Deus 2 or Manticore

[filos]

Equinox 900 lacks a 9" x 12" coil to cover the search area and be able to tuck it between bushes and trees. Coiltek has a 9x14 for Knox but it is expensive and heavy, although it works very well.

[ivconic]

[Chasin OneWays]

Manticore due to build quality. My deus2 is falling apart on the beach after 2 years

[ivconic]

I don't think I need to open a new topic.
I have had a Vanquish 340 for a while.
In the meantime, I got a smaller coil too.
I went out with the detector 4-5 times to the fields.
I noticed in the work that it is a little "beast" with huge potential!
I have never had a cheaper detector with this much quality and potential!
This is a real revelation for me.
Although I don't support such blanket "in air" tests... I was really itching to check the difference between the coils.
Because on real terrains, I had trouble noticing significant differences in performance between the coils.
And here's what the general "room" tests showed (it's been raining for days outside, so I'm forced to play in the room):

[ivconic]

It is clear that the difference between the coils is very small, "thin".
However, a larger coil covers a larger area.
And a smaller coil is a "killer"!
Ideal for working between furrows on a plowed field and similar "tight" places.
No, I'm not being paid by Bruce Candy to promote and glorify this little "beast".
I am simply delighted!
The last time I was this excited about a detector was in 2012 when I bought the Deus 1.
For someone who is exclusively looking for antique coins; this is an ideal detector.
Extremely calm and stable!
It has no competition for stability and quiet operation on the worst soils.
(in this price range, of course)

[ivconic]

You will notice that VDI is "walking" at the 2nd and 3rd coins on the chart.
It's easy to explain.
These are bronze coins coated with a very thin layer of silver, which has cracked over time and is slowly disappearing from the surface.
Otherwise, with uniform alloys without "coating"; The Vanquish 340 has an unprecedentedly stable VDI.
My friend has an Equinox 800 with a larger coil.
One day we compared the VDI on both detectors on the same targets.
VDI matches 100% on both detector models!
What else to say?
Although I am often critical of ML prices... once again they did not disappoint with their quality!

[ivconic]

However, in order not to make everything "great and wonderful"... I also noticed some difficulties in working with "Multi-IQ".
This is not only related to the simple and cheap 340 but also to the EQ800.
In extremely polluted soil where there are too many small pieces of rusty iron, of various sizes and shapes, surrounding small antique coins (I spent a whole day on such soil the day before yesterday) these detectors become problematic to work with.
Often, for such a smaller but "thicker" piece of iron, the detector will give a high pitch in the audio and a high VDI number that first indicates a good find.
In other words, long story short, both myself and a colleague with an EQ800 dug up too many such unwanted finds the day before yesterday.
That site is "fatal" and serves as the ultimate testing ground for detectors.
The only advantage of the 340 and EQ800 over... for example the Deus1 is in quietness of operation.
Deus 1 on that site constantly gives various audio responses, to the extent that it is simply impossible to work with it.
Unless I reduce all the "good" options in the setup, to the extent that the Deus1 has the performance of some cheap Chinese model.
At the end of the day, the search success was almost the same as with Deus 1, with the difference that I listened to much less neurotic "music" during the day.
A colleague with an EQ800 was more lucky because he brought with his detector the smallest coil that exists, I'm not sure what the dimensions are,
I think they are something around 5-6" while I brought a "bigger" coil with a 340 and bitterly regretted that I left the "smaller" coil at home.
It is one of those "sites" where it is desirable to have as little coil as possible. And on which "depths" mean nothing.
I would like to take there all those people who tirelessly make tons of demo videos for Youtube, showing off the "deep" machines.
It's no accident that I started mentioning the Fisher 1265 more often on several topics. Because the Fisher 1265 is the only machine so far that has made a difference on that site. Deus 1 has a problem.
I put together a "Fast" based program on Deus 1, especially for that site. Very rigorous and restrictive. And Deus 1 works noticeably better. But it still has a problem with random minerals that are scattered a lot on that site.
On such sites (there are a lot of them in my area) "smart" machines do not fare well. But that's why machines like the Fisher 1265, Minelab Musketeer and several Tesoro models (older series) still make a difference.
What is the logical explanation for this? I've been trying to figure this puzzle out for years!

[ivconic]

There is one more interesting thing that I noticed that is worth mentioning here.
I have noticed that the Vanquish 340 and Equinox 800 detect the smallest possible, miniature findings extremely easily and successfully!
A coin with a diameter of 5-6mm, a "micro" nail 4mm long and 1mm wide and similar items.
Findings that I'm 100% sure the Deus 1 would either not detect at all (small nail) or detect them very weakly with almost imperceptible response in the audio. There is no question of any stable VDI number in those cases.
This brought a smile to my face more than once, as I found such finds, I remembered the "golden nugget brain" in the brain of ML engineers and how they became famous precisely on the basis of machines that are good for small native gold and smallest nuggets.
Maybe this is just my prejudice, imagine... maybe I'm wrong.
But I imagine the vast flat deserts of Australia, with nothing but strong minerals and a small piece of native gold.
I was watching the "Discovery (or some such channel)" series about gold prospectors in Australia.
I watched every second of those series very carefully and watched every detail.
I haven't noticed that they have any problem with rusting iron there.
I think that such a thing does not exist there. But that's why they have a big problem with strong mineralization on those soils.
And that's why I have the impression (perhaps a prejudice) that in ML development teams they always have this as an imperative.
Because it is very obvious that the 340&EQ800 have advantages and virtues that the Deus 1 does not have and vice versa.
The 340&EQ800 just don't "see" mineralization and deal with it very easily, but they have a big problem with rusty iron chips.
Whereas with Deus 1 it is the opposite; very easily copes with rusty iron pieces but almost never copes with strong mineralization!

[ivconic]

Who has the patience to read my "essays" and is thoughtful enough to learn from all this; one can easily come to the conclusion that some future "perfect" and "ideal" machine would be a hybrid between these two approaches.

[ivconic]

In the spirit of the title of this topic... I will mention that I saw the same problem with Manticore.
Not live, haven't had a chance to, but watching the "countless" Youtube demos of Manticore.
This issue is crucial in deciding whether to buy expensive machines like the EQ900 or the Manticore.
Of course, there is no need to generalize, here I am exclusively thinking out loud, keeping in mind only and exclusively the soil conditions that I have here in my area.
What's left?
To borrow Deus 2 from a friend, for a few days.
And to go to the same site, spend the whole day (maybe more days) and "toughen up" the machine... so that in the end I would have a complete impression.
I regret to say at the end that top machines like GPZ7000 and CTX3030 don't have much chance on this site.
The more specialized a machine is in one aspect of searching - the less chance it has for another aspect of searching.
I have no experience with the CTX3030 but I have direct and immediate experience with the GPZ7000.
Excellent machines, to be commended... but in this case they are the wrong "tool" for a specific task.
This is going to sound crazy bordering on a joke... but I've been thinking more and more about the idea of finding and buying a mint condition Fisher 1265 again, if one still exists on the planet.
It would be very easy for me to build a 1265 machine myself, even blindfolded... but what I am unable to build is its coil.

[Qiaozhi]

This is going to sound crazy bordering on a joke... but I've been thinking more and more about the idea of finding and buying a mint condition Fisher 1265 again, if one still exists on the planet.

There's one here on UK eBay, but it's collection only.
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/186710580...Bk9SR7KKlr_NZA

[EL NINO]

However, in order not to make everything "great and wonderful"... I also noticed some difficulties in working with "Multi-IQ".
This is not only related to the simple and cheap 340 but also to the EQ800.
In extremely polluted soil where there are too many small pieces of rusty iron, of various sizes and shapes, surrounding small antique coins (I spent a whole day on such soil the day before yesterday) these detectors become problematic to work with.
Often, for such a smaller but "thicker" piece of iron, the detector will give a high pitch in the audio and a high VDI number that first indicates a good find.
In other words, long story short, both myself and a colleague with an EQ800 dug up too many such unwanted finds the day before yesterday.
That site is "fatal" and serves as the ultimate testing ground for detectors.
The only advantage of the 340 and EQ800 over... for example the Deus1 is in quietness of operation.
Deus 1 on that site constantly gives various audio responses, to the extent that it is simply impossible to work with it.
Unless I reduce all the "good" options in the setup, to the extent that the Deus1 has the performance of some cheap Chinese model.
At the end of the day, the search success was almost the same as with Deus 1, with the difference that I listened to much less neurotic "music" during the day.
A colleague with an EQ800 was more lucky because he brought with his detector the smallest coil that exists, I'm not sure what the dimensions are,
I think they are something around 5-6" while I brought a "bigger" coil with a 340 and bitterly regretted that I left the "smaller" coil at home.
It is one of those "sites" where it is desirable to have as little coil as possible. And on which "depths" mean nothing.
I would like to take there all those people who tirelessly make tons of demo videos for Youtube, showing off the "deep" machines.
It's no accident that I started mentioning the Fisher 1265 more often on several topics. Because the Fisher 1265 is the only machine so far that has made a difference on that site. Deus 1 has a problem.
I put together a "Fast" based program on Deus 1, especially for that site. Very rigorous and restrictive. And Deus 1 works noticeably better. But it still has a problem with random minerals that are scattered a lot on that site.
On such sites (there are a lot of them in my area) "smart" machines do not fare well. But that's why machines like the Fisher 1265, Minelab Musketeer and several Tesoro models (older series) still make a difference.
What is the logical explanation for this? I've been trying to figure this puzzle out for years!

Ivconic...you hit the nail on the head....many detectorists only measure the detector by depth of detection.,and good separation.in various tests...but that is only one side of the equation for a good detector..because many such detectors on many types of terrain, there still ..they work "inefficiently."!!!..and this is what I call "Detection Effectiveness", it means the number of good targets detected to the number of undesired ones dug up ..ferrous or non-ferrous targets...while maintaining a good depth of detection as well as a really good separation...in the optimal case you can find a separated target with a good VDI..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lJ11-NSM0DU

https://youtube.com/shorts/NOXNrJUUJmc?feature=share

https://youtube.com/shorts/u4imKUG0HjU?feature=share

https://youtube.com/shorts/WxFfPnERqvY?feature=share

[ivconic]

There's one here on UK eBay, but it's collection only.
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/186710580...Bk9SR7KKlr_NZA

Thanks!
The price is more than favorable.
Even if it is in a faulty state.
I would bring it in order and in a state of prefection.
But there is always the same problem; Serbian customs and this:




and now i spotted this too:

[ivconic]

Ivconic...you hit the nail on the head....many detectorists only measure the detector by depth of detection.,and good separation.in various tests...but that is only one side of the equation for a good detector..because many such detectors on many types of terrain, there is still a significant error....and this is what I call "Detection Effectiveness", it means the number of good targets detected to the number of undesired ones dug up ..ferrous or non-ferrous targets...while maintaining a good depth of detection as well as a really good separation...in the optimal case you can find a separated target with a good VDI..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lJ11-NSM0DU

https://youtube.com/shorts/NOXNrJUUJmc?feature=share

https://youtube.com/shorts/u4imKUG0HjU?feature=share

https://youtube.com/shorts/WxFfPnERqvY?feature=share

I follow your testing regularly and am impressed with how similar we think.
It seems that a similar way of thinking and understanding things has been imposed on us by similar harsh conditions on the sites.

[Qiaozhi]

and now i spotted this too:

It probably didn't sell because it's collection only. It's way down south near Bognor Regis.
The detector has since been relisted and is (apparently) in working condition ->
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/186721124183
It might be worth contacting the seller to see if they are willing to post it.