Deus V4.1 vs 4.0 (comparison data, test, actual targets in the wild

vferrari said:
Dirtlooter,

I believe that to be the case, however, I am concerned about the ability to tweak the ground sensitivity setting consistently to get that performance and, more important, concerned that if not set properly it could actually degrade performance under extreme soil conditions. If you just keep it at what I believe to be the default setting, 6, you should be ok for most situations and may even see improved performance IF you use GB tracking (it really does nothing for you if you use Fixed GB). Hope this helps.
Click to expand...

at this point, it may be more trouble than I really want to deal with but it is nice to know that it can be done
 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

How to Research for Treasure Hunting and Metal Detecting From Lead Generation to Vetting - Grab it through Amazon!
tnsharpshooter said:
I will be again testing version 4.1 Deus today.
My goal.
To see if possibly using TX power 3 is in fact more useful in my soil with ground sensitivty set to level 6.

With earlier versions Deus, Tx power level 3 in my area's soil- washes out signals.

I may play with tx power setting 1 also.

These tests will be on undisturbed targets in the wild.

So I have to find some.
Not easy in this testing site I have declared.
Wish me luck.
Click to expand...

My goal today not met.
Not enough data to give good info on the above.

Did use Deus with 9"LF V4.1 in the wild today.
First let me say, Deus V4.0 is now in my rear view mirror.
All my units have 4.1 loaded since last nite.

Again today some what I think is very good performance.
V4.1 ground sensitivity setting for me is secret weapon.lol
Although it's no secret anymore.

Using this ground sensitivity and varying over suspect targets, reminds me sorta like iron check on both Garrett ATX and Minelab GPX series.

I find it quite reliable.

I also know Mr Sharpshooter has been previously leaving nonferrous finds in the ground too when using Deus V4.0 and previous versions, and get this- just maybe even when using round and elliptical HF coils.

I definitely came home today with a few extra finds attributable to V4.1.

2u884gn.jpg


All nonferrous finds.
The items on the left less challenged, meaning all gave equal or very similar tonal,signature when comparing ground sensitivty 6 vs 10.
Settings used today
Hot program
93 sensitivty
Freq 18khz
9"LF coil
Located with ground sensitivity level 6
Reactivity 2.5
Silencer -1
Disc 0 full tones
GB manual to actual ground 73 in meter.
Tx power 2
No ground notch.

All of the items on the right more challenged. Meaning when I went from ground sensitivty 6 to 10 some thing happened to the tonal signature in one way or the other.

If I would have been running groud sensitivity level 10, and hunting none of the finds on the right would have been dug by me today.
Additionally had I been hunting using ground sensitivty level 6 setting, good chance none of the finds on the right not found by me today either.

Sound strange?
It might to some.

First of all, it is my opinion, folks wanting to be all they can be using Deus looking for all and any nonferrous, highly recommend audio response 5 or higher.

This area where I found the above has seen CTX, Etrac, V3i, Deus 2.0/3.2 action by myself previously, been a while back though.

The finds on the right, all but 2 of them (smaller musket ball and bigger lead) gave real small static signals (ground sensitivity 6) very low volume hard to hear even wearing full headphones with module for at 6 and audio response at 5. I rate these signals on these as consistent noise.
Sounds more like Deus coil sensing small ground anomaly. Very coil position particular and sweep speed sensitive. Using pinpoint showed a big signal. So after hearing these only setting changed is going to groud sensitivity (GS) level 10. Signal what little signal there was at GS at 6, going to 10 signal either disappeared or got even more shaky.

The 2 targets that did have higher volume bigger signals ( musket ball and bigger lead) but these signals sounded extremely low like iron. Again pinpointing showed what I thought was a large pinpoint. If I would have based my dig decision on pinpoint size Inwould have walked. So both of these targets above sounded a whole lot like each other. What to do?
I sure don't like digging iron if I don't have to.

So I monitored my sweep speed while listening to these 2 targets listening to the tone as the coil was moved. Then I went to GS level 10, the signals both got chopped slightly.
And when digging the nonferous was there, both targets about 6" deep.

Gotta love version 4.1.
Another arrow in one's quiver.

I did also today do a few checks on some signals (crappy) while detecting using GS setting 6. After composing to GS level 10, if the signals improved going to GS 10 turned out to be iron or nail.

I did get fooled one time. Turned out to be s nail vertical and deeper.

Will be interesting to see what other users see and hear when they start using V4.1.
 

Last edited:
Your posts are super helpful Tn and I really appreciate the time you’ve taken to share your findings. Thanks!
 

After reading the description of this new feature in the 4.1 manual I'm more convinced that this is a tracking offset setting with 5 being neutral and anything higher being positive and lower than 5 being negative. I've used detectors that have had a tracking offset in the past and except for the name they are very similar.
 

Mike G. said:
After reading the description of this new feature in the 4.1 manual I'm more convinced that this is a tracking offset setting with 5 being neutral and anything higher being positive and lower than 5 being negative. I've used detectors that have had a tracking offset in the past and except for the name they are very similar.
Click to expand...

Similar but different. The key is if it were simply an offset, you would never have a situation where it just defaulted to a set ground phase value (e.g., 88) simply because you are not swinging the coil, which is what it does when it cannot pick up sufficient changes in ground mineralization. Apparently, XP uses changes in ground mineralization (not ground phase) to determine when a new ground phase reading should be taken for tracking purposes. In other words, if you were looking at the mineralization bar graph on the right side of the display screen, what ground sensitivity is telling you is how much difference between subsequent ground mineralization readings are needed before the Deus calculates a new ground phase reading while tracking. I do not know for sure, but I think previous to version 4, the GB tracking algorithm did not have any mineralization index input. In that case, the ground phase reading was continuously tracked, perhaps on a constant time sampling basis, and hence you had situations where ground phase changed rapidly and cancelled out target signals below the coil as you swung the coil over a large ferrous target or hot rock that could change the localized ground phase reading. I think in version 4.0, XP added the ground mineralization index input into the tracking algorithm to counter this undesirable effect. This had the benefit of giving the tracking algorithm a tangible "reason" to remeasure and periodically recalculate ground phase. The problem was they made it TOO sensitive to ground mineralization index, hence it took only very small variations in ground mineralization to cause a ground phase reading to be taken. This is bad in highly mineralized soil were the local variations in mineralization index are significant and this caused ground tracking to be unstable in highly mineralized soils.

The 4.1 tweak of adding a sensitivity scale or threshhold to how much mineralization HAS to change before a ground phase measurement is taken is an attempt to calm down this behaviour in mid-to-highly mineralized soils. I read elsewhere that Gary from XP has stated that setting ground sensitivity to 10 is the equivalent of what version 4.0 was set at. Imagine that this setting (if linear) requires a change in mineralization index only 1/10th that of a ground sensitivity of 1. In other words, if the mineralization bar graph change of say only 10 units is required to trigger a ground phase measurement with sensitivity set at 10 then a bar graph change of 100 units would be required if sensitivity is set at 1. I do not know what the real thresholds are for the various ground sensitivity settings nor do I know if the effect is linear (or even if the mineralization bar graph itself is linear, I think its logarithmic), but suffice it to say that you need a fairly big spike in the mineralization bargraph before a ground phase reading is taken if sensitivity is 1 while a only a small bump in bar graph reading would be required if set to 10. That is why a ground sensitivity setting of 6 is a good default setting for most mineralization conditions while you want it set low (e.g., towards 1) for highly mineralized soils like Culpeper. and higher (e.g., towards 10) for low mineralized soils (e.g., dry white sugar sand beach) if you want the Deus to track rather than just default to 88.

Still do not understand why the HF coils seem to see a much smaller impact for the ground sensitivity setting (i.e., there is not much change in behaviour if you have it set at 1 or 10 when using an HF coil).

HTH.
 

Last edited:
Mike G. said:
After reading the description of this new feature in the 4.1 manual I'm more convinced that this is a tracking offset setting with 5 being neutral and anything higher being positive and lower than 5 being negative. I've used detectors that have had a tracking offset in the past and except for the name they are very similar.
Click to expand...

I don't agree.
I see effects with this setting with on top of the ground test. Got some thing to do with mineralization and seems to be tied to the way Deus reacts when ferrous and nonferous is swept.
Maybe some type of ground filter setting.
Anything I say it is would only be speculation.
My job is to discover Deus V4.1 tendencies and apply these tendencies in the field.

Seems like GS setting alters coil footprint. Allows Deus to see more or less mineral. Seems to let weaker signals through with mid level settings vs higher. Can or cannot change tonal pitch of nonferrous, can or cannot change duration of tone, can or cannot change quality overall of tone. Setting seems to mimick a Deus user (when set higher) where s deus user is running too low a Reactivty for soil mineralization levels or is swing too fast for soil mineralization levels.
 

Last edited:
This V4.1 is definitely more dynamic than previous versions. The sound of medium to shallow non ferrous is blasting loud. Actually was out for a short hunt today a very quiet site. I was using 28kHz so my machine was very quiet, very nice Sunday easy quick hunt. My first target was so loud that it scared that crap out of me. I thought about turning my volume down, but instead kept it high to hear the squeaky deep targets. Now that i'm used to the loudness, the machine runs perfectly in my mild soil (left the GS at default 6). The good non ferrous are noticeably louder.
 

Chatted briefly with a dealer here who is a sponsor.
He says some of his customers are indeed seeing some thing (improved) as far as version 4.1 goes.
So not my imagination.lol
 

Updated to 4.1 yesterday.
With 3' of snow in my yard it's going to be a long time until I try it out:BangHead:
 

well, down loaded the 4.1 a little while ago. hopefully I will get to try it out a little bit before all of the rain hits us Wed.,Thur.and Friday. I have read and reread a lot of posts and watched various videos by numerous people including the ones by Deus and it really sounds like the right thing to do. Thanks for the info all. DL
 

Great info above from all. My question is anyone running 4.1 on the beach and if so, how has the performance been when compared to ver. 4.0?
 

tnsharpshooter said:
/../
Allows Deus to see more or less mineral. Seems to let weaker signals through with mid level settings vs higher. Can or cannot change tonal pitch of nonferrous, can or cannot change duration of tone, can or cannot change quality overall of tone. Setting seems to mimick a Deus user (when set higher) where s deus user is running too low a Reactivty for soil mineralization levels or is swing too fast for soil mineralization levels.
Click to expand...

That seems to be the case, from what I gather to. It's like looking at the mineralization with the naked eye vs using a 10x magnifier.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

another half dime and more today with the deus.

⬅️ Previous Thread

guess I'm gonna start my HF fund

Next Thread ➡️

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Metal Detecting Stuff

Latest Discussions

Back
Top