SMF

[DigDog]

When the manufacturer claims "X simultaneous frequencies", they never mention that these are transmit frequencies…
I could be wrong, but I think all SMF detectors transmit 2-3 frequencies simultaneously, the rest are just harmonic frequencies. Magic happens mostly in signal processing.

Thats the way i always understood it.
I didn’t think a smf with 5 different frequencies transmitted all 5 all the time.
I thought it depends on what mode you choose and uses the best two for that mode

 

[Nauti]

Well in reality only two have to be transmitted at once for manufacturers to be able to claim SMF.
It's another good marketing ploy to sell detectors though,even if in reality it doesn't improve that much on the really good models without SMF.

 

[DigDog]

Well in reality only two have to be transmitted at once for manufacturers to be able to claim SMF.
It's another good marketing ploy to sell detectors though,even if in reality it doesn't improve that much on the really good models without SMF.

In all though two is still better than one, has to make some difference or improvement in certain areas.
I get it with marketing all companies use a play on words

 

[Nauti]

In all though two is still better than one, has to make some difference or improvement in certain areas.
I get it with marketing all companies use a play on words

Be interesting to find out what improvements by taking a top non smf detector and an smf detector and testing them on the same targets in real detecting conditions.I just wonder how many more targets the smf detector would find.......I know that my old GT will find anything a nox will at the beach (at the time of writing) which puts me off investing in a technology that I don't believe will greatly increase my finds rates.
We have seen so many "innovations" over the years but how many have really improved the amount and quality of our finds?I doubt its in the best interests of manufacturers to come up with something that truly makes a big difference so they just come up with things that keep us guessing and buying at the same time.
I have detectors that have the most simple technology but I still seem to find just as much as those who own the latest "light sabre"........maybe its because I don't rely on technology and dig more than a lot of detectorists??

 

[DigDog]

Be interesting to find out what improvements by taking a top non smf detector and an smf detector and testing them on the same targets in real detecting conditions.I just wonder how many more targets the smf detector would find.......I know that my old GT will find anything a nox will at the beach (at the time of writing) which puts me off investing in a technology that I don't believe will greatly increase my finds rates.
We have seen so many "innovations" over the years but how many have really improved the amount and quality of our finds?I doubt its in the best interests of manufacturers to come up with something that truly makes a big difference so they just come up with things that keep us guessing and buying at the same time.
I have detectors that have the most simple technology but I still seem to find just as much as those who own the latest "light sabre"........maybe its because I don't rely on technology and dig more than a lot of detectorists??

Yes, well someone like me who sold all my detectors and now going back into hobby or new people getting into the hobby i cant see paying the same price for old 20 year old technology.
The detectors that i liked are no longer being manufactured with the exception of the excalliber II which is $600 more now and strictly a beach machine.
So given the options i can find an old tesoro cibola still new in box for $600 or a new legend for the same price which is waterproof, smf, more versatile the choice is easy.
The detectors of the past are also more specific to what type of hunting you prefer whereas now they are more multi functional. You can eliminate 3 detectors and just use one now for those who have detectors and have been doing it for awhile and new people its the better choice I believe.
Keep in mind a few of these new detectors can function as a vlf or smf and allows to choose the frequencies again eliminates having three or four different detectors and needing only one.
If just for the convenience factor alone you can probably sell all three and get one new one if there is no big difference in performance between them all.
Why carry three machines with you when you can carry just one and with the push of a button choose what you want.
I think a good example is someone like Monte who i believe does carry a few detectors at a time and has to go back and forth and alternate depending which frequency or features he wants to try.
Look at it from the other side will the three individual detectors outperform by a big difference the one.

 

[DigDog]

Someone responded to a different thread that would be interesting to know is that the DD coil detection field is very narrow at the deepest part to where a 6” coil only had a detection area of only 1-2” at the deepest part so theoretically to cover 24” of ground you have to overlap and sweep the coil 12 times in a two foot section to get even coverage at maximum depth. And an 11” DD coil is roughly only 6” coverage at maximum depth still having to sweep 4 times in two feet of area.
That seems awe full high.
I understood a concentric coil is V shaped and has a very small detection area at the deepest point but a DD from what I understood is even depth from the front tip to the rear tip and doesn’t have that V shape or even U shape in the detection field, therefore one sweep of a 6” DD coil will give you an even 6” wide sweep at the same maximum depth and 11” respectively.
So then to cover the same 24” ground going forward with a 6” coil should only need 4 sweeps not 12 to get the same depth all the way across.
I could be wrong though

 

[Nauti]

Yes, well someone like me who sold all my detectors and now going back into hobby or new people getting into the hobby i cant see paying the same price for old 20 year old technology.
The detectors that i liked are no longer being manufactured with the exception of the excalliber II which is $600 more now and strictly a beach machine.
So given the options i can find an old tesoro cibola still new in box for $600 or a new legend for the same price which is waterproof, smf, more versatile the choice is easy.
The detectors of the past are also more specific to what type of hunting you prefer whereas now they are more multi functional. You can eliminate 3 detectors and just use one now for those who have detectors and have been doing it for awhile and new people its the better choice I believe.
Keep in mind a few of these new detectors can function as a vlf or smf and allows to choose the frequencies again eliminates having three or four different detectors and needing only one.
If just for the convenience factor alone you can probably sell all three and get one new one if there is no big difference in performance between them all.
Why carry three machines with you when you can carry just one and with the push of a button choose what you want.
I think a good example is someone like Monte who i believe does carry a few detectors at a time and has to go back and forth and alternate depending which frequency or features he wants to try.
Look at it from the other side will the three individual detectors outperform by a big difference the one.

I think Monte is far more qualified than me to answer the question of whether the three will be better than the one........he has far more experience than me over a broader range of machines.
Personally over the years i have had a detector that i have used as my go to machine but others that i have used for more specialised tasks........i never found a single machine that would do everything as well as having seperate machines for specific hunting.This may be different with the latest crop of high tech wonders but in truth i cant say one way or another as i haven't had enough experience with them.What you say makes complete sense and if i didn't have my old faithful machines i would be looking at one of the newer models more than likely.Hopefully i can keep mine going for a while yet as i enjoy using them and i still find a lot of stuff with them.

 

[DigDog]

I think Monte is far more qualified than me to answer the question of whether the three will be better than the one........he has far more experience than me over a broader range of machines.
Personally over the years i have had a detector that i have used as my go to machine but others that i have used for more specialised tasks........i never found a single machine that would do everything as well as having seperate machines for specific hunting.This may be different with the latest crop of high tech wonders but in truth i cant say one way or another as i haven't had enough experience with them.What you say makes complete sense and if i didn't have my old faithful machines i would be looking at one of the newer models more than likely.Hopefully i can keep mine going for a while yet as i enjoy using them and i still find a lot of stuff with them.

In the end use what you enjoy I always say

 

[captnkirk]

Oh no bud..........they are great detectors without a doubt and will find a lot for their owners.I just don't think that they are leaps and bounds over some of the detectors I own so i won't be investing in one is what I meant.
Over the thirty plus years I have been detecting I have seen many "innovations" come and go but have yet to see a single one that really makes a big difference to overall finds rates.

Agree; pretty much what Paystreak says too.

 

[captnkirk]

Be interesting to find out what improvements by taking a top non smf detector and an smf detector and testing them on the same targets in real detecting conditions.I just wonder how many more targets the smf detector would find.......I know that my old GT will find anything a nox will at the beach (at the time of writing) which puts me off investing in a technology that I don't believe will greatly increase my finds rates.
We have seen so many "innovations" over the years but how many have really improved the amount and quality of our finds?I doubt its in the best interests of manufacturers to come up with something that truly makes a big difference so they just come up with things that keep us guessing and buying at the same time.
I have detectors that have the most simple technology but I still seem to find just as much as those who own the latest "light sabre"........maybe its because I don't rely on technology and dig more than a lot of detectorists??

If it ain't there, you can't find it AND if you dig EVERY target you'll find it all. One of my older detectors that I really like is the White's Eagle 2 SL. I've been hunting the same park for about 40 years now and found lots of coins, jewelry with the White's. What I've found is that with my Nox 800 and Legend, the same area has given up even more silver and jewelry. Dabbled with the idea of a Deus 1, but can't afford it right now.

 

[DigDog]

If it ain't there, you can't find it AND if you dig EVERY target you'll find it all. One of my older detectors that I really like is the White's Eagle 2 SL. I've been hunting the same park for about 40 years now and found lots of coins, jewelry with the White's. What I've found is that with my Nox 800 and Legend, the same area has given up even more silver and jewelry. Dabbled with the idea of a Deus 1, but can't afford it right now.

Be interesting to know what depths you found stuff with the new detectors.
Pulltaboo was saying that at maximum depth the detection field on the coils on detectors reach can be as little only 1-2” wide. So unless you swing your coil in 1-2” rows as you move forward it can be very easy to miss stuff. Now that is for a 6” coil for example and the detection field can get to 6” wide on say a 11” coil but either way who detects a park or beach only advancing the coil 2-6” forward at a time.each sweep. All while maintaining the same sweep speed and hight.
Thats why nearly impossible to exactly compare different detectors in real world situations. Would take hours just cover an area 100x100 completely the same and if you go back next day could be different emi, soil conditions due to moisture, etc

 

[captnkirk]

Found a 1904 Barber dime at 9" and a pair of Indian Head pennies at 10" is very soft loose sandy soil. Those are a couple of things/times I remember off the top of my head. Both the Dime and the IH pennies were found with my nox 800.

 

[Monte]

In all though two is still better than one, has to make some difference or improvement in certain areas.

Two might NOT be better if they are the wrong two.

Yes, sometimes we might note a slight improvement with some SMF's in certain conditions but that also depends on the Single-Frequency detector and coil we compare it with.

All too often since I started using a multi-frequency detector back in the '90s I have experienced more times when one or more of my Single-Frequency detectors matched or bettered the performance of a multi in an assortment of mineralization environments and for both urban Coin Hunting and especially Relic Hunting dense ferrous debris sites.

Currently I own nine detectors, if I recall, and two of them are SMF's, an Apex and an Equinox 800. Both work OK for a lot of places, but sometimes better using just a Selected-Frequency, or are just not as comfortable or as pleasant to use as one of my loyal Single-Frequency models from Bounty Hunter, Fisher, Makro, Nokta or Tesoro.

Monte

 

[captnkirk]

That's also why I like the Legend; I can operate in Multi frequency 1,2,3 or 4kh, 10kh, 15kh, 20kh, 40kh or I think 60kh. That's if I'm understanding what you are saying.

 

[pulltaboo]

Pulltaboo was saying that at maximum depth the detection field on the coils on detectors reach can be as little only 1-2” wide.

I'm still puzzled why you're so surprised by it. If you have a test garden, do this simple experiment:

1. Find the deepest small target (such as coin) your machine can reach at max sensitivity (this is important, as tx always blasts on full power, sens/gain only affects the rx processing), or as close to full sens as EMI permits
2. Pinpoint its exact location
3. Lower the sensitivity until you can barely hear the signal, this way you're somewhat simulating the very extreme edge of detection depth
4. Sweep the coil to make sure you can still hear the target
5. Note how much forward/backward coil shift is required for the target to completely disappear.

Depending on the soil, YMMV – some soils act as diffusers, so instead of defined "brush" pattern you get more of a "spray paint" pattern… but even then, at extreme depths the result of №5 will be many times smaller than you apparently expect.

 

[Monte]

I think Monte is far more qualified than me to answer the question of whether the three will be better than the one........he has far more experience than me over a broader range of machines.
Personally over the years i have had a detector that i have used as my go to machine but others that i have used for more specialised tasks........i never found a single machine that would do everything as well as having seperate machines for specific hunting.This may be different with the latest crop of high tech wonders but in truth i cant say one way or another as i haven't had enough experience with them.What you say makes complete sense and if i didn't have my old faithful machines i would be looking at one of the newer models more than likely.Hopefully i can keep mine going for a while yet as i enjoy using them and i still find a lot of stuff with them.

Currently I own about 9 detectors, give or take one or two. Two are SMF, an Apex and an EQ-800. At times I find they handle a site better in a selected Single-Frequency. My others are Singles, and since there is no such thing as a 'perfect' detector I determined long ago that having more than one detector on-hand provided me more versatilety and therefore results. Since the late '70s and to the latter '80s I used a lot of detectors in over a dozen US states and ground conditions, and in a variety of site challenges. I determined that for me the best overall operating frequency was from 10 kHz to 15 kHz.

I enjoy the detectors I have acquired and grab different units and mounted coils
for the site I decide to hunt. However, I do own and use a favorite single detector I could rely on if I had to trim down to only one detector. This model has served me well in a lot of locations and rewarded my efforts quite well since late '97. But I still have my other units because I like them, they work well and are comfortable to use.

If I didn't like them, they wouldn't be around.

Monte

 

[DigDog]

Found a 1904 Barber dime at 9" and a pair of Indian Head pennies at 10" is very soft loose sandy soil. Those are a couple of things/times I remember off the top of my head. Both the Dime and the IH pennies were found with my nox 800.

Those i would consider pretty deep especially for a dime and penny. Could have easily been missed even by the same detector my point

 

[Monte]

Search coil Electro-Magnetic Fields; Coverage-at-Depth; Overlapping; Effective Coverage.

Perhaps one of the most misunderstood and errantly described is the generated EMF and the shape of the responsive portion of that field as the coil-to-target distance increases (aka Depth).

A Concentric coil does not send out a 'V' shaped signal and a DD coil does not send out a 'knife-blade' signal that only goes straight down.

There is an EMF that is generated or projected around the Transmit coil and as the coil-to- target distance increases the [u']reactive'[/u] or 'functional' portion of that EMF will diminish and that means a target, especially a smaller target like a coin, will finally be responsive about in-line with the center-axis of the search coil. Doesn't matter if it us a DD or Concentric design.

That is why most skilled and avid detector users can Pinpoint most targets in-line with the center of the coil. It is the hot or most sensitive area.

Therefore, and I demonstrated this to a few groups years ago, if you want to find the deepest coins in a trash-free area, you should sweep left and right over the ground and advance the coil no more than the diameter of the coin you are searching for. In a wide-open park for example, it takes a lot of patience and a lot of time to tediouslhy cover an area to get all the good targets.

Most do not hunt that way which is why we can continue to find keepers in the middle of those wide-open spaces.

Monte

 

[DigDog]

Two might NOT be better if they are the wrong two.

Yes, sometimes we might note a slight improvement with some SMF's in certain conditions but that also depends on the Single-Frequency detector and coil we compare it with.

All too often since I started using a multi-frequency detector back in the '90s I have experienced more times when one or more of my Single-Frequency detectors matched or bettered the performance of a multi in an assortment of mineralization environments and for both urban Coin Hunting and especially Relic Hunting dense ferrous debris sites.

Currently I own nine detectors, if I recall, and two of them are SMF's, an Apex and an Equinox 800. Both work OK for a lot of places, but sometimes better using just a Selected-Frequency, or are just not as comfortable or as pleasant to use as one of my loyal Single-Frequency models from Bounty Hunter, Fisher, Makro, Nokta or Tesoro.

Monte

I agree Monte just saying for those who don’t or cant own nine detectors, one for every situation, a detector that can do vlf and smf can be three different detectors in one for someone.
Maybe not the best in every situation but close enough for those who cant have nine detectors

 

[DigDog]

That's also why I like the Legend; I can operate in Multi frequency 1,2,3 or 4kh, 10kh, 15kh, 20kh, 40kh or I think 60kh. That's if I'm understanding what you are saying.

Thats what i love about it, to me its both a vlf of choice of frequencies and a smf with choice of multiple frequencies.
Best of both worlds to me. Might not be the absolute best in every situation but close enough for me.
I cant buy five different detectors at this point so that’s the next best thing