Welcome!
» Log In
» Create A New Profile
MINELAB MANTICORE: DATA & PERFORMANCE
Posted by NASA-Tom
This forum is currently read only. You can not log in or make any changes. This is a temporary situation.
|
Re: MINELAB MANTICORE: DATA & PERFORMANCE January 30, 2023 02:18PM |
philber Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> NASA-Tom Wrote:
>
>
> Additional info:
> In Factory Presets...... the Manticore is approx 4
> % better at ID'ing iron............... thus/theref
> ore..........4% less iron-falsing rate.
> BUT......... then you add Ferrous Limits.......Upp
> er & Lower......(and compare it to EQX Fe & F2).,.
> ,.,.,.,.,.,., and the Manticore adjustability ther
> eof. HERE is where it really makes a difference:
> I will use myself (my hunting settings & mindset)
> via example =
> I hit a new (to me) site. After about 12-15 minute
> s of hunting this site.......... I learn that I ca
> n run Ferrous Limits: Upper on '5'........ and Low
> er on '3'. Deliberately: On purpose..... (to my br
> ains calibration likings)......this allows all of
> the nails to 'false' (as a non-ferrous target) 30%
> of the time......during body-rotation around targe
> t whilst sweeping. (Most normal/rational folks wou
> ld not tolerate this!). If there is even the sligh
> test bit of non-ferrous metal in close proximity o
> f the 30% falsing nail.......... the 30% falsing g
> oes up to a much higher %-number. For instance....
> ... a square-nail at 9" deep is high-tone 'falsing
> ' 30% of the time. BUT...... this time..... just 1
> -inch below the square nail (at 10" deep) resides
> a Shield Nickel. Even though the Nickel is deeper
> and weaker than the stronger signal from the (shal
> lower) square nail.......... the detector is now:
> non-ferrous tone FALSING....MUCH more........ say:
> 87% of the time. HUGE delta/difference! ------You
> are now POSITIVE that MORE than just a (ferrous) s
> quare nail exists. It takes VERY little...... to u
> pset this 30% falsing "BALANCE"........and that 30
> % falsing VERY RAPIDLY (asymptotically) launches u
> p in percent. Dead giveaway. Huge clue!
>
>
>
> Hmm, I have read this multiple times and cant wrap
> my head around it. Tom states that the fact that
> the detector is non-ferrous tone falsing much more
> (say 87%), that this is a "dead giveaway. Huge cl
> ue!"
>
> I'm totally missing where this huge clue is! We d
> o not know what the target is to begin with when i
> t is in the ground, only that whatever it is, it i
> s falsing 30% of the time as we rotate around it.
> Call this the "30% target". Additionally, just be
> cause we find a target that falses MORE than that
> 30% target (say 87%), how the heck can we know tha
> t it is the caused by a non-ferrous target immedia
> tely in the vicinity of the "30% target"? The onl
> y way we can ascertain any of this is to actually
> dig them up and say "oh, thats what was causing th
> at scenario!" But we cant possibly know any of
> this until AFTER the targets have been dug. So ho
> w is this example/made up scenario of a V nickle j
> ust under the falsing nail a "Dead giveaway. Huge
> clue!"? Intellectually, I am following the logic
> as an "example", but I dont see how it translates
> into real world usage in the field because we cant
> know what is causing our particular level of falsi
> ng (be it 30% or 87%), until we dig it up and see.
>
>
> Calling Steve Goss! lol I follow your train of th
> ought/explanations pretty well and wonder if you c
> an clarify this one for me? Or anyone else who wa
> nts to take a crack at it.
>
>
> And Tom, I ask you to clarify only if Steve (or an
> yone else) cant explain it as I feel like asking y
> ou to explain every little question is like asking
> the vice president of a company when the company p
> icnic is! Sure, you know the answer, but probably
> a dozen others do as well and your time is better
> spent dealing with the bigger issues that are in n
> eed of your specialized expertise that others cant
> address. Thus, like many here, I read and lurk w
> ithout interjecting too much. Even reading this r
> eply is taking up your valuable time that could be
> used in continuing to bring us improvements on thi
> s and future products! I dont feel unworthy of as
> king questions, I just dont want to take up your l
> imited time with questions others can handle, or I
> can learn by reading it somewhere.
>
> PS I also throw my hat into the ring to add the
> dual FE-CO numbers on the machine. I've been sayi
> ng for years that my ideal machine would be a cros
> s between the Equinox and the Etrac with its tones
> and the FE-CO ID system. We're getting closer!
philber -- I am really glad to hear that the way my rather odd brain works (and thus the words that flow from it) are at times "coherent" and "understandable" to some, and at times maybe even a bit helpful! Thank you!
And, going all the way to the bottom of your post, yes -- we ARE "getting closer!" I totally agree, and have also been saying that the ideal machine would be the "offspring" of E-Trac and Equinox "parents," LOL! I think we are very close to that, with the Manticore, and I couldn't be happier...except...for the FE-CO two-number ID that is missing!
As for the falsing issue, that you asked if I could clarify, I will try, but not sure I'll make it much clearer, because you basically understand what NASA-Tom was saying quite well. There is one thing you may be missing, though, not sure...which is, he DID dig those "30% targets." LOTS of them. That's where he came up with his "test." The 30% target became a "known" target because he dug a bunch, to LEARN that they were "30% targets." THEN, he listened for targets that were MORE than 30%...
To elaborate...
In THEORY, what he was implying is that -- especially on a site with a particular, and generally consistent, type of iron (say, 2" square nails), that with your limits set rather "loose," you will of course get a good bit of non-ferrous audio (in part, because you have your limits set so "loose," and in part just because they like to "false" onto the "zero line"). And usually of course, they sound "better" from some angles, than others. So, he's saying that when he first gets to the site...say 1/2 hour just for grins, he is in "testing mode." After awhile, if he finds is getting alot of targets where he's hearing about 30% "high tones," during his rotation around the target, and the rest ferrous tones, and then he's digging each one of these, and then finding that they are 2" square nails, he's now locking that target behavior into his brain, saying "OK, today, on this site, with the type of nails that seem to prevail here, and with my settings, I CAN NOW CONCLUDE that nails will generally report as 30% non-ferrous, and then 70% iron grunts." SO, then, if he hits a target, and on this particular target, he's getting say 60% of non-ferrous (instead of 30), and then only 40% iron grunts, that immediately means there's "something different" going on. Clearly, there's iron there (the 40% iron grunts), but what is accounting for the extra percentage of non-ferrous audio as compared to the other square nails? If it's not a "high-toning" nail, then there must be something else that is permitting the rest of that high-toning to occur, right?
SO -- that is what he's alluding to, but...I think you know most or all of that already. You seem to understand pretty well what he's saying.
I think what you are saying is -- that in the real world, you have never seen a site where the ID characteristics of the nails in the ground were so "exacting," that EACH ONE reports as 30% high tone falses, and 70% iron grunts. I think you are saying "OK, so now I hit a nail that gives a high tone 60% of the rotation, and only 40% falsing...WHY CAN'T THAT JUST BE A DIFFERENT TYPE OF NAIL, or maybe a BENT NAIL, or TWO NAILS lying beside each other, or TWO NAILS IN AN X-SHAPED CONFIGURATION?"
And, to that, I would agree with you; I think it IS usually harder, for most of us mere mortals, than NASA-Tom makes it sound. I personally have rarely seen a site where nails behave as "consistently" as NASA-Tom is experiencing at some of his sites. I have one site in particular in Pennsylvania that is an old church; I've talked about it before. It was built somewhere around 1800, but has burned either two or three times in its history, and was rebuilt. And so, as you can imagine, there is all manner of square nail debris in that church yard. Small ones, big ones, bent ones, straight ones, skinny ones, fat ones. Some only give a small "rotational sector" of high tones; meanwhile, others sound so good for almost the entire rotation around the nail that it is difficult if not impossible to know that it's a nail, and not a deep high conductor. SO -- for me, especially on a site like this, the whole "x-percent high tone means nail, but if I hit a target where I hear a higher percentage of high tones, it means nail plus coin" idea is to some degree not usable/practical in many cases.
Now, I think NASA-Tom would say that yes, even on his sites, there are some "outliers." I'm sure he's had some targets that "held onto" the non-ferrous high tones for much more of his rotational sector, than his standard "x percent" that he has ascertained means "nail." In other words, I would be pretty sure that he will dig some nails on those sites, that his "test" would "fail" on, and thus cause him to dig and end up with just a nail. I would bet he's dug some bent ones, that he thought had a better than even chance of being a nail/coin combo. But, he is, I think, playing a "percentages" game, in terms of REDUCING the number of nails he digs, when trying to unmask coins, but still digging a few nails that "pass his test."
Finally, in a much "looser" way, than NASA-Tom's very "precise" approach, I have, to at least some degree, experienced something akin what he is saying ON OCCASION. In particular, there's a spot near my house that is the site of a former country club, that closed down in the 1960s, from what I can tell, and the clubhouse was converted into a country church. I have permission to hunt this site, and there's a spot next to where the old pool was...a sloping hillside that has a bunch of modern (round) nails. But, there ended up also being a good number of wheat cents, and a few silver coins there as well. I went through there with my Explorer and 13" Ultimate coil several years back, and hit it really hard...and pulled every wheatie and silver dime I could detect.
When I got my Equinox, this spot immediately came to mind as a GREAT place to test the Equinox's so-called "superior" ability to unmask. So, I started through the mess of nails, and, over the course of that first hunt with the EQX at that site, I started to dig a few wheaties. SO -- I knew that I was unmasking some coins that I could not, with my Explorer and the big coil (not surprising). So, I slowed down, and started to focus, and try to learn how I might "unmask" the coins that were obviously still lurking in the dirt. And during that time of focus, I started to realize that the coin/nail co-locations would definitely tend to "hold the high tone" for much more of the rotational sector, than the nail (no coin) targets. With modern nails, there's often a tendency (the way I set up my machines) to "sound good" at, say, 180 and 360 degrees. OR, more correctly, though a SECTOR surrounding 180 and 360 -- say 160 to 200 degrees, and then again in a "mirror image" way, at 340 to 20 degrees. Meanwhile, through all of the rest of the rotational sector, it's essentially all iron grunts. BUT -- on those coin/nail targets, at this site, I'd still hear the pronounced high tones through those same sectors surrounding 180 and 360. BUT -- not only would those high-tone sectors "expand" in size, but I would also hear at least some CHIRPS of high tones, sometimes one-way hits, sometimes two-way, through MUCH OF THE REST of the rotation. IN OTHER WORDS, a much higher percentage of high tones. Sure, there were sectors of predominantly iron grunts, but I'd get at least SOME high toning through most or all of the 360-degree sector, not JUST 180 and 360. THIS, I came to COUNT on, as being the key to unmasking THOSE coins, at THAT site, in THOSE type of nails, with MY machine set up the way I set it up (which at that time, was with FE=0).
I do want to make a note here, though, for anyone who might be reading and want to "try" this idea, that this is not some UNIVERSAL rule. IT MUST BE NOTED that the exact description I just gave, though quite successful for me at that site (I pulled MANY more wheats and a couple of silver dimes over the course of a couple of hunts) ONLY APPLIED in those specific circumstances. For instance, that description I gave of exactly what I learned to listen for, WOULD HAVE -- at that same site and with all else being equal -- been totally different with say, FE set at 6 or 7 or 8. And the reason I make THIS point, is that the SAME THING applies to the Manticore, and limits settings. IF you find one of these "rules of thumb" that works for you when unmasking, telling others about it on the forums is USELESS, unless they KNOW YOUR SETTINGS, and UNDERSTAND WHY your settings were causing what you observed, and HOW, if they use DIFFERENT settings, it would change the equation -- potentially substantially...
Wow. That's alot of words; I hope there was at least something useful in all of that, that perhaps addressed at least some of your question...
Bottom line is that as you were saying, you can't KNOW that you have a coin, using the "NASA-Tom" approach, until you dig it, as you said. BUT, you can formulate a pretty strong HUNCH, and put the odds in your favor if digging ONLY the targets that behave in that specific way. You would know FOR SURE that SOMETHING was different; for instance, if you hit one of those targets he described, thinking "coin-nail co-location," but it turned out to be a bent nail, you'd simply say "OH, now I see why it held the non-ferrous tones for so much more of the sector than the other nails did; the others were straight..." And thus, even THIS target could build your confidence that your "rule of thumb" is still accurate...as you would EXPECT the bent nail to deviate from a "test" you set up to identify a STRAIGHT nail...
OK, enough words!
Steve
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/30/2023 02:31PM by steveg.
-------------------------------------------------------
> NASA-Tom Wrote:
>
>
> Additional info:
> In Factory Presets...... the Manticore is approx 4
> % better at ID'ing iron............... thus/theref
> ore..........4% less iron-falsing rate.
> BUT......... then you add Ferrous Limits.......Upp
> er & Lower......(and compare it to EQX Fe & F2).,.
> ,.,.,.,.,.,., and the Manticore adjustability ther
> eof. HERE is where it really makes a difference:
> I will use myself (my hunting settings & mindset)
> via example =
> I hit a new (to me) site. After about 12-15 minute
> s of hunting this site.......... I learn that I ca
> n run Ferrous Limits: Upper on '5'........ and Low
> er on '3'. Deliberately: On purpose..... (to my br
> ains calibration likings)......this allows all of
> the nails to 'false' (as a non-ferrous target) 30%
> of the time......during body-rotation around targe
> t whilst sweeping. (Most normal/rational folks wou
> ld not tolerate this!). If there is even the sligh
> test bit of non-ferrous metal in close proximity o
> f the 30% falsing nail.......... the 30% falsing g
> oes up to a much higher %-number. For instance....
> ... a square-nail at 9" deep is high-tone 'falsing
> ' 30% of the time. BUT...... this time..... just 1
> -inch below the square nail (at 10" deep) resides
> a Shield Nickel. Even though the Nickel is deeper
> and weaker than the stronger signal from the (shal
> lower) square nail.......... the detector is now:
> non-ferrous tone FALSING....MUCH more........ say:
> 87% of the time. HUGE delta/difference! ------You
> are now POSITIVE that MORE than just a (ferrous) s
> quare nail exists. It takes VERY little...... to u
> pset this 30% falsing "BALANCE"........and that 30
> % falsing VERY RAPIDLY (asymptotically) launches u
> p in percent. Dead giveaway. Huge clue!
>
>
>
> Hmm, I have read this multiple times and cant wrap
> my head around it. Tom states that the fact that
> the detector is non-ferrous tone falsing much more
> (say 87%), that this is a "dead giveaway. Huge cl
> ue!"
>
> I'm totally missing where this huge clue is! We d
> o not know what the target is to begin with when i
> t is in the ground, only that whatever it is, it i
> s falsing 30% of the time as we rotate around it.
> Call this the "30% target". Additionally, just be
> cause we find a target that falses MORE than that
> 30% target (say 87%), how the heck can we know tha
> t it is the caused by a non-ferrous target immedia
> tely in the vicinity of the "30% target"? The onl
> y way we can ascertain any of this is to actually
> dig them up and say "oh, thats what was causing th
> at scenario!" But we cant possibly know any of
> this until AFTER the targets have been dug. So ho
> w is this example/made up scenario of a V nickle j
> ust under the falsing nail a "Dead giveaway. Huge
> clue!"? Intellectually, I am following the logic
> as an "example", but I dont see how it translates
> into real world usage in the field because we cant
> know what is causing our particular level of falsi
> ng (be it 30% or 87%), until we dig it up and see.
>
>
> Calling Steve Goss! lol I follow your train of th
> ought/explanations pretty well and wonder if you c
> an clarify this one for me? Or anyone else who wa
> nts to take a crack at it.
>
>
> And Tom, I ask you to clarify only if Steve (or an
> yone else) cant explain it as I feel like asking y
> ou to explain every little question is like asking
> the vice president of a company when the company p
> icnic is! Sure, you know the answer, but probably
> a dozen others do as well and your time is better
> spent dealing with the bigger issues that are in n
> eed of your specialized expertise that others cant
> address. Thus, like many here, I read and lurk w
> ithout interjecting too much. Even reading this r
> eply is taking up your valuable time that could be
> used in continuing to bring us improvements on thi
> s and future products! I dont feel unworthy of as
> king questions, I just dont want to take up your l
> imited time with questions others can handle, or I
> can learn by reading it somewhere.
>
> PS I also throw my hat into the ring to add the
> dual FE-CO numbers on the machine. I've been sayi
> ng for years that my ideal machine would be a cros
> s between the Equinox and the Etrac with its tones
> and the FE-CO ID system. We're getting closer!
philber -- I am really glad to hear that the way my rather odd brain works (and thus the words that flow from it) are at times "coherent" and "understandable" to some, and at times maybe even a bit helpful! Thank you!
And, going all the way to the bottom of your post, yes -- we ARE "getting closer!" I totally agree, and have also been saying that the ideal machine would be the "offspring" of E-Trac and Equinox "parents," LOL! I think we are very close to that, with the Manticore, and I couldn't be happier...except...for the FE-CO two-number ID that is missing!
As for the falsing issue, that you asked if I could clarify, I will try, but not sure I'll make it much clearer, because you basically understand what NASA-Tom was saying quite well. There is one thing you may be missing, though, not sure...which is, he DID dig those "30% targets." LOTS of them. That's where he came up with his "test." The 30% target became a "known" target because he dug a bunch, to LEARN that they were "30% targets." THEN, he listened for targets that were MORE than 30%...
To elaborate...
In THEORY, what he was implying is that -- especially on a site with a particular, and generally consistent, type of iron (say, 2" square nails), that with your limits set rather "loose," you will of course get a good bit of non-ferrous audio (in part, because you have your limits set so "loose," and in part just because they like to "false" onto the "zero line"). And usually of course, they sound "better" from some angles, than others. So, he's saying that when he first gets to the site...say 1/2 hour just for grins, he is in "testing mode." After awhile, if he finds is getting alot of targets where he's hearing about 30% "high tones," during his rotation around the target, and the rest ferrous tones, and then he's digging each one of these, and then finding that they are 2" square nails, he's now locking that target behavior into his brain, saying "OK, today, on this site, with the type of nails that seem to prevail here, and with my settings, I CAN NOW CONCLUDE that nails will generally report as 30% non-ferrous, and then 70% iron grunts." SO, then, if he hits a target, and on this particular target, he's getting say 60% of non-ferrous (instead of 30), and then only 40% iron grunts, that immediately means there's "something different" going on. Clearly, there's iron there (the 40% iron grunts), but what is accounting for the extra percentage of non-ferrous audio as compared to the other square nails? If it's not a "high-toning" nail, then there must be something else that is permitting the rest of that high-toning to occur, right?
SO -- that is what he's alluding to, but...I think you know most or all of that already. You seem to understand pretty well what he's saying.
I think what you are saying is -- that in the real world, you have never seen a site where the ID characteristics of the nails in the ground were so "exacting," that EACH ONE reports as 30% high tone falses, and 70% iron grunts. I think you are saying "OK, so now I hit a nail that gives a high tone 60% of the rotation, and only 40% falsing...WHY CAN'T THAT JUST BE A DIFFERENT TYPE OF NAIL, or maybe a BENT NAIL, or TWO NAILS lying beside each other, or TWO NAILS IN AN X-SHAPED CONFIGURATION?"
And, to that, I would agree with you; I think it IS usually harder, for most of us mere mortals, than NASA-Tom makes it sound. I personally have rarely seen a site where nails behave as "consistently" as NASA-Tom is experiencing at some of his sites. I have one site in particular in Pennsylvania that is an old church; I've talked about it before. It was built somewhere around 1800, but has burned either two or three times in its history, and was rebuilt. And so, as you can imagine, there is all manner of square nail debris in that church yard. Small ones, big ones, bent ones, straight ones, skinny ones, fat ones. Some only give a small "rotational sector" of high tones; meanwhile, others sound so good for almost the entire rotation around the nail that it is difficult if not impossible to know that it's a nail, and not a deep high conductor. SO -- for me, especially on a site like this, the whole "x-percent high tone means nail, but if I hit a target where I hear a higher percentage of high tones, it means nail plus coin" idea is to some degree not usable/practical in many cases.
Now, I think NASA-Tom would say that yes, even on his sites, there are some "outliers." I'm sure he's had some targets that "held onto" the non-ferrous high tones for much more of his rotational sector, than his standard "x percent" that he has ascertained means "nail." In other words, I would be pretty sure that he will dig some nails on those sites, that his "test" would "fail" on, and thus cause him to dig and end up with just a nail. I would bet he's dug some bent ones, that he thought had a better than even chance of being a nail/coin combo. But, he is, I think, playing a "percentages" game, in terms of REDUCING the number of nails he digs, when trying to unmask coins, but still digging a few nails that "pass his test."
Finally, in a much "looser" way, than NASA-Tom's very "precise" approach, I have, to at least some degree, experienced something akin what he is saying ON OCCASION. In particular, there's a spot near my house that is the site of a former country club, that closed down in the 1960s, from what I can tell, and the clubhouse was converted into a country church. I have permission to hunt this site, and there's a spot next to where the old pool was...a sloping hillside that has a bunch of modern (round) nails. But, there ended up also being a good number of wheat cents, and a few silver coins there as well. I went through there with my Explorer and 13" Ultimate coil several years back, and hit it really hard...and pulled every wheatie and silver dime I could detect.
When I got my Equinox, this spot immediately came to mind as a GREAT place to test the Equinox's so-called "superior" ability to unmask. So, I started through the mess of nails, and, over the course of that first hunt with the EQX at that site, I started to dig a few wheaties. SO -- I knew that I was unmasking some coins that I could not, with my Explorer and the big coil (not surprising). So, I slowed down, and started to focus, and try to learn how I might "unmask" the coins that were obviously still lurking in the dirt. And during that time of focus, I started to realize that the coin/nail co-locations would definitely tend to "hold the high tone" for much more of the rotational sector, than the nail (no coin) targets. With modern nails, there's often a tendency (the way I set up my machines) to "sound good" at, say, 180 and 360 degrees. OR, more correctly, though a SECTOR surrounding 180 and 360 -- say 160 to 200 degrees, and then again in a "mirror image" way, at 340 to 20 degrees. Meanwhile, through all of the rest of the rotational sector, it's essentially all iron grunts. BUT -- on those coin/nail targets, at this site, I'd still hear the pronounced high tones through those same sectors surrounding 180 and 360. BUT -- not only would those high-tone sectors "expand" in size, but I would also hear at least some CHIRPS of high tones, sometimes one-way hits, sometimes two-way, through MUCH OF THE REST of the rotation. IN OTHER WORDS, a much higher percentage of high tones. Sure, there were sectors of predominantly iron grunts, but I'd get at least SOME high toning through most or all of the 360-degree sector, not JUST 180 and 360. THIS, I came to COUNT on, as being the key to unmasking THOSE coins, at THAT site, in THOSE type of nails, with MY machine set up the way I set it up (which at that time, was with FE=0).
I do want to make a note here, though, for anyone who might be reading and want to "try" this idea, that this is not some UNIVERSAL rule. IT MUST BE NOTED that the exact description I just gave, though quite successful for me at that site (I pulled MANY more wheats and a couple of silver dimes over the course of a couple of hunts) ONLY APPLIED in those specific circumstances. For instance, that description I gave of exactly what I learned to listen for, WOULD HAVE -- at that same site and with all else being equal -- been totally different with say, FE set at 6 or 7 or 8. And the reason I make THIS point, is that the SAME THING applies to the Manticore, and limits settings. IF you find one of these "rules of thumb" that works for you when unmasking, telling others about it on the forums is USELESS, unless they KNOW YOUR SETTINGS, and UNDERSTAND WHY your settings were causing what you observed, and HOW, if they use DIFFERENT settings, it would change the equation -- potentially substantially...
Wow. That's alot of words; I hope there was at least something useful in all of that, that perhaps addressed at least some of your question...
Bottom line is that as you were saying, you can't KNOW that you have a coin, using the "NASA-Tom" approach, until you dig it, as you said. BUT, you can formulate a pretty strong HUNCH, and put the odds in your favor if digging ONLY the targets that behave in that specific way. You would know FOR SURE that SOMETHING was different; for instance, if you hit one of those targets he described, thinking "coin-nail co-location," but it turned out to be a bent nail, you'd simply say "OH, now I see why it held the non-ferrous tones for so much more of the sector than the other nails did; the others were straight..." And thus, even THIS target could build your confidence that your "rule of thumb" is still accurate...as you would EXPECT the bent nail to deviate from a "test" you set up to identify a STRAIGHT nail...
OK, enough words!
Steve
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/30/2023 02:31PM by steveg.
