Got My replacement F75 with D.S.T....Nothing wrong with this all metal WOW!!! ((VIDEO))

daniel and i have the messed up pinpoint as well so they have to fix i would think.

The entire situation is disturbing. I had two AT Pro's at different times. The difference in performance between the two was very obvious. The second one was a dog/lemon/piece of crap.

It turned me off to the entire notion of buying another Garrett product. I personally find it hard to sell a detector on the forums when I know the performance is substandard to other detectors of the same model. I almost feel obligated to wrap it around a tree. The F-75 was the only thing FT had going for it in recent years. Now they seemed to have made a disaster of that too. Maybe I am speaking early and they will make things right. But I will always wonder when I see one for sale on the forums if it is a top performer or not. Because we all know that the posters on this forum are only a small piece of those F75 LTD 2 models sold. There is that guy out there that doesn't know his detector is substandard. We all make mistakes. I certainly make my share. But FT needs to come forward and make a public statement. JMHO.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/14/2014 04:34PM by goodmore.

There seem to be a couple of different things at work here.

First of all, testing of preproduction detectors seems to be done by handful of individuals like our own Mike Hillis, who put in a lot of time and effort to get the manufacturer feedback on how the prototype does in the field. With the best will in the world and with a lot of dedication, these few individuals are unlikely to uncover every possible shortcoming in the units they are testing.

Secondly, putting a much larger number of production units in the hands of folks like us - the visitors to this forum - amounts to a kind of "crowdsourcing" test situation. We are all using the machines in different environments, some of us are comparing them directly to previous F 75's – either the same device before it was upgraded or an earlier one we had. The results of all that individual private testing are becoming evident here - widely varying results leading us to conclude that the performance of units shipped in fact varies widely.

I know very little about how modern electronic circuits involving surface mount components, large-scale integration chips and other stuff actually behave from the point of view of variability of completed device performance. It may very well be that the tolerances of the individual components "stack up" in different ways once an actual set of these components is assembled into an end Item. I do know from six years experience working at Honeywell where were building stuff like electronic control components for rocket engines, that in an environment where you test every end item, the performance of each one is likely to be somewhat different from every other one. You set up pass fail criteria which measure key characteristics - and units which do not fall within these limits are rejected.

For us detector users, The only directly comparable test results we can achieve are air tests. Even then the EMI environment we test in can influence the results greatly.

I suspect that even if Fisher tested every unit for depth in discrimination and all metal prior to shipment - not shipping any that did not meet minimum criteria - there would still be some units that perform well beyond the minimum criteria and others that just meet it.

I do remember from Honeywell, that one of the design goals in any project was to ensure that - statistically speaking - the "average" item actually returned a test result in the middle of the range from minimum to maximum for the test involved. This way the normal bell curve distribution meant that your design would yield the maximum number of acceptable units. If acceptance testing showed that the median result did not fall in the middle of the range of acceptability then your yield of a product would be lower because normal distribution would mean that a larger number would fall outside the acceptable range becaust the results were biased to one end or other of normal distribution around the median value of the acceptability range. When that happened you would go back to the designers and tell them to tweak the product so that the median test result falls in the middle of the acceptable range, thus raising the yield without having to screw with trying to get the customerto accept a different range of values formthe pass-fail acceptance texting.

Rick Kempf
Gold Canyon AZ- where there is no gold



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/14/2014 05:43PM by lytle78.

I sent my G2 in and it came back with the new coil cover. (with the tabs) Here's a pic of the new coil (or coil cover)...(I think that I got a new coil too):

I realize that the G2 is a different machine, but I noted this different looking coil as soon as I got it. It feels a bit heavier than the old coil that was on it. Could be the heavier coil cover. But it seems to have made my machine coil-heavy. Sort of feels like a larger after-nmarket coil. It still gets the same G2 air test results. But on my unit, the Disc circuit and the All Metal circuit give practically the same air test results. I felt that this was worth mentioning.

If I owned detector company I woud test every machine to meet certain requirements before shiping..

That would include a run through the test bed..and if say a 9 inch dime did not hit and I.D. in that soil it would be removed for evaluation...

Companys dont do that though...they feel that if they build each one the same then they all should do as the original...

I think Troy tested everyone and it showed in the price...

FT could test every one and it would refelect in the price....Rememebr they would have to take pallets full of machines before packing and load batteries and go to test area and check them...NOT GOING TO HAPPEN..

.....and most people in the world of detecting will never Know if they have one from another..

Tesoro was one of the worst Ive seen at hot to cold models back in the 80s and 90s...they have better across the baord perfomance now...

Heres the real Kicker before the internet how did you know you had a subpar machine or an over the top unit....you didnt...and you still made finds...

Nowdays for the people (me included) who want the performance we have the ability to share info...and the manual even says the machine can hear 15 inch coins...But there will be tons of people buy them and never look back..just go and hunt and have a fun time..


I go out of my way to supply info to people ....But the reason I do it is because I went for so long wanting to know myself what a machine sounded like or reacted like or tested like compared to what I have i usually ended up buying two or three of same units to compare..well videos take care of alot of this...cause anyone can say this or that but to show it pretty much sums things up...And if it helps people to see things then so be it...

I see the F75 v2 in current procuction as deep as the old F75 but we can hear it better..My proto seemed a little tad weaker than this one in disc and the original included ...this one seems about par to a original BP....but QUIET....and that it has more usable depth so its deeper in my opinion...

If it was me(((but its not))) I would drop the 9.1 thing and just have the 9.0 to ease off the confusion and load the machines like they are right now...and in a few months they would be the talk of the town...IN A GOOD WAY...

I posted a video to show that I thought the all metal mode was working very well for my standards and alot of people were saying theres was not up to there standards ...Im happy with mine ...T-manly is happy wiht his so maybe if otheres are not there some small batch out that had the programming loaded wrong or glitched or ????

Keith

Well, for $1100 they can test the machines before shipping. Sure is cheaper than not selling due to bad press.Just my oponion.

If the new DST are as quiet as some say, why didn't fisher publish a standard performance check in the new manual. Like maybe a wavering threshold at 23" on a US nickel in AM. And then maybe a reasonable test of the disc circuit. You see I as a detecting company would want a customer to know their detector meets specs or not. As a company, I sure wouldn't want detectors that met the the standard to be shipped to me (the company) on the company's dime. Sound reasonable???

If they do come up with something like the machine will waver a threshold at say 23" on a nickle under ideal conditons with no EMI and that includes silent EMI...and then print it ... then people test it out and dont get it ,they would say its silent EMI killing the depth...

I think thats why they put its CAPABLE of 15 inch coins ...

I do think though a simple assembly line test of a certain in house depth should be met for their local conditions and if not pulled off an evaluated....you test the disc dpeth on 100 units and there all within reason for the locale the bad ones will weed out...

But again someone has to initiate it...upper management..

I do know an intial's requirement on a machine can go a long ways in QA....At my job every test I do my name goes on it and Im responsible for it..No one else..its my problem so I care....I want raises I want to have a sense of pride in my job and I dont want no one harmed...

I work hard for my money as Im sure we all do.. and I want quality for my money....I dont mind spending more for better products that matter....I only buy Samsung electronics....Samsung gets my money I never have a problem with it....it cost a bit more but for me its worth it...Tires I only Buy BF Goodrich.....Why they do me right....never any problems...

I was die hard American trucks....Not no more.. they lost me....especially Chevrolet after the bailout...quality went down...

Companys should have the attitude that there name is synonymous with exacting quality....It does not take alot to clean up QA...a few key people with proper attitude could make sure their product is a competition crusher ....

Keith



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 12/15/2014 04:54AM by Keith Southern.

FT Send me a unit i will gladly test it for free

I work for a company that makes fuel injectors for the major vehicle manufacturers. We pump out about 50,000 injectors a day. Each and every one goes through multiple quality control checks before it leaves here to go in a vehicle. Every quality check gets documented by who done it, the date and time, and gets plotted on XR charts. They can come back to any part that tested bad and find out who passed it, when, and all that stuff. And they do take action against them. I'm pretty sure Fisher/First Texas is not producing 50,000 F75 units a day. At our company, a customer return is a big issue. In fact, in the past, we have shut the whole plant down to have an all associate butt chewing over quality control because we had 2 customer returns in a fiscal year. Yep. Shut the plant down for a 1,200 employee butt chewing. If a company and manufacturing plant the size of ours can take the time and take the steps to ensure a quality product is leaving our plant...Surely a smaller metal detector factory can do the same, if not better. I'm probably gonna get hung up on in the morning when I call them. Especially if they don't opt to take care of the problem. I'll send it back to em with a box full of cow and horse crap.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/15/2014 04:57AM by Daniel Tn.

Well when I was in the Air Force we had precision equipment laboratories that periodically calibrated, repaired, and tested all the electronic test equipment used on the base by the different people. After the equipment was deemed "done" ready for reboxing, they had a jar with 3 coins. They would flip the jar and turn right side up. If the 3 coins came up the same, heads or tails, the piece of equipment was taken off the outbound line and taken back to the technician who worked on the equipment and a quality assurance person would sit back and watch them recheck the unit. A very good random way to check quality. There is of course probability involved with the coins coming up the way they do. The program seemed to work very well and kept everyone on their toes when working on the equipment.

Right on Daniel TN

I checked mine, and it's also an 11-14-14 (upgraded F75 LTD camo unit).

So the 11-14-14 units are bad, or ?

Daniel, wrap it in a not-so-fresh coyote hide....LOL! Great post!
I hope you and everyone gets good results today.