The dongel comes with a new machine. You can also get one from a dealer like Tom D or Steveg here. Or from Dimitar directly.

Chris

The dongel comes in the same box as the battery charger. It's the 5" cord that allows you to connect 'wired' headphones to the Tarsacci.

Thanks! I'll have to go look through the pack. I don't remember seeing it.

I went ahead and got Tony to make me a pair of his headphones. Looking forward to getting this beast out some place in the wild. I honestly can't believe I'm getting a good strong non ferrous reading on a 12 inch minie ball. Back in the day when I ran the F75 all the time, I had dug bullets that deep but it required using it in motion all metal mode, then circling the area where I got a signal listening for the double blip of a nail or a solid hit all around, and just digging a lot of holes. This is going to be the machine combo that came along 30 yrs too late for me...I drive by places daily that are now developed, and think "man I wish I had the technology of today, back when we could hunt that".

Daniel,

I'm real curious on:

How difficult your learning-curve is/will-be..... in YOUR dirt.
How the Tony Eisenhaur phones work.
And what your real-World success-rate will be.

ScoTTT2......... I am going to answer your question here......... in proper location..........yet; in short format...... due to time-constraints.

Absolute nutshell: Manticore ..... VS ..... Tarsacci =

* Remember....... the Tarsacci presents a coarse ID ability. It's about 70% "ID effective" as compared to these fine/precise high-resolution VLF SMF units.
* In mineral-free wet-salt beach conditions (which is many/most beaches around the World).......... the Manticore is the trump-card. , . , . , . in two facets. 1-ONE: Tiny gold fine jewelry. 2-TWO: depth on ring/Nickel sized targets on the wet-slope ....and in the dry sand.
* Submerged IN the ocean water....... and the playing-field becomes very comparable. (Jury is not out yet).
* If your beach conditions have wet-salt AND black/magnetic/mineralized sand........... the Tarsacci is the clear winner.
* If you are in fairly heavy mineralization dirt/inland/turf hunting....... the Tarsacci is the clear winner.
* If you are a old coin hunter....... the Manticore is the clear (audible intelligibility) winner.
* If you are old coin (and/or relic) hunter...... in carpets of chewing gum foil........ the Tarsacci is the winner. ((( Manticore Beach Seawater Mode...... is a close 2nd place ))).
* If you are hunting in carpets of nails.......... both units (for differing reasons) will present similar performance.
* If you are in medium-mineralization dirt (and lower mineralization)......... the Manticore is the winner.

Nutshell!

Choose wisely!

One additional thought:

Sometimes it is PAINFUL to know the facts; yet,

I would rather hurt you with honesty...... rather than mislead you with a lie.

You will be surprised how SHORT life is.................therefore: --- be armed with knowledge.,.,.,.,., choose wisely..........and do it right the first time!

Thanks Tom ...for both the incite and words of wisdom...it helps a lot in making my decision and what direction I want to take this hobby to, both differ from my thoughts of yesterday.
It is my belief that in this "short" time we have here it is best to leave with no regrets. If one can do that, they have truly done things right.

NASA-Tom Wrote:
> I would rather hurt you with honesty...... rather
> than mislead you with a lie.
>
Tom, you have a unique writing style; but, I've never heard you paraphrase 70s song lyrics before, lol.

Bayard....... what song is that!?!?!? 70's music is my era. . . . . . and I had no idea what I said was in a song!
The only one I can think of is: Lynard Skynard "I wouldn't tell you no lie" -----.......... but that must be too far away from what I said......and what you are referring to.

NASA-Tom Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Bayard....... what song is that!?!?!? 70's music
> is my era. . . . . . and I had no idea what I said
> was in a song!
> The only one I can think of is: Lynard Skynard "I
> wouldn't tell you no lie" -----.......... but that
> must be too far away from what I said......and wha
> t you are referring to.

That would be Dan Hill - Sometimes When We Touch

Tarsacci is a VERY deep machine...

However, in the interest of furthering Dimitar's future development...

In my particular dirt, and given my particular (limited) level of experience with the unit (a few months, around 50 hours or so maybe) I would like to respectfully state that I found the MDT 8000 to be far less than 70% "ID effective." If it were 70% ID effective, in my dirt, I'd still be swinging it.

IF "ID effective" is simply referring to its ability to distinguish ferrous vs. non-ferrous, then I would tend to agree. It does do a good job of differentiating ferrous vs. non-ferrous; very good, in fact. This accuracy, plus its depth, makes the MDT (I would expect) a very good machine for a relic hunter. BUT -- if "ID effective" means differentiating between different conductivities of non-ferrous targets, in even a GROSS sense, then I would strongly disagree based on my experience, and would put its "ID effectiveness" at a level closer to maybe 25% or so (beyond a few inches in depth). Again, this is in MY dirt, and this is from the perspective of someone who used the unit for a limited amount of time, and who is also used to the "accuracy" of FBS/Multi-IQ in a "trashy, inland site/deep-coin-hunting application."

I do not mean to be critical or negative, or disrespectful, but instead I simply feel it's important for the development of future Tarsacci models, that the problem of ID accuracy, as it pertains to a deep turf coin hunter's needs, is recognized as being REAL and SIGNIFICANT, in at least some types of dirt.

Steve



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/17/2023 07:03PM by steveg.

PullTabKing...... that's it! ( I had to look that one up......and it's almost exact/verbatim ).

Steve.... two things:
1. Yes....... in the sense of Fe.......VS........non-Fe differentiation
2. At least in my dirt conditions........ the ID will splatter in a 'ballpark' range/region.,.,.,.,.,.,., and I can fairly easily tell the averaging approximation.

NASA-Tom,

Understood, about your dirt, and the ID splatter. Splatter, but with the correct "average," is acceptable in my view. For me though, it must be my red clay, because beyond a few inches, it was just "wrong." No averaging to a reasonable ID, but plain "wrong" (except, again, the FE vs. non-FE, which remained good at depth).

Steve

Steve. Just curious:
In your red/bad dirt............. does the EQX or Manticore "hold on to correct ID" of targets ...... to deeper depths over the Tarsacci?
I think what I need to ask is: At what depth does EQX or Manticore start to "splatter" the ID badly enough..... that you can no longer guess a approximation ID range of detected target?

NASA-Tom,

YES SIR. SUBSTANTIALLY moreso. EQX (and Manticore, from what I can tell so far) "hold onto correct ID" -- nearly all the way the fringe of detection capability -- i.e. until you hit that point where on some sweeps, the machine can't even GENERATE a VDI number. FBS behaved this way as well, in terms of ID accuracy. Now, when I say "correct" ID, it's obviously not "air test perfect." There will definitely be a bit of up-averaging that occurs, on silver in particular, but even on wheat cents, and the ID definitely gets more "bouncy" (i.e. a bit "splattered" with depth), BUT -- the behavior is a pattern that you can definitely recognize, it's consistent, and thus it's pretty easy to know what your targets are, even at the deepest of depths, with just a bit of experience. For instance, an 8" silver dime, in good condition, on the Equinox (an inch shy of max depth capability in my dirt) might read 26, 32, 28, 29, 34, 31, 33, 29, 31 on successive sweeps (air test around 27 or so). Meanwhile, a well-worn Barber dime at those depths might read 23, 25, 24, 26, 24. In other words, FBS and Multi-IQ are even accurate enough that you can see the "average" of a splattered ID still reveal subtleties about the coin itself (old, slick Barber vs. good condition Mercury dime). Meanwhile, Indian-Head pennies remain much "tighter" in their ID, all the way to max depth, always ranging between 18 and 21, usually 18 or 19. No up-averaging, and little splatter. Same with nickels, but if anything, they "down-average" just slightly. A nickel that might read 12, 13, 12, 12, 13, 13, 13, 12, 13 at 6", might read 12, 13, 11, 12, 11, 12, 12, 13, 12, 12 at fringe depth.

Bottom line, in my dirt, the lower conductors exhibit minimal splatter at fringe depth, and a very slight down-average; mid conductors show very little splatter, and no down- OR up-averaging; high conductors show more splatter, and moderate up-averaging, unless very old/well-worn.

So, to answer your question, the only time EQX would splatter ID to the degree that you'd start to wonder, might be RIGHT AT the very maximum depth capability, like within the 1/8" or so that you'd lose the VDI entirely...and often NOT EVEN THEN...

Final note, FBS and Multi-IQ are, with one exception, the ONLY machines I've ever swung with this capability; nearly ALL other machines degrade substantially. But, even on these "other machines," that degradation would usually occur in the 5 to 6 to 7 inch range; Tarsacci is the "shallowest," of any machine I've ever used, in terms of when you lose any meaningful ID capability within the non-ferrous range. Again, it still keeps the ability to tell you FE vs. non-FE, however, even at depth.

So, above, I said "with one exception." What unit (of the ones I've tested) would I classify as "second best" at maintaining accurate ID to maximum depth, in my dirt? Gold Bug Pro/F19. VERY good, for a single freq. unit, and in fact -- depth capability AND ID accuracy were not far short of Multi-IQ (or FBS) in my ground. Sometimes, a Gold Bug Pro could match, or even SLIGHTLY rival, FBS depth (which means it would fall just shy of EQX)...very impressive job that Dave Johnson somehow did with that machine's bad-dirt-handling capability.

ONE LAST POINT. On an FBS machine, in my dirt, the Explorer, specifically (i.e. before Minelab "normalized" the FE number on good targets to "12"), any "up-averaging" or "ID inaccuracy" that would occur at depth, was almost ENTIRELY confined to the FE number. In other words, a silver dime that would read 03-29 in an air test, would read 07-29, 02-29, 13-29, 15-29, 11-29, 05-28, 06-30, 11-28 at, say, 90% of max depth. This, to me, was almost "magic," in that Minelab somehow was able to "isolate" the degradation at depth of target ID that the iron in my dirt would cause, to ONLY the "FE" side of the equation -- which then left CO ID virtually pristine/un-touched...all the way to max depth.

Steve



Edited 9 time(s). Last edit at 02/19/2023 11:38PM by steveg.

The Deus2 is spectacular at ID'ing in the ground as in an air test at depth. I was air testing targets after I dug them and was always mumbling a "WOW"!under my breath. I just got the 13"x11" coil and had it out to what I named "The Button Field". I and others have dug several dozen+ flat colonial buttons out of this tiny area in a large field.
Dug many square nails a pistol ball and a large flat button. Have to get use to a coil that big, never had one. I buried a clad dime in this field at 9" and the Deus2 hit it easily with the big coil . . . not sure it would have with the 9". Numbers were 89-91 and this is what a dime reads in the air. This is max for any other detector I own, around here.

ozzie -- very interesting. Sounds like, at least in your dirt, the D2 is another very accurate machine. I don't know if it would be as good in my red clay, as I don't swing a D2. What I DO know is that I have a hunting partner who swung a D1, and it would NOT ID accurately at depth, AT ALL, here in our dirt. I would expect that the simultaneous/fast MF D2 would do a better job, vs. selectable MF on the D1, but don't know for sure...

Steve

Steve....... well-defined/good explanation. It is always interesting to hear about how different units react/respond to different dirt........especially in regards to ID.

NASA-Tom,

Thanks. And I am hoping that something I said there in all of that, means something to your "engineering brain," in terms of future development/improvement/advancing the hobby. I know that you know the "secrets" internally, of how the machines I mentioned "do what they do," and so with that knowledge, my hope would be that it would perhaps spark a thought or idea that could prove beneficial. You, in other words, would be rather uniquely capable of making connections between some of those things, that most would be unable to...in terms of the HOW and WHY those things occur in my dirt...and what might be able to be done about it.

Steve

Steve....... you are talking not just to me....... but a 'team'.
AND....... plenty of others /// movers-n-shakers.

NASA-Tom --

That is encouraging!

Steve

Video done by gent showing Tarsacci tone ID

[m.youtube.com]

Above video taken from the following thread - this forum.
And added here on this thread at forum owners request.
[www.dankowskidetectors.com]



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 05/30/2023 03:44AM by tnsharpshooter.

I will concur with Steve G on the MDT's TID being sub par at any kind of depth. I have similar mineralized red dirt. What was not mentioned is the Tone ID at depth. I have found this to be very accurate at depth. You may get just a whisper right before it disappears but the tone holds. The only caveat is that I have witnessed non ferrous targets getting up averaged all the way around to -30 on the TID and alternate between a high tone & a low tone in very heavy minerals at depth. The -30 is a give away of this. I have never dug iron that gave a -30. The target blended into the Ground response numbers but you could tell it was a target. Perhaps my settings were not optimal, I have not figured it out any better yet.

Chris

David.........thanks for bringing that video over here. It's top quality......and......as such.........deserves proper placement.

Chris........... somewhere on this thread........I have always claimed that: the Tarsacci presents about 70% accuracy...in the department of ID. It is a completely different Operating System. , . , . as compared to VLF's, SMF's and-the-like. Where the Tarsacci REALLY shines is....in medium mineralization.,.,.,and ESPECIALLY high mineralization/bad dirt. This is where most other detectors shut down. Yes.....there certainly is a learning-curve to its nuances , . , . yet, once mastered......... is next-Gen phenomenal.
I don't EVER want this technology: forsaken.

NASA Tom, I'm with you on the MDT's attributes and I sincerely hope Dimitar is working on the next generation WITH the user suggested improvements in view to make a unit that is even more outstanding in performance on difficult sites.

Chris

I can only say........ Dimitar is always constantly working on stuff.

Listening intensely.

Been using the Tarsacci about 2 weeks now and I've noticed something of great importance to me.
I have a few locations where EMI, or I'm assuming EMI will cause the detector to display random numbers with some audio noise. Trying to rectify the noise, I find a clean area and change the frequency, GB and SB. Went through each frequency doing the same procedure with no change. Turn on the Black Sand mode which seems to make it better but still the issue is present. Since I only run the detector on sensitivity of 7, I start turning it down, finally at 1 I can hunt. But at 1 the detector can still detect metal at 4-5" deep but extremely faint. I'm just going to assume there is no frequency shifting hidden on the machine. Well anyway moving 50' further and the machine is quiet again.
I can see where this detector was primarily designed for beach hunting. Usually there is little EMI on the beaches unless you get around a WiFi hot spot.

I can concur on your statement. That is EMI and it is different for every one everywhere. The Tarsacci does not have a frequency shift option. Changing the selected frequency is your first option.
I will recommend you try reducing the Threshold some before running Sensitivity below 4. Try to find a stable balance point between the two. Threshold effects depth and EMI response quicker than Sensitivity. I try to set Sensitivity to suite the Ground feedback and Threshold to suite the EMI and tiny false hits from micro trash.
Sounds like you are comming along with the unit. Good hunting.

Chris