Zircon And Other Stud Finders

.... After reading this thread http://familywoodworking.org/forums/showthread.php?t=1466


I felt I should share this post with everyone.


Zircon And Other Stud Finders


.... I wanted to put up some shelving on a given wall the other night. Over an hour later, I hadn't got past trying to find two of four studs in the wall. The bottom half of the wall is particleboard and the top half is sheet rock. I finally established a ROUGH line on one side of one of the studs. On the other side of the stud I could NOT establish consistent repeatable mark(s). Matter of fact, I now have a whole wall full of marks that I cannot draw a straight, vertical line down on the other side of this stud. I have two Zircon units that I was using and replaced the batteries in both (Studsensor 4 and the Triscanner). The Studsensor 4, which I think is slightly more sensitive than the Triscanner, have some differences between them. For the most part I could NOT establish a good repeatable mark(s), some would be 1/4 to 1/2” from the first original mark and some did repeat but NOT enough to feel confident enough about to draw a second straight vertical line on the other side of this stud. I did try using a piece of paper under the scanner and that did help in a smother operation, especially on the particleboard, but didn't seem to help with repeatability. I talked with the manufacturer ZIRCON and the bottom line there was to try a thicker slide like the backing of a (pad of paper [the cardboard]) which is a little thicker than what I used (piece of paper) and I will try that. The question that begs an answer now is - Is there anyone who has had the same experiences or frustration that I now share?

Thanks in advance

Boyd


.... Update: I also recently purchased the STANLEY IntelliSensor and though I did not go to the same extent in comparing I got the same results.
:(

.​
 
.... I went ahead and tried the Mfg's (ZIRCON) suggestion with the heavier piece of cardboard under the unit as I scanned. It did seem to improve it's performance, somewhat, but nothing to write home about.
.... What I did to find the TRUE stud position is I used a plywood blade set to a depth of 1/2” on my circular saw and scored the wall horizontally about where I figured the stud should be and compared the penciled marks from before. A STANLEY variable adjustable hand held square with a very thin knife-like blade was used to probe the saw slot on both sides of the stud and marked it with a heavy long black mark on both sides of the stud and with a tiny black mark as it's center. Here are the results (see pics)

P1000476-b.jpg

P1000480-b.jpg

P1000481-b.jpg

P1000482-b.jpg

P1000486-b.jpg

P1000487-b.jpg

P100048-b.jpg

P1000494-b.jpg

:doh:

.​



.... After reading this thread http://familywoodworking.org/forums/showthread.php?t=1466


I felt I should share this post with everyone.


Zircon And Other Stud Finders


.... I wanted to put up some shelving on a given wall the other night. Over an hour later, I hadn't got past trying to find two of four studs in the wall. The bottom half of the wall is particleboard and the top half is sheet rock. I finally established a ROUGH line on one side of one of the studs. On the other side of the stud I could NOT establish consistent repeatable mark(s). Matter of fact, I now have a whole wall full of marks that I cannot draw a straight, vertical line down on the other side of this stud. I have two Zircon units that I was using and replaced the batteries in both (Studsensor 4 and the Triscanner). The Studsensor 4, which I think is slightly more sensitive than the Triscanner, have some differences between them. For the most part I could NOT establish a good repeatable mark(s), some would be 1/4 to 1/2” from the first original mark and some did repeat but NOT enough to feel confident enough about to draw a second straight vertical line on the other side of this stud. I did try using a piece of paper under the scanner and that did help in a smother operation, especially on the particleboard, but didn't seem to help with repeatability. I talked with the manufacturer ZIRCON and the bottom line there was to try a thicker slide like the backing of a (pad of paper [the cardboard]) which is a little thicker than what I used (piece of paper) and I will try that. The question that begs an answer now is - Is there anyone who has had the same experiences or frustration that I now share?

Thanks in advance

Boyd


.... Update: I also recently purchased the STANLEY IntelliSensor and though I did not go to the same extent in comparing I got the same results.
:(


.​
 
I have the same experience with that useless piece of cr**.

Here's another entry for your list of what tools really do:

STUD FINDER - a prep tool for painting. Leads the user to make so many marks on the wall trying to find a stud that he must paint the wall.


Frankly, I have better luck tapping the wall with a finger.
 

tod evans

Member
Messages
4,993
Location
ozarks
in drywall try a "hatpin" one of those "t" shaped pins woman used to use to hold their hat in place.......tap with a finger, hammer or the closest childs head `till you`re close then probe with the hatpin....they actually poke through drywall fairly easily.....tod
 
S

Steve Clardy

Guest
I've had the cheap $20.00 stud finder that Sears sells for about 5 years now.
It has not let me down. It will pinpoint a stud every time.
 

Travis Porter

Member
Messages
292
Location
Wake Forest, NC
I have a $50 Zircon. Don't know the model, but it has deep scan and will scan for electrical. It is supposed to show you the edge and center of a stud so that does help, but like you, I have had it be completely wrong. I would say it is accurate 75 percent of the time. I have seen it do wierd things. It works well enough that I forget to test before committing to the results it gives.

One thing I have found, making sure you are not starting near a stud and are on the same density of material you are scanning helps some.
 

Vaughn McMillan

Administrator
Staff member
Messages
33,318
Location
ABQ NM
I finally had to quit using my stud finder because everytime I was in the same room with it, all it did was point to ME. :D

It is obviously faulty. Just ask LOML. :rofl:
 

Jim Hager

Member
Messages
374
Location
N.E. Arkansas
I finally had to quit using my stud finder because everytime I was in the same room with it, all it did was point to ME. :D

It is obviously faulty. Just ask LOML. :rofl:

Dang it Vaughn beat me to it. That is nearly exactly what I was gonna say too.:rofl: :rofl: Except that my wife will confirm that rather than deny it.:thumb:
 
.... Well... from most everyone's experience, including my own, it appears what we have here is another ideal product that may work correctly under ideal conditions maybe. Apparently, and for the most part, the practical everyday application of this product is non-existent and non profitable for the user. But, good enough for the advertising department to declare a winner. After all, it did it once and therefor it should be able to do it again we have a seller. The Bible of manufacturing is ADVERTISING, if there is a legal way (not necessary morally) to claim a product works it is saleable. Once again, if the hype implies, but does NOT necessarily produce the end result that's just considered innocent noninvasive advertising. After all, it sounds good doesn't it. In the meantime, your money has changed from your hand to theirs!!

Anything to show a profit and make money and YOU get to go back to work to make some more money.


:)
.
 
Last edited:

larry merlau

Member
Messages
18,409
Location
Delton, Michigan
using wrong model

the model i have is better thant wht you must have gitten,, mine workd well and still does the batterys even hld a very long time and high density aspect of it works very well too its possibly made diffently than yours boyd..:huh:
 

Karl Laustrup

Member
Messages
485
Location
Wisconsin Dells, WI
I have the Zircon Multi-Scanner 700. It works very well. It even has an onboard marking device so you don't have to carry a pencil. It begins reading at the edge of a stud and shows center and then shows the other edge.

I think it's probably about 98% accurate. Of course I always run the scanner from both directions before committing to punching holes in the drywall. This scanner will also show AC lines as well as metal studs. It is far and away better than the older cheap Zircon I had.

My $1.398 cents worth.

Karl
 

Norman Hitt

Member
Messages
1,813
Location
Odessa, Tx
I have a still have a couple "SOMEWHERE" but their use has been very erratic. I still have the best results from rapping my knuckles or the hard rubber hammer handle on the wall. One thing I've noticed is that if the drywall is not "TIGHT" against the stud for some reason, the rapping method is pretty iffy, and under the same circumstances, the stud finders I have used were Very Erratic, (if they would read at all) and basically useless. These circumstances seem very similar to the operation of depth finders I've had on boats. If there is not solid contact of the boat's hull and the water directly beneath the depth finder's "Pick up, transducer, or whatever it is called, (can't remember today),with no bubbles or aeration between the two surfaces, you either get a very erratic readout or none at all.
 
Top