Fisher AQ Impulse Pure Hype or the real deal ? VS Whites TDI BEACH HUNTER MINELAB MANTICORE

[Calabash Digger]

I’ve been following the development and discussion around the Fisher AQ Impulse for the past five years. From the way the machine was initially released, I’ve always had some reservations. Over time, the lack of consistent, real-world videos supporting the depth claims—especially on gold rings—only added to that skepticism.

Recently, I decided to purchase one myself and put it to a proper, controlled test against today’s modern simultaneous multi-frequency detectors.

There has long been a widely accepted belief that pulse induction (PI) machines are inherently deeper than simultaneous multi-frequency (SMF) detectors on saltwater beaches, particularly when it comes to gold jewelry. I wanted to see if that assumption still holds true in 2026 under realistic, stable hunting conditions.

The results were surprising—and I think they may challenge some of the long-standing claims surrounding this machine.

It raises an important question: has the performance of the AQ Impulse been overhyped over the years?

I’d be interested to hear your thoughts and experiences. If you get a chance, check out the video where I walk through the testing process, including how the detector must be set up to remain stable on the beach for a fair comparison.

Stay tuned, and I appreciate your time.

 

[eman1000]

That wasn't even close! I'm a thousand miles away from the beach so it doesn't affect me but still that was eye opening. I actually went and checked Nora's Youtube channel and it looks like she has switched to the XP for most of her diving hunts. Can't blame her if that's the results you get! I would have been curious to see how a CZ-3D would fair given it's age but I always heard it did well running both 5 & 15khz but I doubt that would hit gold at depth's greater then 10".

 

[Calabash Digger]

This thread will probably get interesting because it’s already ruffled some feathers from the shallow water post I made earlier.

For years, I believed the same thing many others do—that pulse induction units were deeper. Two weeks ago, I set out to test that belief.

I’ve run multiple pulse induction machines, including the White's TDI BeachHunter and the Fisher AQ Impulse, which is often considered a top-tier depth machine for the beach. The results you’re seeing in the videos aren’t one-off tests—they’re backed by hours of footage from Morehead City down to Ocean Isle Beach.

Every machine was run in stable, usable, huntable settings—not pushed into unrealistic, unstable configurations. I even included tests where the PI units were run “hot” to show what happens when you try to force maximum performance.

The results are clear and consistent.

On a mild to moderate saltwater beach, modern simultaneous multi-frequency detectors show a significant depth advantage on gold rings over pulse induction units. This has been demonstrated repeatedly across multiple tests.

There’s also another factor that wasn’t fully highlighted in this particular video but is shown in others on my channel—gold rings on edge. In those scenarios, the simultaneous multi-frequency machines clearly outperform the PI units. In some cases, the PI detectors won’t respond at all to rings on edge at depth, while the multi-frequency units hit them cleanly and confidently.

With all that being said, I know this thread may be controversial for some. But it really shouldn’t be. The results are clearly demonstrated, tested under real-world conditions, and presented in a comprehensive, repeatable way.

 

[Digger54]

Thanks for walking point on the subject.

 

[dugafewthings]

“There has long been a widely accepted belief that pulse induction (PI) machines are inherently deeper than simultaneous multi-frequency (SMF) detectors on saltwater beaches, particularly when it comes to gold jewelry.”

Widely accepted perhaps by people who do not understand the technology. Anyone who does understand it knows this is not and has never been the case. What is true is what works best is dependent on the detecting environment, in other words things like mineralization and salinity levels. What works best in one environment may be exactly the opposite of what works best in a different environment. Which brings us to:

“On a mild to moderate saltwater beach, modern simultaneous multi-frequency detectors show a significant depth advantage on gold rings over pulse induction units.”

Anyone who knows the technology would not expect any different. Why in the world would anyone use a PI in a low to moderate environment when a SMF is clearly a better choice? The entire reason for using a PI revolves around locations where an SMF falls on its face. I’ll assume the OP had never hunted places where a Manticore or Deus 2 lose accurate target id at less than 50% of normal depth. So what was a good signal at 10-12” now can only be had at 5-6”. This is less about salt than it is about heavy magnetite concentrations, but at places like Salt Lake salinity does indeed take a heavy toll.

People do not use PI detectors because they want to, they use them because magnetite or hot rock conditions force the move. If you want to do some honest videos on the subject, seek out a beach where the Manticore etc lose 50% or more of the normal depth. Then compare to the PI to see what reality is, not these nonsensical comparisons on beaches where no educated user would bother running a PI.

 

[Calabash Digger]

“There has long been a widely accepted belief that pulse induction (PI) machines are inherently deeper than simultaneous multi-frequency (SMF) detectors on saltwater beaches, particularly when it comes to gold jewelry.”

Widely accepted perhaps by people who do not understand the technology. Anyone who does understand it knows this is not and has never been the case. What is true is what works best is dependent on the detecting environment, in other words things like mineralization and salinity levels. What works best in one environment may be exactly the opposite of what works best in a different environment. Which brings us to:

“On a mild to moderate saltwater beach, modern simultaneous multi-frequency detectors show a significant depth advantage on gold rings over pulse induction units.”

Anyone who knows the technology would not expect any different. Why in the world would anyone use a PI in a low to moderate environment when a SMF is clearly a better choice? The entire reason for using a PI revolves around locations where an SMF falls on its face. I’ll assume the OP had never hunted places where a Manticore or Deus 2 lose accurate target id at less than 50% of normal depth. So what was a good signal at 10-12” now can only be had at 5-6”. This is less about salt than it is about heavy magnetite concentrations, but at places like Salt Lake salinity does indeed take a heavy toll.

People do not use PI detectors because they want to, they use them because magnetite or hot rock conditions force the move. If you want to do some honest videos on the subject, seek out a beach where the Manticore etc lose 50% or more of the normal depth. Then compare to the PI to see what reality is, not these nonsensical comparisons on beaches where no educated user would bother running a PI.

Dugafewthings things. I appreciate your condescending comments, but that’s not the long-held dogma most of us have heard for years. PI machines have consistently been promoted as deeper on virtually any beach. I fully understand the advantage PI units can have in highly mineralized environments like gold fields, Culpeper-type dirt, volcanic soils, Hawaii, or certain west coast beaches. But that’s exactly the point—I’m not claiming otherwise, and I’m not going out seeking those environments because the videos I’m making are honest, real-world tests based on the beaches I actually hunt.

What you’re presenting as widespread knowledge really hasn’t been the common message in the broader beach detecting community. The dominant belief for years has simply been: “PI machines are deeper on the beach.” Period. That’s what has been repeated, marketed, and reinforced over and over. I don’t need to understand every technical detail to recognize what the common narrative has been, because I’ve followed this community for years and watched that belief shape purchasing decisions and opinions.

In fact, that exact dogma was reinforced immediately in this very discussion when the moderator in the shallow water section jumped in with the standard “PI is deeper” stance—without first clarifying mineralization, beach type, or environmental differences.

Now, to be clear, most experienced detectorists do understand PI machines can absolutely excel in extreme mineralization. That’s not really in dispute. But on the mild-to-moderate Carolina beaches I hunt, my videos are showing honest, side-by-side comparisons in usable, stable conditions—and in those environments, simultaneous multi-frequency is coming out ahead.

So maybe this isn’t surprising to you, but for many people who’ve heard the old blanket statement for years, it absolutely is. And that’s why I’m making the videos.

If you’d like to demonstrate otherwise in the environments you’re talking about, by all means, I’d genuinely like to see the data. Make the videos, show the comparisons, and let’s all learn something. But until then, I’m simply presenting what I’m seeing firsthand in my conditions. Thanks for the comment.

 

[Calabash Digger]

Marketing from Whites.....
White's Surf PI Dual Field metal detector combines turn-on-and-go ease with unbeatable depth and sensitivity. The Surf metal detector's all-new power circuit reaches new depths, especially on the most prized jewelry - smaller gold, platinum and white gold. Even in the worst beach conditions like black sand. Now, beach and surf metal detection has a new, deeper layer of hunting!

Background: The Surfmaster Dual Field has been enhanced with increased performance over past Surfmaster PI models. It is a high-performance user-friendly metal detector, waterproof to an underwater depth of 100 feet, operating on the Pulse Induction principle. It is capable of extreme detection depth on coins and jewelry in salt water and mineralized ground. In the past, P.I. metal detectors had to be swept very slowly for maximum depth and they had very poor sensitivity to copper-nickel coins and gold. They had manual tuning which was critical to adjust and prone to drift. Most of them used a VCO or fire siren type of audio tone which changed from a low growl to a squeal when a target was detected.

The Surfmaster Dual Field is different. It is the result of over fifteen years of research and development. Our goal was to develop a Pulse Induction metal detector which could match the sweep speed, sensitivity, stability and ease of use of an Induction Balance VLF without responding to wet salt or mineralized ground. The Surfmaster Dual Field may be swept either quickly or slowly with virtually no loss in sensitivity. It was designed to be more sensitive to gold and copper-nickel alloys than to other metals.

Dry Sand Searching: The Surfmaster Dual Field operates on the Pulse Induction principle. Unlike an induction balance detector, it does not require any ground balance adjustments. Most P.I. instruments must be swept very slowly in order to achieve maximum depth, but the Surfmaster Dual Field, does not. It was designed to have a fast target response, so it can be swept almost as quickly as an Induction Balance (VLF) detector.

 

[Calabash Digger]

duga,
fisher marketing

 

[Carl-NC]

The dominant belief for years has simply been: “PI machines are deeper on the beach.” Period. That’s what has been repeated, marketed, and reinforced over and over.

Up until the last 10 yrs or so, that has been absolutely true. Put an old Aquastar up against a CZ20, Excalibur, or even CTX3030 and it will spank them thoroughly. It's only the lastest SMF detectors (probably starting with the Equinox) that have been more competitive with PI, and mostly in the more benign conditions, like Ocean Isle. In tougher conditions, a PI may still excel. In some cases, it may not even be close.

The same thing is happening in prospecting. PI has absolutely ruled in the highly viscous soils of typical gold fields. But along comes the Gold Monster 2000 which is an SMF machine that can hunt the same viscous soils, something no other SMF machine has been successful at, and apparently is doing quite well. In another 10 years, PI might be not be the king of the gold fields. But it would be incorrect to say that all those years of hyping PI as the best solution was wrong.

 

[tnsharpshooter]

Correct. This is what Calabash is trying to say. And show. What was said over the years has changed comparing pi and vlf for depth. Yet some folk are sticking with the old story. Instead of what is happening now capability wise.
And seems video showing this was indeed lacking.

 

[Carl-NC]

This is what Calabash is trying to say. And show.

Could be, but he seems to be dismissing the long history. And he's painting with an awfully broad brush on a very narrow canvas, then suggesting this is the whole picture.

 

[tnsharpshooter]

Could be, but he seems to be dismissing the long history. And he's painting with an awfully broad brush on a very narrow canvas, then suggesting this is the whole picture.

No he has not dismissed the long history. But what happened back when is not what happens today necessarily. He and I talk frequently.
Think about this.
A manufacturer doesn’t change their marketing lingo of past released models dothey when another model releases, be it from the same manufacturer or a competitor.
So a person reading about an older unit could be mislead, couldn’t they?
What detectors came out MF wise after AQ Impulse? You and I both know.
Calabash hasn’t tested or compared MF to PI everywhere. But he’s has shown comparisons in some places in NC coast.
Did anyone learn anything from his videos? I think so.
And as I stated earlier. Videos comparing models like Xp Deus 2 and Manticore vs PI models were lacking. Why?
Especially when we know Deus 2 and Manticore seem to yield considerable depth advantage on a US nickel on even NC’s salt beach over units like CTX 3030 and Excalibur. Another Gent also did video soon after Xp Deus 2 release in NE USA innwet salt sand with buried Nickel. He was impressed and stated as much in video he did.
So the question how does a person know where a PI detector in around salt sand and salt water will have definite advantage over detectors like Xp Deus 2 and Manticore.
It was other folks commenting who were painting with a broad brush. Basically saying PI is deeper.

 

[Carl-NC]

It was other folks commenting who were painting with a broad brush. Basically saying PI is deeper.

I don't disagree with that. Both sides are painting with a 4" brush on a 2" canvas. What Calabash is showing is a small part of the picture. But it's the only part he's gonna show, and the only part his followers are likely to see.

 

[Tesorodeoro]

I don't disagree with that. Both sides are painting with a 4" brush on a 2" canvas. What Calabash is showing is a small part of the picture. But it's the only part he's gonna show, and the only part his followers are likely to see.

There is a pool of resources provided by folks that are interested in detecting/video editing/social media.

It’s just a small slice of the pie.

I don’t know if you know, but the key to social media success is using provocative titles and topics.

 

[bklein]

AQ owners have been commenting that settings were wrong or the machine is defective. I know I can display bizarre behavior events with the AQ but that’s not how I run it. My last hunt it ran perfect - no threshold audio, full sensitivity, zero ATS, and 8us delay - at beaches with black sand. Total quiet unless there is a target. There is a coil management technique necessary but nothing exotic. Same sweep rate as you would use with the Manticore. I was looking forward to OBN comparing his machine at the same site. The big question is: how would another AQ compare, at his site, run by a user who has had better experiences with it.

 

[Calabash Digger]

AQ owners have been commenting that settings were wrong or the machine is defective. I know I can display bizarre behavior events with the AQ but that’s not how I run it. My last hunt it ran perfect - no threshold audio, full sensitivity, zero ATS, and 8us delay - at beaches with black sand. Total quiet unless there is a target. There is a coil management technique necessary but nothing exotic. Same sweep rate as you would use with the Manticore. I was looking forward to OBN comparing his machine at the same site. The big question is: how would another AQ compare, at his site, run by a user who has had better experiences with it.

I mean no disrespect, Barry, but here you are talking about how smoothly your machine runs in black sand like that—and you’ve got a YouTube channel. So while you were out there supposedly running a pulse delay of 8 in wet black sand, why not break out the camera, stick a microphone in the headphones, and actually show us? Let us hear it running stable. Let us see it in real conditions. And not just carefully managed coil control either.

Because honestly? Without video evidence, it starts sounding a little comical.

If you were genuinely trying to help, it seems like the simple response would’ve been: “Hey Calabash, here’s my machine running smooth. Here are my settings. Let me mic it up and show you.”

A lav mic costs about $30. Stick it in the headphones and demonstrate it. You seem to have enough electronics know-how that this shouldn’t be difficult.

But instead, it’s the same old story—talk, claims, theories… but no proof.

Meanwhile, I’ve shown the machine. I’ve shown multiple configurations. I’ve shown the exact settings people keep talking about. I’ve demonstrated that on my beaches, those settings did not run correctly or smoothly.

Do I have a defective unit? No.

The issue is pulse delay.

There’s a reason most metal detector companies historically didn’t put pulse delays below 10 on beach machines. Go look at what Steve Herschbach has said—once you push below 10, that’s when salt starts becoming a serious factor.

So here’s the challenge:

Take that machine down to your black sand beach.
Mic it up.
Run pulse delay 8.
Run 0 ATS.
Jack the sensitivity.
Swing it in the wet sand and waterline.
Go north and south… then east and west too.

And show us—on video—how smooth and stable it really is.

I’ll be waiting.

Thanks for your comment.

 

[Calabash Digger]

Could be, but he seems to be dismissing the long history. And he's painting with an awfully broad brush on a very narrow canvas, then suggesting this is the whole picture.

Carl, no disrespect intended, but I’ve got to say a few things here.

You could’ve publicly stated years ago that pulse induction units really had little to no practical advantage on many mild to moderate saltwater beaches once machines like the Equinox 800 came out. You seem to act like that was already common knowledge, but now after the fact, here we are hearing that my results are somehow “skewed” because I’m only showing one small piece of the pie.

Well, then let’s solve that.

Give me a list of the beaches where pulse induction machines truly excel, and I’ll gladly put that information on my channel, give you credit, and we’ll try to get people in those locations to test a Manticore against a PI unit.

Because here’s the problem: on my mild beaches, the Fisher AQ Impulse simply does not run well. I’ve shown video after video after video—wet sand, shallow water, salt—and the machine is unstable. It chatters, it makes racket, and lowering that pulse delay way down to 8, like some people claim, just doesn’t line up with what I’m seeing in the real world.

Historically, there’s a reason most pulse machines weren’t running delays that low, and as an engineer, you probably understand that better than most. Even raising ATS doesn’t magically make it stable when you push it too low in wet salt conditions.

So when people say I’m only showing a “small piece of the pie,” my question is this:

Are the majority of U.S. beaches highly mineralized, volcanic, or extreme black sand beaches… or are they more like the beaches most of us actually hunt along the East Coast, Florida, the Gulf, and much of the Northeast?

The Manticore is the deepest beach machine made on mild to moderate beaches...Where are the videos to disprove it?

What I did say is that the Manticore is the deepest beach machine I’ve personally tested for the types of beaches I hunt—and as far as modern simultaneous multi-frequency machines go, what exactly is beating it overall on those types of beaches?

That “mineralization caveat” matters if you hunt those environments. I don’t.....

And here’s the real issue: where is the video evidence from U.S. beaches showing PI units having this overwhelming advantage people keep talking about?

I’m not saying PI doesn’t have advantages—I absolutely believe it does in certain environments—but belief and forum talk aren’t enough anymore.

Show us.

Show us stable, huntable settings.
Show us wet salt.
Show us black sand.
Show us target depth.
Show us side-by-side against top-tier SMF machines like the Manticore.

Because at the end of the day, people watching my channel know exactly what beaches I’m testing on. I’ve been transparent about that from day one.

So no, I’m not painting with a broad brush.

I’m saying that if you live in the United States and hunt mild to moderate beaches like many of us do, the evidence I’ve shown is becoming very hard to ignore:

You clearly see which machine makes more sense—and for those beaches, it sure doesn’t look like the Fisher AQ Impulse.

 

[Calabash Digger]

AQ owners have been commenting that settings were wrong or the machine is defective. I know I can display bizarre behavior events with the AQ but that’s not how I run it. My last hunt it ran perfect - no threshold audio, full sensitivity, zero ATS, and 8us delay - at beaches with black sand. Total quiet unless there is a target. There is a coil management technique necessary but nothing exotic. Same sweep rate as you would use with the Manticore. I was looking forward to OBN comparing his machine at the same site. The big question is: how would another AQ compare, at his site, run by a user who has had better experiences with it.

One more thing I was thinking about unblocking you...This comment shows me I made the correct decision!

 

[Calabash Digger]

What's this? Give me a few minutes and I will find the videos of you running it on the beach with it squealing every swing..

 

[Tesorodeoro]

FYI “The small slice of the pie” was my comment. I was replying to Assembker. One contributor’s testing in one general locale is a small slice of the internet as far as opinions, demonstrations, and data to consider prior to making purchase decisions.

I’d also like to say, I’ve found detectors are kind of like 7.3 Powerstroke engines or firearms. Some examples excel beyond others. I know my dad has sent his Fisher Gold Bug back to the factory to be re-tuned. Came back hitting on small gold really well compared to the 2 other units we have with the same coils, same settings.

Carry on.