Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Tesoro - Make it deeper

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

  • Tesoro - Make it deeper

    As a big fan of Tesoro detectors; I made a Tesoro Bandido clone.
    With the original coil (pictures bellow).
    What to say?
    This works very well, super stable, GEB is fantastic, Disc is fantastic.
    AM mode works great. Threshold performs great.
    There is only one flaw!
    It doesn't have enough "depth" even in the air.
    The Roman coin "Antoninianus" (medium large) is barely detectable at about 10cm in the air.
    This is nothing strange when it comes to that older series of Tesoro detectors.
    The mentioned "Antoninianus" is not of the best quality, it is badly damaged.
    A better such silver-plated coin detects up to 15cm in air. "Sestecius" at about 20cm.
    I also have an original De Leon.
    Which with the same coil detects all mentioned coins almost 50% better and some even better than that.
    Once upon a time, I achieved a lot with TGSL.
    Coils were 27cm DD. The same coins were detected by TGSL over 30-35cm in the air.
    But it's been many years, I haven't done anything on that topic. I literally forgot everything.
    I believe that if I were to make a 27cm DD coil now; to get much better results.
    But that is not my goal. My goal is to get somewhat better performance with the original coil.
    Carl "provoked" me to start thinking about this in a different way, while writing on another topic.
    What are all the possibilities to get better performance? Coil is therefore a "constant".
    All that remains for me is to "mod" the TX&RX frontend. Pros and cons? Solutions? Ideas?
    In case this is the optimum with this coil; next thing i would like to analyze is a small (20cm and below) DD coil with different inductances (read as "small") and accordingly adjusted TX&RX frontends.
    Carl wrote two very interesting and educational posts on another topic, I will add a link here later.

    ...

    I'm relying on a schematic that Carl drew years ago. Basically all those old Tesoro models are very similar. In this case, it is a Bandido detector, so the schematic is also adequate.


    Click image for larger version

Name:	20241103_091718.jpg
Views:	596
Size:	712.2 KB
ID:	429921
    Click image for larger version

Name:	20241103_152332.jpg
Views:	457
Size:	710.8 KB
ID:	429922​​

  • #2
    Schematic:
    Attached Files

    Comment


    • #3
      A video where I show the incredibly low consumption of this Bandido. Otherwise, the detector is powered by only one 9V battery.


      Comment


      • #4
        I also found an old video of the original Bandido II on my channel that I no longer have.
        If I remember correctly (maybe not); watching this video it seems to me that the original works 1-3cm "deeper" than my clone... not sure.



        Comment


        • #5
          And finally, also an old video (has it been 4 years already !!!) of my first encounter with a De Leon model:

          Comment


          • #6
            Here is a newer version of the schematic.

            Bandido2uMax_2018.pdf

            Comment


            • #7
              The Bandido design appears to me to be lacking gain in the G channel. In newer analog VLF designs the R channel (and G channel) are run with gains 4-8 times higher than the X channel because they are substantially ground-free, and the G channel is what we use for targeting. Also, if this is the design that uses a 6mH TX coil then you can get a boost from lowering the LTX.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Carl-NC View Post
                Here is a newer version of the schematic.

                [ATTACH]n429931[/ATTACH]
                I'm tired, I've tried following that schematic with the pcb on my Bandido and so far I haven't come across any significant discrepancies.
                Everything that matters matches 100%. Except! I need to open Bandido and see what I put in place of the bipolar 4u7 capacitors. I'm sure I haven't found new ones in local stores.
                I'll have to check that out one of these days. But as for the rest; everything matches 100%.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Carl-NC View Post
                  The Bandido design appears to me to be lacking gain in the G channel. In newer analog VLF designs the R channel (and G channel) are run with gains 4-8 times higher than the X channel because they are substantially ground-free, and the G channel is what we use for targeting. Also, if this is the design that uses a 6mH TX coil then you can get a boost from lowering the LTX.
                  Increasing the gain is possible in smaller steps. A matter of experiment.
                  ...
                  Yes, both Bandido and DeLeon use 5.6/6.2mH coils.
                  Lowering the LTX implies making a new search head. Phew!
                  Just what I want to avoid!

                  ​In any case, the new coil must be "DD" because I can't make a concentric-coplanar one.
                  I've tried many times in the past and it would always be a total fiasco.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Once upon a time, I replaced the TLC2262 chip with TL074, the sensitivity has almost doubled. Try it, it's not difficult.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      If the ICs are put in the sockets, try to replace them. I`ve had such a problem with another VLF schematic - one and the same PCB demonstrate totally different behaviour replacing the ICs from different prodicers. With some of them the mashine is is shallow and nervous, with other is deep and with better treshold...
                      Besides, selecting and playing with resonant capacitor (and even rotate it on 180 gr.degr) one can notice verry different results, it can be understood even by ear, as well as measuring the detection distance...
                      Greetings!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        No need to open the detector, I found the pictures. Fortunately, I always have a habit of taking pictures of the work process.
                        Two dilemmas are resolved; I put the IC sockets and the two bipolar ones are ok.
                        TLC27M2 are in place. It is difficult to say about the quality of the opamp.
                        Today, anything is possible, even if it's a low-quality opamp.


                        Click image for larger version

Name:	20240213_230108.jpg
Views:	438
Size:	662.8 KB
ID:	429944

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          The LF347 performed "gloriously" for me in similar "mods" on SMW.
                          SMW with TL084, TL074 and TL064 works average but when I replace them with LF347 then SMW works phenomenally.
                          Increases "range" by 50% on certain targets.
                          The S/N ratio is still very good. But LF347 is a quad, duals are used here.
                          What would be an adequate "half" of the LF347?

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I can't help but refer to one very interesting fact that I have noticed over the years. Coil cables used by Tesoro are definitely the best in history!
                            They have no competition! No wonder they advertised their machines with a "lifetime" warranty. In my 40-year "career" as a service technician, I have NEVER had a problem with a coil cable on a Tesoro model.
                            XP detectors are fantastic in terms of performance but have the absolute worst cables. I had "1000's" of hard service on those cables. Here I am looking at these 3 Tesoro coils that I have, how old are they; 30 years? They are still in perfect condition without the slightest sign of damage.
                            It would be good to research and find out who the manufacturer of those cables is? Incredibly durable cables of superior quality.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by ivconic View Post
                              The LF347 performed "gloriously" for me in similar "mods" on SMW.
                              SMW with TL084, TL074 and TL064 works average but when I replace them with LF347 then SMW works phenomenally.
                              Increases "range" by 50% on certain targets.
                              The S/N ratio is still very good. But LF347 is a quad, duals are used here.
                              What would be an adequate "half" of the LF347?
                              I agree, 10 years ago the LF347 had excellent chips. but since everyone is from China now, buying chips has turned into a lottery. last month I bought LF347 from different manufacturers and they all worked much worse than TL074

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X