Welcome!
» Log In
» Create A New Profile
Home
>
Thomas Dankowski Metal Detecting Forum
>
Topic
Some E-trac II ideas
Posted by Digs_alot
This forum is currently read only. You can not log in or make any changes. This is a temporary situation.
|
Some E-trac II ideas April 02, 2012 06:40PM |
Registered: 12 years ago Posts: 455 |
Note: this post is heavily biased towards upgrading the E-trac for finding small gold jewelry.
The E-trac is already very good at detecting silver coins, especially U.S. coins. There’s not much park trash, besides iron, that sounds like a silver dime , quarter, or half dollar (excluding modern coins). Rusty iron nails, etc. is about the only trash that is regularly found in parks that can sound like a silver coin.
Finding small gold jewelry is another matter. There’s an enormous amount of low conductive park trash that can read as low as small gold jewelry (pieces of tin foil, lawn mowed pieces of aluminum can, etc). The beach appears to be a better way of finding this small, low conductive gold.
Videos on Youtube show the difficulty the E-trac has in detecting small gold using air-tests, dry sand tests, or tests with small gold jewelry (isolated from the wet sand) inside of a bag or PVC tube. The E-trac can detect some of the small gold out there under the right conditions. A conductive wet/damp sand beach, combined with a high manual sensitivity level, and perhaps a high noise cancel number, should increase the possibility of finding small gold with the E-trac.
The E-trac can find small gold, but there’s definitely room for improvement.
From Thomas Dankowski’s “5th Edition of Fisher Intelligence” paper, “There’s approximately 11 times more losses of micro-jewelry in comparison to rings/wedding bands”. Of my 101 E-trac gold finds, 54% are less than 2 grams. Out of that, 30% are between 1 and 2 grams, and 24% are less than 1 gram. There’s probably a lot more sub-gram gold jewelry at the beach where I hunt (thin chains, thin broken rings, etc), but detecting it is another story. Although other detectors, like VLFs, can detect (air tests) small sub-gram gold jewelry, I’m relatively sure that many of them would have difficulty on a high iron rust content, black sand, iron infested, saltw@ter wet sand beach.
1) One possible way of upgrading the E-trac would be increasing control over the sensitivity settings.
Auto-sensitivity controls the high, medium, and low channels independently to stabilize the E-trac’s performance. Whereas manual sensitivity forces all 3 channels to a user controlled level, regardless of the stability. I believe the high frequency channel is for sensitivity to targets with short time constants, like small low conductive gold. And the low frequency channel is for sensitivity to targets with long time constants, like silver coins. If a user could monitor all 3 Auto-sensitivity controlled channels, the user could get an idea of which channel(s) is being adversely affected by ground conditions. The user would be able to adjust each channel individually, optimizing performance for their own particular use.
For example.
If the high frequency channel is being severely affected by the ground, then Auto-sensitivity will probably lower the high channel to stabilize the E-trac. The user would see this decrease, and know that sensitivity to small low conductors (like small gold jewelry) is being affected by ground. The user could raise the high channel to a level above Auto +3, but below the desired manual level for more stability, and adjust the medium and low channels to user acceptable levels.
If the low frequency channel is being severely affected by the ground, then Auto-sensitivity will probably lower the low channel for better stabilization. The user would see this decrease, and know that sensitivity to targets with long time constants (like a silver quarter ) is being affected by ground. The user could raise the low channel to a level above Auto +3, but below the desired manual level, and adjust the medium and high channels accordantly.
Although the Auto sensitivity works very good to stabilize the E-trac, high levels of manual sensitivity can pull up very deep targets, and very small targets a lot better than Auto +3. But the price for high levels of manual sensitivity on bad ground can be a lot of falsing.
A 2nd Smartfind screen, (enabled/disabled thru the expert menu), with a smaller depth gauge on the right, and an expanded Auto/Manual level gauge for each of the 3 channels. Seeing the 3 Auto channel levels alone would tell you how the ground is affecting the detector, but being able to adjust the 3 channels independently would allow you to specialize your detecting capabilities. Perhaps increased user control of sensitivity levels, combined with the effects of selected Noise Cancel # hunting, would further optimized the E-trac’s capabilities.
From a previous post titled “E-trac hack”, 3 of the 8 parameters are mL, mM, and mH. Are they related to Low, Medium, and High channels? If they are, how would they be related to the Auto-sensitivity controlled channels? There might be usable information already available on the sensitivity channels in the E-trac hack, but how to use it is another question.
2) Another area would be perhaps adding a particular mode which would set the hardware specifically for hunting small gold jewelry or nuggets, while sacrificing high conductor detection capabilities in that particular mode.
Being a beach hunter, I’m finding some small gold jewelry that have very low conductive values, but very high ferrous values while in the ground. Small gold rings, necklace pendants, name ID bracelets, and large earrings, they generally are in the 01 to 03 conductivity range. Perhaps this low conductive range, say 01 up to 10 could be expanded across the 01 to 50 scale in a particular mode (5x resolution), also increase sensitivity to extreme low conductors like thin gold necklaces, it could be used for small gold jewelry hunting, perhaps even nugget hunting in mild ground conditions.
Finding small gold jewelry is probably very similar to nugget hunting, if you really think about it. You’ll dig a lot of tiny pieces non-ferrous junk, and rusting iron, just to get some small gold, just like a nugget hunter.
Being able to switch from the normal E-trac mode to a low conductor gold jewelry mode (E-trac small gold mode) would be like having 2 detectors built into one. You would be able to “nugget hunt” for small gold jewelry. Since there’s approximately 11 times more micro-jewelry being lost than rings, it would open up a new opportunity for those who have learned how to detect with the E-trac.
3) For shallow water hunters, making a saltw@ter dunkable E-trac, or be able to remove the control box housing and battery to waterproof it. Okay, a dunkable E-trac is unlikely, at least affordably, but a removable control box is a possibility.
4) From a previous post here, titled “More E-trac Depth”, discovered that the repeatable 01-50 signals (using Noise Cancel #11, volume gain = 30, and a high manual sensitivity) were actually targets that were beyond target ID depth. Nearly 2 years ago, the first few initial finds were ironstone or small magnetite rocks. At a gold jewelry productive part of the beach, recently assumed that these irritable 01-50 signals were deep magnetite rocks or pockets of heavy mineralization. After a couple of days of digging some of these signals, now know that the repeatable signals are targets. Most are tiny pieces of very conductive metal near the surface, but some are deeper, heavier targets. Only dug non-ferrous targets when an iron discrimination pattern is being used. Using an all-metal pattern, only dug 1 very thin iron nail that read 01-50 (probably falsing). When a target is too small or too deep to be identified in mineralized soil, the E-trac appears to use this “catch all” signal to indicate a target is beyond target ID depth, but is still within detectable range.
This would be another area for a possible upgrade, a deep target E-trac mode. Although target ID and multi-tone would be disabled, it has a potential for finding very deep targets with user defined iron discrimination. From what I’ve read, the E-trac doesn’t like air, like plowed field furrows, and tilled ground. I now believe that such ground decreases target ID depth, but the 01-50 signal seems to like sand/dirt excavated above a buried coin-size target, and can reach several inches beyond target ID depth in this situation. It could be useful in hunted out fields where most of the targets with target ID depth have already been removed, and very little new trash has been introduced.
One problem is that lots of tiny pieces of very conductive metal on or near the surface can cause non-repeatable 01-50 signals, but these objects’ detection depth is very limited. Raising the coil a couple of inches would allow you to differentiate shallow pieces of tiny metal from deeper, larger targets. Also removing the top few inches of sand/dirt above a potential target would also allow differentiation, since tiny metal is only detectable an inch or two.
As it is, this 01-50 signal can be useful under the right conditions, but upgrading the circuitry/software could potentially make it another power detecting tool.
It would be nice to get some information on which ground conditions adversely affect target ID depth, but doesn’t affect this 01-50 signal as much, and why this happens.
Detecting since Feb, 2010
E-trac with 18"x15" SEF, 13" Ultimate coil, Pro coil, Minelab 8" coil, 4.5"x7" SEF, Sunray target probe
CTX3030 with 17"x13" DD coil, 11" DD coil
The E-trac is already very good at detecting silver coins, especially U.S. coins. There’s not much park trash, besides iron, that sounds like a silver dime , quarter, or half dollar (excluding modern coins). Rusty iron nails, etc. is about the only trash that is regularly found in parks that can sound like a silver coin.
Finding small gold jewelry is another matter. There’s an enormous amount of low conductive park trash that can read as low as small gold jewelry (pieces of tin foil, lawn mowed pieces of aluminum can, etc). The beach appears to be a better way of finding this small, low conductive gold.
Videos on Youtube show the difficulty the E-trac has in detecting small gold using air-tests, dry sand tests, or tests with small gold jewelry (isolated from the wet sand) inside of a bag or PVC tube. The E-trac can detect some of the small gold out there under the right conditions. A conductive wet/damp sand beach, combined with a high manual sensitivity level, and perhaps a high noise cancel number, should increase the possibility of finding small gold with the E-trac.
The E-trac can find small gold, but there’s definitely room for improvement.
From Thomas Dankowski’s “5th Edition of Fisher Intelligence” paper, “There’s approximately 11 times more losses of micro-jewelry in comparison to rings/wedding bands”. Of my 101 E-trac gold finds, 54% are less than 2 grams. Out of that, 30% are between 1 and 2 grams, and 24% are less than 1 gram. There’s probably a lot more sub-gram gold jewelry at the beach where I hunt (thin chains, thin broken rings, etc), but detecting it is another story. Although other detectors, like VLFs, can detect (air tests) small sub-gram gold jewelry, I’m relatively sure that many of them would have difficulty on a high iron rust content, black sand, iron infested, saltw@ter wet sand beach.
1) One possible way of upgrading the E-trac would be increasing control over the sensitivity settings.
Auto-sensitivity controls the high, medium, and low channels independently to stabilize the E-trac’s performance. Whereas manual sensitivity forces all 3 channels to a user controlled level, regardless of the stability. I believe the high frequency channel is for sensitivity to targets with short time constants, like small low conductive gold. And the low frequency channel is for sensitivity to targets with long time constants, like silver coins. If a user could monitor all 3 Auto-sensitivity controlled channels, the user could get an idea of which channel(s) is being adversely affected by ground conditions. The user would be able to adjust each channel individually, optimizing performance for their own particular use.
For example.
If the high frequency channel is being severely affected by the ground, then Auto-sensitivity will probably lower the high channel to stabilize the E-trac. The user would see this decrease, and know that sensitivity to small low conductors (like small gold jewelry) is being affected by ground. The user could raise the high channel to a level above Auto +3, but below the desired manual level for more stability, and adjust the medium and low channels to user acceptable levels.
If the low frequency channel is being severely affected by the ground, then Auto-sensitivity will probably lower the low channel for better stabilization. The user would see this decrease, and know that sensitivity to targets with long time constants (like a silver quarter ) is being affected by ground. The user could raise the low channel to a level above Auto +3, but below the desired manual level, and adjust the medium and high channels accordantly.
Although the Auto sensitivity works very good to stabilize the E-trac, high levels of manual sensitivity can pull up very deep targets, and very small targets a lot better than Auto +3. But the price for high levels of manual sensitivity on bad ground can be a lot of falsing.
A 2nd Smartfind screen, (enabled/disabled thru the expert menu), with a smaller depth gauge on the right, and an expanded Auto/Manual level gauge for each of the 3 channels. Seeing the 3 Auto channel levels alone would tell you how the ground is affecting the detector, but being able to adjust the 3 channels independently would allow you to specialize your detecting capabilities. Perhaps increased user control of sensitivity levels, combined with the effects of selected Noise Cancel # hunting, would further optimized the E-trac’s capabilities.
From a previous post titled “E-trac hack”, 3 of the 8 parameters are mL, mM, and mH. Are they related to Low, Medium, and High channels? If they are, how would they be related to the Auto-sensitivity controlled channels? There might be usable information already available on the sensitivity channels in the E-trac hack, but how to use it is another question.
2) Another area would be perhaps adding a particular mode which would set the hardware specifically for hunting small gold jewelry or nuggets, while sacrificing high conductor detection capabilities in that particular mode.
Being a beach hunter, I’m finding some small gold jewelry that have very low conductive values, but very high ferrous values while in the ground. Small gold rings, necklace pendants, name ID bracelets, and large earrings, they generally are in the 01 to 03 conductivity range. Perhaps this low conductive range, say 01 up to 10 could be expanded across the 01 to 50 scale in a particular mode (5x resolution), also increase sensitivity to extreme low conductors like thin gold necklaces, it could be used for small gold jewelry hunting, perhaps even nugget hunting in mild ground conditions.
Finding small gold jewelry is probably very similar to nugget hunting, if you really think about it. You’ll dig a lot of tiny pieces non-ferrous junk, and rusting iron, just to get some small gold, just like a nugget hunter.
Being able to switch from the normal E-trac mode to a low conductor gold jewelry mode (E-trac small gold mode) would be like having 2 detectors built into one. You would be able to “nugget hunt” for small gold jewelry. Since there’s approximately 11 times more micro-jewelry being lost than rings, it would open up a new opportunity for those who have learned how to detect with the E-trac.
3) For shallow water hunters, making a saltw@ter dunkable E-trac, or be able to remove the control box housing and battery to waterproof it. Okay, a dunkable E-trac is unlikely, at least affordably, but a removable control box is a possibility.
4) From a previous post here, titled “More E-trac Depth”, discovered that the repeatable 01-50 signals (using Noise Cancel #11, volume gain = 30, and a high manual sensitivity) were actually targets that were beyond target ID depth. Nearly 2 years ago, the first few initial finds were ironstone or small magnetite rocks. At a gold jewelry productive part of the beach, recently assumed that these irritable 01-50 signals were deep magnetite rocks or pockets of heavy mineralization. After a couple of days of digging some of these signals, now know that the repeatable signals are targets. Most are tiny pieces of very conductive metal near the surface, but some are deeper, heavier targets. Only dug non-ferrous targets when an iron discrimination pattern is being used. Using an all-metal pattern, only dug 1 very thin iron nail that read 01-50 (probably falsing). When a target is too small or too deep to be identified in mineralized soil, the E-trac appears to use this “catch all” signal to indicate a target is beyond target ID depth, but is still within detectable range.
This would be another area for a possible upgrade, a deep target E-trac mode. Although target ID and multi-tone would be disabled, it has a potential for finding very deep targets with user defined iron discrimination. From what I’ve read, the E-trac doesn’t like air, like plowed field furrows, and tilled ground. I now believe that such ground decreases target ID depth, but the 01-50 signal seems to like sand/dirt excavated above a buried coin-size target, and can reach several inches beyond target ID depth in this situation. It could be useful in hunted out fields where most of the targets with target ID depth have already been removed, and very little new trash has been introduced.
One problem is that lots of tiny pieces of very conductive metal on or near the surface can cause non-repeatable 01-50 signals, but these objects’ detection depth is very limited. Raising the coil a couple of inches would allow you to differentiate shallow pieces of tiny metal from deeper, larger targets. Also removing the top few inches of sand/dirt above a potential target would also allow differentiation, since tiny metal is only detectable an inch or two.
As it is, this 01-50 signal can be useful under the right conditions, but upgrading the circuitry/software could potentially make it another power detecting tool.
It would be nice to get some information on which ground conditions adversely affect target ID depth, but doesn’t affect this 01-50 signal as much, and why this happens.
Detecting since Feb, 2010
E-trac with 18"x15" SEF, 13" Ultimate coil, Pro coil, Minelab 8" coil, 4.5"x7" SEF, Sunray target probe
CTX3030 with 17"x13" DD coil, 11" DD coil
|
Re: Some E-trac II ideas April 02, 2012 08:16PM |
Registered: 13 years ago Posts: 2,251 |
I'll take a shot at a few upgrades. Mine will not be veery technical.
Weight issue needs resolved.
Poor screen viewing needs resolved.
Being able to update firmware through USB would be nice.
I don't care about waterproof. I can get an Excal for that.
Over all the E Trac remains a top line detector after how many years? 5?
I really don't see the next generation being any deeper. A faster recovery speed would be nice. But then I guess the FBS sysyem itself would need an over haul.
The E Trac is and remains one of the top dogs. It is just in a crappy housing.
Weight issue needs resolved.
Poor screen viewing needs resolved.
Being able to update firmware through USB would be nice.
I don't care about waterproof. I can get an Excal for that.
Over all the E Trac remains a top line detector after how many years? 5?
I really don't see the next generation being any deeper. A faster recovery speed would be nice. But then I guess the FBS sysyem itself would need an over haul.
The E Trac is and remains one of the top dogs. It is just in a crappy housing.
|
Re: Some E-trac II ideas April 02, 2012 08:54PM |
Registered: 13 years ago Posts: 214 |
goodmore Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'll take a shot at a few upgrades. Mine will not
> be veery technical.
>
> Weight issue needs resolved.
> Poor screen viewing needs resolved.
> Being able to update firmware through USB would be
> nice.
>
> I don't care about waterproof. I can get an Excal
> for that.
> Over all the E Trac remains a top line detector
> after how many years? 5?
> I really don't see the next generation being any
> deeper. A faster recovery speed would be nice. But
> then I guess the FBS sysyem itself would need an
> over haul.
>
> The E Trac is and remains one of the top dogs. It
> is just in a crappy housing.
Spot on! I played with one late last week. Cumbersome and annoyingly heavy (had a Sunray probe on it). Screen very hard to see in the sun.
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'll take a shot at a few upgrades. Mine will not
> be veery technical.
>
> Weight issue needs resolved.
> Poor screen viewing needs resolved.
> Being able to update firmware through USB would be
> nice.
>
> I don't care about waterproof. I can get an Excal
> for that.
> Over all the E Trac remains a top line detector
> after how many years? 5?
> I really don't see the next generation being any
> deeper. A faster recovery speed would be nice. But
> then I guess the FBS sysyem itself would need an
> over haul.
>
> The E Trac is and remains one of the top dogs. It
> is just in a crappy housing.
Spot on! I played with one late last week. Cumbersome and annoyingly heavy (had a Sunray probe on it). Screen very hard to see in the sun.
|
Re: Some E-trac II ideas April 03, 2012 01:52AM |
Registered: 13 years ago Posts: 2,251 |
|
Re: Some E-trac II ideas April 03, 2012 02:45AM |
Registered: 15 years ago Posts: 3,120 |
Make it balanced better. 3.5 pounds is not heavy folks. 50 pounds is heavyish. 100 pounds is heavy. 3.5 is not. You're talking about just a handful of ounces between the lightest machine on the market and the "heavier" machines out there. The F75 is talked about as being one of the lightest weight, most ergonomic detector platforms out there. It weighs 3.5 lbs listed weight, without batteries. Well guess what the eTrac listed weight is? 3.5 lbs without battery. Exactly the same weight. So how can one machine at 3.5 lbs be the lightest machine people have ever used...vs the eTrac which everybody says is the heaviest machine, and it weighs 3.5 lbs too? It's all about BALANCE.
There is a lot of room there they could go in the balance aspect of it.
I would like to see improved battery life...and less batteries. Whatever Dave J did with the T2/F75 and make it go so long with 4 AA batteries...is exactly what the others need to learn from and go to. 8 AA batteries get old after a while...especially when they don't last but about 1/4 of the life of a F75/T2.
True All Metal mode. This is what kills the eTrac for me as a relic hunter. It doesn't have a true all metal mode. It needs one!
I'm not a tone guy. Two tones is the most I want in a machine. Having the others available for those that want them...that's fine. As long as I have the option for mono tone or 2 tone, I'm happy.
There is a lot of room there they could go in the balance aspect of it.
I would like to see improved battery life...and less batteries. Whatever Dave J did with the T2/F75 and make it go so long with 4 AA batteries...is exactly what the others need to learn from and go to. 8 AA batteries get old after a while...especially when they don't last but about 1/4 of the life of a F75/T2.
True All Metal mode. This is what kills the eTrac for me as a relic hunter. It doesn't have a true all metal mode. It needs one!
I'm not a tone guy. Two tones is the most I want in a machine. Having the others available for those that want them...that's fine. As long as I have the option for mono tone or 2 tone, I'm happy.
|
Re: Some E-trac II ideas April 03, 2012 04:30AM |
Registered: 12 years ago Posts: 1,023 |
Daniel Tn Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Make it balanced better. 3.5 pounds is not heavy
> folks. 50 pounds is heavyish. 100 pounds is heavy.
> 3.5 is not. You're talking about just a handful
> of ounces between the lightest machine on the
> market and the "heavier" machines out there. The
> F75 is talked about as being one of the lightest
> weight, most ergonomic detector platforms out
> there. It weighs 3.5 lbs listed weight, without
> batteries. Well guess what the eTrac listed weight
> is? 3.5 lbs without battery. Exactly the same
> weight. So how can one machine at 3.5 lbs be the
> lightest machine people have ever used...vs the
> eTrac which everybody says is the heaviest
> machine, and it weighs 3.5 lbs too? It's all
> about BALANCE.
>
> There is a lot of room there they could go in the
> balance aspect of it.
>
> I would like to see improved battery life...and
> less batteries. Whatever Dave J did with the
> T2/F75 and make it go so long with 4 AA
> batteries...is exactly what the others need to
> learn from and go to. 8 AA batteries get old
> after a while...especially when they don't last
> but about 1/4 of the life of a F75/T2.
>
> True All Metal mode. This is what kills the eTrac
> for me as a relic hunter. It doesn't have a true
> all metal mode. It needs one!
>
> I'm not a tone guy. Two tones is the most I want
> in a machine. Having the others available for
> those that want them...that's fine. As long as I
> have the option for mono tone or 2 tone, I'm
> happy.
The F75 is 3.5lbs WITH batteries. Add another 6-8oz for the battery for the Etrac and you have a detector over 4lbs.
When I had my Explorers, I weighed the coil and it alone was like 1.7lbs. So I imagine the Etrac coil weighs too much.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Make it balanced better. 3.5 pounds is not heavy
> folks. 50 pounds is heavyish. 100 pounds is heavy.
> 3.5 is not. You're talking about just a handful
> of ounces between the lightest machine on the
> market and the "heavier" machines out there. The
> F75 is talked about as being one of the lightest
> weight, most ergonomic detector platforms out
> there. It weighs 3.5 lbs listed weight, without
> batteries. Well guess what the eTrac listed weight
> is? 3.5 lbs without battery. Exactly the same
> weight. So how can one machine at 3.5 lbs be the
> lightest machine people have ever used...vs the
> eTrac which everybody says is the heaviest
> machine, and it weighs 3.5 lbs too? It's all
> about BALANCE.
>
> There is a lot of room there they could go in the
> balance aspect of it.
>
> I would like to see improved battery life...and
> less batteries. Whatever Dave J did with the
> T2/F75 and make it go so long with 4 AA
> batteries...is exactly what the others need to
> learn from and go to. 8 AA batteries get old
> after a while...especially when they don't last
> but about 1/4 of the life of a F75/T2.
>
> True All Metal mode. This is what kills the eTrac
> for me as a relic hunter. It doesn't have a true
> all metal mode. It needs one!
>
> I'm not a tone guy. Two tones is the most I want
> in a machine. Having the others available for
> those that want them...that's fine. As long as I
> have the option for mono tone or 2 tone, I'm
> happy.
The F75 is 3.5lbs WITH batteries. Add another 6-8oz for the battery for the Etrac and you have a detector over 4lbs.
When I had my Explorers, I weighed the coil and it alone was like 1.7lbs. So I imagine the Etrac coil weighs too much.
|
Re: Some E-trac II ideas April 03, 2012 01:10PM |
Registered: 15 years ago Posts: 3,120 |
Detectorist -- Go to the Fisher website. Look up the specs on the F75. Look what it says....3.5 lbs WITHOUT batteries. At most you are talking about a few ounces differences between them. 4 AA vs 8 AA....yeah it has 4 more batteries and the old coil on the Explorer vs the newer Pro Coil on eTrac is quite a difference.
Even still... 3.5 vs 4 lbs....6 ounces of difference? Heavy? If it is...some folks need less PC time and more time doing yard work or gym time.
Even still... 3.5 vs 4 lbs....6 ounces of difference? Heavy? If it is...some folks need less PC time and more time doing yard work or gym time.
|
Re: Some E-trac II ideas April 03, 2012 01:14PM |
Registered: 17 years ago Posts: 10,071 |
As with aircraft; weight/balance is critical.
Although I can swing a GPX-5000 or a CZ-20 (pole mounted) w/10.5" coil all day long............. the weight-n-balance issue is valid.
Recently, in F75 SE.......... I installed 3 AA batteries............ and one aluminum AA 'blank'. Unit worked per design. Battery LCD indicator displayed 2 LCD batt bars.
I would like to see more detectors utilize only one 9V battery. When you have a unit that requires several batteries............. it is not uncommon for one battery to go bad................. and the common practice is............ you throw out ALL the batteries.............. and replace with ALL new ones. This is not efficient.
Although I can swing a GPX-5000 or a CZ-20 (pole mounted) w/10.5" coil all day long............. the weight-n-balance issue is valid.
Recently, in F75 SE.......... I installed 3 AA batteries............ and one aluminum AA 'blank'. Unit worked per design. Battery LCD indicator displayed 2 LCD batt bars.
I would like to see more detectors utilize only one 9V battery. When you have a unit that requires several batteries............. it is not uncommon for one battery to go bad................. and the common practice is............ you throw out ALL the batteries.............. and replace with ALL new ones. This is not efficient.
|
Re: Some E-trac II ideas April 03, 2012 01:54PM |
Registered: 12 years ago Posts: 1,023 |
Daniel Tn Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Detectorist -- Go to the Fisher website. Look up
> the specs on the F75. Look what it says....3.5 lbs
> WITHOUT batteries. At most you are talking about a
> few ounces differences between them. 4 AA vs 8
> AA....yeah it has 4 more batteries and the old
> coil on the Explorer vs the newer Pro Coil on
> eTrac is quite a difference.
>
> Even still... 3.5 vs 4 lbs....6 ounces of
> difference? Heavy? If it is...some folks need less
> PC time and more time doing yard work or gym time.
From the Fisher F75 spec page:
F75 Specifications
Mechanical: S-rod with electronics housing mounted on handgrip, 3-piece breakdown, batteries under elbow, 2-way armrest adjustment —
forward/backward & around forearm.
Searchcoil: 11” (28 cm) open-frame elliptical double-D, waterproof.
Batteries: 4 AA, alkaline (not included).
Weight: 3.5 pounds (1.6 kg) with alkaline batteries installed.
Static Balance: force in vertical plane normal to elbow 0.47 pounds (0.22 kg).Varies with adjustment and user’s stance and arm/hand physiology.
Dynamic Balance: axial moment, 0.29 foot-pounds (0.39 newton-meters). Varies with adjustment and user’s stance and arm/hand physiology.
Sweep Effort: lateral moment 5.2 foot-pounds (7.1 newton-meters).
Operating Principle: VLF induction balance
Operating Frequency: nominal 13 kHz, quartz crystal timing reference
Basic Sensitivity: 6 x 10 9 root Hertz (detectivity)
Lag Coefficient: 78 milliseconds
Reactive Overload: approximately 10,000 micro-cgs units (volume susceptibility)
40,000 micro-cgs units with sensitivity < 30.
Resistive Overload: approximately 1,200 micro-cgs units (volume susceptibility)
4,800 micro-cgs units with sensitivity < 30.
Ground Balancing Range: From ferrite to salt, inclusive
Discrimination Ground Suppression: combination of second and third order methods
ID Ground Suppression: third order
Battery Life: Typically 40 hours with high quality alkaline batteries
Estimated 80 hours with nickel oxyhydroxide batteries
Estimated 65 hours with lithium iron disulfide batteries
Operating Temp Range: 4 to +122 degrees F (-20 to +50 degrees C)
Operating Humidity Range: 0-90% non-condensing
There are many folks who have injured themselves using the Minelab Explorer/Etrac due to the terrible ergonomics. When you swing a detector thousands of times in a day, any excess weight, especially at the coil will be magnified.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Detectorist -- Go to the Fisher website. Look up
> the specs on the F75. Look what it says....3.5 lbs
> WITHOUT batteries. At most you are talking about a
> few ounces differences between them. 4 AA vs 8
> AA....yeah it has 4 more batteries and the old
> coil on the Explorer vs the newer Pro Coil on
> eTrac is quite a difference.
>
> Even still... 3.5 vs 4 lbs....6 ounces of
> difference? Heavy? If it is...some folks need less
> PC time and more time doing yard work or gym time.
From the Fisher F75 spec page:
F75 Specifications
Mechanical: S-rod with electronics housing mounted on handgrip, 3-piece breakdown, batteries under elbow, 2-way armrest adjustment —
forward/backward & around forearm.
Searchcoil: 11” (28 cm) open-frame elliptical double-D, waterproof.
Batteries: 4 AA, alkaline (not included).
Weight: 3.5 pounds (1.6 kg) with alkaline batteries installed.
Static Balance: force in vertical plane normal to elbow 0.47 pounds (0.22 kg).Varies with adjustment and user’s stance and arm/hand physiology.
Dynamic Balance: axial moment, 0.29 foot-pounds (0.39 newton-meters). Varies with adjustment and user’s stance and arm/hand physiology.
Sweep Effort: lateral moment 5.2 foot-pounds (7.1 newton-meters).
Operating Principle: VLF induction balance
Operating Frequency: nominal 13 kHz, quartz crystal timing reference
Basic Sensitivity: 6 x 10 9 root Hertz (detectivity)
Lag Coefficient: 78 milliseconds
Reactive Overload: approximately 10,000 micro-cgs units (volume susceptibility)
40,000 micro-cgs units with sensitivity < 30.
Resistive Overload: approximately 1,200 micro-cgs units (volume susceptibility)
4,800 micro-cgs units with sensitivity < 30.
Ground Balancing Range: From ferrite to salt, inclusive
Discrimination Ground Suppression: combination of second and third order methods
ID Ground Suppression: third order
Battery Life: Typically 40 hours with high quality alkaline batteries
Estimated 80 hours with nickel oxyhydroxide batteries
Estimated 65 hours with lithium iron disulfide batteries
Operating Temp Range: 4 to +122 degrees F (-20 to +50 degrees C)
Operating Humidity Range: 0-90% non-condensing
There are many folks who have injured themselves using the Minelab Explorer/Etrac due to the terrible ergonomics. When you swing a detector thousands of times in a day, any excess weight, especially at the coil will be magnified.
|
Re: Some E-trac II ideas April 03, 2012 05:38PM |
Registered: 12 years ago Posts: 455 |
Daniel Tn Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Make it balanced better. 3.5 pounds is not heavy
> folks. 50 pounds is heavyish. 100 pounds is heavy.
> 3.5 is not. You're talking about just a handful
> of ounces between the lightest machine on the
> market and the "heavier" machines out there. The
> F75 is talked about as being one of the lightest
> weight, most ergonomic detector platforms out
> there. It weighs 3.5 lbs listed weight, without
> batteries. Well guess what the eTrac listed weight
> is? 3.5 lbs without battery. Exactly the same
> weight. So how can one machine at 3.5 lbs be the
> lightest machine people have ever used...vs the
> eTrac which everybody says is the heaviest
> machine, and it weighs 3.5 lbs too? It's all
> about BALANCE.
>
> There is a lot of room there they could go in the
> balance aspect of it.
>
> I would like to see improved battery life...and
> less batteries. Whatever Dave J did with the
> T2/F75 and make it go so long with 4 AA
> batteries...is exactly what the others need to
> learn from and go to. 8 AA batteries get old
> after a while...especially when they don't last
> but about 1/4 of the life of a F75/T2.
>
> True All Metal mode. This is what kills the eTrac
> for me as a relic hunter. It doesn't have a true
> all metal mode. It needs one!
>
> I'm not a tone guy. Two tones is the most I want
> in a machine. Having the others available for
> those that want them...that's fine. As long as I
> have the option for mono tone or 2 tone, I'm
> happy.
I believe the pinpoint mode is a non-motion all-metal mode. You could use the Sizing function to hunt with. The problem is the ground tracking will drift, and as you hunt, it will start to get noisy. I think I read about that in Andy's book "The Minelab Explorer and E-trac Handbook". I believe the ground tracking isn't updated in pinpoint mode, and as the ground mineralization changes, the audio will respond.
-------------------------------------------------------
> Make it balanced better. 3.5 pounds is not heavy
> folks. 50 pounds is heavyish. 100 pounds is heavy.
> 3.5 is not. You're talking about just a handful
> of ounces between the lightest machine on the
> market and the "heavier" machines out there. The
> F75 is talked about as being one of the lightest
> weight, most ergonomic detector platforms out
> there. It weighs 3.5 lbs listed weight, without
> batteries. Well guess what the eTrac listed weight
> is? 3.5 lbs without battery. Exactly the same
> weight. So how can one machine at 3.5 lbs be the
> lightest machine people have ever used...vs the
> eTrac which everybody says is the heaviest
> machine, and it weighs 3.5 lbs too? It's all
> about BALANCE.
>
> There is a lot of room there they could go in the
> balance aspect of it.
>
> I would like to see improved battery life...and
> less batteries. Whatever Dave J did with the
> T2/F75 and make it go so long with 4 AA
> batteries...is exactly what the others need to
> learn from and go to. 8 AA batteries get old
> after a while...especially when they don't last
> but about 1/4 of the life of a F75/T2.
>
> True All Metal mode. This is what kills the eTrac
> for me as a relic hunter. It doesn't have a true
> all metal mode. It needs one!
>
> I'm not a tone guy. Two tones is the most I want
> in a machine. Having the others available for
> those that want them...that's fine. As long as I
> have the option for mono tone or 2 tone, I'm
> happy.
I believe the pinpoint mode is a non-motion all-metal mode. You could use the Sizing function to hunt with. The problem is the ground tracking will drift, and as you hunt, it will start to get noisy. I think I read about that in Andy's book "The Minelab Explorer and E-trac Handbook". I believe the ground tracking isn't updated in pinpoint mode, and as the ground mineralization changes, the audio will respond.
|
Re: Some E-trac II ideas April 03, 2012 06:45PM |
Registered: 12 years ago Posts: 190 |
|
Re: Some E-trac II ideas April 03, 2012 07:54PM |
Registered: 13 years ago Posts: 1,445 |
On top of what others have said (weight being the #1 thing), some ideas for the new E-Trac:
Shorcuts - e.g. - If I want to compare a signal with recovery fast on with off, then I shouldn't have to go in a menu, go down and change it. There should at least be a last settings shortcut or the like. Perhaps a few shortcut buttons or something of that nature.
Better backlight - the current one serves no function unless it's almost dark. (V3i has a great backlight, though it's on a color screen - perhaps easier done.)
Better Buttons! (The V3i again comes to mind.)
Higher resolution screen - I think this is a given with technology.
Show me the GB number and mineralization level! It helps when comparing settings with others as well as helps you to adjust in the field with changing conditions.
USB updates. If Deus can do it so can Minelab, they already have counterfit units so that reasoning is now by the wayside. (Minelab was concerned about the ability to hack the code I believe if they had USB update functionality.)
Weatherproof.
Some more programability - expert settings.
Try to get the time domain processing a bit faster, yes, that is an ironic thing to say but I'm sure it can be done.
Wireless headphones should be an option. The V3i's were very nice, super comfy, but cabled had better sound imo.
Shorcuts - e.g. - If I want to compare a signal with recovery fast on with off, then I shouldn't have to go in a menu, go down and change it. There should at least be a last settings shortcut or the like. Perhaps a few shortcut buttons or something of that nature.
Better backlight - the current one serves no function unless it's almost dark. (V3i has a great backlight, though it's on a color screen - perhaps easier done.)
Better Buttons! (The V3i again comes to mind.)
Higher resolution screen - I think this is a given with technology.
Show me the GB number and mineralization level! It helps when comparing settings with others as well as helps you to adjust in the field with changing conditions.
USB updates. If Deus can do it so can Minelab, they already have counterfit units so that reasoning is now by the wayside. (Minelab was concerned about the ability to hack the code I believe if they had USB update functionality.)
Weatherproof.
Some more programability - expert settings.
Try to get the time domain processing a bit faster, yes, that is an ironic thing to say but I'm sure it can be done.
Wireless headphones should be an option. The V3i's were very nice, super comfy, but cabled had better sound imo.