Test test test

separation 0011
I see test all the time on detectors separation videos but there all at 1 to 2 inches from the target nail boards different plain and so on, how about making test that are real 7 to 10 inches from the targets that's where my good coins are at in depth not 2 to 3 inches ID is more important than separation when we go deep . sube

separation 0011 at you tube type it in



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/10/2020 01:33PM by sube.

Just me but I don’t think air testing at that height will NOT provide the same affect as in the ground. Even the belief because a coil swings over a buried target 4 or 5” it translates to real depth. I believe low, high and buried will produce varied results. You just can’t beat a test garden



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 10/10/2020 02:00PM by dewcon4414.

This is true but i also tested in ground same results. sube

So what were your results between the tests? How did things change?

There will also be different results between freshly buried targets and targets that have been in the ground for several years that have developed halos.

This is a very good test ... Sube .... Equinox in multi with this will have a problem ... but at 1F 4 and 5 khz it will detect well ....

Spectra V3 in multifrequency and Teknetic G2 will do very well with this Pull-Tab test ...

Tom D. can you weigh in on this. I always thought minelab detectors did much better when it comes to depth and separation when the coil scrapes the ground than swinging it 3 or4 inches above the ground. No air gap between the coil and ground. I have used both the CTX and Equinox and have always had great luck using the Equinox in trashy parks, fairgrounds and iron sites and have pulled many deep old coins in sites I pounded with the CTX.

Certain types of heavy mineralization .....does indeed require the coil to be elevated above the ground. This is a test-and-trial requirement. Bad minerals will generate too much (initial) blowback/feedback.......which........in turn..........will 'blind' the detector to buried targets.
If mineralization is 3-bars or lower....... than lightly scrubbing the coil is fine. Especially with SMF units. This will get you some additional signal-strength/depth.

The EQX does indeed perform better in 3-Dimentional (real-World/real-dirt) scenarios..... as compared to some other detectors. There are some 'software timing' advantages with the EQX; yet, the primary advantage is.....the large 11" round coil. By virtue alone....... that large (greater angle-of-attack) ElectroMagnetic footprint from the large coil.,.,.,.,.,.,., generates/envelops a deeper........ wider-angle...... stronger signal.,.,.,.,.,.,.,.,., which also equates to better (and stronger) ID. If you have deeper (7" & 8" & 9") targets that are in fairly close proximity to each other........ on most detectors with smaller loops.... the signal strength may be too weak to detect, ID, discern, and separate. With the EQX...... the signal(s) are still of formidable strength.,.,.,.,.,.,.,., more than enough for the unit to express these targets as 'individual' targets. , . , . , . , . , and with reasonable ID.

The only remaining question would be: How does the EQX separate these 'close-together' (deeper) targets. The timing/clock-speed of the microprocessor.... helps perform exactly such. (((Certain discrete electronic prioritization))).