I have a question about seperation of ferrous/non ferrous targets. I have a etrac, a cz6a, a Yukon 77b and a t2 classic. Various coils for each (except the 77b). Now I know the etrac and cz are not the machine most people are going to grab to go hunt in the iron. The t2 classic edges the cz in most seperation tests I've done. Let's take the 77b out of the equation because we all know what it can do in iron albeit with limited depth and somewhat erratic behavior. The other machines I can't get to pass the elevated nail test at all. Different settings...different coils...different sweep speeds...same result. So I watch these videos of some machines doing pretty doggone well with this test. Equinox...Deus...T2 se are a few. So I am at a place where I am looking to get something that I am more confident in when detecting in the iron. Has the T2 improved that much with the latest se version over what I am seeing with the classic? I am satisfied with depth. The e trac is the deepest machine I have in my mineralized soil. I guess a long post to ask you guys what's your experience with seperation in iron and other low conductor trash sites with the mentioned machines (or others).

If i am hunting on really trashy sites then i will almost certain use my original T2 with a 5'' coil on it,coil size is the most important aspect of hunting in trashy sites,if you use stock or the worst case scenario use large than stock size coils you will get 'nulling' and will miss alot of targets.

I've always found that high frequency machines do extremely well separating ferrous from non-ferrous. 19 kHz or higher.

Below 19 kHz you need a machine with fast (preferably adjustable) recovery speed. The smaller coil, the better.

I had the T2 SE and now have the F-75 LTD. They are very capable iron hunters although, I think if I were going to buy a detector specifically for hunting iron, there a lots of better choices.



Edited 12 time(s). Last edit at 02/24/2019 05:07PM by Badger in NH.

CZ is out...easily masked...not familiar with Yukon....Junk and Disorderly offers best advice...

You might want to read the thread on this forum titled: Rcpt Acknowledgement of F75 LTD Prototype

Here is the thread Tom is referring to. [www.dankowskidetectors.com]

Thanks for posting the link Badger. One of the best threads ever.

I think an F75 (any model) and T2 units with the 5 inch DD are extremely capable detectors in any trash environment.

The ergonomics of those units with that coil are exceptional, hence coil control is very easy to do. That is paramount when hunting in trashy environments as overlapping needs to occur and it is very easy to 'get sloppy' and completely miss a lot of areas, where a inch is all it takes to sniff out a good target.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/24/2019 05:24PM by therover61.

Thanks for the thread. Briefly read over it and will read again. Seems to be advocating small coil use in trashy sites. I am using small coils in trashy sites. Let's only look at the t2 classic as my example. I have a 5" coil and a sharpshooter coil that I use on the t2 in trashy sites. But, I have tried the elevated nail test where two nails are about 1 1/2" above let's say a dime. These nails are not directly above the dime but to the side (slightly). I get a report on the nails only. I saw a video that Keith Southern did maybe 5 or 6 years ago with one of the original black t2 se. The machine didnt pass the seperation test even with the nail and the target on the same plane. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong. My classic will pass that test. But now I am seeing videos of the t2 se that hit the dime on the elevated nails. So has the t2 evolved to a level in seperation that warrants an upgrade. And has anyone experienced the same level of seperation with say the Equinox. Again, I understand the small coil is the choice. But even the small coil on the classic can't duplicate what it (seems) the latest version t2 can do. Just curious if others are finding this to be true with some of the latest releases or not so much.

iam seriously looking at the t2+ with the 5" dd coil for precisely the same reasons.i'm wondering if circuit improvement on the t2 has improved it's ability to hunt in the iron.i owned an f-75 back in '07 and did NOT give it a fair chance as it was super noisy in just about any environment and was difficult to quiet down as a result of exposure to (e.m.i.) i am " assuming" f.t. has made improvements over time,and perhaps the detector now reacts more quickly from target to target,and maybe it is quieter as well
comments appreciated.

(h.h.!)
j.t.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 02/24/2019 08:25PM by jmaryt.

j.t.

I have a F75LTD with DST. It is by far much better with EMI than the original F75 I had a few years ago. I have not tried running in non-DST mode since using it so I am not sure if there is a tad more noise in that mode.

I do know FA mode is much more reactive and I have to run my sensitivity lower when encountering EMI. I have also learned cycling through the frequencies a few times listening to how the F75 reacts in each one, makes a difference. FA mode is really fast, but I like running DE more when using the 5 inch DD. May have to try out FA more at some point.

Running the unit in DE or JE mode, using the 5 inch DD and using 1 tone, I can run the sensitivity up into the high 85-92 range without much issues. Using 1 tone does make you look at the screen more, but when the numbers hit in the upper 80's, I know it's a coin. Mid range numbers in tot lots can be anything from a ball of foil, tab, screw cap or a piece of jewelry. Gotta dig those, but when tot lotting I tend to use 3 tones instead of 1 since there isn't much iron in the ones I hunt and I like hearing the mid tones if jewelry hunting. Whats cool is zinc pennies hit in the 50's so when jewelry hunting, I always like seeing those 20-30 range targets.

When encountering a lot of small iron in places, I run 1 tone per Tom D's suggestion in reading his posts. I run discrimination setting of 6.

Lots of versatility with the F75 in terms of modes, tones and discrimination settings.

Hey j.t.
I have some correspondence with one of the guys showing the t2 se in a elevated nail test. He says his se version is a 2016 model. My classic is a 12/16 model. He also has a new t2 se coming tomorrow and I will likely order one as well. I'll let you know how things go. I will say I didnt have emi issues with the classic. If you haven't looked at the newer se version you might want to compare to the t2+. I believe you get some tone control as well as on demand dst that maybe you don't get on the plus model. Shop around and you can get the se for maybe 50 bucks more (if you want).

yes! i remember reading tom's suggestions long ago,and you have jogged my memory to that! teknetics is running an ad that
indicates the t2+ has "boost" mode but no mention of d.s.t.
my early f-75 (2007) was noisy no matter what i tried to do to quiet it down,so i give up on it..been talking to "monte" on his forum,and he has purchased the t2+ and claims it is quiet where he runs it in ghost towns,and the like.i would use mine again in urban areas.i am concerned if it will still be a "chatterbox" although i have been assured it is not,yet (f.t.) claims the f75+ has d.s.t. but not the t2+ difference between them is $100.00
so,i guess (smart money) says buy the 75.got along way to go before spring arrives,so it doesn't cost anything to "think about it"..thanks for your input..if i do get it i will use it with the 5" dd coil,as it is supposed to run quieter with that coil on board.
monte claims it the second fastest detector combo (t2+ and 5"" dd) in his arsenal next to the two 'turks" he owns.i'm just saying'

(h.h.!)
j.t.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/25/2019 02:31AM by jmaryt.

bailey1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hey j.t.
> I have some correspondence with one of the guys sh
> owing the t2 se in a elevated nail test. He says h
> is se version is a 2016 model. My classic is a 12/
> 16 model. He also has a new t2 se coming tomorrow
> and I will likely order one as well. I'll let you
> know how things go. I will say I didnt have emi is
> sues with the classic. If you haven't looked at th
> e newer se version you might want to compare to th
> e t2+. I believe you get some tone control as well
> as on demand dst that maybe you don't get on the
> plus model. Shop around and you can get the se for
> maybe 50 bucks more (if you want).


yeah! i would really appreciate that as well! i am getting ready to
"pull the tigger" too on one of the t2's just want to get the right one at the "best" price!..hopefully with the 5" dd with it!..thanks in advance!..monte berry loves his! really rocks in the junk!
i'm just sayin'

(h.h.!)
j.t.


(h.h.

in addendum: it is possible (f.t.) may have the (d.s.t.) BUILT into
the t2+.they do NOT indicate in their ad that it has it,but the f-75+ ad DOES indicate it has (d.s.t.) could ne clever marketing in that they want to "throw" people to the f-75 by 'saying" in the ad it has the "new" software!..who knows!.i'm just sayin"..only way to know d for sure is to call first teas.may end up doing that! i'll look forward to your results! ..thanks again!

(h.h.!)
j.t.

does anyone know if the t2's and the f-75's that have the (d.s.t.)
software lose depth when it is actuated? .also i thought i read that the (f.e.) mode lose depth when actuated!..any one "know" to a certainty if this is true?

(h.h.!)
j.t.

jmaryt Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> does anyone know if the t2's and the f-75's that
> have the (d.s.t.)
> software lose depth when it is actuated? .also i t
> hought i read that the (f.e.) mode lose depth when
> actuated!..any one "know" to a certainty if this i
> s true?
>
> (h.h.!)
> j.t.


Yes F75 with dst lose depth when dst is fully activated.
I think NASA Tom has said some dst is used all the time.
Fast audio loses depth too.
I will go find thread and post here where F75 dst was tested.
See this link page 13.
[www.dankowskidetectors.com]

Copied, remember there is 9.0 and 9.1 data for each

9.0 data
NASA-Tom Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I MUST start somewhere...... in regards to the new
> F75 LTD2. This report is going to be incremental..
> ... as I collect aggregate data. This has been lon
> g-term....... and more difficult than meets the ey
> e.
> First......... let me paint a bit of the 'difficul
> ty' picture. With the initial onset, batch incons
> istencies invalidated data. Incongruencies/Incons
> istencies that would produce varying results each
> day. Now, the largest contributor for my prolonged
> delay is..... silent EMI. Sparing you the volumes
> of invalidating data.............. finally; some s
> olidified data has emerged. Multiple F75 LTD2's...
> .... have produced parallel end-resultant data.
>
> Let's start with this: ONLY the ID mode, 9.0, 11"
> elliptical DD coil, Sens 99, Disc '0'. Remember...
> .... the data provided below is from a batch of PR
> ODUCTION RUN units. I can (nearly) say..... disreg
> ard previous LTD2 (especially proto units) data.
>
> Nutshell........... utilizing only a clad dime in
> Florida low-mineral (primarily silica/quartz) dirt
> :
>
> bp = 11.7"
> cl = 11.8" (Exceptionally 'delayed' audio respon
> se)
> je = 11.2"
> pf = 11.2"
> de = 11.1"
> bc = 10.1"
> FA = 9.8"
>
> And this nominal median averaging............ over
> a period of months...... worth of aggregate/collec
> ted data......... during multiple atmospheric/EMI
> conditions........... and................. with di
> fferent F1 - F7 freq selections. It has been a lon
> g road of dissection ....... for reasonably solidi
> fied data. Selecting different tone options is pri
> marily a 'user preference'...... and hardly affect
> s depth/performance. When invoking the 'boost proc
> ess' modes..... many times...... it can audibly be
> heard that the LTD2 is imminent of ....... and rig
> ht at the threshold of inducing EMI.
> Remember...... it is still a F75....... and nearly
> all other (old) provided data..... still stands.
> I will provide 9.1 data...... as aggregate data so
> lidifies.
> I will also provide all-metal performance in time.
> Then........ 5" DD coil data.
>
> Now....... with hundreds of hours of use...... I c
> an safely report nearly a 85% reduction in EMI in
> 9.0. Switching to 9.1 does add a bit more EMI miti
> gation.
>
> It is more difficult to see any form of pronounced
> depth/performance/gain whilst Disc is 4, 3, 2, 1 o
> r 0......... and the subsequent Disc of 20 and abo
> ve. It still exists; yet, is more subdued.
>
> What I am still having difficulty ascertaining con
> crete data is..... measuring performance gain/loss
> between 1N audio.............. and FA process. (Ye
> s, you can invoke both). 1N does give a substantia
> l order-of-magnitude "fatigue reduction" in carpet
> s of nails relic hunting capacity. FA process is e
> xtremely fast, and has marked performance gain pro
> viding enhanced adjacent target separation charact
> eristics. This is to include hunting in carpets of
> aluminum trash and/or hunting carpets of nails. Th
> is process is extremely fast; yet, does not 'unmas
> k' in it's true semantic definition.
>
> FA certainly takes getting use to. For instance...
> .... a clad dime at the 9.0" to 9.8" depth in clea
> n dirt...... is merely a slightly elongated audio
> 'tick' (click); yet, to the astute/tuned ear......
> still discernible/intelligible.
>
> So far........... in a nutshell............ it's a
> n enjoyable detector to use. ((( I hardly realized
> how much steroid/overdrive/EMI/high order-of-magni
> tude "fatigue factor" tolerance I had developed wh
> ilst hunting with the older generation F75 LTD....
> .. and still do. )))

9.1 data talked about here.
NASA-Tom Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> More data to be documented.
>
> Now let's talk 9.1. All of the below data will be
> exclusively 9.1 ...... and you can compare it to t
> he (above..... exclusively) 9.0 data.
>
> ONLY the ID mode, 9.1, 11" elliptical DD coil, Sen
> s 99, Disc '0'.
>
> Utilizing only a clad dime in Florida low-mineral
> (primarily silica/quartz) dirt:
>
> bp = 11.4"
> cl = 11.6" (Exceptionally 'delayed' audio response
> )
> je = 10.6"
> pf = 10.6"
> de = 10.4"
> bc = 9.8"
> FA = 9.7"
>
> These numbers are not quite (but almost) 'linear'
> to the 9.0 numbers. . . . . just a bit less (overa
> ll) depth.
>
> In bp process mode..... there is a bit of a lag/de
> lay in audio response to the detected target. If y
> ou have a standard F75 SE/LTD....... this audio la
> g delay would be akin to ...... somewhere between
> the 'bp' and 'cl' modes. It does take a bit of lea
> rning-curve time to get accustomed to. This 9.1 re
> v....... is 100% DST....... and appears to provide
> approximately 7% more EMI mitigation.
>
> bp & cl modes present a 'time lag' delay in audio
> response to a detected target. [[[ bp & cl audio l
> ag's ]]]
> FA mode is the exact opposite (both 9.0 & 9.1). Th
> e audio report is quite premature. In fact...... B
> EFORE the target is under the coil.... the detecto
> r reports the audio response. [[[ FA audio respons
> e leads ]]]
>
> On ANY F75 (old or new).......... the more you low
> er the Disc....... the stronger the propensity for
> the detector to ID non-Fe targets more accurately.
> This is also true with the T2/F70 & Makro Racer.
>
> If you can keep the coil close to the ground......
> .... will easily ascertain the depths listed above
> (in Florida low mineral dirt). If you need to have
> a 5" or 6" air-gap above the ground....... THEN th
> ere is a greater loss in depth/performance.......
> as compared to the noisy F75 SE/LTD's.
>
> So far.......... I have yet to find need/purpose/f
> unction for 9.1. The forfeit of a bit of overall d
> epth/performance coupled with a mild increase in a
> udio lag...... is somewhat disconcerting. On the c
> ontrary........ 9.0 is very applicable/usable/valu
> e-added.
>
> Zero difference/change in battery consumption on L
> TD vs LTD2.



Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 02/25/2019 03:14AM by tnsharpshooter.

All this talk of the T2 and F-75 has made me get out my F-75 LTD DST that I bought about a year ago. I stopped using it when I got my Equinox last spring. I was actually thinking of selling it but now I think I'll keep it.

I just now put the small coil on it and can't wait to start hitting all my old cellar holes as soon as the ground thaws in a few weeks.

I had a T2 SE for five years or so and really liked it except for the EMI interference. I couldn't use it anywhere near power lines. When I got the F-75 with DST, I almost felt a little disappointed because it was so quiet. The T2 had a sparkyness to it that made me feel like it was performing really well. I have tested the F-75 in my test garden and it seems to go just as deep as the T2 but it's so quiet that it makes you wonder. I guess it's just something I have to get used to.

I haven't tried the F-75 with DST off yet but plan to on my next hunt. I want to see if it makes a difference.

.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/26/2019 11:34AM by Badger in NH.

this is correct,but when they were introduced in '06,it was difficult to take them anywhere because of the interference...super sensitive,and hard to quiet down,no matter what you did..i am wondering if both of them have improved to the point of being able to run them WITHOUT resorting to turning (d.s.t.) on in MOST situations,as a result of circuit modification only.

(h.h.!)
j.t.

tnsharpshooter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> jmaryt Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > does anyone know if the t2's and the f-75's tha
> t
> > have the (d.s.t.)
> > software lose depth when it is actuated? .also i
> t
> > hought i read that the (f.e.) mode lose depth wh
> en
> > actuated!..any one "know" to a certainty if this
> i
> > s true?
> >
> > (h.h.!)
> > j.t.
>
>
> Yes F75 with dst lose depth when dst is fully acti
> vated.
> I think NASA Tom has said some dst is used all the
> time.
> Fast audio loses depth too.
> I will go find thread and post here where F75 dst
> was tested.
> See this link page 13.
> [www.dankowskidetectors.com]
> .php?2,4402,page=13
>
> Copied, remember there is 9.0 and 9.1 data for eac
> h
>
> 9.0 data
> NASA-Tom Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I MUST start somewhere...... in regards to the n
> ew
> > F75 LTD2. This report is going to be incremental
> ..
> > ... as I collect aggregate data. This has been l
> on
> > g-term....... and more difficult than meets the
> ey
> > e.
> > First......... let me paint a bit of the 'diffic
> ul
> > ty' picture. With the initial onset, batch inco
> ns
> > istencies invalidated data. Incongruencies/Inco
> ns
> > istencies that would produce varying results eac
> h
> > day. Now, the largest contributor for my prolong
> ed
> > delay is..... silent EMI. Sparing you the volume
> s
> > of invalidating data.............. finally; some
> s
> > olidified data has emerged. Multiple F75 LTD2's.
> ..
> > .... have produced parallel end-resultant data.
> >
> > Let's start with this: ONLY the ID mode, 9.0, 11
> "
> > elliptical DD coil, Sens 99, Disc '0'. Remember.
> ..
> > .... the data provided below is from a batch of
> PR
> > ODUCTION RUN units. I can (nearly) say..... disr
> eg
> > ard previous LTD2 (especially proto units) data.
> >
> > Nutshell........... utilizing only a clad dime i
> n
> > Florida low-mineral (primarily silica/quartz) di
> rt
> > :
> >
> > bp = 11.7"
> > cl = 11.8" (Exceptionally 'delayed' audio resp
> on
> > se)
> > je = 11.2"
> > pf = 11.2"
> > de = 11.1"
> > bc = 10.1"
> > FA = 9.8"
> >
> > And this nominal median averaging............ ov
> er
> > a period of months...... worth of aggregate/coll
> ec
> > ted data......... during multiple atmospheric/EM
> I
> > conditions........... and................. with
> di
> > fferent F1 - F7 freq selections. It has been a l
> on
> > g road of dissection ....... for reasonably soli
> di
> > fied data. Selecting different tone options is p
> ri
> > marily a 'user preference'...... and hardly affe
> ct
> > s depth/performance. When invoking the 'boost pr
> oc
> > ess' modes..... many times...... it can audibly
> be
> > heard that the LTD2 is imminent of ....... and r
> ig
> > ht at the threshold of inducing EMI.
> > Remember...... it is still a F75....... and near
> ly
> > all other (old) provided data..... still stands.
> > I will provide 9.1 data...... as aggregate data
> so
> > lidifies.
> > I will also provide all-metal performance in tim
> e.
> > Then........ 5" DD coil data.
> >
> > Now....... with hundreds of hours of use...... I
> c
> > an safely report nearly a 85% reduction in EMI i
> n
> > 9.0. Switching to 9.1 does add a bit more EMI mi
> ti
> > gation.
> >
> > It is more difficult to see any form of pronounc
> ed
> > depth/performance/gain whilst Disc is 4, 3, 2, 1
> o
> > r 0......... and the subsequent Disc of 20 and a
> bo
> > ve. It still exists; yet, is more subdued.
> >
> > What I am still having difficulty ascertaining c
> on
> > crete data is..... measuring performance gain/lo
> ss
> > between 1N audio.............. and FA process. (
> Ye
> > s, you can invoke both). 1N does give a substant
> ia
> > l order-of-magnitude "fatigue reduction" in carp
> et
> > s of nails relic hunting capacity. FA process is
> e
> > xtremely fast, and has marked performance gain p
> ro
> > viding enhanced adjacent target separation chara
> ct
> > eristics. This is to include hunting in carpets
> of
> > aluminum trash and/or hunting carpets of nails.
> Th
> > is process is extremely fast; yet, does not 'unm
> as
> > k' in it's true semantic definition.
> >
> > FA certainly takes getting use to. For instance.
> ..
> > .... a clad dime at the 9.0" to 9.8" depth in cl
> ea
> > n dirt...... is merely a slightly elongated audi
> o
> > 'tick' (click); yet, to the astute/tuned ear....
> ..
> > still discernible/intelligible.
> >
> > So far........... in a nutshell............ it's
> a
> > n enjoyable detector to use. ((( I hardly realiz
> ed
> > how much steroid/overdrive/EMI/high order-of-mag
> ni
> > tude "fatigue factor" tolerance I had developed
> wh
> > ilst hunting with the older generation F75 LTD..
> ..
> > .. and still do. )))
>
> 9.1 data talked about here.
> NASA-Tom Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > More data to be documented.
> >
> > Now let's talk 9.1. All of the below data will b
> e
> > exclusively 9.1 ...... and you can compare it to
> t
> > he (above..... exclusively) 9.0 data.
> >
> > ONLY the ID mode, 9.1, 11" elliptical DD coil, S
> en
> > s 99, Disc '0'.
> >
> > Utilizing only a clad dime in Florida low-minera
> l
> > (primarily silica/quartz) dirt:
> >
> > bp = 11.4"
> > cl = 11.6" (Exceptionally 'delayed' audio respon
> se
> > )
> > je = 10.6"
> > pf = 10.6"
> > de = 10.4"
> > bc = 9.8"
> > FA = 9.7"
> >
> > These numbers are not quite (but almost) 'linear
> '
> > to the 9.0 numbers. . . . . just a bit less (ove
> ra
> > ll) depth.
> >
> > In bp process mode..... there is a bit of a lag/
> de
> > lay in audio response to the detected target. If
> y
> > ou have a standard F75 SE/LTD....... this audio
> la
> > g delay would be akin to ...... somewhere betwee
> n
> > the 'bp' and 'cl' modes. It does take a bit of l
> ea
> > rning-curve time to get accustomed to. This 9.1
> re
> > v....... is 100% DST....... and appears to provi
> de
> > approximately 7% more EMI mitigation.
> >
> > bp & cl modes present a 'time lag' delay in audi
> o
> > response to a detected target. [[[ bp & cl audio
> l
> > ag's ]]]
> > FA mode is the exact opposite (both 9.0 & 9.1).
> Th
> > e audio report is quite premature. In fact......
> B
> > EFORE the target is under the coil.... the detec
> to
> > r reports the audio response. [[[ FA audio respo
> ns
> > e leads ]]]
> >
> > On ANY F75 (old or new).......... the more you l
> ow
> > er the Disc....... the stronger the propensity f
> or
> > the detector to ID non-Fe targets more accuratel
> y.
> > This is also true with the T2/F70 & Makro Racer.
> >
> > If you can keep the coil close to the ground....
> ..
> > .... will easily ascertain the depths listed abo
> ve
> > (in Florida low mineral dirt). If you need to ha
> ve
> > a 5" or 6" air-gap above the ground....... THEN
> th
> > ere is a greater loss in depth/performance......
> .
> > as compared to the noisy F75 SE/LTD's.
> >
> > So far.......... I have yet to find need/purpose
> /f
> > unction for 9.1. The forfeit of a bit of overall
> d
> > epth/performance coupled with a mild increase in
> a
> > udio lag...... is somewhat disconcerting. On the
> c
> > ontrary........ 9.0 is very applicable/usable/va
> lu
> > e-added.
> >
> > Zero difference/change in battery consumption on
> L
> > TD vs LTD2.

thanks for the reference!..interesting for sure!

(h.h.!)
j.t.

Tom's post about DST on or off is very confusing in part due to the way the DST display is designed.

Assuming that 9.0 = DST ON and 9.1 = DST OFF ( hard to remember), Tom seems to be saying that turning DST off (9.1) will result in a slight reduction of depth.

Is this correct? I just want to be sure that leaving DST on is the best setting.

It sounds like the only reason they added the off option was just in case anyone thought they didn't like or trust the DST feature.

.

Badger in NH Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Tom's post about DST on or off is very confusing i
> n part due to the way the DST display is designed.
>
> Assuming that 9.0 = DST ON and 9.1 = DST OFF ( har
> d to remember), Tom seems to be saying that turnin
> g DST off (9.1) will result in a slight reduction
> of depth.
>
> Is this correct? I just want to be sure that leavi
> ng DST on is the best setting.
>
> It sounds like the only reason they added the off
> option was just in case anyone thought they didn't
> like or trust the DST feature.
>
> .

Read the bottom few lines of what I copied above.
NASA-Tom states where he had used dst F75 unit he saw no need to use 9.1 (full dst on). You though could have a situation (site) where it may have a benefit.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/25/2019 12:07PM by tnsharpshooter.

tnsharpshooter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Badger in NH Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Tom's post about DST on or off is very confusing
> i
> > n part due to the way the DST display is designe
> d.
> >
> > Assuming that 9.0 = DST ON and 9.1 = DST OFF ( h
> ar
> > d to remember), Tom seems to be saying that turn
> in
> > g DST off (9.1) will result in a slight reductio
> n
> > of depth.
> >
> > Is this correct? I just want to be sure that lea
> vi
> > ng DST on is the best setting.
> >
> > It sounds like the only reason they added the of
> f
> > option was just in case anyone thought they didn
> 't
> > like or trust the DST feature.
> >
> > .
>
> Read the bottom few lines of what I copied above.
> NASA-Tom states where he had used dst F75 unit he
> saw no need to use 9.1 (full dst on). You though
> could have a situation (site) where it may have a
> benefit.


The manual says that 9.1 = full DST off, not on.

What Tom is saying is that there is no performance advantage in turning DST off and that turning it off resulted in a a slight loss of depth.

Am I correct here or am I missing something?

.



Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 02/26/2019 12:02PM by Badger in NH.

Badger -- There has always been a long debate over which is off and on...9 or 9.1. Tom's results show what a lot of us said all the while. With DST on, there is a reduction in depth. You are gaining overall stability in places that you might not have previously been able to detect. With DST off, you gain some of that depth back but it is more prone to EMI. So whichever number 9.0 or 9.1 coincides with the depth loss is also going to be the more stable one because it's more the less being neutered. We just started saying that the stable one was with DST turned ON and the more chattery mode was with it OFF. The OFF side will give about an inch more depth

Everybody around here that still uses the F75 platform, actually took this a step further. The consensus is that the DST models are throttled back too much from the earlier non updated versions, and that the original non updated models are much deeper. So the non updated models are coveted here....it reminds me of the 1021 serial number CZs....those are the ones that most people wanted for a while. In fact, there are still quite a few people locally that hunt with the F75 and all of them have reverted back to the non updated versions and sold or traded the DST models.

Thanks Daniel. That was very helpful.

Now I will have to compare each mode, decide which one is more chattery and go with that to get the best depth.

Calling it 9.0 and 9.1 instead of DST ON and DST OFF was a major mistake by the company and the cause of a lot of confusion I'm sure. The weird thing is that after all these years, they have never corrected it. Same goes for those ultra thin coil ears that break so easily.

I kind of regret buying the F-75 and wish I could go back to my old T2.

.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 02/26/2019 08:14PM by Badger in NH.

My experience with the T2 Classic and T2+ is that in mineralized dirt is that the T2+ in boost mode has a tendency to iron grunt on non ferrous targets even at shallow depths. So the added features on the T2+ was useless for me. The T2 Classic is a very stable and fairly deep detector in my soil with a brisk sweep speed. If you have mild soil without minerals I'd go with the T2+ but in mineralized soil just get a T2 Classic.

Hi J.T.,
Just a thought, if I have followed your intended purpose for this unit it is for coin shooting, correct?
As I understand the Fisher & Tek product lines the T2 has a much broader range of disc in its iron range, 40; the F75 has the expanded range in the higher end, only 15 in iron.
T2 was designed with relic hunting in mind, F75 for traditional coin hunters.
Not sure if those factors may affect your decision making process.
Cheers,
Drew.

hi drew!
no! i am aware of that the "tek" will be used exclusively for
coin shooting.most of the time disc will be set to zero,or possibly lower range to eliminate the "small" iron,and let the big stuff "bleed" through Liam mostly concerned with having the ability to run it "hot" at 99 gain all the time,IF i can! in fairly "open" areas,running 99 gain,along with "beast" mode (b.p.)
will hopefully make a difference and "light up" stuff hiding deeper...in my view,both the f-75,and the tek t2 pack enough wallop,and "speed" to make a difference in the "junk" as well as
more open ball fields and the like.the 11" dd coil is great for open areas,and the "outrageous" 5" dd coil turn it into a "monster" in the trash.got my eye on the t2 ltd se. as the detector of choice.it comes with the fantastic 5" dd coil,and smart money says if ya pick the right dealer,you can get a "working package" with it for free...i'm close.

(h.h.!)
j.t.

Daniel Tn Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Badger -- There has always been a long debate ove
> r which is off and on...9 or 9.1. Tom's results s
> how what a lot of us said all the while. With DST
> on, there is a reduction in depth. You are gainin
> g overall stability in places that you might not h
> ave previously been able to detect. With DST off,
> you gain some of that depth back but it is more pr
> one to EMI. So whichever number 9.0 or 9.1 coinci
> des with the depth loss is also going to be the mo
> re stable one because it's more the less being neu
> tered. We just started saying that the stable one
> was with DST turned ON and the more chattery mode
> was with it OFF. The OFF side will give about an
> inch more depth
>
> Everybody around here that still uses the F75 plat
> form, actually took this a step further. The cons
> ensus is that the DST models are throttled back to
> o much from the earlier non updated versions, and
> that the original non updated models are much deep
> er. So the non updated models are coveted here...
> .it reminds me of the 1021 serial number CZs....th
> ose are the ones that most people wanted for a whi
> le. In fact, there are still quite a few people l
> ocally that hunt with the F75 and all of them have
> reverted back to the non updated versions and sold
> or traded the DST models.


yes! they called it back then (06-07) "working into the noise"
if memory serves.you could "kick up gain" but you had to endure constant "chatter".if you was able to do this,and some could,then the results could be nothing short of spectacular!
unfortunately,"tons" could not,or would not,and the classifieds was "full" of f-75's needing a new home...i was one of them.
it's the main reason why i want to be sure they have made circuit modifications to "quiet 'em down" (so to speak) before i open my wallet again!..i'm just saying'

(h.h.!)
j.t.

Hi J.T.,
I don't think you can go too far wrong with that set up, they will both signal on coins to the same depth I reckon, probably deeper that one would need for boulevard strips, and urban drops in general in areas that haven't been re-graded or landscaped.
I was seriously looking at both the T2+ and F75+ myself, dealer was clearing out discontinued Pro Arc model, it has all the same features as F75 LTD, came with the 5" coil, a wicked gun case I can use for my rifles, write in rain paper I can use in my work, rechargeables & charger, and a bunch of spare parts same price pretty much as the F75 + so I bit on it. Also picked up a 7" round DD Mars Lion coil for it so I will be trying it after snow goes away.
Had an original F75 and loved the ergomomics but found it was too noisy for me, (audio fatigue), like you I hope the DST and iron volume to lower the noise factor will make it a winner. Time will tell.
Cheers,
Drew.

in addendum:
you always had the option to lower "gain" ,however,apparently,
even changing frequencies and dropping gain had little effect,
just about everywhere you hunted in "urban" areas. at least this was true with the one i had,and many,many others complained
about how "noisy" theirs were as well...as mentioned,a lot of 'em got dumped.people just could not "justify" the noise,and let 'em go! ..i'm just sayin'

(h.h.!)
j.t.