Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Remember?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Remember?

    Remember the White's V3i?
    3 frequencies.
    Each independent of the other.
    Analyzing an in ground target using each of these frequencies provided much needed dig no dig information (colors).
    Funny discussion Sunday when Fred and I were hunting with these all new detectors, the Manticore and Equinox 800. Both can be fooled but we remember when the V3i ruled in our hunting days. If the dominate frequency was green, low frequency the target was most likely something good. If red then it was very close to 100%, trash. Now the V3i was terribly crippled by EMI so we've been revisiting those locations and surprise, the Manticore is finding those lost items where EMI all but shutdown the V3i. Sent Garrett an email yesterday asking if they might possibly develop a hybrid TDI or V3i and of course they won't say.

    It took monumental thinking to develop the V3i.
    Just can't understand what happened to cause White's to close their doors.

  • #2
    Originally posted by Mark-VA View Post
    Just can't understand what happened to cause White's to close their doors.
    Multiple gunshot wounds to the feet.

    Comment


    • #3
      As a long time user and admirer of White's detectors I can say that I am very sorry to see that company fail.
      In many respects, they were the true "pioneers" of that technology.
      By me; the best detector they have produced is the DFX and not the Spectra.
      Although the Spectra is an impressive machine, from a technological point of view.
      But it did not perform well in real conditions.
      But even that is not the main and only reason for the collapse of the company.
      Carl hinted at some of the reasons somewhere earlier but missed one, if I remember correctly.
      In my opinion, it is an unfortunate circumstance that at that time, in that period, several new models from other manufacturers suddenly appeared;
      who are the originators of a new era, a new technology and a new philosophy.
      Somehow at that time we here heard that there is some XP out there and that there are two models that make a difference in the fields.
      Gold Max Power and Gmaxx II.
      People don't like to philosophize too much and play with options too much when on site. The XP models filled that gap in the market at the time.
      Very simple and straightforward to set up, and their performance was unprecedented.
      But what is definitely new is the recovery speed function, which works really well and quickly.
      And with that, great sensitivity to great depths.
      The first detectors of this type that successfully mastered the problem of masking.
      I then gave up the much-loved ML Explorer SE and opted for the Gold Max Power.
      And my closest colleague did the same with his Spectra.
      Suddenly "overnight" everyone I know switched to one of the XP models. The voice spread. People have gone "crazy" for XP detectors.
      And it coincides roughly with White's attempt to impose with their new detector.
      Spectra was just unlucky.
      Wrong time. Late. It didn't have time to prove itself.
      Of course, the "traditionalism" that Carl ascribes to White's in also has its share in the downfall.
      But it's an age when a lot of bad things are happening in the world for the economy, in general.
      In such moments, you must not make mistakes because they are fatal.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by ivconic View Post
        As a long time user and admirer of White's detectors I can say that I am very sorry to see that company fail.
        In many respects, they were the true "pioneers" of that technology.
        By me; the best detector they have produced is the DFX and not the Spectra.
        Although the Spectra is an impressive machine, from a technological point of view.
        But it did not perform well in real conditions.
        But even that is not the main and only reason for the collapse of the company.
        Carl hinted at some of the reasons somewhere earlier but missed one, if I remember correctly.
        In my opinion, it is an unfortunate circumstance that at that time, in that period, several new models from other manufacturers suddenly appeared;
        who are the originators of a new era, a new technology and a new philosophy.
        Somehow at that time we here heard that there is some XP out there and that there are two models that make a difference in the fields.
        Gold Max Power and Gmaxx II.
        People don't like to philosophize too much and play with options too much when on site. The XP models filled that gap in the market at the time.
        Very simple and straightforward to set up, and their performance was unprecedented.
        But what is definitely new is the recovery speed function, which works really well and quickly.
        And with that, great sensitivity to great depths.
        The first detectors of this type that successfully mastered the problem of masking.
        I then gave up the much-loved ML Explorer SE and opted for the Gold Max Power.
        And my closest colleague did the same with his Spectra.
        Suddenly "overnight" everyone I know switched to one of the XP models. The voice spread. People have gone "crazy" for XP detectors.
        And it coincides roughly with White's attempt to impose with their new detector.
        Spectra was just unlucky.
        Wrong time. Late. It didn't have time to prove itself.
        Of course, the "traditionalism" that Carl ascribes to White's in also has its share in the downfall.
        But it's an age when a lot of bad things are happening in the world for the economy, in general.
        In such moments, you must not make mistakes because they are fatal.

        I wanted to edit the post, was too late, timeout.
        I wanted to emphasize the "which works really well and quickly" claim.
        Recovery speed (Reactivity) was nothing new and genuine at XP models, but it was perfected to the extent that makes the difference.

        Huge difference!

        Comment


        • #5
          The truth is that Spectra V3 definitely has shortcomings in 3D separation... and the competition at that time was much better...

          Even if you optimize Spectra..V3 for the best possible separation. really..you won't achieve what the best detectors do separately...in this type of 3D separation..

          In other types of separation, for example 2D, a smaller coil can help you... but even then it will not be the best separation detector for 2D separation situations...
          Of course, not all objects are heavily masked by iron... and there Spectra can show its other good detection properties..

          Some of my Spectra V3 3D separation tests
          on a small 13.5mm -0.5 gram silver coin in a depth of 11cm...on a 13" ltimate coil...

          On the other hand, with a good Spectra V3 setting, there is no problem detecting this coin even at a depth of 23cm - on my 4x4 test field... where it is not masked by iron...​ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mvngb1fIJPE&t=3s

          Comment


          • #6
            You're right El Nino Spectra is great equipment, it just needed some refinement, Ground filters are her pain point,it would be nice if Garrtett made updates in a new form with a good coil, This is a unique device with real multi operation on three devices simultaneously.

            Comment


            • #7
              Is the V3i programming, software driven or preprogrammed on internal chips?

              Wonder if it is possible to hack into the programming to see what is actually happening?

              Just curious.

              Comment


              • #8
                There are 2 micros. In the lower box there is an MSP430 that handles all clocking for the TX, demods, and ADC, plus audio. It is probably read-protected but typically that is not hard to circumvent. I once had the binary ripped from an MSP430 by a place in China for $400 or so. In the upper pod there is a Freescale iMX processor, it uses external flash with no protection at all so it is trivial to extract the binary.

                Once you have the binaries, you then decompile them to assembly code. That's when the Hard Part begins, because the V3 has a monstrous amount of code. It would take years to figure it all out. If you're lucky, maybe there is an assembly-to-C translator that could cut it down to a year or 2.

                The guy who wrote most of the V3 code now works for FTP, and I am using his latest platform code for the projects I do. It is written in C++ (as was the V3) with a heavy reliance on precompiler code (as did the V3) so even if you decompile and convert to C, it won't make much sense.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Thanks I just very curious. Programming has interested me for decades.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    The new Garrett Vortex reminds me of the Whites V3i. Makes me wonder if Garrett may have used some Whites technology in the Vortex?

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X