"" Tom What's Your Opinion On The New 75? ""

That was my impression, too, Rick, after checking the "F75 (sic) forum" for myself.
I'll try to be nice, here, and just leave it at that <g>.

Pleasant Garden, NC
AT Max, Nokta Impact, MX Sport, Nokta FORS Relic, GPX 4800, Infinium, Racer, Deus, F75SE, Nautilus DMC II (order of acquisition, last to first)

Does an archeologist argue with a plow? A bureaucrat with a bulldozer?

I have seen very few "official" fieldtests done by Steve... have i seen any ?

What i do know is that in the last 10 years many detectors have been released without TQM

Steve and many others should have been involved more.

OldandBold Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I have seen very few "official" fieldtests done by
> Steve... have i seen any ?
>
> What i do know is that in the last 10 years many
> detectors have been released without TQM
>
> Steve and many others should have been involved
> more.

As far as Steve Herschbach (now departed from this forum due to careless writing of some here) -

Check this - [www.detectorprospector.com]

As far as how many field testers of protypes and final version F-75's there have been, i have no idea, but I suggest you re-read Mike H's post above on the subject. I reckon they probably had as many as they thought were necessary. You, of course disagree.

Rick Kempf
Gold Canyon AZ- where there is no gold



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/07/2014 06:37PM by lytle78.

Hi Rick

The knowledge is based on what they did not do.

Not what they did.

Customer value in the valuestream is not determined by what was done.

But what how much the customer valued the product.

Any error in fieldtesting should be removed.............................

Obvious things like F75 go bananas and the black spot of the early GB s is obvious and and AT Pro, early start to.

OldandBold Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hi Rick
>
> The knowledge is based on what they did not do.
>
> Not what they did.
>
> Customer value in the valuestream is not
> determined by what was done.
>
> But what how much the customer valued the
> product.
>
> Any error in fieldtesting should be
> removed.............................
>
> Obvious things like F75 go bananas and the black
> spot of the early GB s is obvious and and AT Pro,
> early start to.

You seem to know "what they did not do"

if you are referring to the current version of the F-75 with DST, then kindly reveal to us your source for the data you based the "F-75 go bannanas" and the "black spot of the early GB"

Also, please post which errors in field testing you are referring to which were not "removed"

There's a saying, "you're entitled to hour own opinions" - I support that. Facts are another matter, please post yours so we can evaluate your assertions about First Texas' lack of due diligence in the testing and introduction of this revised F-75.

Rick Kempf
Gold Canyon AZ- where there is no gold

Im not talking about the new F 75.

Only the first generation.

And only the first GB s with black spot on high conductors.

The fact is, much to few hours fieldtesting.

OldandBold Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Im not talking about the new F 75.
>
> Only the first generation.
>
> And only the first GB s with black spot on high
> conductors.
>
> The fact is, much to few hours fieldtesting.

Well, you did a great job of confusing the two versions!

The original was what - 6 - 7 years ago - get over it!

Rick Kempf
Gold Canyon AZ- where there is no gold

Lets all crack open a beer together and MERRY CHRISTMAS !!! Cmon back Steve H...yes,I know where to find you,but your insight and oponion on post here matter alot! Ray

Hi,,,I'm wondering if anyone else is experiencing "delayed target audio" that Cal_cobra is???? Also in relation to the DST mode, according to the manual you have the option of running with DST on or off.....page 16.... "The user may choose to operate with DST or without DST.....The default setting, at power-on, employs DST"..... According to what I have read so far most of the users have said that it's on all the time.....I'm wondering what's right?... I guess to be right,you should trust the manufactures that their information is correct....So maybe there is some other explanation to why some users believe it is still being employed?....JJ

If there is one thing I have learned about perusing detecting forums and other as well is not to jump to conclusions to quickly as the typed word leaves a lot to be desired when it comes to tone and expressions. Especially when we often posts on the fly with a few often "hunt and pecked" words of commentary .

I have been detecting for well over 40 years and have yet to develop any detecting heroes except my late father who was good enough to take me detecting as a small child and finance several detectors for me until I was better situated financially. That being said I have learned a lot by both actual words and reading between the lines from many very experienced forum members .This education has lead me to buy several new detectors and all of them have performed as promised . They did however require a learning period to get up to speed . Some I took to immediately and a couple I wondered about for a spell lol .

I guess what I am trying to say is back in the old days about all the pre purchase info we had was printed in the treasure magazines and was often one sided to protect the advertisers. Now with forums like this and the videos to go with them we are in the "enlightened" detecting era .

Thanks to all who are true detecting enthusiasts that are not to busy or selfish to share their results on any given machine with the rest of the world .

Silverhound - well said.

Rick Kempf
Gold Canyon AZ- where there is no gold

Hi,,,I hear ya on the info in the magazines....I could not wait to go to the drugstores after work looking for any new magazines pertaining to metal detecting.....That was my only way to see any if there was any new detectors coming out.....I use to send into a bunch of companies for there booklets etc....If someone did a test on a machine in a magazine you had to take their word for how a certain machine performed....I bought a lot of different ones and sold a lot of them too....With the power of the Internet you get both sides of the coin now,but now it's up to you to sort out fact from fiction.....JJ

On my NON-production (Proto) unit....... there is a audio 'delay' (slow/elongated response) in 9.1 'bp' mode. Not sure if this was corrected for the production-run/roll-out units.

Hi,,,,I have got to admit my thought process was really energized for a possible future purchase of an F-75....But after reading and rereading several post so far I'm really getting skeptical if that will ever happen now....I am going to still keep an open mind and see what else might develop.... Some of the issues I have read about so far could just be operator error?....I still think one of the new changes they made was to just reduce the AVAILABLE overall sensitivity of the unit.....I do need to have more conclusive answers to the following things so far....

#1:Baby Bug....(pinpoint mama) not really a deal breaker

#2:EMI....(does it really eliminate some EMI or is it less prevalent because of it's reduced sensitivity)

#3 Delayed audio....(now this fault would be unacceptable by me if it's to many nanoseconds)

#4 Depth issue....(unconfirmed just need a comparison old Vs. new)

#5 DST 9.0/9.1 on or off....(when is it on or off and which mode is which?)

#6 More To Come?....(....)


In my opinion,if Fisher would of left the operator the choice of selecting the old & new 75 in one unit they would of unequivocally had a winner,,,now the jury is still out on that subject....JJ

Only a few detectors have been released wich automatically adjust other settings then what the user adjust in person.

One obvious one is the Deus, F75 automatically adjust many settings within a group of settings and the name of that group is called a process.

The user have no idea what happens and DST may be the use of sensitivity setting in combination with other settings traditionally known to reduce EMI or the users experience of erratic behaviour in areas where EMI is present.

Among those are ofcourse sensitivity but also discrimination and GB settings and recovery speed. Also non modulated sound or direct unfiltered disc sounds may affect the users experience of EMI.

Impossible to figure out but DST is a name of a way around EMI, not the exclusion of the problem.

When we take medication as a treatment we sometimes suffer other non wanted issues with the medicine itself.

Is that what you guys experience...?

.

Keith Southern Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Good write up Cobra..
>
> I think the whole machine is D.S.T.
>
> jumping form one mode to the other does not turn
> it on of off ..one is just trying to simulate the
> old mode one is not...
>
> I believe the D.S.T. cant be turned off..
>
> I wont use the 9.1 on mine because of the lag
> time..my 9.0 does not have anymore lag in B.P.
> mode though than a older f75..
>
> I find I stay in JE mode the most for site
> work...and drop to BP on more sparse Iron...99
> sense 2f...
>
> I have found that my finds in hit hard sites are
> coming from ability to hear deeper targets but not
> so much in unmasking...Thats where I still feel
> the DEUS has the edge is in unmasking....thing
> about T2's and F75 and such is once you've really
> hunted the site with them you cant rehunt the site
> with them for more unmasking...but you can rehunt
> the site with other machines like euros and find
> more...
>
> Ive alwasy liked the FT machines and they go in
> and make finds in iron but I still cant get next
> level sleuthy with them on sites...there has got
> to be more user defined control to unlock a site I
> feel..now depth is another thing and the new ones
> have great usable depth and airgap performance
> and are hot on low conductors...
>
> Horses for courses
>
>
> Keith

Hi Keith,

I found myself trying to run BP mode most of the time, with lowered sensitivity. All of the sites we hunted over a period of three days were around the same general area, but the soil in some areas was highly mineralized (pegged the Fe3O4 bar graph while pumping the coil). In the area the Fe3O4 meter was pegged, I got a lot of falsing, but it would lock pretty well onto legit targets (although you wasted a lot of time double checking false positives).

In the area the machine has issues with falsing, the F75 would GB to around 77-80, yet other areas were more in the 58-60 range and the F75 would run pretty stable. I wouldn't say, in my experience so far, that the DST technology is as profound as I'd hoped for, for the most part, the F75 in 9.0 mode seemed to run about the same as my F75 LTD did prior to sending it in.

I have an old adobe site that's yeilded quite a few 1800's coins. It's surrounded by a sea of square nails, although for the most part, but we've been able to pull coins from the bed of nails. Before the DST upgrade, the F75 LTD ran really well there, so hopefully I'll be able to give the FA mode a workout to see if I can pull some more coins out of the myriad of nails. The first trip to this site, my hunting partner pulled an 1829 British gold sovereign (not in the nails), and we've found several reales, seateds, a few barbers and indian heads there. I'm sure there's more there and plan to hunt it in FA mode using the NEL Sharpshooter 9.5" x 5.5" coil. I've found that to be a nice coil on the F75, very stable, and more sluethy then the stock 11" DD without loosing depth. Also apparently the NEL coil uses an expoxy that's more impervious to EMI as well as an extra well shielded coil cable (it's twice as thick as the First Texas coil cables). It could be marketing, but it does seem to hold true to their advertising.

I definitely need more time on the upgrade, but so far DST is a mixed bag IMHO.

~Brian

Not sure if this adds anything to the conversation or not, but I went back to the F75LTD Manual and sure enough it mentions some characteristic changes when going from different processes. Slower response speeds, Need to slow coil speeds. Motion All Metal Inheriting
characteristics from BP and CL modes. Copied from manual below:

BP: BOOST PROCESS
This process is an enhanced sensitivity version of the dE (default) process. It is
particularly useful when searching for deep targets in a non-trashy area, or on a site
where vegetation makes it necessary to raise the searchcoil several inches above the
surface of the ground. It will also produce excellent results on trashy sites provided that
you slow down your sweep speed; sweep the coil slower than you would when using the
Default process. When the Boost process is selected, the response characteristics of
the Motion All Metal Mode are also modified; these characteristics include less noise and
a slower response speed.


CL: CACHE LOCATING PROCESS
This process is an enhanced sensitivity, slow-speed, version of the dE (default) process.
Its primary use is in locating large deep objects while sweeping the searchcoil several
inches above the surface of the ground; under these conditions it goes deeper than the
other processes. When the cache locating process is selected, the response
characteristics of the Motion All Metal Mode are also modified; these characteristics
include less noise and a slower response speed. In many situations, you may prefer to do
cache locating in the Motion All Metal Mode after first selecting the Cache Locating
process in the Discrimination Mode.

shoot, I forgot to check CL all metal mode to see if I could finally get some all metal depth. wjs is borrowing it for a couple weeks to try it out.

Thanks again for letting me test it out. I checked the CL mode in all metal and disc. I could get around 16" on a nickel in both. That was with 9.1



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/09/2014 12:02AM by wjs.

Tom, have you got your hands on a production unit yet?

No....... not yet.

Looks like big biz for you there Tom, certifying what Keith calls a "Proper F75"!

Especially with the digital units.......... I have witnessed/seen my share of software errors. Not just with Fisher. I remember validating/certifying another brand unit for someone on this forum........... only to find that ....... when Sens was placed on 88 ...... and Disc on 14.......... the unit would detect nothing! What a unique anomaly..... to say the least.
And on another unit...... when Grnd Bal was set on 65, 66, 67, 68 or 69......... the unit went to 1/4 depth capabilities on low and high conductors. I very much wanted to purchase/save these units........ so as to demonstrate software/code/digital error.
I often wonder how many units are in the hands of (non Electrical Engineering/technically-minded) folks that have imbedded ambiguity code in their unit(s)............. and they simply don't know it.

Just one example = When I validate/certify a F75...... it is a 7-hour process. There would be no way that Fisher/FTP (or any other Mfr) would have disposable time/money/resources to perform such function(s).

I have no interest in being a dealer what-so-ever; yet, it thrills me to no end to place a 'proper' (per engineering design/intent) unit into the hands of ......... especially.......... any one of our (at minimum) 'above-average' forum members hands................. and let them see/witness/experience eye-opening/game-changing/stunning phenomena. The members......specifically on this forum......... are much more mono-maniac/astute/attention-to-detail/technically-minded/exceptionally-dedicated/demanding. This lends itself to setting the pace for future technological advancement/growth. It is one of the best value-added tools to collectively aid any R&D department.

ozzie Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Quote by Dwight ; And if my comments on
> test/reviews cause him to leave the forum then I
> could be right.
>
> Could be? What are you fishing for? Read my post
> about the inner voice. This talk isn't necessary
> or wanted on this forum. There are other forums
> that are already screwed up from guys that spew
> this crap,.... have some respect, please.
>
> I for one, as many here, hold these men in high
> regard for there experiences and knowledge about
> detecting. It's not blind faith either. It is from
> reading their posts year after year and getting to
> know them personally from their words. These are
> our friends you are talking about man. So lets
> keep this trouble making stuff out of here.....and
> yes, I'm a bit riled.


i'm with you ozzie!..many people have been "helped" on this forum
by others taking the time to impart knowledge.it's what it is all about!
i'm just sayin'

(h.h.!)
j.t.

NASA-Tom Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> On my NON-production (Proto) unit....... there is
> a audio 'delay' (slow/elongated response) in 9.1
> 'bp' mode. Not sure if this was corrected for the
> production-run/roll-out units.


My upgrade is version 11/14/14, and it exhibits that exact same quality you describe. BP in 9.1 seems much more "vague" and less crisp than before. Hard to describe exactly, but your description is as close as I can come. Mine also has the peculiar pinpoint bug, and is very loud when ground balancing. A constant high pitched background noise when Gbing. It DOES seem to Gb, but you'd never be able to tell audio wise. Will be on its way back to FT in the AM. Other than that, all else seems ok.

(F.T.) aims to please,just sometimes their ''aim" ain't too hot!

(h.h.!)
j.t.

Quote
NASA-Tom
Just one example = When I validate/certify a F75...... it is a 7-hour process. There would be no way that Fisher/FTP (or any other Mfr) would have disposable time/money/resources to perform such function(s).

I can't believe that FT couldn't automate this process with a little investment in equipment. Cut the testing time to one hour and amortize $20K test equipment over 1000 units. At $35/hr labor rate and $20 amortization + 25% profit you have a ~$70 adder.

Who wouldn't pay that for a truly validated unit from the factory?

To engineer a test-jig..... and automate the process,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.............,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, not a chance. Too cost-inhibiting. And this is applicable for all metal detector Mfr's. (At current time).

yes sounds cost prohibitive to me as well.
the cost of special test equipment can be staggering,
especially when set up to operate automatically. cost would be difficult to
absorb,without adding substantially to end product."commercial" manufacturers do NOT
have the "luxury" of passing the additional cost to the "government" like defense contractors do.
with complex testing procedures in place to ensure "mil-spec" quality control standards,this specialized equipment
is mandatory,and essential,however for commercial quality standards would not be feasible,and the cost cannot be justified!

(h.h.!)
j.t.

Tom, please elaborate. Why can't a thorough final testing process be developed with metal detectors when it is required of any ISO9002 / TS16949 certified company that manufactures other electronic equipment?