Manticore M9 coil compared to Deus 2 9” coil Small Spanish bit on edge

This is an open discussion forum about metal detecting. Please be generally polite and respectful. Please note that Dankowski Detectors now has Terms of Use provisions. Nothing has really changed, its just now everything is written down for the sake of those who in the past liked to argue. If anybody sees anything unreasonable or disagreeable in the Terms of Use, please let me know.
Post Reply
EL NINO
Posts: 43
Joined: Sun Feb 11, 2024 10:38 pm

Re: Manticore M9 coil compared to Deus 2 9” coil Small Spanish bit on edge

Post by EL NINO »

Good video David,, Deus2 can be a bit shallower at reactivity 3..at 2.5..it is more optimal when you are looking for deeper targets..especially when you are using audio pitch...which weakens strongly with the depth of the target...it all depends on the size of the target and its depth...it is often better to use multitones/listen to the faint, soft sound of a mosquito/.,or 2 tones...if you are looking for deep targets..

If you also include the iron factor in the test, the situation becomes even more complicated..

Audio pitch is more effective in shallow and medium-deep unmasking...

Pitch 2 in the test can be seen to thin and shorten the total detected target signal..but at the same time it amplifies the shortened signal...sometimes it is better..but it can be seen that with a less smooth signal it can be lost altogether.
Tnsharpshooter
Posts: 354
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2024 2:06 am

Re: Manticore M9 coil compared to Deus 2 9” coil Small Spanish bit on edge

Post by Tnsharpshooter »

EL NINO wrote: Sun Jan 11, 2026 12:31 pm Good video David,, Deus2 can be a bit shallower at reactivity 3..at 2.5..it is more optimal when you are looking for deeper targets..especially when you are using audio pitch...which weakens strongly with the depth of the target...it all depends on the size of the target and its depth...it is often better to use multitones/listen to the faint, soft sound of a mosquito/.,or 2 tones...if you are looking for deep targets..

If you also include the iron factor in the test, the situation becomes even more complicated..

Audio pitch is more effective in shallow and medium-deep unmasking...

Pitch 2 in the test can be seen to thin and shorten the total detected target signal..but at the same time it amplifies the shortened signal...sometimes it is better..but it can be seen that with a less smooth signal it can be lost altogether.
Correct. Pitch 2 can be better. It can be “worse” meaning audio behavior user may suspect ferrous false due to short “blutiness” of signal -Not smooth sounding like more textbook signal generally.
Post Reply