Larry (IL)
Well-known member
A lot can happen (or not) in a year. Since White's keeps new development under wraps like everyone else, we have to assume it is just speculation at this time.
Find's Treasure Forums
Welcome to Find's Treasure Forums, Guests!
You are viewing this forums as a guest which limits you to read only status.
Only registered members may post stories, questions, classifieds, reply to other posts, contact other members using built in messaging and use many other features found on these forums.
Why not register and join us today? It's free! (We don't share your email addresses with anyone.) We keep email addresses of our users to protect them and others from bad people posting things they shouldn't.
Click here to register!
Need Support Help?
Cannot log in?, click here to have new password emailed to you
Changed email? Forgot to update your account with new email address? Need assistance with something else?, click here to go to Find's Support Form and fill out the form.
New machine
- Thread starter Thound
- Start date
Larry (IL) said:
You are correct Larry.
The economy and consumer confidence has to be considered. I hope that with the latest release from Minelab that Whites will be able to gauge profitability and consumer interest. And we know that Whites listens to its customer base. Any thing that I have mentioned above has been out in the public for the last 4 months and has been released by Carl or a Whites representative. The real hush hush stuff are the things that are in development and may not make it out for a while. We all know that the race is on to identify gold vs foil and every company is working on it.
I for one am saving my money for the next Whites and have my v3i
Many companies can try to imitate but there is only one. I purchased mine used and have had it for 2 years and its resale value is almost the same price as it was back then.Jacki N Thound, I have a old Whites Eagle II SL 90 4R years witch i Love, The tone ID Locks on hard, A Whites 6000 XL-Pro Best Anolog Whites made!!!!!! Thanks Whites!!!!! I upgraded???? too the V3i Love the Color, but not the Auido Signal too mutch of a Deleay in the Auido,
I traded it off 4R two Detectors with my Multi Dealer Garratt AT-Pro and a Garrett Sea Hunter, Sea Hunter PI wen i go to the Beach
AT-Pro for real Junkie sites, Im set 4R Life, Mickfin,
I traded it off 4R two Detectors with my Multi Dealer Garratt AT-Pro and a Garrett Sea Hunter, Sea Hunter PI wen i go to the Beach
AT-Pro for real Junkie sites, Im set 4R Life, Mickfin,
Critterhunter
New member
The wireless pinpointer idea is a nice one, as it could still be used with other detectors by just listening to the pinpointer's report and not have to rely on it telling you through the headphones like it would be able to do with the machine it's meant for.
I doubt there will ever be a way to tell gold from foil or tabs. There are limits in terms of physics as to just how much information you can gleam from a VLF detection field's interaction with a metal object. It just doesn't have enough "vocabulary" to be able to relate those kinds of details to the detector. Like trying to ask a baby who only knows a few words to explain the nature of the universe to you. It just doesn't have the ability to tell you those things.
I doubt there will ever be a way to tell gold from foil or tabs. There are limits in terms of physics as to just how much information you can gleam from a VLF detection field's interaction with a metal object. It just doesn't have enough "vocabulary" to be able to relate those kinds of details to the detector. Like trying to ask a baby who only knows a few words to explain the nature of the universe to you. It just doesn't have the ability to tell you those things.
Critterhunter
New member
But according to the laws of physics and aerodynamics man CAN fly. On the other hand, we must also follow those same limiting laws of physics in terms of magnetic detection fields and just what they do when interacting with metal. If you read technical reports on the nature of magnetic detection fields and how they interact with metal there just isn't much data that can be told to the RX coil in terms of the metal's qualities, let alone what the detector can derive from what the RX coil is receiving. Again, it's like trying to do something like ask your dog to read the newspaper to you. He/she simply doesn't have the ability to do that. Sure, the dog can see the paper, but there is no way it can get much information out of it other than it looks white, how big it is, and that it sure would be fun to chew on. 
That's a bit more information than even a VLF detection field can tell a detector about the qualities and traits of a metal object. It just can't gather that much information. It's not a problem with the detector being able to understand what the field is trying to tell it, it's that the field just CAN'T tell it much of anything other than the conductivity of the target. Look at even the extra ferrous value that some machines can sort of gleam from the target. In reality that value is so unreliable that most guys using those machines don't even pay attention to it. It can range wildly based on any number of factors, including ground content (not just the target) and so on. For that reason most of those guys pay no attention to that number and rely soley on the conductivity value of the target.
There's also the limits of a VLF detection field in terms of just what it can "see". The first metal object it hits is the the only one it sees. It in effect "bursts" or warps around the first target it comes in contact with and can't travel past the side of that object to see something deeper than it. If two targets are at the same depth and so close together that they are both being washed in the field at the same time, the machine can not separate them but rather averages them on the conductivity scale as one target. For that matter, the only way to unmask better is to use a sharper detection field such as the compressed left/right width wise detection field of an SEF coil. You want to be able to light up one target and not the other in order to ID it properly. There just is no way according to the limits of the what these detection fields can do that you can light up two targets at once and be able to ID them both separetly at the same time on the screen. Can a machine first see one target, post it's VDI # on the screen, and then move on to see another target (without also seeing the first one at the same time)...And then post that second targets ID # on the screen at the same time? Sure, but that's nothing new in VLF technology. It's in effect just posting the history of the previous item it saw while also displaying the VDI # of the new one.
That's a bit more information than even a VLF detection field can tell a detector about the qualities and traits of a metal object. It just can't gather that much information. It's not a problem with the detector being able to understand what the field is trying to tell it, it's that the field just CAN'T tell it much of anything other than the conductivity of the target. Look at even the extra ferrous value that some machines can sort of gleam from the target. In reality that value is so unreliable that most guys using those machines don't even pay attention to it. It can range wildly based on any number of factors, including ground content (not just the target) and so on. For that reason most of those guys pay no attention to that number and rely soley on the conductivity value of the target.
There's also the limits of a VLF detection field in terms of just what it can "see". The first metal object it hits is the the only one it sees. It in effect "bursts" or warps around the first target it comes in contact with and can't travel past the side of that object to see something deeper than it. If two targets are at the same depth and so close together that they are both being washed in the field at the same time, the machine can not separate them but rather averages them on the conductivity scale as one target. For that matter, the only way to unmask better is to use a sharper detection field such as the compressed left/right width wise detection field of an SEF coil. You want to be able to light up one target and not the other in order to ID it properly. There just is no way according to the limits of the what these detection fields can do that you can light up two targets at once and be able to ID them both separetly at the same time on the screen. Can a machine first see one target, post it's VDI # on the screen, and then move on to see another target (without also seeing the first one at the same time)...And then post that second targets ID # on the screen at the same time? Sure, but that's nothing new in VLF technology. It's in effect just posting the history of the previous item it saw while also displaying the VDI # of the new one.
Well Critter i have to agree with you on VLF as we MDers think of it. But have you ever considered it might be possible to use a modified VLF waveform. Maybe something like pulsed VLF or enhanced VLF. I don't know much about it except that the military has ways of sending messages that are really high-tech.And they use a lot of ELF and VLF for long distances so I'm just saying that there may be some technology out there that can be adapted to a metal detector. But what do I know. HH
Thound said:
You are on the money with this....It becomes a capacitance when pulsed repeatedly, then by measuring the decay time between gradually diminishing pulse more information is extracted. This is when the items density can start to come into play. Lead and gold will be much harder to determine. I think this thread is gearing towards a different subject matter than it was for.