Welcome!
» Log In
» Create A New Profile
Internet Detector Comparison - Coin targets
Posted by Johnnyanglo
This forum is currently read only. You can not log in or make any changes. This is a temporary situation.
|
Internet Detector Comparison - Coin targets February 09, 2016 05:55AM |
More fun ...
Since the last comparison, I've adjusted the coil area formula ... reducing the effective area of DD coils to make them appear more like long concentric coils. In any case, the output is for detectors that were tested by others and put in a database. I've picked silver and gold coins with different coil sizes for comparison. The tests were done either in the ground (GND - meaning in soil) or in the air. They are either with the detector in All-Metal (AM) or Discrimination (DISC) mode (usually to eliminate an iron nail). The detectors shown are reduced to those results meeting the filter(s) (for coil size, target type, GND/Air and AM/DISC modes, etc. - the results can be filtered many ways). The number above the column is the detector's rating (score). The rating is not depth ... think of it as efficiency (the lower the number the more sensitive a particular coil/detector is at finding the target at depth).
Of course, there are limitations to combining a multitude of tests performed under various conditions - but I don't think the results are totally without merit. Still, be aware that a detector's score shown is the averaged result of all targets (and if all coils are included, then all coil sizes are combined into a single score). Some detectors had many trials on many targets and others fewer, so variations may or may not be averaged out depending on the number of targets (e.g., a detector may have been tested on dozens of different coins or only on a few - the results will be better averaged if there are more coin targets). In other words, nothing is perfect and these charts aren't either. This is for entertainment (or possibly education). If you want to see something specific, let me know.
Since the last comparison, I've adjusted the coil area formula ... reducing the effective area of DD coils to make them appear more like long concentric coils. In any case, the output is for detectors that were tested by others and put in a database. I've picked silver and gold coins with different coil sizes for comparison. The tests were done either in the ground (GND - meaning in soil) or in the air. They are either with the detector in All-Metal (AM) or Discrimination (DISC) mode (usually to eliminate an iron nail). The detectors shown are reduced to those results meeting the filter(s) (for coil size, target type, GND/Air and AM/DISC modes, etc. - the results can be filtered many ways). The number above the column is the detector's rating (score). The rating is not depth ... think of it as efficiency (the lower the number the more sensitive a particular coil/detector is at finding the target at depth).
Of course, there are limitations to combining a multitude of tests performed under various conditions - but I don't think the results are totally without merit. Still, be aware that a detector's score shown is the averaged result of all targets (and if all coils are included, then all coil sizes are combined into a single score). Some detectors had many trials on many targets and others fewer, so variations may or may not be averaged out depending on the number of targets (e.g., a detector may have been tested on dozens of different coins or only on a few - the results will be better averaged if there are more coin targets). In other words, nothing is perfect and these charts aren't either. This is for entertainment (or possibly education). If you want to see something specific, let me know.
|
Re: Internet Detector Comparison - Coin targets February 09, 2016 05:39PM |
The rating is not depth ... think of it as efficiency (the lower the number the more sensitive a particular coil/detector is at finding the target at depth).
Somehow this needed to be made more clear. I was very confused when this was originally posted. I skimmed the post and tried to follow the chart and had a major "What the..?" moment. It seemed backwards to what I thought I knew. And it was because I did not carefully read the text. Bigger is better in some areas but not here!
Thank you for a thoughtful, helpful contribution!
Past(or)Tom
Using a Legend, a Deus 2, an Equinox 800, a Tarsacci MDT 8000, & a few others...
with my beloved, fading Corgi, Sadie
Somehow this needed to be made more clear. I was very confused when this was originally posted. I skimmed the post and tried to follow the chart and had a major "What the..?" moment. It seemed backwards to what I thought I knew. And it was because I did not carefully read the text. Bigger is better in some areas but not here!
Thank you for a thoughtful, helpful contribution!
Past(or)Tom
Using a Legend, a Deus 2, an Equinox 800, a Tarsacci MDT 8000, & a few others...
with my beloved, fading Corgi, Sadie