beachrumbum
Senior Member
Rick, I have to say I respect this answer. It appears to be an honest and well worded description of the detectors functions. This is actually more about the machine than I have heard in this entire thread.
Fisher Impulse AQ detector update
- Thread starter tnsharpshooter
- Start date
Rick, I have to say I respect this answer. It appears to be an honest and well worded description of the detectors functions. This is actually more about the machine than I have heard in this entire thread.
BRB - you are correct, I now expect to have a financial interest in the success of the AQ. Of course, you know that because I disclosed it some time ago (a month or two?) - for the rest of the 3 years I have been learning about and sharing what I have learned, I had no such financial interest.
Leaving that aside, I don’t disagree what you have written. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary support. It will come.
Right now, the only folks with the combination of access and experience necessary to create the kind of videos and tests you refer to are the development team themselves. My own very limited experience at the beach with a prototype hardly qualified.
All this will come. I am pretty sure lots more would already be out there except for the fact that Fisher Marketing has made it clear that the time has not come for that.
We all look forward to hearing from OBN and other respected forum contributors their experience after using one. Meanwhile we wait....and wait....
Leaving that aside, I don’t disagree what you have written. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary support. It will come.
Right now, the only folks with the combination of access and experience necessary to create the kind of videos and tests you refer to are the development team themselves. My own very limited experience at the beach with a prototype hardly qualified.
All this will come. I am pretty sure lots more would already be out there except for the fact that Fisher Marketing has made it clear that the time has not come for that.
We all look forward to hearing from OBN and other respected forum contributors their experience after using one. Meanwhile we wait....and wait....
Here is a link to a text file in my Dropbox account. It is a first draft of my attempt to document PI detector functions in general and Ground Balance PI’s in particular - with specific information about the AQ.
If you have comments, you may PM me, email me at [email protected] or comment on the forum.
I still have a lot to learn about the AQ and I have much more information which I have gathered over the yearscontaining material which I still have to consider and likely incorporate some if it into my draft.
Here’s the link.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/phj9ayjbcilgbcx/PI stuff.txt?dl=0
If you have comments, you may PM me, email me at [email protected] or comment on the forum.
I still have a lot to learn about the AQ and I have much more information which I have gathered over the yearscontaining material which I still have to consider and likely incorporate some if it into my draft.
Here’s the link.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/phj9ayjbcilgbcx/PI stuff.txt?dl=0
beachrumbum
Senior Member
You mean those with deep enough pockets to jump on the machine at its first release without worry of the flop it may be? Or perhaps those with exceptional hunting conditions, maybe it could sell better outside the US where competition is nearly non existent. Or is it the contributors that are given handouts for being good little sheep? See, I just can’t believe everything I read or hear, unless there is solid proof to back it up. I work hard for every piece of gold I find, and I don’t go running my yapper every time I find it. I like to keep what I work so diligently for. I don’t have ideal beaches, great spots, extreme luck or old gold. I face a lot of competition that would love to see me go home empty handed every time on beaches that are constantly renourished every few years. For this machine to be worth its salt, it has to pay the bills. At this point I think it is do your business or get off the pot.
Last edited:
Tom_in_CA
Elite Member
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2013
- Messages
- 20,781
beachrumbum
Senior Member
Tom I took Ed out of the equation. I must say though he has a nack for walking out onto a beach and finding huge expensive things after three or four swings.
BRB - you wrote...
“ You mean those with deep enough pockets to jump on the machine at its first release without worry of the flop it may be? “
How about “those who are intrested enough to bet their own money that they will find it an amazing and productive tool which they are eager to put to use.”
Deep pockets? Let’s say it costs $2500 - cheaper than a a ML CTX when it was introduced - they had no problem finding folks with deep enough pockets to buy those.
I am pretty certain that no one who buys one of the first batch of these machines will suffer serious financial harm thereby. If they are not satisfied, the low production rate which Fisher is apparently planning will likely make a used AQ a better re-sale bet than most used detectors.
One other thing. If this thing can really find gold jewelry better than any existing machine, it might be a lot like a gold nugget detector. It may be mostly harvesting a non-renewable resource - old losses not yet found. And when they are gone??? Steve H has often talked about how nugget hunting in North America is way past its “glory days” and nuggets bigger than fly poop are getting much harder to find. Perhaps the AQ will do that to the beaches - Who knows.
In any event, like any new and interesting tool, some will get in early, hoping for a head start on a new tool and risking disappointment and possible financial loss in the process - when in detector history has this NOT been a normal event. I paid full retail for a V3i and a TDI - that’s how I know about that!
As far as freebies, I don’t know of anyone who has gotten a free AQ prototype or otherwise. I doubt that will change, Test machines have all been returned and the one I got in December I paid dealer price for.
“ You mean those with deep enough pockets to jump on the machine at its first release without worry of the flop it may be? “
How about “those who are intrested enough to bet their own money that they will find it an amazing and productive tool which they are eager to put to use.”
Deep pockets? Let’s say it costs $2500 - cheaper than a a ML CTX when it was introduced - they had no problem finding folks with deep enough pockets to buy those.
I am pretty certain that no one who buys one of the first batch of these machines will suffer serious financial harm thereby. If they are not satisfied, the low production rate which Fisher is apparently planning will likely make a used AQ a better re-sale bet than most used detectors.
One other thing. If this thing can really find gold jewelry better than any existing machine, it might be a lot like a gold nugget detector. It may be mostly harvesting a non-renewable resource - old losses not yet found. And when they are gone??? Steve H has often talked about how nugget hunting in North America is way past its “glory days” and nuggets bigger than fly poop are getting much harder to find. Perhaps the AQ will do that to the beaches - Who knows.
In any event, like any new and interesting tool, some will get in early, hoping for a head start on a new tool and risking disappointment and possible financial loss in the process - when in detector history has this NOT been a normal event. I paid full retail for a V3i and a TDI - that’s how I know about that!
As far as freebies, I don’t know of anyone who has gotten a free AQ prototype or otherwise. I doubt that will change, Test machines have all been returned and the one I got in December I paid dealer price for.
beachrumbum
Senior Member
I suppose you are just lucky enough to have 2500 dollars to bet with. I don’t think everybody does. I get it, you want to sell this machine badly and make a profit and you are willing to say whatever it takes to do so.! Good for you, have fun. Anyway didn’t you know the sand shark is the deepest pi on the market?
Last edited:
beachrumbum
Senior Member
sure, except I have paid all my machines off detecting and none have cost what this one does. Look at Minelab, their new nox does better than the ctx in certain situations and is a quarter of the price. So I deduce it was obviously not that great a seller. I have a lot of competition, do you know how many times I have seen a ctx? 1 this has gone so off topic though, I just want to know how this detector is any different than any other ground balancing pulse beyond the claimed 7us? This thread keeps getting revived yet it is lacking any real meat. I mean let’s face it, depth is nice, I have a pulse and it is deep, however depth and discrimination is where this machine has made headlines, I however am still very confused as to how well it can actually discriminate. If I will still need to dig huge holes for possible iron, depending on its size where does that leave one? Sure if it does what it claims, perhaps I will need to buy it and one won’t need to sell it at all, as it will sell itself.
Last edited:
BRB. Given your misgivings, I advise you not to buy one.
Time will tell if you see any reason to buy one later.
This machine is the first in a series of pulse induction detectors which Fisher is developing. It is likely a “loss leader” I expect Fisher will not make an overall profit on this machine anytime soon.
So why are they doing it??? Because PI offers one of the few openings in metal detector technology which have not beeN thoroughly explored/exploited.
Even if they only ever sell a few hundred or thousand a month (peanuts in the metal detector business) they believe that it will be a solid investment to build a technical and manufacturing Basis for a series of further developments which will challenge other industry leaders.
I have first hand knowledge to support the above statements.
Time will tell if you see any reason to buy one later.
This machine is the first in a series of pulse induction detectors which Fisher is developing. It is likely a “loss leader” I expect Fisher will not make an overall profit on this machine anytime soon.
So why are they doing it??? Because PI offers one of the few openings in metal detector technology which have not beeN thoroughly explored/exploited.
Even if they only ever sell a few hundred or thousand a month (peanuts in the metal detector business) they believe that it will be a solid investment to build a technical and manufacturing Basis for a series of further developments which will challenge other industry leaders.
I have first hand knowledge to support the above statements.
beachrumbum
Senior Member
Well you are correct, pulse is the Wild West of metal detector technology. Not a bad investment really, the true gold mine is in the sales and manufacture of metal detectors, and their paraphernalia. If I cared less about the actual thing, I would probably pursue such avenues myself. It is good to know that Fisher is trying to be innovative.
Tom_in_CA
Elite Member
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2013
- Messages
- 20,781
This statement offers a rare glimpse into some of the possible "back-story".
Ie.: You have to ask yourself : "Why hasn't anyone 'been thoroughly exploring' this technology " ? I mean, .... do you think there's some sort of conspiracy going on ? Some sort of hideous "back-room room cover-up" that amounts to "laziness" or "saving the riches for ourselves" etc... ? If so, you're welcome to your conspiracy theories.
Or maybe, just maybe .... it's simply not possible or all-that-it's-mused-to-be-possible-of " ?
Because trust me: If a "better mousetrap" were on-the-horizon, then sure as heck, the profit-motive/better-mouse-trap would kick into full spring.
If there were truly a better mousetrap technology on the drawing board, then .... Trust me .... "It would be being thoroughly explored". Persons would be exploring it D/t the "evil profit motive".
KOB
Forum Supporter
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2019
- Messages
- 5,757
I think you nailed it Tom. I have learned so much from being on this forum for just 1 year. And it seems that guys have stated these types of better "mousetraps" have been in the works many times. Only to fizzle out and not come to fruition. Maybe it's all a dream because it can't be done. Otherwise , like this 1 , it would be out by now instead of excuses. It's always something. Believing their own lies.
Sure guys, advanced detctectors like the Minelab GPZ are just a dream - sleep well.
Better PI machines are inevitable - they will appear and make changes in our expectations at the seashore and in the goldfields. Minelab has published a roadmap with 5 new detectors - some of them will be “Slot fillers” to round out their new line - but mark my words - there will be new technology there as well.
Better PI machines are inevitable - they will appear and make changes in our expectations at the seashore and in the goldfields. Minelab has published a roadmap with 5 new detectors - some of them will be “Slot fillers” to round out their new line - but mark my words - there will be new technology there as well.
Last edited:
The world was once believed to be flat.
KOB - you wrote “ And it seems that guys have stated these types of better "mousetraps" have been in the works many times. Only to fizzle out and not come to fruition.
True enough. Dave Emery demonstrated discrimination in PI detectors but was unable for various reasons to get to market.
It’s not just individual engineers have tried and not made it to market. Established companies also patent valuable innovations but for various reasons, lack of engineering talent, lack of capital, unwillingness to make necessary investment, no product emerges.
Here are a couple of patents from Whites for example - which never resulted in products
Truncated half-sine methods for metal detectors
Never used, potentially valuable
Constant current metal detector
Never used, potentially valuable
Alexandre Tartar developed the Manta over a period of about 10 years. His team had arrived at the point where the device worked as planned and could demonstrate capabilities in advance of any beach machine on the market. What he could not do however is produce it in quantity. His choices at that point were either set up a small scale production system - much like Eric Foster did with his PI machines - or do a deal with a major manufacturer to turn his prototype into something which could be mass produced in a qualified production system to ensure unit to unit consistency and adequate supply at a reasonable price. This is where Fisher came in.
None of us who were following the progress of the Manta since it first was announced by Alexandre on the Geotech forum more than 5 years ago understood how much work was involved turning a hand-built prototype into a consumer level production electronic device.
So here we sit 3 years after Fisher’s acquisition of the project and we are on the brink of release of production hardware and - bang - beaches across the country are closed!!!
True enough. Dave Emery demonstrated discrimination in PI detectors but was unable for various reasons to get to market.
It’s not just individual engineers have tried and not made it to market. Established companies also patent valuable innovations but for various reasons, lack of engineering talent, lack of capital, unwillingness to make necessary investment, no product emerges.
Here are a couple of patents from Whites for example - which never resulted in products
Truncated half-sine methods for metal detectors
Never used, potentially valuable
Constant current metal detector
Never used, potentially valuable
Alexandre Tartar developed the Manta over a period of about 10 years. His team had arrived at the point where the device worked as planned and could demonstrate capabilities in advance of any beach machine on the market. What he could not do however is produce it in quantity. His choices at that point were either set up a small scale production system - much like Eric Foster did with his PI machines - or do a deal with a major manufacturer to turn his prototype into something which could be mass produced in a qualified production system to ensure unit to unit consistency and adequate supply at a reasonable price. This is where Fisher came in.
None of us who were following the progress of the Manta since it first was announced by Alexandre on the Geotech forum more than 5 years ago understood how much work was involved turning a hand-built prototype into a consumer level production electronic device.
So here we sit 3 years after Fisher’s acquisition of the project and we are on the brink of release of production hardware and - bang - beaches across the country are closed!!!
beachrumbum
Senior Member
Tom, this could indeed be the case, that such a thing is not possible. Not being an electronic engineer it is hard to say. What I can say is that I do not believe that the technology has reached its maturity. Inquiring minds will always seek to push the limits of possibility. Hybrid detectors ect. Is this machine pushing those boundaries? Not sure, but as I stated before, if it is, it should sell itself as people will see it for what it is or is not.
