2 detectors of olde

[Anonymous]

The first was made by AH Electronics and was called the "QUINTRON". I believe it had a normal TR Disc. mode plus a Disc mode labelled "ATTENTUATE",which was mineral free, but I never saw or read of one.
The second is the Compass Coin Magnum. This detector 'analyzed' and did so fron a true non motion ground balance mode. It also had the first surface blanking [adjustable mode] on the market and may even have had a notch flter. The drawback was that nails below 7" would read good, but you could use your your ground control to balancing them out. But they went the motion route and stuck it in a closet never to be seen again.

 

[OldeTymer]

I had one of the Quintron detectors back in 1975. It was the most advanced of it's time. It was around $700, if I remember right. I bought it from Glenn Carson when he and I used to hunt together. Being 30 years ago, and the fact that I can hardly remember yesterday anymore, I can't remember much about it. Thinking back on it, it seemed to have the complexity, and learning curve, that many of todays modern programmable units have.

It was shortly after I got it that Whites introduced the Coinmaster V Supreme with ground exclusion balance (GEB). Boy, was that a breakthrough for mineralized ground. That was probably the deepest detector that I have ever used. The only problem was, it had no discrimination. It could get a BB at 12+ inches, and, as you can imagine, larger iron targets much, much deeper. It was based on an industrial unit Whites had developed for the logging industry to find nails, and other metal objects, in logs before going through the saw. The offshoot of that first GEB unit became the 5000, 6000, 6000di series 1, 2 and 3, 5900, 6000Di Pro and finally culminated in the XL Pro. The XL Pro has a long heritage. It's a shame that Whites has decided to let it go. I'm sure parts availability, etc. are the main causes, along with the fact that everyone seems to want digital everything anymore.

Thanks for sparking my fond memories of those days.

OldeTymer

 

[Monte]

it stunk! If you ever got one that worked, and never needed to have any service done on it, then you were lucky. The 'problem' was that Compass at the time was in a slump and needed a shot in the arm. It was rushed into production before all the bugs were out of it and, well, history shows it was treated with due respect. History!

The Coin Magnum, like quite a few models during that era, used a needle meter that had a centered needle. A Left or Right deflection of the needle alerted the operator to a 'Trash' or 'Treasure' target response. It was a new detector circuitry combined with a new Tri-Planer coil design, and it was more limited than many were led to understand.

For example, we all know that (USUALLY, not always) the All Metal mode can detect deeper than the Discriminate mode. We also take into consideration that while me might lose a little depth we also use discrimination because we want to lose a little trash digging as well.

With the Coin magnum, their advertisement states the following:

"Statistics show that most trash items are within 1"-2" of ground surface." ... Certainly a point many of us could argue, even a quarter-century

 

[Cody]

It might be interesting for historical purposes that early detectors were BFO or Inductive Balance machines and transmitter receiver two box design. A transmitter receiver detector was a two box type of detector that are often called "deep seeking" today with the transmitter mounted on one end of a pole or two poles and the receiver on the other. Users however liked the term TR instead of IB for the detector that we call a TR or VLF with the transmitter and receiver in the same box.

TR won out over IB so manufactures yielded to the public and most went with TR. When George Payne invented the VLF hobby detector then we went to VLF for the ones that have ground balance, TR for the ones that do not, and I guess BFO machine are long gong. I don't think there are any BFO machines being manufactured for our hobby.

 

[Cody]

You nailed this one on the head. I had more problems with that machine than any I have used. It had a pretty high cost as I recall. I gave the mine to a friend but warned him it was going to be a problem.

 

[Joe Patrick]

Monte,

There were two 'die hard' Revolutionary War hunters in our local club about 15 or so years ago that used Arado 120's exclusively. Now as I am sure you know, the Arado's are legendary for their depth, although current detectors can do as well or better. The 120's had a 'good/bad' type of ID meter (like the Compass model you speak of) that was center-tuned. Anyway, these guys had enough finds to choke a horse ... so to speak. I remember seeing many old silver Spanish Reales, halfs and bits ... early copper coins and military and civilian buttons. Really nice stuff! They also had many, many nice iron artifacts as well. Also, many coins and artifacts from the early and later 1800s. The Arado's were all they ever used and the 'swore' by them.

About 5 years ago, I bought a 120B and had a lot of fun and some success with it. I eventually sold it, but still wish that I had it in my 'arsenal'. I hear that C-Scope's 1220 is very similar and it is another unit that I would love to own and 'play around' with.

Does anyone have any experience with either the Arado 120B or C-Scope 1220?

Joe

 

[Monte]

There were many good detectors early on that brought us some success after we mastered them. I didn't get a chance to use the Arado as long as I wanted to as it was a loaner for a day. It was possible, however, once you learned it and the analog meter, how to eliminate a lot of unwanted stuff. Actually, I used to use the meter a good deal on my all time favorite VLF/TR, the Gold Mountain VIP. I'd combine the audio I got with subtle meter deflections, L or R, and do pretty well.

A couple of years ago I visited a dealer who dealt only in C-Scope models. I, too, had heard good things but the 1220 didn't do well at all. Not for me, the dealer, or a freind. Might have been a bad unit?

Monte

 

[CWRelichunter]

Just thought I would mention the Garrett Master Hunter CX analog meter. I know many like the Whites 6000/5900 series meter better, but the best one I ever used was the Garrett. (not the new CX Plus model)

Both Target ID and pinpointing target depth were <b>very</b> precise on the Garrett. I tried the 6000 XL, and it wasn't quite as good. Close though.

J in VA

 

[coinscreenz]

Both are excellent the 120 b does not work well in high iron infested sites neither does the 1220 b. On sites like parks though they are both superb detectors for locating low conductive jewelry. 1220 B IS GOOD AT FINDING GOLD RINGS.

 

[jmaryt]

yes!.the series 2,and 3 of the 6000 DI series detectors bring back fond memories for me!..used them exclusively through the eighties,and found a ton of goodies with them!the 8" general coil these detectors came with was a fine hunter,and produced many silver coins for me!

 

[UK Brian]

The Arado is still going strong in the Saxon Ultra Depth form which is rather expensive but up to twice the depth of the old 120b and 130 models.
The C-Scope went through various versions ending up with the XDP version. All slight improvements but they turned to the dark side for the latest version (the 1220R) and fitted a digital meter. This is a lighter, better balanced machine but doesn't seem to cope with hot sunny weather for some reason.
Arado/Saxon and C-Scope meter discriminators all suffer from one main drawback. They don't handle bad mineralisation as well as many current models. Otherwise they can keep up or beat many modern detectors.
If you ever see one the Fieldmaster FX 77's (Mk 1,2 or 3) which worked in the same way as the Arado and on my ground was a bit deeper it might be worth picking up and the Company is still in business. They also introduced a slight offset to the coil which allowed a degree of I.D. of very small iron in the all metal primary search mode.