• Forum server maintanace Friday night.(around 7PM Centeral time)
    Website will be off line for a short while.

    You may need to log out, log back in after we're back online.

Garrett APEX Has Two New Available Coils

John-Edmonton

Elite Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2006
Messages
2,559
Location
Way up North, Canada
Sometimes adding a new search-coil for your detector is the equivalent of adding a new metal detector. The latest Garrett release, the "APEX", has now added two more available search-coils as per many requests.
 

Attachments

  • coil.jpg
    coil.jpg
    45.4 KB · Views: 728
The 6X11 Viper coil is OK for lot of applications, but .... It's just a tad-bit small to help with depth in more open areas, and definitely a wee-bit too big to work as a handy mid-size coil like the 5X8 or 5X9½ sizes. We have many plowed fields now that it's harvest season and a 'Raider' ought to work well out there. But the 'Ripper' looks to be a primary-use coil for most of my wants and needs on an Apex.:good:

With 56 years of detecting I've been using Garrett's since '68/'69, and heavily from '77 thru '10, and out of all the different detector brands and after-market coil makers, I have had the least issues with Garrett's search coils. Solid, rugged, dependable ... never a coil issue. Looking forward to putting them to work and reading other's reports on their trips afield in the months ahead.

Monte
 
Last edited:
The 6X11 Viper coil is OK for lot of applications, but .... It's just a dad bit small to help with depth in more open areas, and definitely a wee-bit too big to work as a handy mid-size coil like the 5X8 or 5X9½ sizes. We have many plowed fields now that its harvest season and a 'Raider' ought to work well out there. But the 'Ripper' looks to be a primary-use coil for most of my wants and needs on an Apex.:good:

With 56 years of detecting I've been using Garrett's since '68/'69, and heavily from '77 thru '10, and out of all the different detector brands and after-market coil makers, I have had the lest issues with Garrett's search coils. Solid, rugged, dependable ... never a coil issue. Looking forward to putting them to work and reading other's reports on their trips afield in the months ahead.

Monte

Monte, your input to the md'ing community is always a breath of fresh air. Always got good input !!
 
Monte... question - how much additional depth do you think the 8.5 X 11 would have over the stock Viper coil? Thank you!
 
LovestheShiny!: said:
Monte... question - how much additional depth do you think the 8.5 X 11 would have over the stock Viper coil? Thank you!
A good question deserves a good answer, so I'll give mine. No magic mystery percentages that are not calculable, like some imaginary 12% better separation or something similar, because in this real world of metal detectors and metal detecting there are just too many variables involved.

Ground mineral composition. Ground material make-up, ground density, porosity, and the variance from dry to damp to wet to saturated conditions. Target size, shape, metal alloy make-up and orientation in the ground. Search coil presentation to the target and search coil sweep speed. Settings used, especially those regarding Sensitivity, Discrimination, Ground Balance and operating Frequency.

Now, with all that to consider, I also consider this ... I am not a big fan of 'Depth' topics I so often read about. I have been present many times when a recovery has been made by an individual and I observe the recovery process and the located target's depth and orientation to the search coil. Then I hear a comment made by the finder of the target who describes how deep it was ..... but it really wasn't. Rarely, but occasionally, they under-guess the target's depth. Most of the time it exceeds the actual located depth, and for several reasons.

I'm not into 'depth' so much because with over 55 years of very avid detecting I have found a few truly deep coin-size targets, but very few. Coins don't sink, and unless there is some sort of activity, such as mowed grass, fallen leaves, digging, tilling, plowing, or some sort of vehicle, human or animal foot traffic to help cause disturbance and displacement, lost coins and similar objects are not going to be all that deep.

In the real world, and caused by natural occurrences or acts of nature (floods, erosion, tree and vegetation growth and decay, etc.) the bulk of the lost targets we are after are going to be located from surface to about 4". Those that are an honest 4" to 6" would be a mid-depth target, and the majority of the so-called 'deep' finds are in the over 6" to perhaps 8" or 9" depths. On rare occasions are they going to be deeper. They might be now and then, but those are the rare finds.

So, lets get to search coils. The standard 'Viper' measures 6X11 and is a Double-D design. The new 'Raider' coil that is announced is based on Garrett's proven 8½X11 coil. So the front-to-rear coverage isn't enhanced because both coils are 11". But the increased width of the coil will enhance the detection depth. Partly due to the wider diameter of both the Transmit and Receive windings, and a bit more overlap of the two windings down the center of the coil, tip-to-tail.

The length is the same, and the new coil's width is about 41.666% or 41⅔% wider, but that is a measured amount. When it comes to anticipated depth increase over the 'Viper' coil, without having one in-hand yet or used afield, my typical 'best guess' would be an increase of anywhere from ½" to 2" depending upon the size of the coin.

The other reasons I am not into 'depth' is because so many posters are relating their wishes for increased depth when looking for smaller-size targets. Ideally, smaller-size to mid-size search coils are the best considerations for finding smaller-size targets. Larger-size search coils are more intended for finding larger-size targets.

Big belt buckles, knives, axes, firearms, helmets, spurs, or perhaps bags, bottles, cans or boxes that contain large amounts of metal. A Cache Hunter might appreciate a bigger-size coil, and in the earlier days of ground-cancelling detectors the devoted Relic Hunters enjoyed bigger coils because they were usually looking for bigger-size artifacts.

A lot will depend on the types of sites a person hunts and the challenges they face. For me and where I typically search, I am confronted with a lot of debris, especially ferrous-based junk. There are too many targets that are too close to be able to expect any opportunity for improved depth. It's tough enough just trying to find and isolate a keeper in all the debris. Smaller or occasionally mid-size coils are the better choices.

But I live in a small rural town and we're surrounded by rangeland, pastureland and farmland. There once were old cabins, ranch-hand sites, bunkhouses, barns, schools, churches, migrant worker sites and dance halls scattered about country in what is now wide-open grazing land or cultivated farm land.

'Cultivated' is the key word here because all that activity over decades of time has churned things down and back up countless times so lost targets can be shallow, mid-depth or deep and the areas are wide-open and a lot of ground to cover. The 'Raider' on an Apex should help with coverage, but also add that needed ½" to 2" detection depth that might come in handy. For smaller-size targets I do not expect to gain more than 2", if that. But when the opportunity is there, and the conditions are favorable due to fewer targets to impede performance, any little 'edge' can make for a good day.

Monte
 
Thank you Monte, appreciate you thoughts and expertise! I use the AT Pro with the stock 8.5 x 11 coil, and on some of the silver dimes I am just barely getting a soft high tone, and only when making sure I am keeping my coil as close to the grass as I can while scanning. The coin depth on that marginal silver runs about 7" approx. Was wondering whether the Apex with the larger Raider coil and multi freq will go just a bit deeper, to make those marginal signals clean up a bit. And yep, depth is not everything, I figure I find about 95% of what the Nox guys find, and there are plenty of good targets at 6" and under
 
LovestheShiny!: said:
Thank you Monte, appreciate you thoughts and expertise! I use the AT Pro with the stock 8.5 x 11 coil, and on some of the silver dimes I am just barely getting a soft high tone, and only when making sure I am keeping my coil as close to the grass as I can while scanning. The coin depth on that marginal silver runs about 7" approx.
I have a friend with an AT MAX and another fiend had the AT Pro. I tinkered with both, at different times and locations, but some of what I did suggested the AT Max, using the same coil, got a bit better depth. Not massive, but a little bit better depth potential based on the audio response I could hear.

Keeping the coil skimming the grass tops should have been about right in order to maintain an inch or two off the ground surface for best performance.

The biggest point to make here is that you referred to the potential on a Dime, and that's the smaller-size, commonly-used US coin. A very small coin to try and get a reasonably good signal with most detectors and coils.


LovestheShiny!: said:
Was wondering whether the Apex with the larger Raider coil and multi freq will go just a bit deeper, to make those marginal signals clean up a bit.
I have all these brand new detectors I bought for my multi-model evaluation and now that they are going up for sale, I plan to acquire a new AT MAX when I get some $$$ back in my pocket. Then I'll have that on-hand for side-by-side comparison when the Garrett coils get out.

I plan to so a few 'depth comparison tests' in the next couple of weeks and have been getting a test bed prepared for doing that. it will be an incremental depth comparison based on about a ½" for each increase difference, or as best I can, and my goal is to test one unit to it's depth limit, then go from there using any defectors that continue to respond, and eliminate makes and models as I go. I am sure the differences will not be by much.

Oh, as for in Multi-Frequency, I'll compare that plus Single-Frequency because while there are times SMF works OK on many detectors, there are also times when a Single-Frequency make a better-performing choice.


LovestheShiny!: said:
And yep, depth is not everything, I figure I find about 95% of what the Nox guys find, and there are plenty of good targets at 6" and under
There are a lot of detector/coil combinations in use today that struggle on a 5" or greater depth small coin. My 'depth test' will start with a 5" coin, and proceed from there. Mainly using detectors with 'standard' coils, some with coils I would attach for day-to-day Coin Hunting, and then move up to mid-size and larger-size.

Actually, it is kind of a 'depth test' but from a more practical standpoint. I am doing it with an assortment of coils, but it is based more on what the average Coin Hunter is likely to get with typical detector and coil set-ups. I'll report the detector & coil used, the settings, operating Frequency, and I'll include the GB read-out for that specific detector & coil for the ground I'm using for the comparison, That way readers can better relate it to their expectations.

I state that because, as I pointed out in the multi-model comparisons follow-up on my Forums, just changing search coils can make a difference in a detectors Ground Balance read-out, plus the fact that most of the makes and models use different default GB references. It's an interesting study.

What is the default GB read-out on an AT Pro or AT Max? Here are the default GB references on a few models I compared:

82.70 -- F5
93 ------ Apex
90.00 -- Racer 2
90.00 -- FORS CoRe
90.00 -- FORS Relic
90.00 -- Simplex +
82.9 ---- Omega 8500
90.60 -- T2 +
69 ------ MX-7

And since we're referring to the Apex and Frequencies an coils. With only the 6X11 DD Viper coil for the Apex, here is the result of checking out the GB read-out number on the Apex/Viper using a very mineralized rock I have on-hand from a gold mining era site from the 1870's:

93 -- Apex only w/6X11 DD, using different frequencies: 5 kHz.. 91, at 10 & 15 kHz.. 93, at 20 kHz,, 94, and at MF.. 93.

This shows a little variance based on a different frequency. Usually a detector w/different coil results in a bigger difference.

Monte
 
findgold: said:
I would like to see concentric Coils for the Apex.
I'm with you on that, and it would not need to be a lot. Maybe two sizes, especially one in a smaller, round-shaped design.

I wish most makes and models would offer consumers at least one or two choices in the Concentric category, but in the last decade or so there's been a big trend to make DD coils. Sometimes I am not certain the design engineers know the merits of Concentric vs Double-D options for actual in-the-field use.

Monte
 
I wish most makes and models would offer consumers at least one or two choices in the Concentric category, but in the last decade or so there's been a big trend to make DD coils. Sometimes I am not certain the design engineers know the merits of Concentric vs Double-D options for actual in-the-field use.

Monte[/COLOR][/QUOTE]

Lately I've been wondering myself what is the reason for this lack of concentric coils being offered across the board? Tougher for the engineers to design the detectors electronics to work well with concentric coils versus DD coils? Another possible reason I was thinking of...DD coils have the ability to work smoother over tougher ground and might benefit those that live in such areas especially with the pre-set GB units?
 
Walknstik: said:
Lately I've been wondering myself what is the reason for this lack of concentric coils being offered across the board? Tougher for the engineers to design the detectors electronics to work well with concentric coils versus DD coils?
Partly, I believe, it has been a fad or trend that started due to all the surge in Minelabs about twenty years ago. There were still a lot of Concentric coils used as 'standard' coils on most detectors back then, but .....

We have seen DD coils used as 'standard' and some o it comes from a lot of statements we read about, but I have fund, quite often, that Concentric coils still worked as well or better than a comparable -size DD. Each have their strengths and weaknesses.

A Concentric coil uses a very uniform EMI about the Tx winding and you would think they ought to be easier to design the circuitry for and make a compatible coil operate than a Double-D design.


Walknstik: said:
Another possible reason I was thinking of...DD coils have the ability to work smoother over tougher ground and might benefit those that live in such areas especially with the pre-set GB units?
And there is a statement I often read but have challenged with a wide range of DD and Concentric coils, and I live in and hunt in very mineralized ground 90% of the time. A lot depends on the size and shape of the coil, but I use both types on different detectors and I have found that a good detector & coil can handle the ground mineral challenges just fine, regardless of the coil type.

Monte
 
Back
Top Bottom