Etrac users

earthman --

To answer your question about "why" on the E-Trac, I don't know for sure. Sheer number of Tracs? Don't think so; many folks DON'T use them, due to price for one thing; good out-of-the-box depth? Don't think that's it -- you can say the same for a Fisher F-series or T2 (or other machines); ease of use? Don't think so -- I personally don't think they are among the easier machines to get proficient with -- not SUPER hard, but not "easy"; lower frequencies? YES, based on what NASA-Tom says -- I think this is a big part of it; I also think that the SOUND of high conductors like silver on the Explorer/E-Trac is pretty distinct, and recognizable. That helps; I also think having the FE AND the CO numbers is very helpful (or, if you want a graphical depiction of the two numbers, the smartfind screen, whichever one prefers). I feel that these machines just give superior information, allowing one to really "hone in" on silver. Once you get the hang of these machines, and if your focus is SOLELY deep silver, you can learn over time to have fairly high confidence pre-dig, on those targets that your Minelab "E" is telling you "silver." I cannot say that same thing, with other machines I have used. There ARE some things that can fool them into a silver sound/ID, but overall as you learn the machines, it becomes fairly easy to "hone in" on silver with them. It's hard to narrow it down to one thing, or even two, but I can do things with my machine on a "silver hunt" that I simply cannot do with other units that I've tried...

I doubt that helps any, and I am NOT saying other units are not capable in the silver-specific arena. But I know lots of guys, that have hunted for lots of years, with lots of machines, and of those whose FOCUS is on deep, old coins, and silver in particular, many seem to eventually gravitate toward Minelab Explorers and E-Tracs, and then stick with them, due to the noticeable increase in silver finds. Not sure exactly what the "why" is, but I suspect that superior ID and silver-resonant frequencies play a big, big role (and also their ability to handle less-than-mild soil)...

Steve



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 11/02/2011 08:16PM by steveg.

NASA-Tom,

That was a TERRIFICALLY educational write-up, both on the behavior of the T2/F75, and on the "phase angle wrap-around" issue.

Do I understand you to say that while some machines will "down-average" a coin/nail combo out of coin range and maybe into "mid-tone" range, the Minelab "E's" on the other hand might, due to "upping" (for lack of a better word) the normally less-dominant high-conductive characteristics of iron, tend to allow a coin/nail combo to still ring up as a high-conductor/coin ID -- and thus we might tend to dig them more often? Is that what you are saying? The down side, then, as I understand you to say, is dealing with more nail falses from sharp tips, and bent nails especially. You sure did "nail" that one (no pun intended), as I definitely dig TONS of nails that lie horizontally in the ground, and end up just out of the edge/off to the side of my hole. Now I think I understand WHY that is; it's a "tradeoff" that is necessary to keep more of the coin/nail combination targets ringing up as high conductors...did I paraphrase you correctly?

WOW -- thanks for the education. Just terrific!

Steve

In general....... most units will 'down-average' a coin/nail co-locate....... but usually into the iron ID range only. The T2/F-series units will "live-fire" snap-shot pretty much what ever the nominal 'composite' average that exists under the coil...... at any given split-second (yet are not immune to up-averaging/down-averaging). Some other units will 'up-average' into the coin ID range. BUT...... to a very minute' amount (esp on the FBS platforms). Hardly useful. Where the FBS platform attributes...........is............. they operate at a very low frequency(s). Even though the manual advertises 1.5Khz - 100Khz.......................... fact of the matter is................. it is the bottom end of its available spectrum unto which the FBS platform primarily operates. The benefits are 2-fold. Lower freq's are much more resonant to high-conductor silver........... AND ............ much less resonant to iron............. especially tiny flecks/flakes of rust. In fact......... tiny/minute flecks of rust to the (psudo/quasi PI platform) FBS units (electronic/electromagnetic decay-rate) are simply viewed upon as 'minerals'. The only way to analyze (electronically measure) "decay-rate"...... is to have a slow sampling clock speed. If only to have the attributes of FBS.......... yet...... have a much faster microprocessor clock-speed.

the question is,WHY don't other detector companies develop their OWN
"low frequency"designs to compete with the "trac"?..perhaps "patent infringement"
prevents this?

(h.h.!)
j.t.

NASA-Tom Wrote:
> If only to have the attributes of
> FBS.......... yet...... have a much faster
> microprocessor clock-speed.

So, is this doable? Could an E-Trac perform better with a faster processor? Or, as you allude to is the slow clock speed intrinsic to measuring the decay rate? (Hope I got that right) I guess we could just use the fast clock speed for other actions and then an occasional sample (matching the current E-Trac, or there abouts) to assist with decay rate measurements. I guess, in a sense, what might the next E-Trac do better, outside of being lighter and better balanced?

Hmmmm...

It is the decay rate of iron oxides and other minerals that dictated 'what' the operating parameters (ie....clock-speed) of the FBS platform should/needs to be.

j.t. ...... What is the operating freq of the 1280-X?

Thanks for the clear explanation from Tom.

Many have wondered and still wonder why the FBS s are high conductor biased and seem to be immune to tiny flakes of iron and other low conductors like aluminium foil. And why they are not equally good on gold and other low conductive finds. Maybe they operate on 28 harmonics produced by two peak low frequencies. Meaning a two frequency machine.

Other detectors with low freq do exist. I use the V3 in 2,5 single freq and it goes deep. If you look for deep silver and dont want the tiny bits to disturb you it is an option.

Minelab will eventually release a new detector. Lets hope they invest some money in faster processing instead of wireless coils.

OK -- sounds like my initial thought may have been off a bit (about the "up-averaging" -- as you say on an FBS unit it is too small of a factor to be of great help). BUT, you made very clear WHY the FBS platform processor MUST be "slower" than some -- because to measure decay rate, you have to have a certain, proper, "slower" clock speed. Very, very interesting...

Steve

Great explantions and thread.
Thanks!

One thread of many on this forum to bookmark.

Minelab is very secret about their tecknology and even if experienced users "have a hunch" or "experience the facts" no one with a name really came foreward with the facts.

Minelabs operating on lower freqs and needs time to analyze seems so important knowledge to users that wants the most out of it that it cant be measured in time or money.

Whatever keeps Minelab from stating facts maybe that they advertise the fbs as a 28 freq unit giving you the impression it is equally hot on all 28. But YOU know it isnt so.... even if you find the deepest silver dollar ever.

28, wich in fact isnt 28 but only 2 or 3 giving advertising advantage when harmonics comes into play in advertising.

We are getting somewhere.... Thanks..



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/05/2011 05:59PM by frnifo.

.......and now we know why the CZ platform vs the FBS platform are quite comparable..... in so many regards.

At some time in the future, answers to relative question shall be answered.
This has to be the very best mding site on the net.

agreed

Very interesting! But I do hope that minelabe will not do the wireless junk! You need to send your coil in if the battery is dead, etc.... No good in water etc...
I also dont think minelab will do anything about the weight cause it has been like that for years. I actually think minelab will become worse in customer service and quality. Look what is going on with them right now. Dont get me wrong, I love minelab units but I am now also very open to other brands. I personally find very tiny bits of aluminum foil and really nice depths and also gold with my etrac too. I also found the back of an earring even though silver not gold but it gave on heck of a signal on my etrac.

Yes connortn, the Etrac will false on iron, especially if you run in high manual sensitivities where you need to run the Etrac to get the maximum depth. I prefer to run in +3 Auto-sens mode, giving up a little depth for improved target ID. This is a very fatigue-free mode that is best for trashy areas. I only reserve the manual mode for relatively iron-free sites or in very old sites where I'm digging everything.

I just picked up a 5" Sunray X5 for testing in my bed. So far my preliminary tests show improved target separation compared to the 6" eXcelerator, probably due to it's 30% less surface area.

I'm about done with the Etrac and tend to use my LTD as my "go-to" machine, probably due to my greater experience with it and my relatively short usage on the Etrac due to my never ending workload... I'll be posting my Etrac for sale here soon, with pics.

A guy by the name of "Jim Upstate NY" used to post Findmall but stopped after the beating he took criticizing the Etrac on it's tendency to iron false. His last post over there was two years ago.

[www.findmall.com]

[www.findmall.com]

In the end I believe Jim went back to the Explorer.

NASA-Tom Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It is the decay rate of iron oxides and other
> minerals that dictated 'what' the operating
> parameters (ie....clock-speed) of the FBS platform
> should/needs to be.
>
> j.t. ...... What is the operating freq of the
> 1280-X?


hi tom!
perhaps i wasn't clear on what exactly i was asking!
i am "aware" of fishers dual frequency units,however the thrust of my question pertains to
"several" low frequencies that the trac employs to do the 'deed!"..apparently others cannot duplicate what minelab is doing
with it's "low" multi-frequency format,WITHOUT infringing on proprietary circuit design?..just curious!

(h.h.!)
j.t.

True..... as that data is proprietary.

FYI .... the 1280-X is a (very low) 2.4Khz operating freq; however, single freq.

Great explanations. Learned a great deal from this thread.

NASA-Tom Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> True..... as that data is proprietary.
>
> FYI .... the 1280-X is a (very low) 2.4Khz
> operating freq; however, single freq.


thanks! tom ! i WAS "un aware" the 1280x's operating frequency
is that low,albeit,still a single frequency. the thought occurs that "hopefully",
dave and crew can "avoid" patent infringement,and produce a worthy competitor
to the venerable "e-trac!"

(h.h.!)
j.t.

A friend of mine has a etrac that just stoped working. We changed the batteries, did a voltage test on the battery pack, voltage was good. Still wouldn't turn on. Anybody have this problem?
I also know that there are worthy competitors to the E, easily the cz's and f-75's to name two.

Dave's mindset/persona could absolutely care less about copyright/patent infringement...... and would never encroach upon this......... but for different/unsuspecting reasons. Dave "might" look at other Mfr's detectors........ but moreso for the intrigue/curiosity/fascination/interest/love of electronic engineering concepts from another human beings direction/mindset/perspective. Dave has no interest in copying anything from anyone. He is not a 'follower'. He is a natural leader (not by choice). IF he reverse-engineers another Mfr's detector (doubtful).......... it is just for fun & curiosity. If he sees something he likes in another platform...... he would take it multiple steps further (advanced)........ then modify it again.... so as to fit what ever design architect he may currently have on his brain. Dave is much more independent.... and correctly 'engineering stubborn'......... a 'wanted' feature in a chief design engineer. ((( "Engineering Stubborn" = no such thing as failure........and...... "I'll never be 'complete' with this project" ))). This came out in a lengthy phone conversation with Dave (and John) a few years ago.
This is exactly why the T2/F75/F70 are very different platforms...... as compared to the 'norm'........ due to 'out-of-the-box' thinking. Bruce Candy (Minelab Chief DE) fits the same mold. The Excal/Sov and especially the Explorer/E-series are very different electronic architect...... as compared to the 'norm'. These units have attributes and detriments. The Fisher T and F series units also have attributes and detriments. Comparing the two Mfr's........ the attributes/detriments may not be the same!

Can you utilize (put-to-use) the attributes!

ozzie Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> A friend of mine has a etrac that just stoped
> working. We changed the batteries, did a voltage
> test on the battery pack, voltage was good. Still
> wouldn't turn on. Anybody have this problem?
> I also know that there are worthy competitors to
> the E, easily the cz's and f-75's to name two.

Sometimes if you put the battery in too hard it doesn't lock into place correctly. Try placing the battery in gently and push down at the very end to make sure it locks into place correctly. It has to drop down and click in at the very end of putting it in.

Thanks coinnut, I did notice that and made sure they were in place, then did the voltage test and inserted the battery pack...we did this several times, nothing. Off to ML repair.

NASA-Tom Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Dave's mindset/persona could absolutely care less
> about copyright/patent infringement...... and
> would never encroach upon this......... but for
> different/unsuspecting reasons. Dave "might" look
> at other Mfr's detectors........ but moreso for
> the intrigue/curiosity/fascination/interest/love
> of electronic engineering concepts from another
> human beings direction/mindset/perspective. Dave
> has no interest in copying anything from anyone.
> He is not a 'follower'. He is a natural leader
> (not by choice). IF he reverse-engineers another
> Mfr's detector (doubtful).......... it is just for
> fun & curiosity. If he sees something he likes in
> another platform...... he would take it multiple
> steps further (advanced)........ then modify it
> again.... so as to fit what ever design architect
> he may currently have on his brain. Dave is much
> more independent.... and correctly 'engineering
> stubborn'......... a 'wanted' feature in a chief
> design engineer. ((( "Engineering Stubborn" = no
> such thing as failure........and...... "I'll never
> be 'complete' with this project" ))). This came
> out in a lengthy phone conversation with Dave (and
> John) a few years ago.
> This is exactly why the T2/F75/F70 are very
> different platforms...... as compared to the
> 'norm'........ due to 'out-of-the-box' thinking.
> Bruce Candy (Minelab Chief DE) fits the same mold.
> The Excal/Sov and especially the Explorer/E-series
> are very different electronic architect...... as
> compared to the 'norm'. These units have
> attributes and detriments. The Fisher T and F
> series units also have attributes and detriments.
> Comparing the two Mfr's........ the
> attributes/detriments may not be the same!
>
> Can you utilize (put-to-use) the attributes!


innovating engineers! thank god they are involved with metal detectors!

(h.h.!)
j.t.

Not all...... but only a select few.

understood! i am aware of the reasons why this is so,however STILL happy for the select ones that DO get involved!
guys like yourself,and of course,dave and crew,jack gifford,george payne,and a few more that don't immediately come to mind!

(h.h.!)
j.t.

NASA-Tom Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Can you utilize (put-to-use) the attributes!

Tom...

I think many can and most would benefit from complete knowledge about what "the secrets " are.

Minelab would even sell more detectors if people knew...!!!!! To the ones who need them. But not to the ones who should own a different detector.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/11/2011 05:08PM by frnifo.

I.... for one...... would certainly like to be armed with more knowledge.

I think Bruce C. got out of ML when the new company bought them out.
One of his strong points was in audio design...which I think is one of reasons for the success of the Explorer/ Etrac series.
It could be argued that most of ML detectors have great audio sound qualities except for the Xterra series.
Back during that time period, there were arguably just as deep detectors, such as the CZ series, along with a few other models which were
mostly used for relic hunting.
But the audio of the Explorer series sort of sets them apart from most other detectors and I suppose with the multi frequency allows for better audio ID
across the conductive range.
I can imagine there is a balancing act that has to be achieved in a design to get a meter reading and at the same time getting the electronics
to assign audio tones which the user can use to decipher what is going on under the coil at any given time.

Now if FT is really working on a multi-frequency and they can get it to have at least as good depth and ID and audio tones....perhaps even a deeper
machine...then ML will not have a hold on the deep turf side of the market.
Can other current/ past detectors be used in the turf successfully? Yes but it is hard to argue with the success of the Explorer series especially
with the users that really get to know their detector really well.

I would like to see in the future the brands use more testers, not just their pick of a small handful....more input means a better end product.
So FT....send me a proto of the newest one.....LOL.

I have the feeling minelab will start to turn into an average unit. Less good quality, lower customer support and higher prices with the same to average performance. I dont know I just have this feeling, I hope I am wrong.