Welcome! » Log In » Create A New Profile

Omega iron discrimination

Posted by Jackpine 
This forum is currently read only. You can not log in or make any changes. This is a temporary situation.
Omega iron discrimination
June 26, 2009 12:14PM
Tom

Is there a critical disc and tone(s) setting for getting the best results in iron with the O-8 ?

Regarding the comment you made about the piece of iron that nulled at 0 disc, have you seen this result repeated since?

Tom
Re: Omega iron discrimination
June 26, 2009 11:42PM
Tom,

So far..... the critical Disc setting for "just barely" Disc'ing out small iron is '16'. Tone options are optional....... yet, monotone is the least 'human-fatiguing' set-up config.

Yes, I have seen (on numerous occasions) large irregular-shaped iron give zero response on the Omega. Rotating 90-Deg..... and the target will then report. This is with the Disc on zero...... and nothing notched out. Have not witnessed this phenomenon with non-ferrous targets. I need to bring a few of these targets home....for futher eval's.
Re: Omega iron discrimination
June 27, 2009 12:16AM
Thanks for the setting info Tom

On those iron pieces, are they older decomposing iron with a lot of rust?

Tom
Re: Omega iron discrimination
June 27, 2009 12:24AM
Yes......... thus far. BUT, , , I have not hunted a modern site with the Omega as of yet. And I always have the dream that; these "undetectable" Fe targets will NOT mask good targets! Unfortunately.............
Re: Omega iron discrimination
June 27, 2009 01:13AM
I thought that might be the case. Probably mid depth or a bit deeper too, my guess is either the GB is partially nulling the iron or there are some tricks going on with the sensitivity level.

Tom



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/27/2009 01:16AM by Jackpine.
Non detection
June 27, 2009 04:15AM
The Omega and Gamma do this also on some foil range targets. It's always small irregular shapped pieces. Usually does it one way but hears it fine the other. AM hears it well all four ways and more if you attack the target from multi-angles. I've dug a lot of these targets, both ferrous and low end non-ferrous, that don't give a signal one way and it's always been junk and seldom colocated with anything else. Since both detectors have done this and it's always been over relatively low mass junk, I consider it a good thing. I still dig these targets just to confirm they continue to be 100% junk and it hasn't stumbled yet. I suspect it's not an accident. smiling smiley
Re: Non detection
June 28, 2009 04:45AM
Good data Brad. Interesting to know that the Gamma has the same ??problem??.
Re: Non detection
June 29, 2009 02:02AM
And something I want and need to test/confirm is once I dig one of these targets that responds in the aforementioned manner, to recheck the GB over where the target used to be. I'd be looking for a possible localized mineral anomaly etc which I guess could have affected the signal since the GB could have been potentially off enough to cause loss of signal strength and ID.
Thanks for the info Brad
June 30, 2009 03:16AM
I have one question for you or Tom that's been kinda bugging me about the Omega. Since I favor detectors with an expanded iron range, the 1270 is one example, how does the Omega compare to the T2's iron disc range? One fault (and its's not a big one) I had with the T2 is that I felt there should have been at least 5 more numbers in the 20 thru 22 range to open up the iron disc some. Is the Omega similar,better or worse or.. since its quieter in iron is it hard to tell?

Thanks

Tom
Re: Thanks for the info Brad
June 30, 2009 10:10PM
TZ,Not sure if this is the entire answer you're looking for but basically the Omega and T-2 share the iron resolution of 40 numbers. However, there are 10 "increments" for each number with the Omega (and Gamma) but only 5 increments per number on the T-2. So thusly, I guess one could initially conclude that the Omega actually has more ability to "fine tune" for iron rejection compared to the T-2. How that actually compares to the analog style control of the 1270? I don't have a 1270 any more in order to actually compare it to the Titaniums. Sorry Jackpine, I can't keep everything around even though I've tried. winking smiley Hope this helps ya out Bud.
Re: Omega iron discrimination
July 01, 2009 11:13AM
Well sorta.. I'm just going to have to jump in and try one out for myself.

Thanks again

Tom Z
Re: Omega iron discrimination
July 01, 2009 08:53PM
Tom,

Yes, there was a dramatic difference between Disc '15' and Disc '16'...... with the 'feel' or 'need'..... of specifically wanting a greater span of iron Disc between '15' and '16', , , yet, the unit performed so quietly...and well..... it was TOO hard to discern the need for a better span-resolution. --Lack of depth was more of a concern for me ((( in boggy/soggy Everglades ...bad sink-rate Fla ))).