Myers Depot Metal Detectors

Proving to myself which is better 900 or Manticore

Cherry Picker said:
And what other detector shows both the conductive VDI and the ferrous VDI? I was not aware there was.

On the E-Trac if the FE VDI numbers ever got above 20s, and even sounded conductive and had a CO VDI then you had an 80% chance it was a deep iron nail or wire. If the FE VDI ever stayed below 18 on an iffy deep target, then you had around an 80% chance it would be a conductive target. Plotting on the Manticore seems to show the same.
Click to expand...
That's because it is the same. Meaning, instead of showing a FE and CO number, the 2D screen shows dots or smudges in the general area of whatever the FE and CO numbers are. The D2 and Legend do the same thing, but instead show the FE and CO as bar meters.

Then again, with a ferrous / nonferrous collocated scenario, even regular old ID and tones can easily expose that. For example, in that scenario, the tones will produce both a nonferrous and ferrous tone, and the ID will show a ferrous and nonferrous number (provided of course that the detector is setup to alert to iron).
 
Diga said:
That's because it is the same. Meaning, instead of showing a FE and CO number, the 2D screen shows dots or smudges in the general area of whatever the FE and CO numbers are. The D2 and Legend do the same thing, but instead show the FE and CO as bar meters.

Then again, with a ferrous / nonferrous collocated scenario, even regular old ID and tones can easily expose that. For example, in that scenario, the tones will produce both a nonferrous and ferrous tone, and the ID will show a ferrous and nonferrous number (provided of course that the detector is setup to alert to iron).
Click to expand...
Bar meter of what, 7 possible ferrous numbers as compared to 30 of the E-Trac. Not in the same ballfield.

These new detectors are killer I'm not playing them down, I just think the Manticore sets itself apart from the others by focusing more on the FE. Doesn't above the line mean one type of ferrous, and below the line another? Like screwcap vs rusted nail? Maybe I have the wrong impression of the 2D, but to compare it to a ferrous meter is a bit stretching it.

I have known for a long time the key to telling deep ferrous from deep conductive is in identifying the ferrous not the conductive. At least for me.
 
Last edited:
Cherry Picker said:
Bar meter of what, 7 possible ferrous numbers as compared to 30 of the E-Trac. Not in the same ballfield.

These new detectors are killer I'm not playing them down, I just think the Manticore sets itself apart from the others by focusing more on the FE. Doesn't above the line mean one type of nonferrous, and below the line another?
Click to expand...
Whether or not the detector shows the FE as a number, bar graph, or smudge, is irrelevant to my point. The point is, is that the detector shows FE in some form or another. All we need to know in one way or another, is if there is ferrous under the coil that is dragging down the nonferrous ID. We don't need the 2D screen to do that :) That's easily accomplished with tones / ID, or something like the D2's and Legend's nonferrous / ferrous strength meters.

But I digress, because the whole point of our actual discussion is what benefit does the 2D screen provide? When I have asked Manticore owners to, "To describe an exact target situation in which the 2D screen changed their dig / no dig decision, in a way that tones and/or ID could not", I got mainly crickets. Although I did get a couple of replies, which humorously and ironically, actually proved my point! Then they got mad lol.

Try it for yourself if you want. Start a new thread asking that exact same question :)
 
Diga said:
Whether or not the detector shows the FE as a number, bar graph, or smudge, is irrelevant to my point. The point is, is that the detector shows FE in some form or another. All we need to know in one way or another, is if there is ferrous under the coil that is dragging down the nonferrous ID. We don't need the 2D screen to do that :) That's easily accomplished with tones / ID, or something like the D2's and Legend's nonferrous / ferrous strength meters.

But I digress, because the whole point of our actual discussion is what benefit does the 2D screen provide? When I have asked Manticore owners to, "To describe an exact target situation in which the 2D screen changed their dig / no dig decision, in a way that tones and/or ID could not", I got mainly crickets. Although I did get a couple of replies, which humorously and ironically, actually proved my point! Then they got mad lol.

Try it for yourself if you want. Start a new thread asking that exact same question :)
Click to expand...
Whether or not the detector shows the FE as a number, bar graph, or smudge, is irrelevant to my point.
Click to expand...

LOL come on! The difference between a 6 bar light representation or a 30 dual-digit number no difference in your point?

The point is, I can take the E-Trac to my city park and still walk away with some deep keepers because of the FE VDI. I couldn't with any of the others. Yes, I have a lot of time on the E-Trac, but explaining to watch for a VDI can be done by a newbie.

Now, whether the 2D provides the info I suggest, I can't say. But, If it does give a way, and it is far more than a 6 light meter, to identify iron over other ferrous, caps, etc., then it will make a difference. The key for my site is the only ferrous that is false like a coin might at 10" is iron. May not help others, but would do the job I require.
 
Last edited:
Cherry Picker said:
LOL come on! The difference between a 6 bar light representation or a 30 dual-digit number no difference in your point?
Click to expand...
Of course that makes no difference to my point, because my point is all about the Manti's 2D screen, but I'll bite anyway on this different topic...

Post an exact target scenario in which that numerical FE number will change the dig/no dig decision, in a way that the FE bar scale, or FE ID, or FE tones cannot.
 
Diga said:
Of course that makes no difference to my point, because my point is all about the Manti's 2D screen, but I'll bite anyway on this different topic...

Post an exact target scenario in which that numerical FE number will change the dig/no dig decision, in a way that the FE bar scale, or FE ID, or FE tones cannot.
Click to expand...
If the E-Trac FE reads in the 20s, it will be ferrous 80% of the time. If the FE NEVER goes above 18, it will 80% of the time be a good conductive target. These are all on targets that are 8"-10+" that sound like good iffy targets and have good iffy CO VDIs. Do that with a 6 bar light. I can get a lower FE VDI but it won't give me my 80% chance. I haven't had a ferrous bar tell me either.
 
Cherry Picker said:
If the E-Trac FE reads in the 20s, it will be ferrous 80% of the time. If the FE NEVER goes above 18, it will 80% of the time be a good conductive target. These are all on targets that are 8"-10+" that sound like good iffy targets and have good iffy CO VDIs. Do that with a 6 bar light. I can get a lower FE VDI but it won't give me my 80% chance. I haven't had a ferrous bar tell me either.
Click to expand...
Ok, but that can be accomplished with any detector that has a TID with a ferrous range. For example, the ferrous range on the Legend is 1-10. The lower the number, the more sure the Legend knows the target is ferrous. Like your E-Trac, I know if the ferrous ID reads about 6 or lower, then the target will be ferrous almost all the time. If the ID is 7-10 in the ferrous range, then I know there is a decent chance that the target is a chain, or something at the fringe of detection.

If in the same scenario, I'm getting an alternating ferrous and nonferrous ID, then it's almost always a nonferrous target, that has it's nonferrous ID dragged down by something ferrous. The tones will clearly indicate that as well.
 
Diga said:
Ok, but that can be accomplished with any detector that has a TID with a ferrous range. For example, the ferrous range on the Legend is 1-10. The lower the number, the more sure the Legend knows the target is ferrous. Like your E-Trac, I know if the ferrous ID reads about 6 or lower, then the target will be ferrous almost all the time. If the ID is 7-10 in the ferrous range, then I know there is a decent chance that the target is a chain, or something at the fringe of detection.

If in the same scenario, I'm getting an alternating ferrous and nonferrous ID, then it's almost always a nonferrous target, that has it's nonferrous ID dragged down by something ferrous. The tones will clearly indicate that as well.
Click to expand...
I get what you're trying to say, but!

You have two speedometers that go to 120 MPH.
Speedo-A goes to 120 MPH in increments of 1 mph
Speedo-B goes to 120 MPH in increments of 20 mph

At 120 MPH both are going to show you at 120 MPH. Even at 80 MPH both are going to show you going at 80 MPH. The problem comes in trying to maintain that 75 mph. Speedo-B will require a guess or rounding off to the nearest mph to get close. Maybe right, Maybe wrong. What we do know is it will not be as accurate as speedo-A. For example, your speedo-B could say you're going 80 mph when you're actually doing 100 mph. Close only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades LOL.

I have no idea where some people get the idea that fewer target IDs would give you a more accurate TID.
 
Last edited:
Diga said:
... the 2D screen shows dots or smudges in the general area of whatever the FE and CO numbers are.
Click to expand...

You keep saying this. Why? What is "general" about the placement of dots on the 2D screen? How do you suppose this generality is accomplished? Engineer on coding team: "hey, we have precise FE/CO coordinates for this signal, but how about we place them "generally" rather than precisely!"

There's more than enough pixels on the Manticore display to accommodate all the FE/CO coordinates precisely. There are hash marks for scale. Why is it you assume to know that they are placed generally instead? My experience is they are placed quite precisely. An "88" with no non ferrous indication lands at precisely the same point time after time. Ditto for all other common signals. And with little practice in use become very recognizable with a quick glance.

But, do tell. What is the point of placing them "generally" instead. How, or why did they do that? When it would be so easy to place them precisely?

- Dave
 
Dave,

There is obviously a misunderstanding of what I said.

Yes, of course "An "88" with no non ferrous indication lands at precisely the same point time after time".

My point is that an 88 is more definitive than TT. When the ID is 88, can you recognize that number easier by seeing the big 88 number, or by looking at the small circle on a line that has no numbers and incremental vertical lines? Is that small dot on the nonferrous axis, a 88, 87, or 89? So ya, seeing the large ID number is easier and more definitive.

Regardless, all that doesn't really have anything to do with my main point and question of, "Can a Manticore user describe an exact target situation in which the 2D screen changed their dig / no dig decision, in a way that tones and/or ID could not".
 
Last edited:
UT_Dave said:
You keep saying this. Why? What is "general" about the placement of dots on the 2D screen? How do you suppose this generality is accomplished? Engineer on coding team: "hey, we have precise FE/CO coordinates for this signal, but how about we place them "generally" rather than precisely!"

There's more than enough pixels on the Manticore display to accommodate all the FE/CO coordinates precisely. There are hash marks for scale. Why is it you assume to know that they are placed generally instead? My experience is they are placed quite precisely. An "88" with no non ferrous indication lands at precisely the same point time after time. Ditto for all other common signals. And with little practice in use become very recognizable with a quick glance.

But, do tell. What is the point of placing them "generally" instead. How, or why did they do that? When it would be so easy to place them precisely?

- Dave
Click to expand...
Would it be that hard for ML to add the Fe/Co as a display option in this $1600 metal detector?
 
Martin_V3i said:
Would it be that hard for ML to add the Fe/Co as a display option in this $1600 metal detector?
Click to expand...
Good luck with that the next option you get will be on the new minelab you buy track record speaks for itself . sube
 
Martin_V3i said:
Would it be that hard for ML to add the Fe/Co as a display option in this $1600 metal detector?
Click to expand...
I never got the logic behind Minelab stopping this dual VDI that no others offered. I used it a lot. I think you can get more information from the FE source on really deep targets than the CO myself. At least for my use. I do think the 2D plotting is more informative than the 2 digit FE. The FE will give you a price number on a given swing, but unless you watch every number, and have the mental capacity to remember each number and calculate the pattern it does not give a great overall odds. At least a plotted pattern made of a series of FE numbers can give you a view of the correlation of all your swings.
 
Cherry Picker said:
At least a plotted pattern made of a series of FE numbers can give you a view of the correlation of all your swings.
Click to expand...
How does that change the dig / no dig decision, compared to using tones and/or ID?

In iron infested sites, I dig any target that even gives a hint of nonferrous (be it a nonferrous tone, or nonferrous ID). Every other hunter I know of does the same. Heck, some even dig the ferrous targets as well. Point being, the how, why, or what ferrous is being identified, is irrelevant. As long as both ferrous and nonferrous is being identified at the same time, the hunter knows to dig, regardless of all else.
 
Diga said:
How does that change the dig / no dig decision, compared to using tones and/or ID?

In iron infested sites, I dig any target that even gives a hint of nonferrous (be it a nonferrous tone, or nonferrous ID). Every other hunter I know of does the same. Heck, some even dig the ferrous targets as well. Point being, the how, why, or what ferrous is being identified, is irrelevant. As long as both ferrous and nonferrous is being identified at the same time, the hunter knows to dig, regardless of all else.
Click to expand...
I'm not a dig it all. I did my dig it all for 40 years. Now I am limited to what I can recover before I end up putting myself in the ER. I still want to find the many deep old coins, but I need better odds than just maybe. I can deal with an 80% chance of good vs junk. Using the FE I can get 80%.

Just a note, but I believe Garrett was testing a good idea in the GTI series. I use sizing a lot to determine if I think a target is worth expending my energy for. Not all detectors are good at telling a target size, but a coin vs a piece of iron or foil can often be determined by how concentrated/size a signal is. I don't know what happened whether the technology wasn't reliable, or it just never caught on.
 
Last edited:
Cherry Picker said:
I still want to find the many deep old coins, but I need better odds than just maybe. I can deal with an 80% chance of good vs junk. Using the FE I can get 80%.
Click to expand...
If you're talking about distinguishing between ferrous and nonferrous, well, that's easy to do with any decent detector. The only exception to that, is targets right at the fringe of detection. Those targets can be just about anything.

Terms like "80%", "better", and "more information", are vague and meaningless. Why? Because those terms don't describe the actual targets, and what is seen and heard from those targets. For example, if someone answered my question with: Tones and ID didn't identify the co-located nail and coin, as well as the 2D screen did, because..., then at least they're describing something tangible that can be discussed.
 
Diga said:
If you're talking about distinguishing between ferrous and nonferrous, well, that's easy to do with any decent detector. The only exception to that, is targets right at the fringe of detection. Those targets can be just about anything.

Terms like "80%", "better", and "more information", are vague and meaningless. Why? Because those terms don't describe the actual targets, and what is seen and heard from those targets. For example, if someone answered my question with: Tones and ID didn't identify the co-located nail and coin, as well as the 2D screen did, because..., then at least they're describing something tangible that can be discussed.
Click to expand...
No, not just distinguishing ferrous from nonferrous, but by a determined number. I can get a FE of 01-15, along with a sweet sound and a CO in the 40s, and it tells me I have an 80% chance it is a deep conductive target. If during any of the swings I get an FE in the 20s, that sweet sound, and CO in the 40s, 80% of the time it will be deep iron.

How do I know? I have dug enough good and bad in this park over the last 20 years to know where the fool's line is. At least for me.
 
Last edited:
Cherry Picker said:
No, not just distinguishing ferrous from nonferrous, but by a determined number. I can get a FE of 01-15, along with a sweet sound and a CO in the 40s, and it tells me I have an 80% chance it is a deep conductive target. If during any of the swings I get an FE in the 20s, that sweet sound, and CO in the 40s, 80% of the time it will be deep iron.
Click to expand...
So like you described, you get a CO of 45, and a FE of 10. On a similar range TID detector without dual numerical displays, the ID would alternate between 45 and -10. So, both detectors show the same thing...and most importantly, the dig/no dig decision would be the same on both detectors.
 
Diga said:
So like you described, you get a CO of 45, and a FE of 10. On a similar range TID detector without dual numerical displays, the ID would alternate between 45 and -10. So, both detectors show the same thing...and most importantly, the dig/no dig decision would be the same on both detectors.
Click to expand...
LOL. You mean more like a 0 to 6 on a bar graph. A far reduction in resolution between 01-30. There may be something there, but I've used all but the Manticore and none gave any hit to the possibility a deep target was likely ferrous vs conductive. Beyond 6" the ferrous indicator gave no measurable indication that it could be a coin and not iron.

You know we could go back and forth all day, but people are going to know a 6 level bar in no way could have the ID resolution of a possible 30 segment ID. Let common sense be their guide. If you're happy, what difference does it make? I'm just stating my experience and use.

And once again. I'm not putting down these new detectors. I think they have some killer features to offer, I just didn't get any use out of the iron bar/checker in my city park on the really deep stuff.
 
Last edited:
Cherry Picker said:
LOL. You mean more like a 0 to 6 on a bar graph. A far reduction in resolution between 01-30. There may be something there, but I've used all but the Manticore and none gave any hit to the possibility a deep target was likely ferrous vs conductive. Beyond 6" the ferrous indicator gave no measurable indication that it could be a coin and not iron.

You know we could go back and forth all day, but people are going to know a 6 level bar in no way could have the ID resolution of a possible 30 segment ID. Let common sense be their guide. If you're happy, what difference does it make? I'm just stating my experience and use.
Click to expand...
First, I didn't even mention a bar graph in what I wrote, and what you replied to.

Second, you didn't address my point that, "Both detectors show the same thing...and most importantly, the dig/no dig decision would be the same on both detectors".

Put another way, your dual ID Etrac / CTX? shows FE -10 and CO 45. Now let's say that detector didn't have dual ID displays. If it had a single ID display, the ID would alternate between -10 and 45. Either way, the hunter is seeing the -10 and 45. So, in that scenario, the dig/no dig decision is the same, regardless of the dual or individual ID displays.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

GetDiggin
What on Earth is this thing?
Replies
5
Views
120
hoser
hoser
John-Edmonton
Come On Garrett.....Send Us A Signal, I'll Throw You A Line.
Replies
5
Views
339
metaladdict
metaladdict
RgnFn
Question for you D2 users
2
Replies
22
Views
535
jmaclen
J
E
Thrift Store Tesoro Golden Sabre Find
Replies
3
Views
175
metaladdict
metaladdict
T
New Manticore owners please read - Involves user manual and software update.
Replies
2
Views
217
AirmetTango
AirmetTango
Back
Top Bottom