Anyone ever studied this chart..

[www.staffsmetaldetectors.co.uk]

interesting..yet look at the Red heats right there at the top with the big name's...this is an older test by the way but not much has changed....

the one I never got to try was the Red heat's..Vic Fiveash design...

He passed away a few years back....but heard the micro17 was the best ever in iron of any detector made....even the Goldmaxx..

Heres the Kicker...I read that a company/person came to his shop after his death and bought out all the equiopment and schematic's from the widow..And truth to this? its been a few years...is that detector on the market yet or is it still in design phases? anyone know who got hold of the design?

By the way they are redoing the test slowly...I think the DEUS and CTX will be tetsed as the updates come...I think He does about 4 different scenario test...

Keith

Interesting, the story about what happened to Vic's designs, stock etc. I'd be interested in that gear myself. However, there could be several stumbling blocks that make it hard to reproduce, remanufacture, develop, improve etc. If he's your typical 'maverick expert', he won't have detailed documentation, paperwork etc, it's all in his head. And...there were micro-controller IC's (computer chips) in his machines, several of them, I recall reading, and the code, source files, the PC they were developed on, the ideas embodied in the code - all these things could be lost, or tricky to find.

Those depth tests are looking a little dated, now. There's no shortage of new machines to test, that's for sure. I like the test, because the results do look realistic. There's plenty of flawed 'tests' out there, one I recall used the machines in their default Factory set straight-out-the-box settings. So the F75 and T2 both performed poorly, and quite differently, too. They have different default settings, but operated correctly should be near-identical performers.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/05/2013 09:28PM by Pimento.

Yes very insightful Pimento...Being analog and being Maverick alot of the design is very likely in His Head...

Ive heard good and bad form his design...some say a Tesoro copy with better iron resolution...I dont know but if it was a Tesoro copy with better iron resolution it would be pretty AWESOME..LOL!!!

Still like to try one out but would not care to own one if there not fixable if tore up...

Keith

But, but, but, if those nails had been undisturbed, allowed to rust and in the ground for 30 years then all those number will change.
In fact everything changes

True Mark!!! Very true!!!...but Like airtest it gives us a starting point to gauge thing's off of....

I have found the best at surface testing for unmasking are the ones that work the best in the real world for unmasking..

Here the real eye opener of the testing tighten up the distances between the nails and the F75 and T2 will fall behind while the GMP and GM still pass..and that holds true on real hunt's,

The recipe for sucess in unmasking in nails is, DD's tightly wound....high freq ...exact tone break for nails...and ability to allow some bleeding of rejected target's...Iron volume is a bonus...

The G2 and the Goldbug with some software tweeks could really take a life of its own...

Boost process the platform

expand the nail range resolution

do not agressively filter the rejected target's

give us some iron volume...

this would really shake things up in the detector world I believe...keep the price the same and designers would be back to the designing board to out do the competiton...and that's what we want!!

thanks for bringing the point up!

Keith

Not just the G2/New Goldbug platform, I see no reason why the T2/F75 (regular or LTD) couldn't do plenty more, tone-break audio is easy, emulation of XP's "all-metal tone-ID" audio should be achievable (do away with the PF ploughed/plowed field mode). Adjustable audio pitch in single-tone DISC mode (just carry over the all-metal pitch setting) . If it weren't for the LCD change that would be needed, I would also tinker with the F75 ID scaling: 00 - 20 for iron, 21 -99 replacing 16 - 94 on the non-iron ID. But I've rambled about all these ideas before on here, I won't repeat them...

Keith, It took me a long time but I was able to get a Red Heat XD-17 unit. I was still learning the unit when a guy in Mexico saw some of my post on the unit. He started making me offers and would increase each time. I finally sold it to him. I can say that it was one of the deepest units I have ever used. I just did not have it long enough to learn. I dug a lot of very deep junk....lol
I still see one for sale from time to time....

Here is the unit
[www.youtube.com]

Tom in SC

Thank's for the Info Tom.!!!

Pimento im wiht you on the scaling and tone breaking on the T2/f75....

But one thing I have found for sure for cricitcal iron work is a freq of around 18kHz and up..

but yes it would help immensely to have the F75/t2 platfrom modernized so to speak..

Keith

You have my attention now Keith.

Seems like someone could replicate this (a la Monte's nail board) for fun. I'd like to try a crumpled foil test for the heck of it.
Bob

Great test gives us a birds eye view how these detectors fare, And glad to see some of my favorites score well.

One of the detectors tested was the old Viking 5, Surprised to see the Viking 5 didn't do so well. That's an old TR and used to have one they see through iron better than our old TR's. Only draw back was in disturbed dirt drove it nuts but out in smooth ground it was an iron un-masker for sure, They still sell these old Viking 5 models out in the UK wish I still had mine.

Thanks for sharing,
Paul (Ca)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/06/2013 08:23AM by Old California.

Yes some of those old TR's are excellent in small iorn.. yet limited depth...

Good info Paul..

Keith