappointed folks...
> >
> > .
>
> chill out. LE JAG is French, and everything in Fre
> nch (as well as many other languages) is either ma
> sculine or feminine.

I agree with silverfiend . Different countries different verbiage. No need to get picky.

The latest developments of the AQ pre-production platform continue to increase the utility of the ferrous discrimination capability of the machine. Steady refinement of the design have made the machine not only deeper overall but greatly narrowed the gap between sensitivity in all metal and sensitivity in the iron ID modes of mute and multi-tone.

I suspect that if no iron/steel trash existed at the beach, no serious beach hunter would use anything except a Pulse Induction machine - unless they were in dry sand, and maybe not then. The reason I say this is that the depth advantage of existing PI machines is well demonstrated since they can operate on most beaches without the penalty of using ground balance. Also, except for iron/steel, no other level of discrimination is useful since gold jewelry can appear almost anywhere in the ID range above iron. So of the iron wasn’t there - PI’s would likely dominate.

In the case of Phase shift discrimination systems like VLF IB detectors use, the strong iron signal dominates the audio output, either silencing the audio entirely in the case of a single tone VLF, by nulling like an FBS/BBS - or by giving a lower tone in a multi-tone Detector. Even in the case of the multitone VLF’s, hearing the non-ferrous target depends on the recovery speed of the processing hardware in the detector.

With the AQ’s PI time-based discrimination, The discrimination of iron is reported to the user either as silence (in the mute mode) or as a low tone (in the case of multi-tone).

In mute, not only do you not hear the iron, but you hear instead silence - unless there is a non-ferrous target, in that case you hear the target with no hint of the iron at all. In this mode, the AQ software simply makes the ferrous targets disappear - just disappear.

In the case of multitone, you hear a high tone for non-ferrous low and medium conductors and a high tone for ferrous targets - close or even superimposed, makes no difference - you would hear both tones in any case.

This has several major advantages.

First, there is “zero recovery speed” - All targets produce an output signal if they return one - the ferrous is - by operator choice - either silenced or assigned a low tone. The low/medium conductors always return their characteristic high tone. This occurs 100% of the time - there is no “switching delay” from target to target based on processor speed limitations happening.

Separation distance between adjacent ferrous and non ferrous targets is ZERO.

By zero, I mean exactly that, even non-ferrous directly beneath ferrous gives a clear non-ferrous high tone and the iron simply “isn’t there” (in mute - in multi-tone it gives a low tone which you would hear along with the non ferrous high tone).

This means that “silent masking” that Tom wrote about long ago, where even a tiny bit if ferrous like a common staple can mask a deeper and larger valuable target, is largely eliminated.

Now this isn’t magic, it’s just that the iron is above the ground balance point (or at it) and you are hearing the signals below the GB point and the ones at or above the GB point are silenced (or give a low tone).

Is it perfect? - no. In discrim on the AQ some high conductor targets will be “above the GB point” and be treated as iron. If your idea of a good beach hunt is finding a bunch of dimes and quarters in dry sand, then stick with whatever light, cheap VLF you want, they can help you avoid all that aluminum and gold which would just slow you down - lol

All this is clearly demonstrated in the video I have linked to before. The machine in the video is the Manta prototype from 3-5 years ago. The system has gone through a lot of development since then, including the very latest gains in overall depth and depth in the iron ID modes which I reported in the first sentence in this post.

Manta Video

Will the AQ “obsolete” any other detectors? Depends on what you mean by obsolete. The gas turbine aircraft engine (the jet) quickly replaced the extremely complex, high maintenance multi cylinder reciprocating aircraft engines for heavy, fast and high aircraft, but lots of light aircraft are still piston powered. The piston engine is still undergoing development for some aircraft applications.


So I expect that IF the AQ in the hands of the early buyers lives up to its claimed capabilities, that serious beach gold hunters will adopt it quickly. When a new tool in the hands of early adopters proves to be superior at doing a specific job to the previous best tools for the job in question, those who are really serious about performance for economic or other reasons will adopt the new tool and stop using the old one. How many framing carpenters still use a hammer. Not many if the compressor/nail gun noise at any construction site is any guide. The framing hammer is not obsolete - it still works just fine - but for serious users the nail gun became “compelling”.

Time will tell how “compelling” the AQ will become for serious beach jewelry hunters.

Rick Kempf
Gold Canyon AZ- where there is no gold



Edited 6 time(s). Last edit at 05/10/2019 01:37PM by lytle78.

Good post Rick!

Cliff

Rick -

THANKS for the very good write-up.

I am NOT following this discussion as closely as I should, as I do not live near a beach and do very little beach hunting. I'm a coin hunter (in park/yard settings) first, a relic/coin hunter in 1800s/early 1900s types of sites second, and a beach hunter a VERY distant third.

So, the Manta -- particularly the "Aqua" version which seems to be closest to production, if I understand, is not of enough interest for me to have followed this discussion as closely as I might otherwise. Point being, please forgive me if any of what I'm going to ask has already been discussed.

SO -- two questions. ONE -- you say that some high conductors will sometimes report as iron, and thus the Aqua may not be a good "quarter/dime hunter" on the beach. Will this "struggle" with high conductors, so to speak, be able to be mitigated at all on the "Terra" version of the machine (to make it a better high conductor hunter)? TWO -- and this is probably ignorant, but.... since ID/discrimination is not achieved by the "phase shift" style employed by VLF-IB machines, then would I be correct to assume that the "nail falses" reporting as high tone, such that "bent nails" will sometimes fool an operator into thinking "coin" (when using a VLF-IB machine) would not be an issue, whatsoever, with this technology, correct?

Thanks!

Steve

Steve, thanks for the questions I will try to past my answers (such as they are) inside your text...

SO -- two questions. ONE -- you say that some high conductors will sometimes report as iron, and thus the Aqua may not be a good "quarter/dime hunter" on the beach. Will this "struggle" with high conductors, so to speak, be able to be mitigated at all on the "Terra" version of the machine (to make it a better high conductor hunter)? You are correct in that this is not intended for finding coinage (except for gold!). I know that they intend to develop a line of machines using the same advanced platform of hardware and software to suit other “jobs to be done”. I have no specific information about how a “silver coin hunter” would function, if they ever do one.

The next “at bat” - the Terra - will be a gold nugget prospecting detector, so high conductor performance is unlikely to be a priority.

TWO -- and this is probably ignorant, but.... since ID/discrimination is not achieved by the "phase shift" style employed by VLF-IB machines, then would I be correct to assume that the "nail falses" reporting as high tone, such that "bent nails" will sometimes fool an operator into thinking "coin" (when using a VLF-IB machine) would not be an issue, whatsoever, with this technology, correct? You are correct about that. The decay profile of ferrous material over time after pulse cut-off is what makes it a “high conductor” to this device. greater mass of the iron, such as cooking pot fragments, sheet metal, etc would only increase the delay period, marking it further as a “high conductor”. It’s not about conductivity at all, but the “time constant” of the eddy currents in the target - long time constants are on one side of the cut-off and short ones on the other. The “iron mask” knob on the AQ adjusts the cut-off point. No “wrap around” occurs

That is not to say that it is infallible - complex targets like newer (untrusted) steel bottle caps might be a problem with alloys and plating of different materials - I have no specific information on to what tdegree these would be an issue

Thanks!

Steve

About relics - for the general run of 19th century and earlier relics, mostly brass, copper, lead, (and oh yes, gold!) etc. even this AQ will likely surprise a lot of people. Its depth in mineralized ground up to levels considered high in much of North America will likely surprise a lot of folks. I have no specific information, but have the strong impression that it handles most ordinary ground just fine. I had a then-current prototype for a few days in October and used it for a few hours in the red AZ “3 bar on an F75” clay around here in Gold Canyon AZ - at the foot of the Superstitions - It ran fine in all metal and in Iron discriminate, in all metal it was quieter than my TDi’s And less ground sensitive. Depth on buried nickels was impressive.

Of course, silver coins would be registered along with ferrous in discriminate, but in all metal, the shape of signals might make it practical to “cherry pick” round targets from ferrous junk. I had no chance to experiment with any of this.


Rick Kempf
Gold Canyon AZ- where there is no gold



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 05/10/2019 07:44PM by lytle78.

Very interesting, Rick. I appreciate the thorough reply!

Thanks,

Steve

Rick.....

7 ns is chain territory. Yellow gold territory but still chain. Has any testing been performed at very low gain settings? Say I wanted to hunt chains in the top 3-4 inches of dirt in turf locations

You can't really hunt fine jewelry in turf locations with high gain settings. Its kind of self defeating. Can the AQ hunt fine jewelry in turf at low gain settings?

I don't care about dimes and quarters.

HH
Mike

Mike,

I suspect that we can take a cue from nugget hunting machines. The best PI to date for small nuggets seems to be the SDC. Of course ML as usual has wrapped the mystery of its operating parameters in the emigrants of arbitrarily labeled controls1 (sorry, had to get that off my chest1). Having said that, I doubt that it can come close to the
GB2 for finding fly poop gold. Why do I mention that, because I think that LE.JAG has already posted that the AQ will likely - even at 7micro sec pulse delay, not equal the very most sensitive higher freq VLF machines for micro gold.

I know this doesn’t answer any of your questions. I suspect that gold chains will remain the most elusive targets of all.

I don’t recall LE.JAG showing any thin ones in his piles of loot!

I’m not sure why low gain would be a plus on the AQ however. It has extremely quiet circuitry very little self generated noise. Having said that, I know that a lot of testing has been done at 40% gain. Why do you think high gain would be a problem?

Nobody is telling fairy tales about this machine as far as I know. It will not be the perfect tool for every job, even within the niche of salt beach detection.

Rick Kempf
Gold Canyon AZ- where there is no gold

Mike...
Le Jag wrote earlier in this thread that the AQ won't see fine gold chains without a larger clasp or pendant attatched.
7us might be close but not fast enough

One point worth mentioning. Coil size. The GB2, for example detects significantly smaller masses of natural gold with the 6” coil than with the 10” coil. Likewise the Minelab SDC only comes with one coil, a small one.

The AQ and the earlier Manta protos have not been shown using any coils smaller than about 11”. It was designed to harvest the maximum amount of gold jewelry for the time spent hunting and “bare” chains are hard to hit targets for any machine. Smaller coils may well yield greater sensitivity to chains.

Having said that, for a any PI to get smaller gold it must operate at shorter delays. At some point the delay becomes short enough that the salt water signal is detected, then it’s game over because of the resulting noise. (Before the Manta platform demonstrated that through careful circuit and coil design you could get to delays as short as (and maybe a bit shorter than) 7 microseconds in salt water beach settings, it was widely proclaimed that 10 microseconds was the limit).

The delay curve of a return signal from a target is related to its time constant. It may be that small chains have a time constant so short that they are effectively undetectable in wet salt.

Although shorter minimum delays might be achievable in dry sand, that approach would guarantee that every micro aluminum bit would be detected as well - the result on a public beach would likely be a situation that only the most patient user would tolerate.

Rick Kempf
Gold Canyon AZ- where there is no gold



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/12/2019 06:48PM by lytle78.

Mike ..... for your purpose .... dirt and most dry sand hunting one of the "CHEAP" Nox 800 will do what you want especially with a 6" coil. Its surprising how many gold rings ive seen pulled from the dirt in the past year. IF multi freq dont .... 20 or 40 khz will get you just as close to pulling a gold chain as 7uS on a PI with a larger coil ......oh and it has a TID screen and im betting better disc for your purpose. You arent talking deep. It will also get anything up to 24k you might come across. I believe JAG said something the AQ might not do. These VLFs arent going any where even with this capable machine.

Just curious....... WHERE are the new Fisher machines going to be assembled? More than one location? I noticed in a few posts back JAG said he just got a new update from Alexandre which improved Disc. So what happens here...... does Alexandre send the program to Fisher.... who loads some more machines..... then swaps it out via mail with all the testers including the overseas ones? I can see how that would be time consuming.

El PASO TX - like every other Fisher and Teknetics detector. Until the AQ is ready to build production units, the software can be modified any time. Not a big deal. Quite normal for companies to tweak it as a result of testing.

And Dew, What’s Mail?

Rick Kempf
Gold Canyon AZ- where there is no gold

Thanks for the information on the chains, guys.

HH
Mike

So..... how does a guy in say.... Hawaii.... load the program thats a tester into his machine with each update? ML made it easy..... but i guess as long as Fisher doesnt allow us to do it via the internet no issues like Deus? If i understand that right. Are you assuming Rick..... just because they have always been made in Texas doesnt mean this time they will be...... i mean we do have a guy in EU doing the heavy lifting on this one thats why i asked. So you know for a fact they will ALL be made in TX? I like to know that MADE IN THE USA is still good buddy lol.

Read the box when yours arrives. It will say “Assembled in the USA with US and imported components” You can’t say just “Made in the USA” unless almost 100% of the content is produced in the US - almost nobody except duck call makers can say that anymore. It will be El Paso, If you would like to bet, I’ll take your money.

How they furnish testers with revised machines is easy - FedEx 2nd day air. Do you really still get MAIL? How 20th century.

A friend of mine has done extensive testing for a detector maker in Europe. He has told me that based on a phone conversation on one day - a detector arrives at his home in the US in under a week with revised firmware.

Not a problem.

Rick Kempf
Gold Canyon AZ- where there is no gold

Thanks Rick.... ha, but dont assume ill be reading that box if the machine is $5000 buddy. You may have to take a picture of yours for me lol. Another question Rick..... what kind of warranty do you think Fisher will have on the machine IF its that pricy (which we know it wont be)? Id think if theres only a 1 meter depth because of the IP rating...... that we wont be seeing a 3 year warranty. Perhaps....... the confidence in that IP rating will be reflected in the warranty duration. I remember Carl told Tom .... the IP rating was an industry standard which the seller interpreted. Doesnt the CZ21...... capable of diving to 250', only have 2 year warranty and its around $1000. The Xcal is another example $1500..... 1 year warranty. Didnt the CZ20 used to have a lifetime warranty? Think they will do it with this machine for that price?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/15/2019 11:04AM by dewcon4414.

I have no clue on warranty. If somebody asked my opinion (and nobody will) - I’d say match the CTX warranty - 3 years for the machine and 1 year (or 6 months - I’m not sure which) on the battery.. One other thing, the AQ will have no screen to go bad, so warranty is likely to be bad coil or failure of the control board itself. FT has a history of inexpensive replacement part charges for out of warranty work. Hopefully this will be the case for the AQ also.

Rick Kempf
Gold Canyon AZ- where there is no gold



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/15/2019 01:07PM by lytle78.

We may still have to content with issues of cable/battery box. 1 year on the battery would be ok .... but its not just the battery back there thats your connector from both the battery and headphones. I assume we cant change the batteries? If thats the case .... after a year how do we know if its a headphone issue vs battery? So these are throw aways? Still see that as a possible pricy item. Hopefully it will come with the 10 hour battery..... with an option to buy a 5 or 10. I do like knobs thou.....just easier to deal with in the water.

When Minelab introduced the GPZ 7000, it was priced at over $9000. People were standing in line to buy them and a huge number were being sold in Australia and many more shipped around the world at prices higher than that.
The excitement was the claim... UP TO 40% increase in depth on nuggets. A lot of people wanted that extra edge and were willing to pay for it.
Now the price is a mere lol $7999.
With the "affordable" Equinox, thousands of people are now swinging them side by side with the same performance on depth. Only those who are more proficient tweak and hunt with their machines to get that extra "edge".
I personally, would rather tough it out and pay more for a deeper seeking machine and be one of the few to have one, than join the masses hunting elbow to elbow with the same technology. JMHO
I am not bashing the EQX as I too own one and am pleased with it in many ways, but I would rather be the only one on the beach with the Impulse

I don’t disagree, but gold was going crazy during that time frame in Africa and Australia. I don’t think there can really be a comparison it will just have to be cost effective for many who just use it for travel, weekends, and dirt hunting. Also there are a good bit of hunters that just dry sand hunt. It may or may not make a difference if the sand is pushed in. So it’s still a notch machine. Serious hunters will have one no doubt....but wonder what that percentage is? I like to think I’m somewhat of a serious hunter.... but $5000 and I’m ok with the MDT and other machines.....I’ll wait for the next generation or who knows ML