Vallon VMH3CS Mine Detector

[kingswood]

Out this morning for a couple of hours. Quite mineralized ground which I think was fine laterite soil/gravel. Picked up excellent signals from various bits of wire, old rivets and a number of bullet leads at various depths. Buried the 1.8g piece in soil...a mellow signal with 2 LED's at 16cm (mineralized soil mode, sensitivity at 12)...improved just a little when sensitivity was up to 14. At about 20cm, it was very faint but I would have dug the signal if I happened to swing over it. The 0.8g roundish nugget was not detected at 20 or 16cm....did get a signal with 1 LED at around 10cm. Again, a signal that I would dig anyway.
Gold seems to sound very mellow....different to lead and much different to the iron stuff that the Vallon screeches on. I would love to see how a 10 ounce nugget sounds

[kingswood]

tested on sub-gram nuggets is good also.

That is my next step...I have a 0.8g and a 0.5g and hope to do some test burials of these tomorrow....As long as the storm we are supposed to get holds off
The 1.8g was quite promising....will try that deeper and see how it goes.
I did look at what I think is your detector...but decided on the Vallon's mainly because I was just starting out detecting with the wife (and kids!!) and didnt want to spend to much in case we didnt like it ha ha ...And I like been a bit different

[garyq]

Thank you I looked closely at your results and can reasonably guess which Aussie machine you used....All things considered comparing your results to Eric with the Vallon's, I am quite happy with how the Vallon goes !....Now to find that elusive alluvial !

Thanks Kingswood and I look forward if you are able to post any further video clips of your Vallon out on your goldfield chasing that elusive alluvial.

Of course Gold targets are what us nugget hunters are chasing and not Aluminium although this particular detector's sensitivity when I have tested on sub-gram nuggets is good also.

[kingswood]

Eric there is nothing missing in regards to that little square box that you are referring too.

The results in the chart are all with the ‘another Australian machine’ that I used for the test.

The idea and reason that prompted me for my tests were when you mentioned that you “need to compare the Vallon with a couple of my other detectors such as the TDi and Goldquest SS”. Therefore if you were interested in my chart it does offer another PI detector comparison on the same test pieces although with a smaller 8 inch diameter coil compared to the Vallon’s 12 inch by 6.7 inch elongated coil. However you had said “If I made an 8in, or less, coil for the Vallon, I reckon I would reach a point where the 1inch square of foil would be detectable."

A further reason was due to another post of yours when you tested small square pieces of Aluminium Can with the Vallon and you said “I can detect a 10mm square of the 0.07mm stuff at 5in with the Vallon and slightly discernable at 6in. I cut a piece 9mm square and couldn't detect it.”

The result in my chart shown as ‘touching Coil’ were for the ‘tiniest piece’ of Aluminium Foil and Drink Can that this particular PI detector could still produce a signal response on although it had to be rubbed across and just touching the bottom of the coil.

Actually when using square pieces cut from Aluminium Baking Foil or even from the middle section on the side of an Aluminium Drink Can it does allow us all access to a common test material as a standard test object.

When you opened up this most interesting thread in regards to the Vallon I have continued to follow every posting.

And when you said “At some future point it will go to Australia for testing in the worst mineralised ground in the world” then it appears to be happening now due to some members purchasing a Vallon and trying it out on our Australian goldfield.

Thank you for as I said, a most interesting thread and look forward to further developments, modifications and tests with the Vallon.

Thank you I looked closely at your results and can reasonably guess which Aussie machine you used....All things considered comparing your results to Eric with the Vallon's, I am quite happy with how the Vallon goes !....Now to find that elusive alluvial !

[garyq]

I'm not clear on this chart since you make reference to 'another Australian machine'. Should there be another image with results for comparison, as there is a little square box that indicates something is missing? Presumably the first results are for the Vallon?

Eric.

Eric there is nothing missing in regards to that little square box that you are referring too.

The results in the chart are all with the ‘another Australian machine’ that I used for the test.

The idea and reason that prompted me for my tests were when you mentioned that you “need to compare the Vallon with a couple of my other detectors such as the TDi and Goldquest SS”. Therefore if you were interested in my chart it does offer another PI detector comparison on the same test pieces although with a smaller 8 inch diameter coil compared to the Vallon’s 12 inch by 6.7 inch elongated coil. However you had said “If I made an 8in, or less, coil for the Vallon, I reckon I would reach a point where the 1inch square of foil would be detectable."

A further reason was due to another post of yours when you tested small square pieces of Aluminium Can with the Vallon and you said “I can detect a 10mm square of the 0.07mm stuff at 5in with the Vallon and slightly discernable at 6in. I cut a piece 9mm square and couldn't detect it.”

The result in my chart shown as ‘touching Coil’ were for the ‘tiniest piece’ of Aluminium Foil and Drink Can that this particular PI detector could still produce a signal response on although it had to be rubbed across and just touching the bottom of the coil.

Actually when using square pieces cut from Aluminium Baking Foil or even from the middle section on the side of an Aluminium Drink Can it does allow us all access to a common test material as a standard test object.

When you opened up this most interesting thread in regards to the Vallon I have continued to follow every posting.

And when you said “At some future point it will go to Australia for testing in the worst mineralised ground in the world” then it appears to be happening now due to some members purchasing a Vallon and trying it out on our Australian goldfield.

Thank you for as I said, a most interesting thread and look forward to further developments, modifications and tests with the Vallon.

[Ferric Toes]

Hello Eric,

This may be of interest with another Australian PI detector set in its default settings except its mode was lowered from 3 to 1 with an 8" mono coil attached.

The test results below were achieved inside the house without the detector being effected by any EMI.

The air depths were recorded in centimeters (inches) for a definite signal response on these square pieces.

Aluminium Baking Foil - Thickness 0.01mm (0.0005")
9mm x 9mm (0.36")Square		25mm x 25mm (1")Square		38mm x 38mm (1.5")Square
touching Coil		15cm (6")		28cm (11")
Aluminium Drink Can - Thickness 0.10mm (0.004")
4mm x 4mm (0.16")Square		25mm x 25mm (1")Square		38mm x 38mm (1.5")Square
touching Coil		28cm(11")		35cm (14")

I'm not clear on this chart since you make reference to 'another Australian machine'. Should there be another image with results for comparison, as there is a little square box that indicates something is missing? Presumably the first results are for the Vallon?

Eric.

[Ferric Toes]

Hello Eric; Haven't been able to do any meaningful air test lately due to EMI. Getting constant chatter and three LED's, though my newer Vallon is relatively quiet. Besides more sensitivity to EMI the main difference I noticed before was also more sensitivity to the foil. I will take both Vallon's out to my farm for additional test and get back with you. As I recall, the remains of the label was bright orange.

One thing you could try regarding the EMI on one of the Vallons is to check the channel settings to see if they are different.
On the one that is less affected by EMI set the mode selector to the speaker symbol. Press C and keep it pressed. After 3 seconds you get a short beep, but keep pressing C. Two LEDs should eventually light, 12 being one of them, but ignore this one. Note the LED number of the other one.

Switch off the first detector and go to the noisy one and repeat the process. If it settles at a different LED number, press either the + or - button so that the channel LED number is the same as te first detector. Switch back to the normal mode and see if the EMI is any better. Any channel change is stored on switch off, so on further use it will be the last change that you are working with.

If there is no improvement in EMI, then there could be a difference in the firmware settings of the two.

EMI is a problem for me in, or near, my workshop. No change in channel setting will cure it and I have not yet found out what the source is. Whatever causes it, goes off after 5.30pm and then the Vallons are quiet. It must come from an adjacent shop; maybe my wife's. I can hear it quite loudly on a medium wave radio and during the day it blots out all but the strongest stations. I use a 14in search coil as a loop antenna, so it is definitely the EM noise that plays havoc with the detectors. I'll have to find a portable radio with ferrite antenna and do some direction finding.

Eric.

[TH'r]

According to the Vallon spec. for the VMXC1, the sensitivity is much reduced to small metal objects, but enhanced to large ones. Also, another version, the VMXC1-3 can discriminate between ferrous and non-ferrous metal. I wonder if any of those will come on to the market any time soon .
There was obviously various firmware upgrades available and the fact that yours had a label indicates that it was different in some respect. What colour was the label? Maybe yours has the variable filter, or the automatic GB upgrades? Can you do an air test with, say, a US nickel on both your machines?

Eric.

Hello Eric; Haven't been able to do any meaningful air test lately due to EMI. Getting constant chatter and three LED's, though my newer Vallon is relatively quiet. Besides more sensitivity to EMI the main difference I noticed before was also more sensitivity to the foil. I will take both Vallon's out to my farm for additional test and get back with you. As I recall, the remains of the label was bright orange.

[Rivers rat]

Found 2/3 years old post on a another forum not too sure if you guys saw that it was about the parts needed to do the audio adaptor


RR

https://metaldetectingforum.com/showthread.php?t=196183&page=3

http://www.ebay.com/itm/311110953552?_trksid=p2060778.m2749.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT

[garyq]

Aluminium Tests

Back home the Vallon coil would not detect a 1in square of aluminium baking foil but would detect a 1.5in square at 8in. My 11in coil would only detect the 1.5in square at 3in. The detection of low conductors seems to fall off very sharply and seems more dependant on coil size than I have noticed before, with other PI detectors.

Also, I need to compare the Vallon with a couple of my other detectors such as the TDi and Goldquest SS.

Hello Eric,

This may be of interest with another Australian PI detector set in its default settings except its mode was lowered from 3 to 1 with an 8" mono coil attached.

The test results below were achieved inside the house without the detector being effected by any EMI.

The air depths were recorded in centimeters (inches) for a definite signal response on these square pieces.

Aluminium Baking Foil - Thickness 0.01mm (0.0005")
9mm x 9mm (0.36")Square		25mm x 25mm (1")Square		38mm x 38mm (1.5")Square
touching Coil		15cm (6")		28cm (11")
Aluminium Drink Can - Thickness 0.10mm (0.004")
4mm x 4mm (0.16")Square		25mm x 25mm (1")Square		38mm x 38mm (1.5")Square
touching Coil		28cm(11")		35cm (14")

[6666]

Hi all, I hope to be able to report on the GB in a couple of days, I think I've worked out whats going on from testing .

[6666]

Ferric I have sent a PM

[kingswood]

The 30cm coil that I ordered has finally left Germany
I note on the order confirmation that they refer to the 30cm coil as a "VMXC1-3 Search head".

[Ferric Toes]

Hello Eric; My Vallon #1 had a sticker on top, like the attached photo, when I received it. It was considerably defaced, and since I did not attach any significance to it till I saw this picture yesterday, I scraped the remains off. This one may have the "sub- munitions" up grade which could account for its much increased sensitivity to the 1 X 1 Std. Wgt. foil over my newer Vallon.
[ATTACH]39019[/ATTACH]

According to the Vallon spec. for the VMXC1, the sensitivity is much reduced to small metal objects, but enhanced to large ones. Also, another version, the VMXC1-3 can discriminate between ferrous and non-ferrous metal. I wonder if any of those will come on to the market any time soon .
There was obviously various firmware upgrades available and the fact that yours had a label indicates that it was different in some respect. What colour was the label? Maybe yours has the variable filter, or the automatic GB upgrades? Can you do an air test with, say, a US nickel on both your machines?

Eric.

[ivconic]

Yes, that was my next move as the Bluetooth phone I have also incorporates FM radio. You can get very small FM transmitters that plug into an iPhone that may be suitable.

Things would be much easier if all the cell phone manufacturers enabled FM chip on their models.
There is complete fully functional FM receiver built into LTE modem that would allow use of cell phone as pretty nice radio.
Some of the Asian manufacturers started first to enable this feature, but some of the most sold western models haven't yet.
Funny and strange decision!?
Otherwise you could put your iPhone in upper pocket and use it as wireless earphone or wireless speaker.
All what you should additionally make is quite simple FM tx with one transistor. So called "FM bug" with consumption barely over few mA.
But this is strange world, simple things usually are over complicated for no obvious reason!