FISHER AQUAMANTA

[LE.JAG]

Hi,

I am back

some news from the next Fisher Aquamanta

for those who have not followed the story
Alexandre who has developed manta technology
MANTA METAL DETECTORS | PULSE INDUCTION HIGH SENSITIVITY
was bought back and hired by the Fisher First Texas group

are on the program
at first the Fisher Aquamanta
a pulse with extraordinary sensitivity to gold
calibrate to 7us // 16 volts
and able to cut iron under certain conditions

he can take an alliance 18k of 1/3 gr under iron nails
and above all he is able to cross the volcanic sand to take the gold

a video that dates a little / but shows the possibility of the machine
which has evolved a lot since


in French

it will be followed by a special Terramanta nugget

then / two others using Bipolar technology
which consists of alternating positive and negative pulses

easy to say on paper / but nobody had ever succeeded before Alexandre ...
the positive pulse magnetizes the ground and lightning the target
the negative pulse demagnetizes the ground = and removes the effect of ground !!!

and much more is planned later

I test the latest Aquamanta Fisher electronic map
and I've never had anything so deep and sensitive about gold

not : the box on the video and the photos
just there / to test the cards
the final product will have a modern / lightweight design and well balance...

pre-series launch / if all goes well /
in the next three months


better than all my pulsepowers
and I owned 9 ....

some finds on my last tides

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Cry Of The Eagle: History And Legends Of The Cherokee Indians And Their Buried Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[sws33]

Anybody that wants to chase a Ring 2 ft deep on a Pacific Ocean Shore in the water is welcome to it. nothing quite like getting hit with three to four foot waves that are constantly refilling your hole as you try to dig it.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Treasure of Victoria Peak - Grab it through Amazon!

[Rick K]

Hence my post about relative depth - factor in some black sand and the difference might be stunning. We’ll see.

 

[OBN]

 

[Rick K]

Coming - when - who knows - what difference will it make - we’ll see.

 

[LE.JAG]

the difference will be very real
and again, it's not just a matter of depth

sensitivity is much more important

What is the difference ?
it's just: at the current depth of your rings of 15/20 grams
you will detect rings of 5 gr

so you will not (necessarily) be deeper
but you pick up more gold .............

note: and you always have the possibility of all metals
and there you will have nothing deeper on the beach

 

[bigscoop]

the difference will be very real
and again, it's not just a matter of depth

sensitivity is much more important

What is the difference ?
it's just: at the current depth of your rings of 15/20 grams
you will detect rings of 5 gr

so you will not (necessarily) be deeper
but you pick up more gold .............

note: and you always have the possibility of all metals
and there you will have nothing deeper on the beach

View attachment 1634068

Well, and playing the role of skeptic, which I hope you don't take personally given the long history of such deflated claims in the past, I just don't see how it's possible given the limits/circumstances of the technology? By their very nature weaker/fainter returns contain less data/information, so how is it possible to extract accurate ID from these insufficient information streams? The only way that I can see this being done is by applying a significantly increased power supply in order to increase the strength of the sends, thus increasing the strength of the returns, much like getting the coil closer to the item so stronger and more accurate returns can be retrieved. It's for this very reason that machines like the modified Excal have become so productive and popular, the ability to achieve maximum depth and sensitivity through the PP mode combined with the quick access to the remote PP/Disc switch once some soil has been removed and the coil can be moved closer so stronger returns can be accessed. So I'm pretty skeptical that accurate ID of these weaker/fainter/deeper returns can be achieved in a single process.

 

[LE.JAG]

Well, and playing the role of skeptic, which I hope you don't take personally given the long history of such deflated claims in the past, I just don't see how it's possible given the limits/circumstances of the technology? By their very nature weaker/fainter returns contain less data/information, so how is it possible to extract accurate ID from these insufficient information streams? The only way that I can see this being done is by applying a significantly increased power supply in order to increase the strength of the sends, thus increasing the strength of the returns, much like getting the coil closer to the item so stronger and more accurate returns can be retrieved. It's for this very reason that machines like the modified Excal have become so productive and popular, the ability to achieve maximum depth and sensitivity through the PP mode combined with the quick access to the remote PP/Disc switch once some soil has been removed and the coil can be moved closer so stronger returns can be accessed. So I'm pretty skeptical that accurate ID of these weaker/fainter/deeper returns can be achieved in a single process.

technology evolves, nothing is frozen
the separation between gold and iron on the AQ
to reach a level never seen
and it's not a question of reactivity / like on a vlf

it's something else / the detector does not see the iron
or he sees it as ground / up to a point: tipping point

the tipping point is determined by the mass: the weight of the object in gold
and its purity / carats

in terms of depth, tests have proven that on any type of sand
we are far ahead of the bbs / fbs
(you will have to see it to believe me ...)

And that's just the beginning
the other prototypes in development will be even better

in the next 3 years, we will see detectors
revolutionize prospecting
they will be able to do things at the level of the separation of metals
that are impossible to imagine

even me, a few months ago I would not have thought possible.........!!

and on this point you are right
You have to see it to believe it

 

[bigscoop]

Well, being the skeptic once again, you're promoting consistency in a pursuit (gold) where there is none. I.e., Mix gold with any number of other alloys and in various quantities and shapes and sizes and masses and suddenly gold and the applied theory of consistency is shattered as "gold" can now register almost anywhere on the scale. And then we have to factor in all of the other elements, distance from the coil (signal strength) the existing matrix, etc., etc. Look, this same type of pre-market hype has been witnessed time and time again and yet the very things I just referenced have always been in place to quickly deflate all of these pre-market claims. Folks are still going to have to dig the same troublesome trash simply because it can register in that same range as the gold items being pursue. As for faster and better target separation, this can only be achieved by placing priority on the strongest and most reliable returns which means that the weaker and uncertain returns have to be sacrificed. In the end, the Identifying of fewer potential targets isn't an advantage. So you're right, seeing is believing because the very nature of the beast strongly disputes the claims. But we'll see?

 

[sws33]

The quantity of gold recovered is directly proportional the amount of gold you swing your coil over. there is zero chance somebody's coming to my beach and taking more gold than me. Why? Because I dig every Target my coil goes over. Even the double beep of a bobby pin can sometimes be a broken ring, a piece of chain or an open earring. The only difference between a person with an Aquamanta and myself with my Garrett Sea Hunter is that at the end of the day I will have dug 100 holes, pocketed a couple dollars in change and if I'm lucky got a couple of rings. You will have gone to the beach, walked around for 4 hours and dug only two holes and walked away with two rings. it's not that you're going to dig more gold, it's that you're going to dig less junk. Personally, I enjoy the surprise of not knowing what's going to be in the scoop, and would get bored pretty quickly walking around analyzing targets and digging nothing.

 

[cudamark]

The quantity of gold recovered is directly proportional the amount of gold you swing your coil over. there is zero chance somebody's coming to my beach and taking more gold than me. Why? Because I dig every Target my coil goes over. Even the double beep of a bobby pin can sometimes be a broken ring, a piece of chain or an open earring. The only difference between a person with an Aquamanta and myself with my Garrett Sea Hunter is that at the end of the day I will have dug 100 holes, pocketed a couple dollars in change and if I'm lucky got a couple of rings. You will have gone to the beach, walked around for 4 hours and dug only two holes and walked away with two rings. it's not that you're going to dig more gold, it's that you're going to dig less junk. Personally, I enjoy the surprise of not knowing what's going to be in the scoop, and would get bored pretty quickly walking around analyzing targets and digging nothing.

You like the Sea Hunter over the Infinium? Any particular reason why? I don't own either, but, have used both in the past. I thought the Infinium was much better. Maybe I had a bum Sea Hunter

 

[Rick K]

sws, with respect - You don't dig every target your coil goes over, simply because you don't get a return signal from every target your coil goes over. Some are too deep, too small or have a signal return which is masked by the return of the salt water itself. What LE JAG is saying is that the Manta is deeper, quieter and more sensitive to small low conductors than any existing VLF IB or PI detector. Your Sea Hunter, for example has a minimum pulse delay probably greater than 20 microseconds. The Manta's is around 8. The difference is that by 20 microseconds after pulse cut off, the signal for marginal targets has completely disappeared - leaving nothing for you to hear.

When we have a production detector in hand we will find out if he is right.

 

[LE.JAG]

The quantity of gold recovered is directly proportional the amount of gold you swing your coil over. there is zero chance somebody's coming to my beach and taking more gold than me. Why? Because I dig every Target my coil goes over. Even the double beep of a bobby pin can sometimes be a broken ring, a piece of chain or an open earring. The only difference between a person with an Aquamanta and myself with my Garrett Sea Hunter is that at the end of the day I will have dug 100 holes, pocketed a couple dollars in change and if I'm lucky got a couple of rings. You will have gone to the beach, walked around for 4 hours and dug only two holes and walked away with two rings. it's not that you're going to dig more gold, it's that you're going to dig less junk. Personally, I enjoy the surprise of not knowing what's going to be in the scoop, and would get bored pretty quickly walking around analyzing targets and digging nothing.

with the Fisher AQ, you can hunt in all metals
if you made 100 holes with your sea hunter
on the same area you will do 1000 with AQ..........
I think it's the right ratio / given the difference in power and sensitivity

the only chance for you to do better, would be to touch the bottom
clay or rock
if you do not touch the bottom of your beach
you can be sure that a multitude of targets are missing == in gold and not in gold...........

I used many beach machines
the most successful was Eric Foster
much better, has the production of large series

the Manta project initiated by Alexandre consists
to do better = in large series
and we reach the goal, you will see for yourself soon

 

[sws33]

I actually had the Infinium for a while. I do appreciate that it has far more coils and I think it may even be a bit deeper on the small stuff. I ended up trading off the Infinium a few years ago for a different detector and since decided to get another Pi unit. I went with the Sea Hunter because the Infinium has been discontinued and also because of the price. in all honesty, I have actually found far more rings and jewelry with the Sea Hunter than the Infinium. I'm not sure if it was because of the low high, high low tone thing that the Infinium has going for it. that feature was handy most of the time but was not always correct and frequently left me second-guessing why I dug what I dug based on the tones. It's just easier now, beep and I dig.

 

[sws33]

I'm good with all that, I just have no interest in digging an $0.87 gold earring back at two and a half or three feet. If that's what you all are after, have at it they are all yours.

 

[Rick K]

Sws - Exercise is good for the body - lol...

There will be plenty of fun had by all when the Manta (AQ?) arrives - just wish it would come sooner than it probably will!

If I get hold of one, Phoenix is short of salt beaches so it’s off to CA for me and my travel trailer. I used to live in Redondo Beach ages ago, will probably revisit old haunts. If you are around, you can play with my machine if you like.

 

[sws33]

you have a deal Rick, look me up when you get out here. I'll take you out to a couple of spots that always seem to have some decent cuts to work.

 

[sws33]

I'm sure this new machine will be excellent. Even if it's only half as good as all the hype I'm reading about it. and it is certainly about time 1st Texas kicked out an under water metal detector besides the CZ 21. In the meantime, I'm happy with my $600 Mark II that has already paid for itself in the few short hunts it has been out. as far as sweeping the beach clean out from under me goes, you're only digging things I can't hear anyway so, I'm really not missing anything if that makes sense. it's irrelevant to me that you come up behind me 10 minutes later and dig up a 4 gram gold wedding band from 3 foot down into hard-packed black sand and shell. It never existed for me to begin with. you will have earned every penny that that ring is worth digging down that deep to get it, especially if you're by the water line, on the west coast at least.

 

[Rick K]

I have been “tracking” this machine since Alexandre posted something about it on Carl Morleland’s ‘Geotech forum a couple of years ago. I think that’s when Carl first found out about it. I had a TDI, a dual field PI and an ATX. PI detectors are way underdeveloped for general purpose detecting and I think FT are on the right track to develop the technology further by a laser focus on one application at a time - beach first.

 

[sws33]

I have been watching and waiting for dang near a decade now. I was in touch with one of the big wigs on the teknetics side on another board that I used to frequent before I got kicked off for daring to compare two different detectors. it's pretty easy to get in touch with them over on the other board as it is heavily influenced by distributors. We exchanged emails and I think we may have even texted a couple of times. He constantly hinted at something that was in the works never revealing too awful much of course. Only that it was the next latest and greatest, so I waited, and I waited some more. After a few years went by I got tired of waiting and thought to myself, what's the deepest saltwater Beach machine I can get. A PI detector of course. Thus the Garrett Sea Hunter. Could I have gotten better? Of course, if I wanted to pay $2,500 for a JW Fischer I would have gone that way, but I wasn't interested in spending anywhere near that much. I guess I'm content with my $600 detector that will find things two feet deep and that I can take in the water below 10 feet without worrying it's going to leak. Are there bigger, better and badder machines out there? Absolutely. Are they going to find more targets than me? Probably, but substantially more? Only time will tell. Believe me when I say I hope this new machine is "all that" and that everyone who picks one up is as happy as can be with their purchase, and that it returns many times over what it cost to purchase.

 

[bigscoop]

"Low conductor"..."high conductor"....I'm still waiting for someone to explain to me how "any machine" can accurately dissect and identify the various alloy compositions containing gold as being, "Beep-beep! This one's definitely got gold in it!" And, "This one definitely don't!"