Are older style IB /TR detectors really obsolete? I am convinced that some TR detectors of the mid and late 70's like the White's Beachcomber 4, the C-Scope TR 400 or the Heathkit GDA 348 (and some other TR detectors) are not as bad as some forum participants claim. Recently, my 20 year old White's Beachcomber 4 outperformed a Minelab Sovereign XS Pro in the most difficult ground conditions (highly mineralised and iron infested soil)!!!! Modern motion detectors are very comfortable to use. They are able to work in highly mineralised areas, have good iron discrimination (e.g: Tesoro), but are affected by target masking caused by small iron parts: they are unable to detect a 1.1 cm coin lying under a 6 cm iron nail whereas older IB/TRs are able to do so! (NB: a sole nail is rejected by a decreasing threshold tone.) Older style TR detectors may not detect as deeply as modern VLF/TR motion detectors, but scan the first 10 cm more accurately (= miss less tiny non-ferrous items) than VLF motion machines! VLF/TR motion detectors, even if well ground balanced, don't go much deeper than older IB/TRs in difficult soil conditions!
I have tried many "deep seeking" motion machines (Fisher 1266 X or CZ-5; White's Spectrum, Minelab Sovereign XS Pro,…), but none achieved better my detecting purpose (detecting tiny non ferrous items in the most difficult ground conditions) than my old BC 4. Only problem of TR non motion detectors: searching in a very roughly ploughed field produces many false signals...
I have tried many "deep seeking" motion machines (Fisher 1266 X or CZ-5; White's Spectrum, Minelab Sovereign XS Pro,…), but none achieved better my detecting purpose (detecting tiny non ferrous items in the most difficult ground conditions) than my old BC 4. Only problem of TR non motion detectors: searching in a very roughly ploughed field produces many false signals...
Comment