JohnnieWalker
Sr. Member
I read that there is about 20 times more chance in ring finds in the water then the wet sand when beach detecting.
How can this be? I am not saying it is incorrect cause I have had other people say the same thing.
I have been told that in the winter go for the cuts after storms and in the summer go south and in the water.
But we know lost objects (rings) can travel many miles as the sand shifts.
We also know that coins from sunken ships many miles out wash up on the shore
We also know that it is the low spots we want to detect, after a storm or other rip currents.
So since we detect at Low tide why would it matter if were were in the water or not? Is that extra 30 feet from shore going to make that much difference? It is so much slower in the water and much more difficult to recover.
The last time I detected at the beach at dead low tide and full moon the bulk of my finds were not at the low tide water line or at the towel line but actually at the mid-tide mark. So since heavy targets were not at the low tide mark why would there be 20 times more in just that extra 30 feet or so from shore? I could agree if we were talking about a lake or gulf coast but not wide open beach where the sand is shifting so much.
Also the FBS units go up to 100 KHz were the BBS only go to 25Khz and it had been my understanding that a higher frequency is better for small gold so why would they say the Excalibur with it's BBS technology out perform something like an explorer or Etrac on small gold?
Something doesn't compute.
How can this be? I am not saying it is incorrect cause I have had other people say the same thing.
I have been told that in the winter go for the cuts after storms and in the summer go south and in the water.
But we know lost objects (rings) can travel many miles as the sand shifts.
We also know that coins from sunken ships many miles out wash up on the shore
We also know that it is the low spots we want to detect, after a storm or other rip currents.
So since we detect at Low tide why would it matter if were were in the water or not? Is that extra 30 feet from shore going to make that much difference? It is so much slower in the water and much more difficult to recover.
The last time I detected at the beach at dead low tide and full moon the bulk of my finds were not at the low tide water line or at the towel line but actually at the mid-tide mark. So since heavy targets were not at the low tide mark why would there be 20 times more in just that extra 30 feet or so from shore? I could agree if we were talking about a lake or gulf coast but not wide open beach where the sand is shifting so much.
Also the FBS units go up to 100 KHz were the BBS only go to 25Khz and it had been my understanding that a higher frequency is better for small gold so why would they say the Excalibur with it's BBS technology out perform something like an explorer or Etrac on small gold?
Something doesn't compute.
Upvote
0
...I feel SICK right now!!! Won't make that mistake again next year...lol. The goodies are in the water....
I always watch the people that are at the beach with me and resist the urge to follow the guy around that is wearing all the Bling. Hard enough not to follow the eye candy around. 
You sometimes see someone walking around looking in the water like they lost something and they hope to see it laying on the bottom. This is another reason for water hunters to wear Polarized glasses to cut the glare from the water so they can see dollar bills on the bottom along with chains that haven't sunk into the sand.
