You are not logged in.

  • Register to access all forum features  

#1

dirtdiggin
Member
From: Brimin
Joined: 09 June 2014
Posts: 102
Member
16 September 2018 02:27 pm

Hi All

Just after someone that knows the QED Inside out!.
I’m very interested in the QED and how to use it after watching a QED Verse SDC
I was surprised at how well it picked up very small bits of gold!.
If someone knows how to use it inside out with great results or tell me who to contact about it it’d be greatly appreciated!!.

Cheers

#2

Trash
Member
From: 3030, VIC
Joined: 26 January 2018
Posts: 554
Member
16 September 2018 02:38 pm

Howdy

All the QED posts & info. now has its own home

Checkout the forum area where all the Detector brands are .


Gpx 5000 ( sold ) Sov. GT ( Sold ) Ctx 3030 still have , 7000

2 users like this post: Jaros, dirtdiggin

#3

Jaros
Moderator
From: S.E.Qld., QLD
Joined: 11 August 2013
Posts: 8,032
Moderator
16 September 2018 02:51 pm

Moved to QED thead.
Jaros


Lottsa hope :F1A4M2, Exterra 705 Gold, Ace 250, Aldi detector, ? detector, Garmin Etrex30, 2 sieves,2 pans,2 sluices, Nugget sniffing Cocker Spaniel. X-Pointer PI by Deteknix, Nokta RS Pinpointer, Jobe Knife, Leschke Shovel, Pro-swing 45 Harness, Treasuremate 11 Amp.Gurney gusunder. VK4NLS

#4

mbasko
Member
From: Central West NSW
Joined: 27 January 2015
Posts: 3,349
Member
16 September 2018 03:31 pm

Reg Wilson does training:
https://www.diggerdownunder.com.au

Retailers:
Maldon Gold Centre
https://maldongoldcentre.com.au
Detech
http://www.detech-metaldetectorsaustral … au/contact

Last edited by mbasko (16 September 2018 03:38 pm)


Everything we use comes from mining or farming.

2 users like this post: dirtdiggin, Ship of fools

#5

Reg Wilson
Member
Joined: 06 September 2017
Posts: 151
Member
11 October 2018 09:42 pm

Had an interesting couple of days working on a project that had promise but ended up as many long shots do. One of my prospecting mates, 'Ringo' and I gained permission to detect a paddock that just happened to be on one of the richest lines of mineralization in Victoria. On the geo maps it looked like a fair punt, and when we got to have a walk over it we discovered along with masses of younger quartz, a patch of decomposed conglomerate. Water worn and ironstone stained quartz, some so worn as to resemble dark colored spuds. A pretty good sign to say the least, and deserving of further exploration. At an elevated situation, this area was once an ancient stream bed, and as such had the potential to have gathered heavy material from the surrounding area. It certainly appeared to have potential.
A careful 'walk over' revealed that rather than a line of tertiary stone this was a patch of roughly one and a half acres spread across a gentle slope. Years of plowing had brought the tell tale stone to the surface, and after digging a series of holes across the deposit, we ascertained that the whole area was quite shallow and very detectable, with a maximum depth in the middle of about twenty inches.
Having a 36" mono sled which had seen service in WA and here in Victoria we decided that to cover such an area that this would be the way to go. We did a hand held test to check ground variability initially using a QED with 25" Nuggetfinder coil. Experimenting gave surprising results. Ground balance was 127, and bias set at 47 as depth was not as important as stable coverage. What was surprising was that the big coil liked mode 2 and not higher. Gain was set at 4. A bit of a wander around revealed that the ground was regular and not changeable.
It was decided to use the GPX4000 as our electronics as it has suited sled use very well, having a proven record in this type of operation. Audio used was also what had proven itself in the past. A pair of sound deadening muffs that I had speakers mounted in. The tow vehicle was a Polaris diesel with a switch to cut out the alternator. Four stroke tow vehicles are no good due to electronic interference. All in all it ran smooth as silk. Small geo flags were used to mark each signal, with a hand held GPX5000 to pinpoint and retrieve signals. Ringo did the pinpointing, and used a 5000 rather than a QED because at this stage he is more familiar with his 5000.
It took about six hours to clean all metal, down to targets as small as .22 slugs out of the grid area. (try doing that by hand held). A pile of junk but no gold. Another area 'eliminated from our inquiries'.
For curiosities sake I tried at the end to see if the QED could run a 36" sled, seeing as how it lacks auto tracking. It can. By experimenting with GB while underway it settled nicely on that ground at 125. I ran bias at 48 and mode at 2. Gain 2. Running over set targets it gave quite a good response. Audio could have used a booster, but i didn't have one to try.
No gold, but good experience. Better luck next time.


Walmer Central Victoria
Began detecting 1979 Best colour 3Kgs Best patch 340 ozs.

5 users like this post: Northeast, Rush, mbasko, Prospector B, Tathradj

#6

washgravel
Member
Joined: 21 May 2014
Posts: 93
Member
12 October 2018 01:57 am

Reg I am currently looking at a 25" mono for my QED although I am wondering how much extra depth the 25" coil would have over my 18" mono on larger targets to make the purchase of the 25" mono a worthwhile investment for my QED. Therefore could you perform an air test using an aluminium soft drink can waved above the 25" coil including the settings for the QED so I can use the same settings on my QED for the same test with my 18" mono as a comparison towards a decision.

#7

Reg Wilson
Member
Joined: 06 September 2017
Posts: 151
Member
12 October 2018 09:13 am

washgravel, I will be happy to do some tests for you as soon as I can, and shall include the 18" Detech coil which is also an excellent product and very light weight. The reason I like the 25" Nuggetfinder is for its coverage, and of course the weight factor. It will be interesting to see the depth results.


Walmer Central Victoria
Began detecting 1979 Best colour 3Kgs Best patch 340 ozs.

1 user likes this post: washgravel

#8

washgravel
Member
Joined: 21 May 2014
Posts: 93
Member
12 October 2018 12:25 pm

Thanks Reg and yes the depth results I look forward too also.
The reason for using the aluminium drink can is it can represent a large test target and it is a constant test object easily attainable for such a comparison.

#9

washgravel
Member
Joined: 21 May 2014
Posts: 93
Member
13 October 2018 10:00 pm

Reg, using a 375ml Nelsen Country Kentucky Blended Bourbon aluminium can swung side-on in an air test above my early series 4 spoke NF 18" mono on my QED (settings B-50 A-30 G-1 M-3) I got a clear signal response at 30".

Last edited by washgravel (13 October 2018 10:02 pm)

1 user likes this post: Ded Driver

#10

Reg Wilson
Member
Joined: 06 September 2017
Posts: 151
Member
13 October 2018 10:45 pm

washgravel, didn't get a chance to do tests today. Worked all day on car. Will do tests and report tomorrow.


Walmer Central Victoria
Began detecting 1979 Best colour 3Kgs Best patch 340 ozs.

#11

Reg Wilson
Member
Joined: 06 September 2017
Posts: 151
Member
14 October 2018 12:43 pm

Tests done, and some surprising results.
I used a 330ml aluminum can for the tests, so results could be marginally different from a 375 ml.
Seeing as how this was a simulation of big gold hunting the bias was set high. After some experimenting the most effective setting was established at 58 using a speaker. Using noise cancelling headphones brought this setting down to an ideal of 54, but a speaker was used for further testing. Seeing as how all coils were tested in a static situation a mode of 1 was used, with gain set at 4.
The first surprise came when the little Sadie coil tested at a nice solid signal at 27". I had not expected to get a good response at that distance, and repeated the test to be sure. I skipped the 11" and 14" coils, because this was a test to determine the performance of larger coils, and next tried the Coiltek Elite 18". When turned on the QED was a bit noisy and 'waffled' a bit. I returned the settings to factory preset, but it made no difference. After a minute or so it settled down and I readjusted the settings. 30" was the best that this coil could achieve, and I wasn't too thrilled with the clarity of signal. I guess that was surprise number 2. Next came the Detech 18", which gave a very positive reaction to the target at 35". I really like the smooth positive sound of this coil. My favorite big coil, the Nuggetfinder 3 spoke, Litz wire 25" did not let me down, giving a lovely mellow, 'gutsy' response at 41". Just for the hell of it I hooked up 'Big Bertha', a 38" mono to see how the QED would handle it. A huge 50", and very definite.
So, in summing up, stunning result from the little Sadie for such a small coil, and very favorable results from Detech 18" and Nuggetfinder 25'. Still scratching my head over the Elite, but maybe it is more suited to the GPX series of detectors. The Elite is also a bit heavier than the others. These tests were a bit of a surprise, and I am now curious about some of the mid range and elliptical coils. I guess I will have to do further tests.


Walmer Central Victoria
Began detecting 1979 Best colour 3Kgs Best patch 340 ozs.

3 users like this post: petere, washgravel, Northeast

#12

washgravel
Member
Joined: 21 May 2014
Posts: 93
Member
14 October 2018 07:30 pm

Thanks again Reg, and for your detailed test results, including the 25" and 38" monos.
My 30” test result on my alum drink can was inside my house using the factory pre-setting’s on my QED with external speaker and my 18” mono.
So after reading your results I thought how much further I could raise the settings while inside the house with my 18” mono, as you say the THS-B (Bias) needs to set high for big gold hunting. The highest I was able to raise the Bias was 56 although I could NOT raise the Gain above 1 up to 4 as the 18” mono became too unstable being in doors. However I was able to lower the Mode from 3 down to 1 and I left THS-A at 30. Therefore now using these settings B-56, A-30, G1, M1 the result on the alum drink can was a sharp positive response at 33”. I did try to see if I could hear a response through the interference with the Gain raised up at 4 and I believe I would be able to up around the 34”-35” mark.
Also I was intrigued after you mentioned your surprise result with the Sadie mono producing a response at 27” Therefore I connected up my commander 8” mono to my QED, again while inside the house trying different Bias settings with G-1, A-30, M-1. Well to my surprise these were the depth results with the 8" mono using these Bias settings: B-50 = 19”, B-54 = 23”, B-56 = 27”, B-58 = 28”. I was only able to raise the Gain up to 4 with the Bias on 50 which produced a 25” result. Finally out of curiosity I tried my commander 11” mono on my QED with B-56, A-30, G-1, M-1 and the result on the drink can was 31”.
This type of testing does show how THS-B (Bias) has an effect on depth.
Btw Reg what did you have your THS-A set too for your results?

#13

Tathradj
Moderator
From: Tathra, NSW
Joined: 17 February 2014
Posts: 7,461
Moderator
14 October 2018 09:20 pm

Down at the bash, They set up a test patch.
Bugwhiskers demonstrated my QED with a sadie.
I was gob smacked with a 28 grammar test at 450 mm. yikes
I pinged the whole patch with a sadie.
From .2 at 200 right through to the 28 grammer.
Have not had a chance to fully recognize what is going on but,
This detector has a lot going for it.
I demonstrated it with a close friend of mine yesterday with a 10 inch commander and I must admit,
a .010 bit coming in at aprox 9 inch's. It got it when tweaked but I still had ground balance issues.
That I will fine tune soon.
The demo was a bit rough but, The QED when tuned in on the small sample was loud and clear.
About the same as an SDC.
What I would suggest is air test it on a small sample and tune the machine to it's best reaction.
I will sink a full few days shortly with a .6 sample in beach sand on Tathra Beach. That to me in
salty sand and high mineralisation is to me an acid test. And I will go down to wet sand and pick
the black bands. One of the QED's strengths is to be able to pick a band of high mineralization.
The results I assure you are going to be rather surprising. big_smile
Please note, I am in no way being " rewarded " for what I am saying.
These are my own unbiased observations and I know a good thing when I see it.


A couple of HiBankers inc. accessories, , 4500, SDC2300, Gt1600,
Aldi, Phantom 4 Pro, A Prado 4x4, A'Van Cruiseliner and a heck
of a lot of determination.Not to mention Luck.
Most importantly, A lot of Good Honest Friends.

2 users like this post: Northeast, jahan

#14

mbasko
Member
From: Central West NSW
Joined: 27 January 2015
Posts: 3,349
Member
15 October 2018 07:28 am

That's the thing with test patches - the (any) detector can be "tuned" to pick up the targets because they are known. In situ targets are a different ball game altogether.
I find it hard to swallow after 13 months (9-10 months of that exclusively as it was my only detector) using a QED to believe it pinged 0.01 gram bit at 9" with a Minelab Commander 11" mono? Did you mean 0.1?
Again "tuning" it in on a known small sample will be a lot different to detecting unknown in situ targets. Also when tuning it to a test piece for the best "reaction" keep in mind that the settings that give you the best response won't always be practically ideal or even usable over the ground. You will need to compromise in a lot of cases & train yourself to pick up how the QED reacts (even at faint levels) while still maintaining usable bias/mode/gain/thr-A settings - no good having a great target response but then picking up every hot rock or putting up with ground noise all day.
I don't think a beach test will be an acid test Tath. An acid test will be finding in situ gold on a goldfield & then doing that consistently when you go. Unless you've purchased the QED as a beach detector?
The QED does have a lot going for it. I might even end up with one again down the track but the bottom line is (& no offence intended) if you're not finding gold with a GPX, SDC, GPZ etc. then the QED is not going to change that.


Everything we use comes from mining or farming.

2 users like this post: Tathradj, Araratgold

#15

Reg Wilson
Member
Joined: 06 September 2017
Posts: 151
Member
15 October 2018 09:26 am

mbasko, I totally agree that the QED is unlikely to find gold where the more expensive machines will not, however that is not the reason why some people are selling their high price detectors in favor of the QED.
The performance of the QED comes surprisingly close to that of the 'top of the range' detectors with some definite advantages over them. Price of course is perhaps the most obvious, but to me the light weight and balance of the QED, plus the ability to set it up to be completely cable and cord free are huge bonuses. Even running the25" Nuggetfinder coil requires no bungee cord, the whole setup being so light.
I also like the sharp clear signal response that allows me to scan at a good pace, covering more ground in less time while hunting for that first positive target. Low and slow might be fine for cleaning out a proven area, but the fast signal reaction of the QED is great for prospecting.
Light weight means less fatigue, both physical and mental, enabling longer periods in the field, and let's face it; we all want to use our time as constructively as possible.
The QED may not be everyone's choice, but it suits my style of detecting.


Walmer Central Victoria
Began detecting 1979 Best colour 3Kgs Best patch 340 ozs.

3 users like this post: Tathradj, goody2shoes, drbob

#16

mbasko
Member
From: Central West NSW
Joined: 27 January 2015
Posts: 3,349
Member
15 October 2018 10:14 am

I'm not disputing the QED's redeeming qualities at all Reg or people's choices. They are well known to those who want to know & have been discussed numerous times on here already.
Besides you & myself there appears to be no rush of people on this site (or that I know of off it either) selling their Minelabs in favour of the QED. I didn't sell my GPZ in favour of the QED but rather to free up cash. It was good to use the QED & utilise those redeeming qualities but it also isn't perfect (like all detectors). It's not a magic bullet. It's a lightweight, competent detector at a very competitive start up price - nothing more, nothing less. thumbsup


Everything we use comes from mining or farming.

4 users like this post: Reg Wilson, Araratgold, Ded Driver, davent

#17

washgravel
Member
Joined: 21 May 2014
Posts: 93
Member
15 October 2018 12:08 pm

washgravel wrote:

Btw Reg what did you have your THS-A set too for your results?

No reply so I will take it was set at FP of 30.

#18

Reg Wilson
Member
Joined: 06 September 2017
Posts: 151
Member
15 October 2018 01:44 pm

Sorry washgravel, yes, it was left at 30


Walmer Central Victoria
Began detecting 1979 Best colour 3Kgs Best patch 340 ozs.

#19

washgravel
Member
Joined: 21 May 2014
Posts: 93
Member
16 October 2018 11:38 am

Reg Wilson wrote:

We did a hand held test to check ground variability initially using a QED with 25" Nuggetfinder coil. Experimenting gave surprising results. Ground balance was 127, and bias set at 47 as depth was not as important as stable coverage. What was surprising was that the big coil liked mode 2 and not higher. Gain was set at 4.

For curiosities sake I tried at the end to see if the QED could run a 36" sled, seeing as how it lacks auto tracking. It can. By experimenting with GB while underway it settled nicely on that ground at 125. I ran bias at 48 and mode at 2. Gain 2.

It is interesting that the 25” coil was able to handle that particular ground with a GB reading up at 127 especially having the Bias down at 47, Gain up at 4 and operating at the fast sample delay in Mode 2. I find the larger the coil the less it can be effected by ground mineralsation so maybe a reason why both the 25” and your 38” coils were able the handle those settings on your QED. I have found the lower the Mode setting the higher the ground balance reading. For example on a particular section of ground with my 8" mono on my QED and all settings the same except for Mode then when set in Mode 1 it ground balanced at 120, in Mode 3 at 111 and in Mode 5 at 106. Now would these different GB readings happen with larger coils I assume so?

1 user likes this post: Dave79

Contact Us - Privacy Policy - Terms Of Service

View Desktop Site

Top