Do I need a two box detector to detect a 12" by 12" (roughly) item that is 3 feet deep? Would a giant CORS coil on a Bounty Hunter Discovery 2200 suffice?
Upvote
0
Detecting medium sized item 3 feet deep?
- Thread starter Zerosen
- Start date
TheGreenBoy
Sr. Member
- Nov 10, 2017
- 402
- 468
- Detector(s) used
- DBP2010, eeTH, tx850
- Primary Interest:
- All Treasure Hunting
Any PI and most of higher level VLFs can do that. Coil should be 10" or larger - providing the ground mineralization is not too hihg (valid for VLF).
The Discovery 2200 looks like an entry level VLF - but you may never know unless you (or someone) try.
The Discovery 2200 looks like an entry level VLF - but you may never know unless you (or someone) try.
Last edited:
Icewing
Silver Member
- Jan 5, 2016
- 2,633
- 5,494
- Detector(s) used
- Minelab Equinox 900 / Garrett PropointerAT.
- Primary Interest:
- All Treasure Hunting
Yes you will need a 2 box unit to hit on any targets at 3 feet deep, aside from maybe a large corrugated steel pipe.
Depends on the size of the object. There is a natural gas pipeline down about 8' on this one farm we detect and every last detector we use finds it easily every time we go over it.
Tom_in_CA
Gold Member
- Mar 23, 2007
- 13,804
- 10,336
- 🥇 Banner finds
- 2
- Detector(s) used
- Explorer II, Compass 77b, Tesoro shadow X2
An object that is a foot diameter square, can indeed be picked up by various standard machines, to a depth of 3 ft. deep. But I would still go with the 2-box (like a TM 808) anyhow. And here's why : Because even though it's true that some of today's standard machines can get a cache to as deep as a 2-box unit, yet .... the devil is in the details : With a standard machine (especially a PI as Greenboy alludes to) will also hear all the other smaller targets in the ground, that perhaps you AREN'T interested in. Ie.: foil, tabs, nails, individual coins, etc....
And even if you set-your-mind to try to "ignore all the small surface targets", you will be forever 2nd guessing, and digging a bunch "just to be sure". Contrast to a 2-box machine, where it simply doesn't even see any targets smaller than a soda-can sized. Ie.: the perfect discriminator for pesky smaller stuff, if caches were your objective.
And just curious: You give a well defined "3 ft. " as the depth . And a well-defined 12" x 12" as the size. Can we ask what the story and item is (such that you have exact dimensions and depth) that you are hunting for ?
And even if you set-your-mind to try to "ignore all the small surface targets", you will be forever 2nd guessing, and digging a bunch "just to be sure". Contrast to a 2-box machine, where it simply doesn't even see any targets smaller than a soda-can sized. Ie.: the perfect discriminator for pesky smaller stuff, if caches were your objective.
And just curious: You give a well defined "3 ft. " as the depth . And a well-defined 12" x 12" as the size. Can we ask what the story and item is (such that you have exact dimensions and depth) that you are hunting for ?
TheGreenBoy
Sr. Member
- Nov 10, 2017
- 402
- 468
- Detector(s) used
- DBP2010, eeTH, tx850
- Primary Interest:
- All Treasure Hunting
Indeed. Being able to detect a 30cm square at 1m is a simple task, finding it is another story - but that was not a question, was it? Go ahead, try it with two-box, and don't forget to report how it was.....
Solving a problem is usually not a single parameter solution, that would depend on detector only.
Solving a problem is usually not a single parameter solution, that would depend on detector only.
Last edited:
2nd - Whatever you finally decide on - please consider buying one from one of 
- Aug 19, 2014
- 38,249
- 138,898
- Detector(s) used
- JW 8X-ML X2-VP 585
- Primary Interest:
- All Treasure Hunting
If price of unit is not an issue.
JW Fisher pulse 8x.
Might get by with a 6x.
JW Fisher pulse 8x.
Might get by with a 6x.
TheGreenBoy
Sr. Member
- Nov 10, 2017
- 402
- 468
- Detector(s) used
- DBP2010, eeTH, tx850
- Primary Interest:
- All Treasure Hunting
When we start MDing, we usually peek a detector and then swinging it more or less by chance. There is nothing wrong with that, but in finding things it is helpfull to be more methodical and systematical. I will not discuss the research beforehand, since this has been done many thimes elswhere, but rather more tecnical aproach to the problem. Take this as my personal advice, if you like.
First, one should focus on target and write down two separate lists; one list is what is known about it, such as its size, depth range, material, magnetic and electric properties, surrounding material (soil), origin, time period of production etc. This will ofently be an empty list. The second one is what it is expected about the target. Though both lists contains same elements, one should not confuse the two of them.
Second, one should focus on search time frame and expected disturbances; can that search be done anythime or in specific time frame(s) only, will it be an open search or a more hidden one etc.
Third, the terrain itselfe; how big will be the area to be searched, the vegetation and relieph of it, the visible obsticles, naihgbourhood and the EMI, type of soil, humidity of soil and mineralization, resistivity of soil, realtive ease or difficulty to dig it, homogenity and uniformity of soil deposits where the target is expected, homogenity of soil electric resistance in the area of interest, presence of other metal targets in the area, their expected size and comosition, .... to name a few.
When all that is considered, then it is the time to peek the right equipement. No metter what you do, keep some form of written documentation of what, where and when you did it, for your own refference.
First, one should focus on target and write down two separate lists; one list is what is known about it, such as its size, depth range, material, magnetic and electric properties, surrounding material (soil), origin, time period of production etc. This will ofently be an empty list. The second one is what it is expected about the target. Though both lists contains same elements, one should not confuse the two of them.
Second, one should focus on search time frame and expected disturbances; can that search be done anythime or in specific time frame(s) only, will it be an open search or a more hidden one etc.
Third, the terrain itselfe; how big will be the area to be searched, the vegetation and relieph of it, the visible obsticles, naihgbourhood and the EMI, type of soil, humidity of soil and mineralization, resistivity of soil, realtive ease or difficulty to dig it, homogenity and uniformity of soil deposits where the target is expected, homogenity of soil electric resistance in the area of interest, presence of other metal targets in the area, their expected size and comosition, .... to name a few.
When all that is considered, then it is the time to peek the right equipement. No metter what you do, keep some form of written documentation of what, where and when you did it, for your own refference.
Top Member Reactions
-
3452 -
1939 -
1908 -
1136 -
1079 -
1006 -
868 -
850 -
849 -
748 -
735 -
675 -
668 -
575 -
498 -
457 -
442 -
415 -
402 -
E
395
