This is turning out to be a funny thread.
An alleged intentional radiator detector device which doesn't at first glance look up to performing even that job, being pawned off as an LRL.
And then someone jumps in with a shopping list for nearly worthless metal detectors.
Let me reword that with explanation. The first is a desperate attempt to find an LRL that actually works, realizing that the ones already on the market are frauds. The second is a frank admission that even this one is a fraud, and that if you're looking for gold and posting in an LRL forum, you may be in the market for a metal detector that works, even it if happens to be a really crappy one.
(And so much for the ridiculous theory that metal detector manufacturers are afraid of LRL's making metal detectors obsolete!)
When it comes to LRL's, everyone involved is willing to admit that the things look like frauds and nobody (not even the manufacturers, who are in the worst position!) is willing to explain why they shouldn't be seen as fraudulent after all.
The LRL world is so committed to fraud, that no manufacturer of a locating apparatus that works and isn't fraudulent wants their product lumped into the LRL category. Heck, even Chuckie, who was de facto in the LRL business as you can follow on this very website, eventually denied that his fraudulent apparatus was an LRL. We all know, even Hung knows.
The problem with LRL's is that they look like the duck, quack like the duck, and waddle like the duck, and the purveyors thereof pretend that the obvious similarity to the duck is not a problem that needs to be fixed. That refusal to address the problem is the manufacturer's confession that the apparatus is an LRL duck, i.e. a fraud. As I so often say, "Read the Advertisement!"
--Dave J.
|