First thoughts and review of the new XP Deus elliptical coil.

[Tedyoh]

Not sure If it matters when pairing a new coil with 4.0 but maybe it also needed to be fully charged?

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Minelab PRO-FIND 35 Waterproof Pinpointer Metal Detector for Experts with Tone ID & Adjustable Sensitivity - Grab it through Amazon!

[laidback4sho]

What about that gold nugget you snagged with the 9" awhile back. How "deep" at the max elliptical freq?

That nugget was just sitting there on the bedrock, hidden by some moss.

Didn't get anything with the elliptical yesterday. Got quite a bit of lead though. No gold.

Sent from my SM-G920T using Tapatalk

 

[laidback4sho]

do you think the coil you received is bad? 5 inchs on a coin?

I have entertained that thought, yes. But I'm not quite sure how I'd go about finding out for sure. In fact, I'd be quite relieved to know that's all it was, as I understand these things are under warranty.

Sent from my SM-G920T using Tapatalk

 

[laidback4sho]

Not sure If it matters when pairing a new coil with 4.0 but maybe it also needed to be fully charged?

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Before I turned the unit on, I charged it fully. Took over an hour with this new coil.

Sent from my SM-G920T using Tapatalk

 

[vferrari]

What about that gold nugget you snagged with the 9" awhile back. How "deep" at the max elliptical freq?

I meant doing a nugget air test (or any other small mid-conductor) to compare to your high conductor coin air test?

 

[laidback4sho]

I meant doing a nugget air test (or any other small mid-conductor) to compare to your high conductor coin air test?

Good point. Haven't tried that one yet. Gotta run to the bank, but I'll do it when I get back.

Sent from my SM-G920T using Tapatalk

 

[jhittle]

I think the thing is this was designed primarily to excel at prospecting small, mid-conductors which does not do a lot for coin shooting unless you like nickels or are seriously trying for the gold coin club. I don't have this coil, but I do have the 9" HF. On a 6" deep gold chain test target (in sand) it was amazing to see how much louder the test target signal got as I bumped frequency up higher. I know at the same time I was doing that I was losing high conductor depth. (i.e., if I did the same test with a silver target it would have gotten fainter). This is not an ideal coil for coinshooting deep copper and silver. It should do OK at 14 khz but it won't go as deep as the standard coil does at 4 or 8 khz, plus you are also dealing with a smaller coil footprint so depth will suffer for that reason also.

On the bright side, I do know that XP is working on advanced versions of software that will supposedly take advantage of some aspects of the two HF coil designs that will help them achieve more depth across the board in highly mineralized soil conditions which is where HF shines. We'll see what they come up with down the road. Consider Ver 4.X for the HF coils basically what V 1 or 2 was to the legacy coils as far as signal processing is concerned.

out of curiosity what setting/program changes would you recommend for the 9' HF in parks that are highly mineralized ground for coin shooting - currently my go to program is Gary's Ultra Hot full tone. would like to get your opinion on what settings you considered when swapping back and forth from standard to HF coils.

 

[laidback4sho]

I meant doing a nugget air test (or any other small mid-conductor) to compare to your high conductor coin air test?

Ok, at 95 sens - 3.5"
90 - 2.75"
75 - 1.75"
55 - 1"

That's on a half gram nugget.

Settings are:

Program 10 Gold Field
Freq: 80.8
React: 2
Disc IAR: 3
Threshold: 0
Response: 2
GB: manual 90

Now if I lower the frequency all the way (13.3kHz), this is what I get...

95 sens - 2.5"
90 - 1.5"
75 - 1"
55 - .5"

Sent from my SM-G920T using Tapatalk

 

[austin_luker]

I all think to say is, I hope they cut the grass short lol...

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

 

[Deft Tones]

Something must be wrong with the coil. Can't hit a penny at 6"?

Who could have confidence hunting gold if that were the case?

I'd be sending it back instead of waiting for more guinea pigs to chime in.

 

[vferrari]

Something must be wrong with the coil. Can't hit a penny at 6"?

Who could have confidence hunting gold if that were the case?

I'd be sending it back instead of waiting for more guinea pigs to chime in.

Agree the penny test at < 6" at 14 khz is not a good sign and the Gold Field Nugget test that LB4S conducted at the high frequency is not a good sign.

On the other hand, I have found that the 9" HF coil is a decent coinshooter at 14 khz, but really shines as a small, mid-conductor magnet at 56 khz. So as a "general purpose" coinshooting coil, the 9" passes muster and you can turn up the gain for beach gold or finding relic brass and small lead in mineralized ground by operating at 28 or, preferably, 56 khz. If I want to go for really deep silver, however, got to switch back to the 9 or 11-inch legacy Deus coils.

Unlike the 9" HF, the elliptical HF may turn out to be a one trick pony. That is, a monster for mid-conductors at the high frequencies with poor high-conductor performance at 14 khz except for the shallowest targets (fresh drops). However, I have not seen any test results or anecdotal evidence, yet, that it is even a one trick pony, unfortunately.

 

[toasted]

5" on a wheat at what settings?

 

[laidback4sho]

5" on a wheat at what settings?

Started out on Deep, but tried others as well as modifying settings on my own... Same results.

Sent from my SM-G920T using Tapatalk

 

[vferrari]

BTW Folks - did a little research on Elliptical vs. Round DD coil performance and came up with some surprising (to me) info.

Because the DD "active" field runs down the center of the coil where the Transmit (Tx) and Receive (Rx) coils overlap, the DD inherently has more side-to-side separation than an equivalently shaped and sized coaxial (concentric if circular) coil. The for-to-aft separation is defined by that vertical dimension whether it is circular (then it is the diameter of the coil) or by its "long" dimension if it is an elliptical coil. Therefore, a 9" round DD will have the same for-aft and side-to-side target separation as a 9"x5" elliptical DD coil. However, the 9x5" elliptical will have less depth capability because there is less cancellation field strength due to its shape than a round DD coil. The cancellation field is what makes a DD have better depth performance in mineralized soil than a coaxial coil. So the only "advantage" of the elliptical is the smaller footprint makes it easier to swing in tight spots. Now, XP also changed the windings of the elliptical coil so that it has a higher HF operating frequency than the round HF coil (74 vs. 56 khz). i don't know what the basis for the different operating frequencies for the two coils (geometry or other reasons), but an early advert of the HF coils from 2016 implied that they would both operate at 56 khz. Neither here nor there, but just a fact. The different, higher operating frequency means that the HF depth comparison between the two coils is difficult to make because both operating frequency and geometry are different. However, all things being equal, I would expect that the HF elliptical coil would have less depth performance and no appreciable separation performance difference than the round HF coil since they both have a 9" "long" dimension.

Note that for coaxial coils, the elliptical coil does provide better side-to-side separation than the round coaxial (concentric) coil that has a diameter equivalent to the "long" dimension of the elliptical coil all other things being equal (but depth will slightly suffer on the coaxial elliptical, as well). And also note that a coaxial coil that has the same dimensions as a DD coil will have better depth performance in ground with minimal mineralization but its performance will drop off significantly vs. the DD'S performance which drops but not as drastically as soil mineralization goes up.

I suspect that people will debate me on this one. But if you do, please do your research before you start the debate. I did my research but unfortunately cannot post some of my references because that would violate forum rules because other forums would be linked. However, I am willing to listen to valid arguments backed up by facts and objective evidence of the error of my ways.

 

[Tedyoh]

So I guess this means every smaller elliptical coil manufacturer either has been ripping everyone off by stating it will have better separation than it's larger counterparts or their engineers are dumb.....im not buying this study....but I'm no electronics engineer either...i do know that an elliptical shape is narrower than a circular shape and I find it impossible that a 9 x 9 electrical field would be the "same" as a 9.5 x 5 field.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[laidback4sho]

BTW Folks - did a little research on Elliptical vs. Round DD coil performance and came up with some surprising (to me) info.

Because the DD "active" field runs down the center of the coil where the Transmit (Tx) and Receive (Rx) coils overlap, the DD inherently has more side-to-side separation than an equivalently shaped and sized coaxial (concentric if circular) coil. The for-to-aft separation is defined by that vertical dimension whether it is circular (then it is the diameter of the coil) or by its "long" dimension if it is an elliptical coil. Therefore, a 9" round DD will have the same for-aft and side-to-side target separation as a 9"x5" elliptical DD coil. However, the 9x5" elliptical will have less depth capability because there is less cancellation field strength due to its shape than a round DD coil. The cancellation field is what makes a DD have better depth performance in mineralized soil than a coaxial coil. So the only "advantage" of the elliptical is the smaller footprint makes it easier to swing in tight spots. Now, XP also changed the windings of the elliptical coil so that it has a higher HF operating frequency than the round HF coil (74 vs. 56 khz). i don't know what the basis for the different operating frequencies for the two coils (geometry or other reasons), but an early advert of the HF coils from 2016 implied that they would both operate at 56 khz. Neither here nor there, but just a fact. The different, higher operating frequency means that the HF depth comparison between the two coils is difficult to make because both operating frequency and geometry are different. However, all things being equal, I would expect that the HF elliptical coil would have less depth performance and no appreciable separation performance difference than the round HF coil since they both have a 9" "long" dimension.

Note that for coaxial coils, the elliptical coil does provide better side-to-side separation than the round coaxial (concentric) coil that has a diameter equivalent to the "long" dimension of the elliptical coil all other things being equal (but depth will slightly suffer on the coaxial elliptical, as well). And also note that a coaxial coil that has the same dimensions as a DD coil will have better depth performance in ground with minimal mineralization but its performance will drop off significantly vs. the DD'S performance which drops but not as drastically as soil mineralization goes up.

I suspect that people will debate me on this one. But if you do, please do your research before you start the debate. I did my research but unfortunately cannot post some of my references because that would violate forum rules because other forums would be linked. However, I am willing to listen to valid arguments backed up by facts and objective evidence of the error of my ways.

One thing I can say for certain is that the elliptical is deadly at target separation. The best I've ever seen, in fact. It's just the extreme loss of depth that concerns me.

Sent from my SM-G920T using Tapatalk

 

[vferrari]

So I guess this means every smaller elliptical coil manufacturer either has been ripping everyone off by stating it will have better separation than it's larger counterparts or their engineers are dumb.....im not buying this study....but I'm no electronics engineer either...i do know that an elliptical shape is narrower than a circular shape and I find it impossible that a 9 x 9 electrical field would be the "same" as a 9.5 x 5 field.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Remember, I'm talking DD here. Different story on coaxial coils, where the elliptical coil effect on the side-to-side field is more pronounced.

The side-to-side active field of a DD coil is already narrow, much narrower than a concentric coil. Making it elliptical cannot change the side-to-side field narrowness significantly.

The Front-to-back field is defined by the diameter of the coil or the long axis of the elliptical and that does not change if they are both the same such as is the case with the XP HF coils.


Viewing the active field (F) of a DD coil (C) from the front O represents No Active Field. (I could not just leave in blank spaces and get it to display correctly)


CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC<---Bold CCC represents the center spine of the coil that runs into the page
OOOOOOOFFOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOFFOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOFFOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOFFOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOFFOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOFFOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOFFOOOOOOO

Viewing the active field (F) of a DD coil (C) from the side


CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF
FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF

As you can see, by making the coil narrower by making it elliptical, you barely affect the side to side separation and no effect on front to back separation (since it is still the same length).

The only thing that changes is the depth because of the smaller coil size and the less negative field compensation you have against mineralization.

Do a google search and the field pattern for a DD coil is pretty consistently represented.

Use all the emotional arguments you want about how the coil companies can't be ripping us off, etc. I think the devil may be in the details about special winding techniques or proprietary approaches to winding DD elliptical coils that may enhance separation, but the basic theory of how they work refutes that an elliptical has any appreciable side-to-side separation improvement. How can it? Its already pretty narrow compared to coaxial cables. Just loss in depth. It's pretty depressing for me.

Again, don't take my word for it go do some of your own research and prove me wrong...PLEASE!

 

[vferrari]

One thing I can say for certain is that the elliptical is deadly at target separation. The best I've ever seen, in fact. It's just the extreme loss of depth that concerns me.

Sent from my SM-G920T using Tapatalk

Increased separation could also be the increased frequency (smaller wavelength field) enabling smaller targets to be better resolved, especially small, shallow targets.

 

[Tedyoh]

Simple Mathematics is my research....also you do realize the high frequency coils are DD coils....lets pretend the standard DD coil is 9 x 9 square and the HF DD coil is 9 x 5.5 rectangle....which coil has more square inches in it? The 9 x 9 does, meaning more of a footprint area to pick up iron..the shorter or narrower east/west width of the elliptical shape means it has about a 4" advantage of not hitting iron and nulling out the good targets, hence "better" separation.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[Deft Tones]

I thought a DD coil field was more like a cross section of a football viewed point to point. Deepest in the center of the coil and tapering towards the heel/toe. I also had understood the front/back view was more akin to a slight V with a rounded bottom.

I also thought, at least on standard freq. coils, an eliptical should exceed its maximum width in depth by around one inch or more on a US dime. So a 5" wide eliptical should be able to detect a dime to at least 6 inches.

Not arguing, really, just what I have read. I've never even seen the detection field on any coil with my eyes. Sowhatdoiknow!