Metal detectors should be more advanced considering technology

[49er12]

Topic of discussion some time ago was a realistic question, why haven’t any detector companies progressed with a machine that would be equivalent to today’s technology, lacking to be honest. Yes cost of making or selling a machine is relavent but seriously all these electronics , computers and this is the best to offer, simply not adding up. We are not further along as we should be. Your answer is.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Minelab PRO-FIND 35 Waterproof Pinpointer Metal Detector for Experts with Tone ID & Adjustable Sensitivity - Grab it through Amazon!

[victhedog]

WHAT DO YOU WANT IT TO DO??

 

[49er12]

I would like it to differentiate the items in ground better, I don’t want it to dig for me. It seems like anything else they r maxed out in there creating I mean how old is the whites v3i now 2009 , 10 years old, just saying, I’m curious like others that’s all, what else can they do other than telling u what type of metal objects are. Oh well don’t hurt to think or ask

 

[sandmartin]

WHAT DO YOU WANT IT TO DO??

let us know when to dig or not to dig. Differentiate between a pull tab and a coin for a start.

 

[Tiredman]

The display of what is in the ground is misleading. Mine said a screwcap and I dug a $5 gold piece. Should I of returned the machine since it didn't work right.

 

[Muddyhandz]

I think the more important question is why humans themselves are not evolving.
Look at how advanced phones have become yet the people behind them are becoming more useless by the minute!

I've found more in the last decade than the previous decades before and I'M USING THE SAME DETECTOR FROM THE 1990'S!
This is despite the fact that there's more hunters and more "advanced" detectors out there.

Humans are just like deer....they stick to the same paths, hunting the same areas over and over again.
All it takes is someone who thinks outside the box and they will become successful.
This applies to everything in life!

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

People seem to forget detecting is based on conductivity of target, targets with same conductivity are going to respond the same.

Minelab has made huge strides with their detectors. CTX 3030 with its "target trace feature" is an example, showing how many targets are under the coil at same time and which one is conductive and which is ferrous.

The Equinox is another, the first all around detector that can be used from hunting for tiny gold nuggets in mountains or deserts to relics, to wading in salt water beaches hunting for lost jewelry. The ability to pick where tones break to the ability to pick how many tones a detector produces are all huge advances in my opinion..

 

[49er12]

U all have good points, we have a lazy society nobody walks, gee so detecting elimination starts there, how many of us hobbiest r out there u guess try, humans r excuses no time etc, I say gee we all have to work, u don’t have time for family then why do u have one again another topic for the lazy and excuses, Im glad we don’t have to register our detectors I don’t need to no how many of us that bad, just curious, ok gotta go.

 

[49er12]

Oh I just wanted to say friends I’m fine with my 20 year old whites dfx heck I’m no master of anything, but would like to consider the whites 3vi, gee the I better go I think the Calvary is coming over the hillside I here the guns a firing from the range, boy they sound like cannon balls, coming from Ohio I think a lot of unrest in the territory, lol thanks

 

[kenstein]

 

[49er12]

All quiet on the home front no more guns a firing from the range, boy they really get it going at times, I swear there are times I think the north and the south are reinacting the war but heck you never no real from acting. Have a good day gotta go to job but I will be back unless the cannon balls destroyed my house when I come back, lol

 

[Grizz12]

I agree

Since the 90's computers have evolved every couple of years yet the technology in this industry seems to be stagnant...

 

[Tom_in_CA]

....Since the 90's computers have evolved every couple of years yet the technology in this industry seems to be stagnant...

And everything in those 'puters, cell-phones, cameras, etc.... was/is all simply a function of "faster and smaller". Can "faster and smaller" change detecting ability ? NO ! There's a thing called the laws of physics. No amount of "faster and smaller" can change how much signal you pump into the ground, and how much info. you pull back out of it.

That's why ... in the past 20 or so years, yes: We've reached the limits of what our current technology can do (aside from random whistles and bells and repackaging). It's not evil lazy engineers. It's not profit motive of sales/demand. It's simply the laws of physics. No amount of faster and smaller is going to change that.

 

[smokeythecat]

49er12 is essentially correct. These recent advances aren't all that great. I have used most of the newer machines. Basically a GRP radar unit with a 100,000 core target memory would be nice. Take the blasted thing out, swing over a target and either see the object or have a nice voice tell you "bottle cap at 10", digging is optional" or "$5 us gold coin at 10" digging is mandatory". But it wouldn't give the YEAR of the coin!

 

[Blkcloud]

I’d like to have a X-ray machine that you could see before you dig

 

[Timecop67]

If George Payne hadn't left the industry more strides would have been made in metal detectors. How many of you have used the 8500, 9000 series Teknetics coin computer models of the late 80s. Not to be confused with the First Texas company of today. The machines were ahead of the times and if they had progressed with modern technology where would they be today? Ahead of the current machines on the market I'm sure.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

I’d like to have a X-ray machine that you could see before you dig

It already exists ! Trouble is: the pixel size is ......... at the smallest ....... 1" square. Hence everything we seek for (coins, rings, nails, tabs foil wads, etc...) are all: 1 pixel.

And even if they got that refined down to 1/100 inch across, you would still be looking at nothing more than a messy blotch of pixels. You are not going to get a magical TV image of your coin or ring or whatever. Unless, of course, you bury a receiving x-ray screen underneath your target. (as in ... human X-rays, where the human stands between the 2 sides of the machine). Then ...... sure ... you'll get a magical TV image.

 

[smokeythecat]

Yes to magical tv images! Probably a $20,000 machine though, and let's skip the radiation factor!

 

[Tiredman]

I’d like to have a X-ray machine that you could see before you dig

How many still have the glasses they purchased?

 

[Opie]

Tom, I completely agree, You can compare the science, not the technology and the technology has now become the bells and whistles.
Great comment!
Opie