Americans Think Target Separation

[Michigan Badger]

A while back I purchased a new machine which I purposely won't name in this post (I buy lots of machines). I'll only say it is in the $500 range. I took it to my coin garden and found that it can only detect a silver quarter at 7 inches max IN MY SOIL. I also own a cheapo detector I bought off ebay for $60 (new) and it gets 10+ inches on a silver quarter.

Now, out yonder in the real world one would think the SUPER deeper machine would be the winner, right? WRONG! I've used this cheapo for maybe 500 hours over the last 4 years and found few pre-1900's coins with it. However, I did find loads of larger relics but little silver and no gold (no rings).

Now back to my latest machine. In less than 30 hours hunting/learning time I've found about 15 early wheat cents, 3 old rings, 1 silver dime, 1865 Indian head penny, large silver medal, loads of clad, an engraved pocket knife, a brass rein guide for an old buggy, and too many things to mention all from the same sites I hunted many times with the deep machine (and other top brands known for exterme depth).

So what's the deal? The cheapo is much deeper in the test garden but when it comes to actual work in the field it fails to deliver.

Extreme depth is NOT the winner for MOST (not all) coin shooting in THE UNITED STATES.

Most of us work for a living and have only a few hours now and then to do metal detecting. So, we're hunting mainly yards, parks, ball fields, sidewalks, and vacant lots.

I can use my cheapo detector all day in these areas and find little or nothing. Why? Because it can't separate the trash from the treasure very well, that's why. Find a coin all by itself and it's toast with the deep machine. But, how often does that happen?

Today a major amount of the price we pay for our expensive machines goes to make them excellent target separators. Depth is a given, that is, it's more than good enough in most VLF models (not all) offered today from $50 to $1,200. So why the big price difference? It?s all about technology in discerning or distinguishing targets. Or in other words, target separation.

Now, assuming ones detector has reasonable depth, hunting parks and yards today is all about target separation. The goodies still out there are mixed in with all kinds of trash and many very old coins are on edge.

Here's a real educator: Learn to pinpoint perfectly and use a plug digger for coins. When you detect a coin, plug it and then carefully check the depth. You'll be shocked at how shallow that find really was. Most detector meters register 30 to 50% deeper than the find really is. If a meter shows 7 inches it's most likely 3 to 5 inches deep.

Think target separation.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Diving for Pleasure and Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[vic910]

Good advice. Thanks

vicki

 

[Jeffro]

You know, I have posted something similar to this awhile back, and about got run out on rails, lol! In my experience anything that shows up in the zinc area on my CZ-5 is trash, so I don't dig many of those signals anymore.

Its funny, a noob comes on with a question about "What should I dig" and the answer is always, DIG EM ALL.

So if we always dig em all, why do we have target seperation? Why have any ID at all? other than Iron? Why have 3000 dollar machines that can almost read dates?

Food for thought- trust your experience with your detector in your soil conditions. And more dollars does not necessarily mean a "better" detector.

 

[dandan]

I give the "dig everything" advice to noobs to reinforce the fact that you have to learn about your machine! Once you have gotten past that learning curve you can be a little more selective. (As soon as you start "selecting" targets you're going to pass up something you should have dug) One mans opinion!

 

[Michigan Badger]

more dollars does not necessarily mean a "better" detector.

You're exactly right! I think the whole thing is some people must pay a big price or they can't believe in their detector.

With them higher cost means greater value.

They do well with the most expensive machines mainly because they have faith in them. This causes them to work very hard to justify the price they paid. So, they hunt very slowly and methodically. If they did this with some of the mid-range Whites, Fishers, Tesoros, etc., they'd do just as well and maybe even better.

 

[Michigan Badger]

slowly and methodically.

Interesting.

How, slow. And how close to the soil/sand?

CZ

Sounds very intersting.

The speed of search depends on the detector being used. One learns the optimum speed by using the machine in question. But every detector has its own perfect swing speed for maximum depth and sensitivity.

As for searching methodically, I mean hunting with a carefully thought out method or strategy in mind. The strategy is developed by blending research and factors related to any given site.

We do research to locate the general search area. Once we're in that area we must work an organized search pattern so that we're able to locate those more productive hunting places within the general area. Once we've found the areas that tend to produce finds we slow way down to that optimum search speed, overlap swings, keep records of where we've been, etc., for best possible coverage.

All successful coin/relic hunters instinctively follow this outline. They may not write things down and may not even realize they're doing these things but if they're consistently making the big finds they're do it.

Most finds are less than 5 inches deep. My oldest US Large Cent (1837) was in near mint detail condition and was 3 1/2 inches deep in a city park. There can be cases where items run much deeper but that happens in landfill areas. Some old parks were covered with black dirt and seeded. It's in these areas that coins can be 7 to 12 inches deep. Very few such places exist today. Those that do would require holes some 7 inches wide and 14 inches deep to recover a coin 12 inches deep. Can you imagine going into a well kept city park and digging giant holes like that all over the place? For one thing one would almost need a full sized shovel. As a general rule subtract 50% (or more) from all depth claims.

 

[ZumbroKid]

I heard that one can also get a little more depth with any detector by using a q-tip to regularly clean wax build up out of their ears. Any one else hear about this?

 

[Michigan Badger]

I heard that one can also get a little more depth with any detector by using a q-tip to regularly clean wax build up out of their ears. Any one else hear about this?

LOL! Good one...I'll try that.

 

[Digger Gabe]

I love that Pete

 

[Mirage]

Very good advice. I do think that a lot of these guys in NY do dig large cents at 12". Also, my son and I dug a lot of wheat pennies at one park and almost every one of the 15 or so were at 6-7.5 inches. We got a little nervous about the size of the holes we were digging. But I agree that these are more isolated areas and not the norm. It still is hard because you want to maximize your depth so you don't miss that deep one - cause the deepest ones many times are the oldest ones. Thanks for sharing your experiences.

Mirage

 

[Michigan Badger]

Very good advice. I do think that a lot of these guys in NY do dig large cents at 12". Also, my son and I dug a lot of wheat pennies at one park and almost every one of the 15 or so were at 6-7.5 inches. We got a little nervous about the size of the holes we were digging. But I agree that these are more isolated areas and not the norm. It still is hard because you want to maximize your depth so you don't miss that deep one - cause the deepest ones many times are the oldest ones. Thanks for sharing your experiences.

Mirage

A agree completely. The trouble I've noticed over the years is for some reason the best target separation machines are often not the deepest.

The ideal would be to have both great depth and excellent target separation.

 

[bk]

I totally agree!
I use an older Garrett Freedom II detector. This detector is unbelievable at detecting coins in extremely trashy areas. It doesn't get the depth as a lot of the newer detectors unless I use the 10" coil, but for trash areas, It works great.
If the area is relatively free of junk I will use my CZ6 with a 10" coil.
Since I prefer to hunt in demo sites where nails are a usually problem, the CZ6 would be useless, but with the Garrett, I can find coins mixed in with the nails.

 

[lou423]

I do not like to be seen digging deep holes at a park, for that reason i am sure i have left many good coins behind...
much to my sorrow.

 

[Monty]

I just did an experiment on a freshly buried silver quarter at a measured 11". This was done to represent a club seeded deep hunt I am going to participate in. My $200.00 detector came within an inch of going as deep as my $900.00 detector! The difference is so insignificant I don't know which one to use on the hunt, and I was really surprised! This is the first time depth has meant a lot to me as most "treasures" I find are about 4". Monty

 

[SHERMANVILLE ILLINOIS]

MB,

interesting post.

Seems to be some good stuff here.
(food for thought).

Thanks for posting.

have a good un............

 

[stoney56]

Very good points MB. Sometimes I wonder if in a bit of a hurry to dig a target that it's also not noticed that after a couple of attemps at digging deeper when the dirt fell into the bottom of the hole, that the coin fell down with it from the side unnoticed and gave a false impression that it was deeper than it really was. This goes mainly for small targets that are caked in dirt and also about the same color. I read about rings that sounded as just a single tone and not a double blip. Not all rings are flat so it won't always do it but if your machine has a fast recovery time between targets, it might make a difference there as well.

 

[Michigan Badger]

Very good points MB. Sometimes I wonder if in a bit of a hurry to dig a target that it's also not noticed that after a couple of attemps at digging deeper when the dirt fell into the bottom of the hole, that the coin fell down with it from the side unnoticed and gave a false impression that it was deeper than it really was. This goes mainly for small targets that are caked in dirt and also about the same color. I read about rings that sounded as just a single tone and not a double blip. Not all rings are flat so it won't always do it but if your machine has a fast recovery time between targets, it might make a difference there as well.

Very good post stoney. I do think you've got it right.

Very few people take the time to pinpoint and some machines lack the ability. I think most people do like I used to do. They dig a certain sized hole and then check the dirt. If they find the target they then look back into the hole and guess the depth plus 4 inches Hey, we all want our brands to be the best, right?

We all know some targets are very deep. Many factors can bring this about. However, I've been THing for a long time now all over this country and I rarely find a coin or ring deeper than 5 inches. In fact I'd say most of my oldest coins were less than 4 inches deep.

Hunting plowed fields or torn-up sidewalks in the UK or US is a totally different situation. The fields are obvious but some don't realize that they often placed lots of leveling fill dirt while doing sidewalks and parking areas, etc. But coins simply dropped and left alone will be shallow. This is one reason it's so difficult to find old coins in old parks today. Most were cleaned out back in the 60's and 70's. Even those BFO units had no trouble getting most of the good stuff.

The vast majority of really great coins and jewelry left in our old parks today are shielded or masked by trash or buried on some angle. I've dug 3 silver dimes in the past 2 weeks and all were buried by or directly over metal trash. As I dug them I dug heavy iron trash. These were missed by hundreds of THers simply because they couldn't separate the coins from the trash. My Tesoro is not all that deep but it can really separate trash from treasure.

In super trashy areas I recommend the Ace 250, Cibola, or some simular machine. Out in plowed fields or pre-50's land hunting sites I'd recommend the Fisher CZ-3D. The 3 D takes some learning but it's probably the deepest practical machine made today.

 

[Michigan Badger]

All true for US, but not the case in most other countries (with history). It's not unusual to find coins at over 20" in developed areas. Though the ones found are usually caches that set off the detector even at great depth.
I remember digging holes close to a yard when the XLT found a huge silver coin cache.
That's why I love the X-terra's, that not only give decent target ID, but great unsurpassed depth.
Just wanted to give the other perspective.

Yes, many of the ancient finds are caches buried by soldiers, etc., 2,000 years ago. Oh how'd I'd love to hunt one of those sites.

And yes, that X-terra and others like it are great machines too.

 

[Russ in Ohio]

MB, I agree completely. I've been detecting for a long, long time and although I've found a few coins at 10" or so the vast majority of keepers have been 4 to 6 inches deep. In fact last weekend I pulled a crusty indian head from just below the surface. I had to soak it overnight just to see the date so it had been there a LONG time! Depth is important to me, but not so much as seperation. The machines of the '80s and beyond were more capable than some realize and the public areas have been long cherry picked. I was one who did some of that picking! In those places goodies still exist, but you have to work for them, mostly in the trashy spots no one else bothered with back then. Thats where seperation ability makes all the difference. As a "for instance" there is a part of one of the local parks where I believe a house once stood due to the high level of iron and weird aluminum trash there. I worked it with several deep machines, ( I have a lot of detectors! ) but was only successful when I used a less muscular detector that has a faster re-tune time. I believe it is the same brand as yours, actually! This weekend I'm going back with a CZ with a 5" coil and see how it does. HH, Russ

 

[Michigan Badger]

MB, I agree completely. I've been detecting for a long, long time and although I've found a few coins at 10" or so the vast majority of keepers have been 4 to 6 inches deep. In fact last weekend I pulled a crusty indian head from just below the surface. I had to soak it overnight just to see the date so it had been there a LONG time! Depth is important to me, but not so much as seperation. The machines of the '80s and beyond were more capable than some realize and the public areas have been long cherry picked. I was one who did some of that picking! In those places goodies still exist, but you have to work for them, mostly in the trashy spots no one else bothered with back then. Thats where seperation ability makes all the difference. As a "for instance" there is a part of one of the local parks where I believe a house once stood due to the high level of iron and weird aluminum trash there. I worked it with several deep machines, ( I have a lot of detectors! ) but was only successful when I used a less muscular detector that has a faster re-tune time. I believe it is the same brand as yours, actually! This weekend I'm going back with a CZ with a 5" coil and see how it does. HH, Russ

Russ how did the CZ do with the smaller coil?

You're right, for the trashy areas (that's most areas) the Tesoros rule. In years past I was always thinking depth. Depth was my entire goal in a machine. Ask any detector dealer and he'll tell you the first thing a potential buyer wants to know is "what kind of depth does it get?"

Again, while depth is important...it's really not the most important thing for most hunting here in the US. China makes cheap machines that have great depth. Actually it's not that costly to make a super deep machine. The real expense and challenge is making a detector that is able to accurately analyze individual buried targets in close proximity. It must also deliver this information to the opperator in an easy to be understood manner. And lastly it must do all this with speed and stability or it's virtually worthless.