Nasa Toms Etrac Test /Evaluation

[Aaron]

Aaron [ PM ]
Nasa's Etrac Evaluation & Test Results/Status
March 26, 2011 05:30PM Registered: 1 year ago
Posts: 318

With all the contraversy regarding the former Ireland made and now Malaysia made Mine Lab machines and which one is better, deeper, better build and parts, quality, ect. ect. I thought I might help settle the issue a little. I put Nasa Tom to task by testing my new in box Etrac. I had Tom put the Etrac through his entire "gamut" of testing and evaluation...which included the following: Bench, Garden and Field. Along with the Etrac also I sent a 5" SunRay coil.
The following is Toms Status. I'm VERY pleased with the results. Maybe this with be of some help to those who are worried about the Malaysia machines and thinking of buying a new one. To those who already have one...your probably not surprised.
Now you be the judge....

Hi Aaron,

OK. Let's start with this:

With a plethora of samples, I have confirmed that 'relic' hunting and 'jewelry' hunting....................specifically with the E-TRAC ...... need to be treated nearly exactly the same. (((This may go in a direction that may not be so obvious, nor....what you may expect))). With my standardized test-targets.....I have confirmed with the ET......that plenty of jewelry and relics can ID as: 12-01. And it is in the '01' herein... whereby, you want to utilize MINIMAL discrimination. So, the QuickMask function becomes a critical necessity. In fresh water AND wet salt conditions, it is recommended to set QuickMask Ferrous Disc to 'wide open'..........or.............'35'...........or.............'31'. Do not employ any form of Conductive Disc. ...... as TOO many conductive targets (small and/or low conductive jewelry) will ID VERY low.....conductively. Now.............wide open, 35 or 31. This will be dictated by 'how much fatigue' you are willing to tolerate. The '31' is for iron littered beaches and/or inland iron infested jewelry hunting sites. Your other recommended settings are:

Multi-tone
Recovery = Fast (if you are inland)
Manual Sens = 24 to 30.........as much as you can handle without fatigue
Ferrous
Trash Density = Low (for beaches)
Ground = Neutral (if you are in mild dirt....as I suspect)
Variability = 30
Response Range = Long

Relic hunting inland is exactly the same as above..........with one exception: Trash Density = High for iron littered sites.

Interestingly, the E-TRAC employs a form of 'Boost Process' when Sens is set above '25'. One of the fairly obvious indications is ... whilst at higher Sens settings....... the delayed audio response over a target..... is a bit more pronounced.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Coin hunting:

Here is where I have been struggling for several days. I have been trying to create a 'magic' program for inland 'old' coin hunting. The fact of the matter is: there is no magic programming secret. Reason: Using a $5.00 gold Half Eagle coin as my minimum conductivity platform/coin..........there have been TOO many real-world scenarios that have 'voided' any of my special 'coin' programs. With this coin slightly tilted.....................or....................... a few small flecks of rust in close proximity to the coin (this is representative of the real world) ............and the coin is 'nulled' (Disc'd). Ironically............with nothing Disc'd out..........the cross-hairs land in a white/clear region on the LCD screen where ........... flipping over to the special 'coin' program(s).....is NOT Disc'd out; yet, the detector 'nulls' over the coin. Sooooooo...............in a nutshell: detect primarily by audio responses. Secondarily, focus your efforts on the upper right quadrant of the screen. (( The factory 'coins' program is not bad, yet, has a few flaws..... due to real-world conditions )).

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Try to run this unit with Sens at/above '24' if possible. Do not utilize 'auto' Sens............if at all possible.
Yes, this unit does like a slightly slower than average sweep-speed.
I could give plenty of recommendations as to what types of specific audio programming should be performed; yet, this is dictated by your level of individualized hearing abilities. I lean more towards a loud and wide audio span.
This is a very powerful unit.............and you may find it performs better than any other detector you have......in the 9" to 11" range..........due to mineralization. Only head-to-head testing will validate this.

End of status.

Sincerely,

Tom

 

[Ray-Mo.]

you can stand it.That is for max depth and still get amazing unmasking of targets. We must remember he is in some of the best soil/sand to be found anywhere and adjust for our own soil/sites

 

[Coilfishin]

Aaron [ PM ]
Nasa's Etrac Evaluation & Test Results/Status


-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Coin hunting:
Here is where I have been struggling for several days. I have been trying to create a 'magic' program for inland 'old' coin hunting. The fact of the matter is: there is no magic programming secret. Reason: Using a $5.00 gold Half Eagle coin as my minimum conductivity platform/coin..........there have been TOO many real-world scenarios that have 'voided' any of my special 'coin' programs. With this coin slightly tilted.....................or....................... a few small flecks of rust in close proximity to the coin (this is representative of the real world) ............and the coin is 'nulled' (Disc'd). Ironically............with nothing Disc'd out..........the cross-hairs land in a white/clear region on the LCD screen where ........... flipping over to the special 'coin' program(s).....is NOT Disc'd out; yet, the detector 'nulls' over the coin. Sooooooo...............in a nutshell: detect primarily by audio responses. Secondarily, focus your efforts on the upper right quadrant of the screen. (( The factory 'coins' program is not bad, yet, has a few flaws..... due to real-world conditions )).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, this unit does like a slightly slower than average sweep-speed.
This is a very powerful unit.............and you may find it performs better than any other detector you have......in the 9" to 11" range..........due to mineralization. Only head-to-head testing will validate this.

End of status.

Sincerely,

Tom

[size=medium][/size] Sorry guys, I do not mean to burst your proverbial "bubble", but what I get out of this --is that it ISN't a good review. It sounds to me like the unit struggles around small chunks of trash="the real world". I am sure Minelab does make a good
product, but I am not wearing Minelab Rose Colored glasses either.

 

[Bowie]

Now, that is not what I got and to be fair, I dont own an ETrac as of yet. Was a bit taken on the gold coin. Pretty much what I have read all along on the ETracs and Explorers, they just arent hot on gold items, especially the micro sized items but, as we all know, jewelry and its make up can ring up in different areas on our VID. It was a very informational evaluation because it was intended to confirm that the Malaysian units run the same as the Irish made units.
I think we all know this, concerning the gold from what we read on the forums, doesnt mean it will not pick up no gold, because it will and countless Minelab users have already confirmed this fact. My take, is this is an excellent machine for many areas and really does well at its unmasking abilities. Good for everyone, no, many click with it, some click with other machines. Excells in every area, no but it must really be a hell of a unit in these trashy parks and schools or you wouldnt hear or see so much written about it. I just think, different machines excell at different tasks better than others plus, the experience of the user in the end.
And after Ive thought about it, the gold coin, i would guess that mabye the ferrous on the coin was lower than the ferrous of the iron, dunno, one of you Minelab users will have to check that out.
Anyway my thoughts after reading the evaluation for the argument concerning the Malaysian vs Ireland units,
HH,
John
PS, NasaTom also stated hunt by sound, isnt that pretty much what many of the successful Minelab owners state???

 

[Ray-Mo.]

Just a lot of guys who find a ton of old coins with the best deep coin turf machine ever made.
And you need to reread Tom's evaluation as you must have missed this part Quote: This is a very powerful unit.............and you may find it performs better than any other detector you have......in the 9" to 11" range..........due to mineralization.
Considering this came from a long time die hard Fisher promoter I think it speaks volumes.
Many of us have owned and used the E-Tracs for over 3 years now and do not need any confirmation from Tom or any one else to know just how great of a machine it is.We found out on our own first hand by digging hundreds of old coins heavily masked and or very deep from hammered public sites many others had all but given up on.

Many more folks have been doing the same thing, only in smaller quantities with only a few days or even hours experience with their E-Trac.
In other words you are more than welcome to read whatever you want into Tom's findings but we know what it is capable of first hand where the coil meets the grass,Ray.

 

[pointer80]

Hey guys, Where can I purchase some of those minelab rose colored glasses? I think they will match my minelab hat Just kidding. I love my e-trac and will stick with what works for me. I know with the e-trac if I hit a site I will find whats there. Good enough for me. HH. to all.

 

[earthmansurfer]

I think that was a pretty nice evaluation. It's worth mentioning that many people think Tom is a Fisher die hard. That is a bit of a mixed bag. On the one hand, yes, he was a primary engineer in the one of the best Fisher models - The multi frequency CZ-3D. But on the other hand, he has stated he is only concerned with what works best (in his soil). He lives in Florida, sweat soil and the E-Trac isn't better for him (there). I have read his forum a lot for years and he really is pretty brand neutral.

Some pretty experienced hunters out there with an eye for electronics have said that it appears that the E-Trac (due to it's performance characteristics - great on coins, especially silver and copper, and not so great on gold (sometimes)) is mostly using the lower combined frequencies. Much like the Fisher multi frequency models (CZ), which also hit deep silver exceptionally well, Though the Fisher models clearly don't do as well in iron as the E-Trac. Something up the sleeve there!

Something he said above is worth repeating and might get some of you guys some more deeper finds. (I will be adding an E-Trac next year more than likely). Pay note to this:

Interestingly, the E-TRAC employs a form of 'Boost Process' when Sens is set above '25'. One of the fairly obvious indications is ... whilst at higher Sens settings....... the delayed audio response over a target..... is a bit more pronounced.

I have never heard that mentioned before (not that it hasn't) and think that is a very valuable piece of information, in particular for experienced hunters. For inexperienced hunters it might be dangerous and counter productive. If you are running auto and the final setting is at 20-24 or so, if the conditions allow, I'd jump it to 25 in manual. I'm speculating on the 20-24 number.

I really enjoy reading this forum. Keep up the nice finds and discussions.

EMS

 

[EtracTom-AdirondacksNY]

Yes that is the point that really stood out for me the over 25 boost point. I will have to test that out as I think most tend to run in AUTO+3 mostly. Ground should be run in DIFFICULT mode for MOST OF NORTH AMERICAN SOIL written in Andy's book and I think the Etrac manual unless it's a beach with sandy soil or a plowed field then run in GROUND neutral.

 

[Southwind]

I removed my first comments after realizing, like the above test/evaluation, it had no real value and was a waste of space.

 

[Goldmanjace]

Ground should be run in DIFFICULT mode for MOST OF NORTH AMERICAN SOIL written in Andy's book and I think the Etrac manual unless it's a beach with sandy soil or a plowed field then run in GROUND neutral.

I would set ground to DIFFICULT always! Only on beaches would I use normal and that only maybe. In the neutral setting the etrac CAN null over high conductive coins (silver dollars) with 0 DISC! There is even a vid of this on youtube! I am not surprised it did this on the gold coin.

 

[Ray-Mo.]

n/t

 

[EtracTom-AdirondacksNY]

Yes I saw that video too. Interesting glad I don't live near too many beaches just parks, schools, houses, and farmland and such. What a dilema that presents. LOL

I'll have to test it out and see if there is some setting changes or discrimination that needs to be modified to prevent that from happening.

 

[Goldmanjace]

I have done a test on mine and it does pick up the coin with the same settings as in the vid. I have been reading may posts about this and many say that minelab has corrected whatever the problem was.

@Ray-Mo I dont quite understand your post?

 

[Go Rebels!]

I own three detectors, a F75LTD, Etrac and CZ-3D. In the red upstate clay of South Carolina, for coin hunting, I now go to the CZ-3D first, the F75LTD second and the Etrac last. The CZ hits coins the hardest, including silver at depth, followed behind by the Etrac and LTD, which I consider both to be equivalent. On deep silver, both Fisher units will give a fluctuating iron/silver response while the Etrac will either null or give a whisper of silver. And in my neck of the woods, deep silver is 8". The Etrac has very poor depth running in AUTO and only equals the depth of the Fisher units when running in manual, usually about 5 points higher than the full AUTO setting. Running the Etrac any higher greatly increases the liklihood of the unit to false on iron. This I found through testing in my test bed and through real world comparisons on common targets in the field. The Etrac has clearly superior depth to the F75 whent he Etrac is run in manual and the F75 is running in any of the non-LTD, 'old' modes (DE, PF, JE, BC).

My testing of the Etrac shows that it unmasks no better than the CZ and to a lesser degree compared to the LTD. The LTD with the 5" DD trumps the Etrac with the Sunray X-5 (and eXcellerator 6" DD) when unmasking in complex iron. The recovery speed of the Etrac is too slow compared to the F75 and the footprint of the stock 11" Fisher coil appears to be tighter compared to the ML 11" Pro coil.

I have a $1 Type 1 gold coin buried at 6" in my test bed. Only the LTD with the 15" white coil, running in BP or CL modes, can see this coin in any ground moisture condition. It is usually blind to the 11" DD on the LTD and always blind to the CZ and Etrac even under the best (moist) of conditions. It is totally invisible to these two machines. To be fair, the CZ has yet to be tuned by Tom; that's coming next.

However, the F75 and F75LTD can tire you out with chatter, forcing your brain to process much more compared to the output of the Etrac or CZ. Running the F75 in hyper mode (zero disc and high sensitivities), where every iron fleck gives an output, is mentally fatiguing. It is that reason why I still hunt with the CZ or LTD if I give one of the other units to a buddy. Maybe this is why so many detectorists have given up on the F70/75/T2 platform; it's just too easy to overdrive the unit into a noisy condition rather than throttle it down to a quiet background. I often run the LTD in CL mode with extremely low sensitivities (10-20) to mimic the output of the Etrac or CZ. Depth in this mode is still outstanding and at least equal to the other two units. Excellent earphones are required!

For more see Tom's site and search for "E-Trac vs. F75 LTD test coming..."

Of course, all this relates to testing done in MY soil, under MY EMI conditions. Your results may differ.

 

[Southwind]

It most cases your results WILL vary LOL

I'm not from Missouri, the "Show me State", but I really prefer to see video comparisons myself. Not that I don't trust the self-interpretations of others but a video is worth a million words when it come to detector comparisons.

For example, I had a guy who swore his lower end detector was deeper than the E-Trac. I've used a lot, and I mean a lot, of low to high end detectors and just found that hard to swallow so I asked for a video. He had many years on his low end detector so he was vary familiar with it where the E-Trac was a fairly new machine for him. In the video it seemed obvious the E-Trac was hitting much stronger than his lower end detector, but he still swore he thought it was giving a better signal. I don't think he was intentionally trying to be misleading because to him the familiar sound of his old faithful seemed better to him, but the video showed otherwise. A good video will take the personal influence out of a comparison. That is why I do videos to back up my opinions. Then all I need say is view my video and decide for yourself.

I tend to believe there is a good reason why certain detectors, like the E-Trac, are considered top machines. I believe they rise to the top because the majority of users find them better than the rest. Not just because someone posts a long indepth opinion as to why they think everyone should believe them, but because in the field use by many different people has them as proven themselves as top machines. The best rise to the top on their own and thats a fact.

If your detector isn't at the top it doesn't mean it isn't the top detector for you, but don't fall for the idea that people just don't know how good it is. You're only fooling yourself. Some people will also attempt to fool you into thinking what they believe is what you should believe. See it and try it for yourself, then make up your own mind.

 

[Go Rebels!]

See it and try it for yourself, then make up your own mind.

So, in the end, we agree.

 

[Diggin Metal]

F75 better than the Etrac not around here for coins in the real world tests not cleaned ground.

if I buried a quarter at whatever depth is max for what site I'm at lets say 9" the Etrac wins every time the Fisher will tell me that its deep iron and if you run all metal you will lose your sanity from all the iron in the ground.

This is a site I have hit hard first with The Fisher F75 SE then with the AT Pro in both directions and pulled 0-Silver 11 weats 1-Buffalo and some clad.
this last Sunday I spent 3 hours 1-direction only very slow I will go back and work it the other direction next year but the picture speaks for its self..

 

[Coilfishin]

I tend to believe there is a good reason why certain detectors, like the E-Trac, are considered top machines. I believe they rise to the top because the majority of users find them better than the rest. Not just because someone posts a long indepth opinion as to why they think everyone should believe them, but because in the field use by many different people has them as proven themselves as top machines. The best rise to the top on their own and thats a fact.
.

Noone is arguing it isn't a TOP machine, yet unless I am misinterpreting this research I am reading that the unit tends to NULL over iron/iron oxide.
As from the above excerpt:

With this coin slightly tilted.....................or....................... a few small flecks of rust in close proximity to the coin (this is representative of the real world) ............and the coin is 'nulled' (Disc'd). Ironically............with nothing Disc'd out..........the cross-hairs land in a white/clear region on the LCD screen where ........... flipping over to the special 'coin' program(s).....is NOT Disc'd out; yet, the detector 'nulls' over the coin. Sooooooo...............in a nutshell: detect primarily by audio responses. Secondarily, focus your efforts on the upper right quadrant of the screen. (( The factory 'coins' program is not bad, yet, has a few flaws..... due to real-world conditions )).

Subsequently, you can "in reality" miss a good target.

Can anyone say otherwise that the unit does not perform like this? and you cannot miss a good target when it NULLS over iron/iron oxide?

 

[earthmansurfer]

Coilfishing, I do remember a thread over there not long ago where they compared an E-Trac to some of the faster before mentioned units in iron. The E-Trac missed on a lot of targets where as the other units didn't and it wasn't close. I do agree the E-Trac is a great unit with great depth, but it's pretty well known about it's nulling. Where I think it excels though, is with the high conductors. This seems to be true in iron (to a degree) as well. I don't have an E-Trac yet but have been reading for years over it...

A coin garden isn't the best place to test machines in iron as it takes years for the iron to get in a state that it usually is in in the field. The same can be said for coins. So, comparing targets in the field seems like the way to go. More people are getting mini camcorders so I expect we'll be seeing more head to heads.

All that said, I still want to try an E-Trac out next year, and for it's silver and copper seeking results (at depth).

EMS

 

[Southwind]

Without a doubt the E-Trac, and If I'm not mistaken other FBS minelabs, null over iron. My argument is in that "targets are being missed" due to the nulling. First, anyone that has actually used the E-Trac for any length of time knows the E-Trac still hits just fine on good targets while nulling over iron. In fact, one of the E-Tracs strongest selling points is the ability to pull good targets out of iron infested areas. Second, every detector I've ever owned does the same over iron. The detector may not null, but the positive target response are affected all the same. IF iron is set to be discriminated the process is the same for all VLF designed machines. Iron, to some degree, will have an adverse affect on any conductive target.

I understand location has a lot to do with how any detector(s) will operate as well as user experience with THAT particular machine, but I've used the detectors Tom likes to promote side by side with both the E-Trac and the V3i, and my experience has been the others, while great detectors and may do very well for the money and in Ireland, was not even in the same class as the E-Trac or V3i, and was a close 3rd in pulling deep coins from our city park. Our city part is full of iron bits most detectors just can't handle.

So I guess what I'm saying is my experience has been just the opposite of what is being reported above. In my "real world" the E-Trac is far above the rest in iron penetrating ability.