Masking, Depth and the Inevitable Comparisons

[steve herschbach]

Hi,

So step up, buy the machines, do the reporting. Why are you not doing this?

It is not about honesty. It is about people thinking they are owed free answers by others labor. Just get on the net and demand answers. I'm supposed to spend my time and my money to provide other people with answers they are unwilling to find out for themselves? Why is that exactly? Why should anyone else?

I said it before and I'll say it again. A test in my ground conditions does not equate with a test anywhere else. Detector results are location and operator dependent. Take two detectors and two different operators in two different locations and you can get exactly opposite results. Both people are being entirely honest. But one detector is working better for one operator in one place and the opposite is true for the other.

So you want to make a local test and then make a global declaration that machine A is better than machine B then have at it. I am well aware the situation is more complex than that and so I decline to provide simple black and white responses to people craving simplicity.

You want real information, listen to people who are hunting locally in the same areas you intend to hunt. If you intend to hunt silver coins around San Francisco, I'd advise you focus on people who hunt in that area. You interested in hunting relics in Georgia, listen to successful relic hunters in Georgia. They know their stuff. What are they using? People figure out what works best for a given area over time.

You want to come to Alaska and hunt gold? You'd do well to listen to me. I can tell you what machines work best where. But on coin hunting in San Francisco and relic hunting in Georgia I'm totally ignorant.

This one machine is better than another nonsense is nothing but local thinking by those not getting around enough to know there are no absolute answers. It reflects the mindset of people who only do one thing in one place thinking their answers apply to everyone. I subscribe to the idea that metal detecting is more complex than that, and that in different locations different tools are called for. I don''t have any one size fits all answers. But the world is full of people willing to provide just that if that is what you want.

I can take any detector currently offered for sale by the major manufactures and go out and do well with it. You have a $200 detector? I'm not going to tell you you are stupid to own it. I'll do everything I can to help explain how to get the most out of it. I am willing to offer time I have too little of to try and help out anyone with a metal detecting question. I reject the idea you have to have a $700 detector or a $1000 detector. What you have to be is smart and dedicated.

I'm personally fired up by the Vision. It should mean nothing to anyone. That is just me talking about stuff I like. I'm not suggesting anyone else should care what I think. I just want to have a good time discussing detectors - not arguing about them.

As a person who sells detectors I am always subject to accusations of bias, even though I sell all the brands. The fact is I am biased - I think metal detecting is the greatest pastime in the world and that if I can turn anyone onto what it is that I have experienced I am doing them a favor. It is my way of paying back for what I have received. If I can make one person out there get a detector made by anyone and make a find that puts that huge smile on their face then I am happy. I get to do this regularly at my Moore Creek Mine. I take people who have never found a gold nugget before and I work hard to try and have them find one. It is super satisfying seeing somebody dig up a 1/4 ounce gold nugget and jump up and down and shake my hand. It is a real celebration and I helped make it happen.

And that is all I hope to do here. Help someone make that find. Not convince them a detector is better than another.

Steve Herschbach

 

[nw1886]

The issue is that different manufacturers prioritize with what they see as being the more important elements on what a detector processes and it's physical characteristics of construction If I was searching old colonial areas... a machine that was slower response with maximum punch would be the one. If I did most of my detecting on heavily used sports fields...a faster responding machine with super accurate ID would foot the bill. All the top machines seem to have the stability issue licked. Some are much lighter than others. Others better balanced. Some have a better track record for needing service. Better screen. More info. Less info (but better info). The list goes on and on. I'm with you also on the sometimes overwhelming choices of most products we use but... it always boils down to doing your own research for a decision that fits you best. No "Golden Grail" of bottom line out there (and there never will be) as detectors are as different as the people using them. I think I might be turning into a guy that needs a machine that is light (or who gets some rotator cuff surgery) as we speak!

 

[steve herschbach]

Hi,

I gave a detailed answer to your other post. Then I read this post.

Then I realized I have a pile on my plate a mile thick. I'm sick of people like you thinking anyone owes you anything. So I'm done. Have a nice day.

Steve Herschbach

 

[bfodnes]

There is a page in UK and one in Netherlands that have tests done the way you suggest.

Turn on and go, test on preburied targets or air tests.

It is of no use, i know for a fact that the tests results shown on those pages is not what i get with the same detectors where i detect.

In fact many of detectors shows completely different results.

If You buy a detector besed on such tests you have to have luck to get the same results. The only thing that would do good is to try out yourself or have a local dealer helping you decide cause he lives in the same area and might know more then you think.

 

[Mick in Dubbo]

Well said Steve.
I've offered information like that in the past, only to have accusations thrown my way and I'm only a hobby user. So I can imagine what you'd cope.
Mick Evans.

 

[Southwind]

While I agree that its more the user than the detector in the end, I don't agree that a cheap detector in the hands of an experienced hunter will out perform an expensive detector in the hands of a beginner. Yes 20 years ago, but I don't believe thats true today. An experienced detectorist can get the best possible performance out of a cheap detector, but will still be limited by the detectors ability. One would need to believe the only difference between a cheap detector and a high end detector is the user to believe the detector makes no difference.

I have a friend who has never detected before who bought a DFX and is finding coins at 6-7". While there are some lower end detectors that can get this depth in the hands of experience, there are far more that won't get that deep no matter who's using it in the conditions my friend is finding his. User experience is important, but so is the detector.

I learned my lesson 18 years ago when I bought a White's Eagle Spectrum. There is a good reason this 20 year old detector still commands the price it does. I've owned a lot of detectors since the Eagle, and none have proved to be a clear cut above the rest like the Eagle. The DFX has been a solid performer but I'm hoping the Vision will be the cut above the rest I've been looking for.

 

[Larry (IL)]

That is a good idea on the coil trade-in. I will bring that to the attention of Carl this weekend.

 

[Larry (IL)]

The biggest reason is that one persons treasure is another persons trash, especially metal detectors. A lot of people dis-liked the DFX but for me I loved it and for my style of hunting, it was a fantastic machine. That has been and always will be for all detector makes and models.

The Vision is the same way. There will be many who won't like it for 100's of reasons.

 

[Andy Sabisch]

For decades, people have talked about comparisions to aid in make the buying decision much like a Consumer Reports test for metal detectors. Well, in theroy that is a great idea but there are several reasons that type of report would be of little actual value . . . . . . many have been mentioned in other posts to this thread:

First, and most importantly, a detector that might excel in one area may be a total dog in another. I have many examples of detectors that worked great for me that when I moved or travelled, provided marginal performance at best. Different ground conditions make a big difference so comparing detectors in my area may show a clear winner while testing one in your area 100's or 1,000's of miles away may show just the opposite in terms of which detector works better. Not getting into a mail-order arguement here but that is why buying from a delaer that does not have any idea on what conditions you will be facing unless you know how the detector will work in your area is a crap shoot at best.

Second, what features you might find at the top of the list might be different than what I would want. I have more than 20 detectors (actually my wife and kids detectors are in that lot) and each serves a different purpose. My son has a Tesoro Silver Sabre with a Clean Sweep coil for the hunts he is passionate about . . . . but that is not the detector I would use if I was going to the local park where all he remaining targets are 8"+ deep or a super trashy urban area in Charlotte. Detection depth, discrimination, weight, balance, complexity of adjustments . . . . the list is endless and each manufacturer has to define what are the key desitgn elements they want to incorporate into each of their detectors.

Finally, experience and familairity with each detector is crucial to one's success. Many people have posted the following statement . . . "When you get a new detector your finds will drop off until you get as familair with the new one as you were with the old one" and this would have a dramtic affect on comparison tests. How many people are willing to invest many hours on different machines to get to the point where they are as proficient on one as they are on the other. Without that, how can you do a valid comparision test and even then, the test would only be valid in the area it was done for the reason described in the first paragraph.

The forums and field test reports are great tools to provide people with INFORMATION and as they say, information is power in making informed decisions. The ultimate decision will always be a personal one . . . what features do I need, what performance is most important to me and what can my budget support. Manufacturers need to keep the state of teh economy in mind as well and realize that not every hunter out there can afford to buy every $1500+ detector that comes out no matter how good it might be.

I will close with one thought that I pass on to people when I get the age-old question .. . . . . . . "Which detector is the best"

There is no one detector that does it all . . . . some excel in certain applications and the one that fits your needs (form, functionm performance and price) is the best one for you. If there was one detector that did it all in any area, the rest of the companies would be out of business.

Ok, off my soapbox . . . .

Andy Sabisch

 

[Southwind]

While true "there is no one detector that does it all" there some that come closer than others. Those in general are the higher end detectors.

 

[Brett]

Good grief there's a lot of activity here... I don't have the time right now to read it all, but just would like to say that I have purchased and tried many different machines... Bounty Hunter Lonestar, Ace 250, Explorer SE Pro, E-Trac, Whites DFX, Fisher Impulse, and soon I'll have the Whites Vision. If someone could make some money off of doing a head to head comparison for the top of the line detectors, around the country, I'm sure they would get it done. It's just simply, a big chore and a big expense most people are not willing to incur.

 

[JW]

I have been telling people the same thing for fifteen years.

 

[Gardinerda]

Well, as a newbie, there is not much I can say about the cost and "ROI" on metal detectors. What I CAN say is just this:

A hunter I allow to use my woods hunts for a very short time ( 2 months a year) and has a GREAT time. His investment in his "sport hobby"? THOUSANDS for guns, deer stand, ammunition, license every year, and clothing. Expenses recur each year.

A golf "addict" pays for clothing, greens fees, cart rental, and clubs. How much? THOUSANDS! Expenses recur each year.

Metal detecting, on the other hand requires and initial outlay ($1600 for a new Vision?) Extra coils? ($300?) Extra tools? ($200), Books? . And there you have it. A sport that can be done as part of a group, or in solitary pleasure. "ROI" Priceless! One of the few sports where you might get something back from your initial investment. Even better, no additional outlay of funds, unless you WANT to upgrade. Read the posts! Some members, (including myself) have old machines by White's and they are still digging, still enjoying, and having a GREAT time! Many of us have spend less then $400 for a GREAT Whites machine, used! Just go with the good stuff!

 

[lytle78]

Great stuff everyone - now how about we talk about masking - has everybody read the Dankowski article? Here's the link;

http://www.dankowskidetectors.com/behindthemask.htm

Do you think it's really a big factor?f

If it is, then old sites will be "new" again when we get a detector which can "see through" at least the small ferrous crap that Dankowski talks about.

Of course if he is wrong or if no detector can beat this masking - then all those goodies will continue to rest in peace (if they're down there at all).

Your thoughts??

 

[Larry (IL)]

That was pretty darned good Andy.........Ever think of writing a book??....................

 

[coinnut]

Even if you took the most seasoned people who are fluent with their particular models, and had a head to head comparison, it would not necessarily mean anything to the average detectorist. True, it may show one model getting a slight advantage over another, but the average guy would have to learn to be fluent (like the tester was) to get those results. In essence, we would see the ultimate potential of that machine, but not be able to recreate those results, or even account for the changes in mineralisation, location, trash count, etc... Now if it were done regionally, and they happen to hit on your type of hunting (cellar hole, beach, tot lot, etc...) then it would help a bit. But you still have to get fluent on it.

 

[coinnut]

I love my DFX and have kept up and surpassed some of the other hunters with other high end models. For me it worked. But I have also been beaten by them in other locations or "dry" times of the year. It's all in how well you know your machine. But if you want to trade your Vision for my DFX Larry, I might do that

 

[Larry (IL)]

You have it easy coinnut, I hunt with my wife, Nancy and her MXT,........ you can guess who does best about 50% of the time. One guess only please......

I took note of your offer...........

 

[coinnut]

Didn't want to publicly embarrass you about who's better, but since you declined my generous trade offer, I guess her

 

[VaRelics]

[size=medium]I know this is a thread about the Whites Vision which looks like a very interesting machine. But to answer the question Iron masking is very important and I have a machine that can see through all but the largest iron trash and pick up non ferrous targets. We hunted a colonial house site which was full of square nails and I didn