Monte's Nail Board Test Teknetics Omega 10"

[www.youtube.com]

Hats off to Monte as he is the king of testing and a fine gentleman and credit to the hobby..But again how in heavens name do you duplicate a 75-100 year old nail which has leached into the ground? Ball park at best and again a tip of the hat for his efforts..

Would be curious what HIS results would have been.........if he had removed the coin from the test.

I have to agree with Dan.
Tests are good to do to get an idea of potential performance
but real world is much different.
I started some 5 or 6 years back looking for the best trash hunter.
I developed some tests that I still will use to evaluate a unit's abilities.
At first I felt those "tests" could be used as a standard but quickly found
out it was different once I went a real detecting venture.
I found out that some of them that did better in those tests would also
give more false positives to iron while detecting.
Gain in one area, lose in another.......that seems to be norm in metal detecting technology.
It would be nice to have a detector that ids well, goes deep, separates and unmasks the best
and not false and be "quiet" all at the same time....I got the feeling that will never happen......
So for me, I think overall performance is more important.

Oh,yeah and Tom is right, one always has to take the coin out to make sure the response
is negative.

Tom, please [www.youtube.com]

Very nice. I would like to see how far the coil is from the targets, and move it up and down to see how the machine responds. Wonder if the 11"DD coil is as good, and how the G2 "the best for working in iron" would perform here.

It would be nice to see more of these videos. I know I saw a few more over at Finds, one with an AT Pro, and I wasn't very impressed with the AT Pro. I like a clean sharp signal to tell me when to dig and when not to dig, and from what I have read the AT Pro requires a lot of brainpower to decode all the signals.

G2 - [www.youtube.com]

AT Pro - [www.youtube.com]

Ace 250 - [www.youtube.com]

E-Trac - [www.youtube.com]


Golden Mask - [www.youtube.com]

x-terra 70 [www.youtube.com]

XP Deus - [www.youtube.com]

CZ-3D - [www.youtube.com]

Wow, thanks Denari, Will have a look at these right away!

Wow, E-trac.... bad result!

The G2 didn't do as well as I expected. Hmmmmm. It's difficult to tell from these videos without knowing the settings of the detector, I think we all can agree that settings make a difference, the F-75 on disk 6 (Don't remember the exact number) and in monotone would do well on the nail-board test, but in 2, 3, 4 tone maybe not so well.

Same with E-trac, I think setting matter, maybe two tone ferrous and low disk, don't know, I never used one, but seems like there needs to be more standardization. I guess one standard to employ would be a setup for best in Iron performance, but I don't think some of the people posting these videos know how to set their machines up for that, nor do I when it comes to other machines.

Denari...........that's a better "before-and-after".

Yes, real-world ...in the dirt....scenarios are more 'telling'; yet, this does provide a interesting starting-point.

the omega is falling out best ,

That's really not the best way to do a test. He could have put a nail right on top of the coin and the coin would probably still sound off. To imitate a masking situation, the coin has to be lower than the nails.

Had he put the coin under the board it would not likely have picked it up. Raising the nails an inch or two higher than the coin increases the iron interference and masking which is what the test is supposed to be about.

Many detectors have no trouble finding a coin with a nail laying beside or even right on top of the coin. Try it yourself. But raise the nail an inch higher than the coin and it becomes impossible. And the deeper the coin is below the nail, the farther off to the side the coin must be, for the coin to be detected.

Coil size is also a factor.

A better way to do that test might be to use two plywood or styrofoam boards of equal size. Tape the coin to the center of the bottom board. Now lay the other board on top, marking the exact spot where the coin is underneath. Then lay your nail or nails around the mark and see how close you can put the them and still detect the coin. You can adjust the depth of the coin by adding as many boards as you want between the upper and lower boards. You now have a portable performance test garden with adjustable depth.



Edited 10 time(s). Last edit at 05/28/2011 04:06PM by Badger in NH.

tests were done the same for all detectors

interesting test omega [www.youtube.com]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/28/2011 02:53PM by Denari.

The older machines can do quiet well on the test. This is a Compass Coin Scanner Pro II test.

[www.youtube.com]

Why would you hunt with no discrimination on some and a lot of discrimination on others?

More important concerning the Omega or any other detector regardless of how it will perform
on Monte's test.....but the "real" world of literally every imaginable
size and shape of iron objects....shallow and deep stuff.....not to mention a field filled with broken and bent nails....
Overall performance is always more important IMO than any one test..., don't buy a detector based solely on
this test....in the ground is the test.
A better way is to read what owners think of a given model one is interested in....if it is a primary or
secondary unit....whether it is their main detector or a backup.....what are its strengths and weaknesses....
I tend tend to give more credence with models that many are using as their main detector.

tests were done equally for all. the same pattern, nail ,coins
[compass-metal-detector-forum.548136.n2.nabble.com]



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/29/2011 07:15AM by Denari.

I did a test on the Omega back in March and I got very different results than what is shown on the video. I don't have a video, just the results. I can see 2 things that were different from what was shown on the video.

1. I had the coil attached to the detector so the coil cable wasn't flopping around.

2. I also would sweep across the nails and coin and not hover and make short, rapid sweeps directly over the coin.


10" Concentric Coil
Disc. mode with a setting of "17" where the nails were dics. out.
Sen. set at 70 (EMI's prevented any higher setting)
Ground Phase - 48 - 50
Tones set at 2

Test #1

Swing Direction #1 - Right to Left - PASSED - Signaled on coin
Left to Right - FAILED - No signal on coin

Swing Direction #2 - Right to Left - FAILED
Left to Right - PASSED

Swing Direction #3 - Right to Left - FAILED
Left to Right - PASSED

Swing Direction #4 - PASSED


Test #2

Swing Direction #1 - Right to Left - FAILED
Left to Right - PASSED

Swing Direction #2 - Right to Left - FAILED
Left to Right - PASSED

Swing Direction #3 and #4 - PASSED




5" DD Coil
Disc. mode with a setting of "17" where the nails were dics. out.
Sen. set at 70 (EMI's prevented any higher setting)
Ground Phase - 46 - 48
Tones set at 2

Test #1

Swing Direction #1, #2, 3# and #4 - PASSED


Test #2

Swing Direction #1 and #3 - PASSED

Swing Direction #2 and #4 - FAILED

seen ? show me the video

Montes nailboard test is rather good and has the potention to become " world standard"

Depending on users and settings and how to perform the test is still off standard though.

I got good result with my Omega in the 1 tone setting and just disc out the nails silent.

Same with GB SE.

Explorer masked the coin dramatically.

This is also a good way to memorize best coil speed, different result may occur with different sweep speed.

This test will not give the full perspective on a detector's ability to deal with trash.
Low powered units will have an easier time.
The Compadre will likely beat any detector on these type of tests.
So if this is to become a standard, my vote will go to the Compadre.

Just did the nail board test with 4 machines the Omega did the best and the AT PRO did the worst.I think this test could be come a standard for testing detectors.

Denari Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> seen ? show me the video

Are you Monte?

Could you clear up something once and for all.... are you on Teknetics' payroll? I respect your knowledge on detectors, but people should have a right to know if your unwavering support for the Teknetics Omega is partially the result of a paycheck.

Denari Thanks for the Video .
Yes different people might use differernt settings or swing speeds of something.
I might use rusty nails or from a post above use a multi level test box
with foam as a spacer for the nails , giving them a different plane from the coin.

The 5 inch coil was the winner over the big coils . No secret there.
Also interesting that the O8 with a concentric did that well with a concentric vs DD coils

ron_c ............ I had similar resultant as you. I still have a Omega.....and will need to revisit my tests for further verification. I do not necessarily like this type of testing..........as..........it is only 2-dimentional (2D). The real-world is (3D). ie: Place one of those nails an inch above the coin......and slightly off to one side by an inch or two...........and the world changes.

A 2D test "can" be utilized for "SOME" data comparison & collection..........and can be quite interesting; yet...............once again...........is not representative of 'real-world'.

I recall being at the (old) Los Banos, CA Fisher Research Lab about a decade ago.........in the large open warehouse (in the back of the factory) where there were 2 Troy Galloway engineers working with a test-stand and a proto X5. At a distance of 12" from the coil.......were a nickel and a nail (spaced about 2" apart from each other)......on the same 2D plane. As I walked by.........I picked up a piece/sliver of wood off of the floor (from a shipping pallet)............picked up the test-nail...and placed the sliver of wood underneath the nail. . . . . being very careful to maintain equidistance and orientation of the nail......as per their original set-up. The nail was (now) elevated by approx. 0.25" (1/4-inch). Their world turned up-side-down.
About a half-hour later....... I walked by again...... and I picked up their nail......set it to the side (out of the equation).......and replaced it with a much smaller square-nail (that was bent 90-Deg). Their world turned up-side-down again.

As I boarded the plane to return to Florida......... I wondered if I instilled a "mind-set" paradigm shift........HOPING....they would NOT take this education as a 'negative'; rather, as "opportunity".


EDUCATION IS IMPERATIVE. KNOWLEDGE IS POWER.

Tom
in the air if you do not do it in the ground too.
detector will be deaf.
Try to xlt

Yes.........this is why the ground (real dirt) is so important.........................so you realize how 'deaf' the detector can truly be.

Quote
NASA-Tom
I do not necessarily like this type of testing..........as..........it is only 2-dimentional (2D). The real-world is (3D). ie: Place one of those nails an inch above the coin......and slightly off to one side by an inch or two...........and the world changes.

Even Monte states " Remember, this is a simple comparison of a good target on the same plane as four ugly nails so it isn’t
really a ‘fair’ test of what to expect if an old coin is 3” or 4” deep and a nail or two are located only 1”-2”
deep and directly above the good target, or very close to it. Nothing is ‘perfect’ in the world of detecting
but learning our detector and coils and how they might deal with common challenges is important."

I know what you mean by placing the coin only 1/4" below the nail or even off the to side below the nail and forget it, no signal on the coin. I haven't found any machine that will find the coin that's below an iron object. (Yeal, I know, I have found coins at times and first thing you dig is a nail or iron object and a little deeper is a coin) I believe it's the exception and not the rule.