do you drag the MD on the ground?
- Thread starter Mr.Jody
- Start date
EasyMoney
Sr. Member
- Sep 15, 2007
- 476
- 7
- Detector(s) used
- Primarily my Fisher cz-70 and Compass Relic & Coin, plus many others
Yes BuckleBoy, I you and I both know that's true. That is a funny one, and so is the one where the guy found a wheatie at 42 inches with his Explorer. He even got angry when people challenged him on it. Some people just don't have a good sense of humor I guess. We all know that that both the 22" story and the 42" one are both true (chuckles). I'm glad SOME of us on here have a good sense of humor.
Nice one BuckleBoy
Check this out. Garys has a good sense of humor too. Rememember that the soil in GB has considerously LESS iron in it than our Southern States do. Imagine that. And remember that Gary is one of those very un-experienced detectorists too. None of the detectors there could get a decent signal on a dime-sized coin at 10" - in that wussie soil, except that the Nexus could barely get a signal with it's 12" coil..
http://garysdetecting.co.uk/hoard_test.htm
Easy MONEY
Nice one BuckleBoy
Check this out. Garys has a good sense of humor too. Rememember that the soil in GB has considerously LESS iron in it than our Southern States do. Imagine that. And remember that Gary is one of those very un-experienced detectorists too. None of the detectors there could get a decent signal on a dime-sized coin at 10" - in that wussie soil, except that the Nexus could barely get a signal with it's 12" coil..
http://garysdetecting.co.uk/hoard_test.htm
Easy MONEY
EasyMoney
Sr. Member
- Sep 15, 2007
- 476
- 7
- Detector(s) used
- Primarily my Fisher cz-70 and Compass Relic & Coin, plus many others
Jody, that doesn't really make a lot of sense. Why would a detector not work well f you held it 1" or 2" off the ground? Is it a $49 Bounty Hunter, with a poor ground balance? Or is it as I said, a TR, etc?
I'm really interested in your answer. And if it's not the cheapie BH which only gets 1-2" in the ground anyway, or an old TR or BFO which often only got that shallow depth too, then it needs repairs. PM me and I'll see if I can help you repair it.
BTW folks, "scrubbing the ground" is not the same as "scrubbing the grass", or "scrubbing the lawn".
Here is another viable site: "Troy Custom Detectors"
http://troycustomdetectors.com/shadowtipes/highly-mineralized.html
Under "General Tips". it reads as follows;
"Hold coil approximately 2 or more inches above the ground when swinging to avoid overloading the coil due to the high mineralization (this is something that you will have to experiment with to get optimum performance without ground noise)."
This is of course what I have been saying .. along with all the other Pros who invent and design metal detectors, including Erik Foster, George Payne, Jack Gifford, Dave Johnson, Keith Wills, etc, etc etc.
If your soil has no mineralization in it then you don't even need a ground balance at all, just an automatic retune and automatic return to threshold. But there is no soil in the USA or on the earth that has that configuration. In La-la land yes, but not on earth.
EasyMoney
I'm really interested in your answer. And if it's not the cheapie BH which only gets 1-2" in the ground anyway, or an old TR or BFO which often only got that shallow depth too, then it needs repairs. PM me and I'll see if I can help you repair it.
BTW folks, "scrubbing the ground" is not the same as "scrubbing the grass", or "scrubbing the lawn".
Here is another viable site: "Troy Custom Detectors"
http://troycustomdetectors.com/shadowtipes/highly-mineralized.html
Under "General Tips". it reads as follows;
"Hold coil approximately 2 or more inches above the ground when swinging to avoid overloading the coil due to the high mineralization (this is something that you will have to experiment with to get optimum performance without ground noise)."
This is of course what I have been saying .. along with all the other Pros who invent and design metal detectors, including Erik Foster, George Payne, Jack Gifford, Dave Johnson, Keith Wills, etc, etc etc.
If your soil has no mineralization in it then you don't even need a ground balance at all, just an automatic retune and automatic return to threshold. But there is no soil in the USA or on the earth that has that configuration. In La-la land yes, but not on earth.
EasyMoney
bazinga
Silver Member
EasyMoney said:
I'm not sure where in my post (nor any other post that I have ever made) I was making outrageous depth claims. I simply stated the facts based upon real world results that I have personally experienced. The more air between the ground and the coil with the explorer, the worse it performs. Ask any experienced explorer user this.
BuckleBoy
Gold Member
bscofield6 said:
You weren't. Easy Money was just putting you in that category of people who don't know even the most basic scientific concepts behind our hobby, and don't care to know anything... the same category of folks who make outrageous depth claims because they don't know that Scientific Fact renders their claims untrue.
(But whether you're that type of person or not, E.M.'s probably just upset at you for blowing off his opinion like it didn't matter.)
But don't worry, Easy Money. BELIEF is more important than science anyhow. At least that's what our King tells us...
Have a good un,
Buck
bazinga
Silver Member
BuckleBoy said:bscofield6 said:
You weren't. Easy Money was just putting you in that category of people who don't know even the most basic scientific concepts behind our hobby, and don't care to know anything... the same category of folks who make outrageous depth claims because they don't know that Scientific Fact renders their claims untrue.
(But whether you're that type of person or not, E.M.'s probably just upset at you for blowing off his opinion like it didn't matter.)
But don't worry, Easy Money. BELIEF is more important than science anyhow. At least that's what our King tells us...
Have a good un,
Buck
I just use the detector in the manner that brings home the most finds. It may defy how science says it should work, but it's how it works best for me. I respect what EM has to say. I've read a number of his posts and he always brings logic to the table when many people try and avoid it. Maybe next time I get some DEEP targets I will start lifting the coil off the ground and see how far they can be detected from.
EasyMoney
Sr. Member
- Sep 15, 2007
- 476
- 7
- Detector(s) used
- Primarily my Fisher cz-70 and Compass Relic & Coin, plus many others
Well guys, I'm not upset at anyone. At 64 years we men don't get that way that easily. We learn that a blade of grass bends with the wind so that it won't break. We also learn that many people are blindsided by their opinions, instead of facts. I don't have any opinions. When we reach a certain age we begin to mature, usually not until we learn to be modest and humble. Our opinions become less pronounced and less important, even useless in reality, and until we someday realize that our opinions mean less than squat. I learn from the biggest of fools and the meagerest and greatest of mind and heart. I draw no lines of distinction, but I do not ever post my opinions on here, or anywhere else for that matter. My world is one of primarily thought first, experience second, and thought third. I know fully well when something seems to "be too good to be true". I am not easily deceived or made a fool of. It is not in my nature, nor is it a weakness of any part of my mind.
The truth is, that a metal detector cannot detect past it's air depth capacity because it is by all virtues impossible for it to do so. There is no magic wand to change that either. The world of truth regarding metal detectors is never a pat science, but it is one of reality and ever changing search conditions. One thing we all need to know is that our metal detectors create a field that is not ideally symetrical, and is also one of limitations. Some patterns of search fields look a bit like a potato with cancer growning here and there on it, sort of lumpy and bumpy. However, the only area that has enough intensity to disturb it's normality is that which is enough to invoke a change at the secondary or receiving coil. And that is why we are not able to find coin-sized objects past a given point equal to that field which we discover in an air test. What this means is that although a detector search field can be as emense as a 5 foot sphere, it does not recognize coin sized objects past it's in-air depth. And yes, an average vlf metal detector creates a sort of an egg-shaped pattern about 5-6 feet in diameter at the ends of each pole, but most of it is useless for hunting coins. If you doubt this, then maybe you should ask yourself why we can find a garbage can lid with a meager Ace 150 at 3 feet, yet a coin no deeper than 8 inches, even in air.
ALL metal detector engineers listed above are fully aware of the limitations of their inventions, AND that oftentimes people are deceived into believing that their detector finds things deeper in the ground than in the air. Most of the time they just blow it off realizing that young men have "visions" and that a few old goats dream dreams. ALL of us also know that unless a copper or brass or lead object has been in the ground for decades and decades there is no "halo effect" at all. Unless of course someone poured lie, acid, etc. all over the ground at some time. They also know that iron or steel can create a halo effect in less than 10 years, easily, depending on the soil type because the atoms of iron are very loosely covalently bonded and they "give them up" very easily. . They also know that silver takes several hundred years to produce a halo effect and that it takes gold as much as thousands of years to even produce a vapor of a halo effect, something that our current measuring devices are unable to measure at all, save for atomically weighing them (down to atom size).
My mission here is to teach, to learn if I can, but mostly to take out the trash now and then. If I don't do it then someone else has to. But oftentimes, it just keeps building up until it starts to stink clear to high Heaven.
And yes BuckleBoy, I think you and I have the same KING, so do others but they often aren't aware of it.
Easy$$$
The truth is, that a metal detector cannot detect past it's air depth capacity because it is by all virtues impossible for it to do so. There is no magic wand to change that either. The world of truth regarding metal detectors is never a pat science, but it is one of reality and ever changing search conditions. One thing we all need to know is that our metal detectors create a field that is not ideally symetrical, and is also one of limitations. Some patterns of search fields look a bit like a potato with cancer growning here and there on it, sort of lumpy and bumpy. However, the only area that has enough intensity to disturb it's normality is that which is enough to invoke a change at the secondary or receiving coil. And that is why we are not able to find coin-sized objects past a given point equal to that field which we discover in an air test. What this means is that although a detector search field can be as emense as a 5 foot sphere, it does not recognize coin sized objects past it's in-air depth. And yes, an average vlf metal detector creates a sort of an egg-shaped pattern about 5-6 feet in diameter at the ends of each pole, but most of it is useless for hunting coins. If you doubt this, then maybe you should ask yourself why we can find a garbage can lid with a meager Ace 150 at 3 feet, yet a coin no deeper than 8 inches, even in air.
ALL metal detector engineers listed above are fully aware of the limitations of their inventions, AND that oftentimes people are deceived into believing that their detector finds things deeper in the ground than in the air. Most of the time they just blow it off realizing that young men have "visions" and that a few old goats dream dreams. ALL of us also know that unless a copper or brass or lead object has been in the ground for decades and decades there is no "halo effect" at all. Unless of course someone poured lie, acid, etc. all over the ground at some time. They also know that iron or steel can create a halo effect in less than 10 years, easily, depending on the soil type because the atoms of iron are very loosely covalently bonded and they "give them up" very easily. . They also know that silver takes several hundred years to produce a halo effect and that it takes gold as much as thousands of years to even produce a vapor of a halo effect, something that our current measuring devices are unable to measure at all, save for atomically weighing them (down to atom size).
My mission here is to teach, to learn if I can, but mostly to take out the trash now and then. If I don't do it then someone else has to. But oftentimes, it just keeps building up until it starts to stink clear to high Heaven.
And yes BuckleBoy, I think you and I have the same KING, so do others but they often aren't aware of it.
Easy$$$
deepskyal
Bronze Member
- Aug 17, 2007
- 1,925
- 63
- Detector(s) used
- White's Coinmaster 6000 Di Series 3, Minelab Eq 600
- Primary Interest:
- Metal Detecting
I scrub grass like I scrub the kitchen floor...(being a bachelor has it's pitfalls). I think that keeps me about an inch or so off the true soil.
I have found that when pinpointing an object, the more I crisscross a target, the grass flattens more, (stupid grass don't know to bend under a foot, instead of breaking)...and the better my target response...simply because I've eliminated space between the object and my coil.
On bare ground...which is a rarity for me...I do try to minimize the amount of pressure that I allow with the coil scuffing the ground...but I still keep it on the ground.
I'm not arguing that scientifically, I may be better off at 1 or 2 inches above the ground, but I can't see me detecting for any length of time with my older 6000DI pro with it held above the ground at a consistant height. I think it could also be proved that once some detectors are ground balanced for a certain height, the average person will not be able to maintain a consistant height and the true balance of the detectors field as they walk along swinging their machine.
My DFX is more ergonomic and lighter. I could potentially walk around with it 2 inches off the ground for optimum performance. Besides a ballfield, however, I've rarely found ground that would cooperate with me being totally level. Frequent dips and hills ...twigs and such in the way...debris like an inch of leaves..(But you don't know the leaf depth because it too can be variable with closeness to a tree).
For me...and this is what I'm saying...for me..I get the most consistency with my coil on the ground. Maybe I'm not getting optimum depth...but I picked a machine that will get optimum depth for the way I use it.
I simply cannot walk around holding my coil at a steady 2 inches.
I have an old Coinmaster 3000 I started out with. GB was a bear with it, constantly retuning. Trying to hold it at an even keel while detecting created more false signals than anything. The only way I could find anything was the "scrubbing" method. At least I was ground balanced without the constant falsing that was terrible with the machine in high mineralized soil. Just moving it a hair off the ground made it beep.
I guess I developed a habit from old technology that has filtered through after many years. Being the stubborn, old goat that I am.......If it ain't broke...don't fix it. If it works for you...stick with it!
Al
I have found that when pinpointing an object, the more I crisscross a target, the grass flattens more, (stupid grass don't know to bend under a foot, instead of breaking)...and the better my target response...simply because I've eliminated space between the object and my coil.
On bare ground...which is a rarity for me...I do try to minimize the amount of pressure that I allow with the coil scuffing the ground...but I still keep it on the ground.
I'm not arguing that scientifically, I may be better off at 1 or 2 inches above the ground, but I can't see me detecting for any length of time with my older 6000DI pro with it held above the ground at a consistant height. I think it could also be proved that once some detectors are ground balanced for a certain height, the average person will not be able to maintain a consistant height and the true balance of the detectors field as they walk along swinging their machine.
My DFX is more ergonomic and lighter. I could potentially walk around with it 2 inches off the ground for optimum performance. Besides a ballfield, however, I've rarely found ground that would cooperate with me being totally level. Frequent dips and hills ...twigs and such in the way...debris like an inch of leaves..(But you don't know the leaf depth because it too can be variable with closeness to a tree).
For me...and this is what I'm saying...for me..I get the most consistency with my coil on the ground. Maybe I'm not getting optimum depth...but I picked a machine that will get optimum depth for the way I use it.
I simply cannot walk around holding my coil at a steady 2 inches.
I have an old Coinmaster 3000 I started out with. GB was a bear with it, constantly retuning. Trying to hold it at an even keel while detecting created more false signals than anything. The only way I could find anything was the "scrubbing" method. At least I was ground balanced without the constant falsing that was terrible with the machine in high mineralized soil. Just moving it a hair off the ground made it beep.
I guess I developed a habit from old technology that has filtered through after many years. Being the stubborn, old goat that I am.......If it ain't broke...don't fix it. If it works for you...stick with it!
Al
T
The.Boomer
Guest
Easy buddy, my main man. The physics of it all dictates that the majority of coins can only sink to a maximum of 6-8 inches in perfect loam. Even supposing some coins were buried with fill at a greater depth the constant movement that all ground is undergoing those coins too, would eventually work their way toward the surface or until neutral density is reached. So what I'm saying about depth is that it's all about the density. Guess when it comes to understanding science fact from wishful thinking they're is some density involved as well. 
Some people are just too dense to accept the facts as they stand. You really gotta love the people who'll stand there in front of the monster as it bears down upon them and they just keep stating there's no such thing as monsters. If ground scrubbing is the only way some people can make their detectors work, then they must be using some really funked up settings. 
Some people are just too dense to accept the facts as they stand. You really gotta love the people who'll stand there in front of the monster as it bears down upon them and they just keep stating there's no such thing as monsters. If ground scrubbing is the only way some people can make their detectors work, then they must be using some really funked up settings. fmrUSMC_0844
Bronze Member
- Sep 4, 2008
- 1,567
- 1,104
- Detector(s) used
- Whites MXT Pro, Whites TDI, Keene A52, Calsluice, Gold Hog Piglet
- Primary Interest:
- Metal Detecting
The O-Hi-O can float those pesky mercs right on down to utah. If it was possible!!BuckleBoy said:
EasyMoney
Sr. Member
- Sep 15, 2007
- 476
- 7
- Detector(s) used
- Primarily my Fisher cz-70 and Compass Relic & Coin, plus many others
Well Boomer, you are exactly right.
In fact there (is) a density factor involved, and it's because soil compacts more and more as time goes along. Different soils compact differently than others too. This of course is not an exact science but it is well-known among more experienced detectorists and agriculturists (farmers). Soil that is high in clay content for example, is more prone to and becomes more compact than most other soils, and eventually will turn into sedimentary stone. Silt compacts too but not to the same degree as clay. Sand compacts very little but it too does compact and eventually will become sandstone if it is there long enough. A compacted soil becomes more dense, hence heavier too, and at some given point it develops to the same density as do coins. Some people float better than others in water, or in quicksand, and it's because of their weight-to-mass index, just like the weight-to-mass index of coins as compared to that of the soils. Soils are made of minerals, sometimes metalic, but minerals just the same, and if the soils has a great deal of iron in it it will soon become the same density as the nickel or tin or copper, etc that the coin is made out of. Essentially, the coin begans to "float" at a level consistent with the same density weight of the soil. It finds it's "floating" level.
It's just a matter of logic.
Now in the case of the Coinmaster 3000 I think it is a PI. It could be one of the earlier White's ground-cancel ones too, but that's not important. Older PI's and phase-shift detectors are notorious for not staying tuned, especially because of their age and problematic infancy. A TR with induction balance will not stay tuned to the ground for a very long time, and then it has to be attended to once again. It goes with the territory for the TR's (transmit-receivers). I own a White's 6000 di and I couldn't use that thing on the ground to save my soul, and I envy anyone who has such nerves of steel and muscular control that they could scrub the ground with such a heavy searchcoil. At 6' 1" and 210 I could not ever manage to keep the coil running along that smoothly without rattling it or scrubbing it - at any time of my life.. Anything that coils hits or is bumped against gives it fits and causes it to false and make noise. And the old "swingers" as in the case of the White's 3000 were NOT supposed to besed that way, they were designed to specifically NOT be used that way. That is some old technology at it's best though, and thankfully we have evolved from that type of configuration with several refinements and improvements, especially with Fisher, White's, and Minelab. Tesoro has a different method of dealing with mineralization, but their manual ground balance controls could use a bit of work. Their auto GB is premium though, bettering their manual ones in most soils.
After the invention of Westinghouse Corporation and it's Ground Cancel discrimination - an automatic threshold apppeared. This was done when George Payne invented phase-shift technology to overcome even more of the affects of iron and sodium mineralization in the soil. In fact, in more heavily mineralized soils metal detectors are still quite similar to the ground-cancel ones we used more than 25 years ago, save for a few refinements for controls, and more bells and whistles.
EZ $$$
In fact there (is) a density factor involved, and it's because soil compacts more and more as time goes along. Different soils compact differently than others too. This of course is not an exact science but it is well-known among more experienced detectorists and agriculturists (farmers). Soil that is high in clay content for example, is more prone to and becomes more compact than most other soils, and eventually will turn into sedimentary stone. Silt compacts too but not to the same degree as clay. Sand compacts very little but it too does compact and eventually will become sandstone if it is there long enough. A compacted soil becomes more dense, hence heavier too, and at some given point it develops to the same density as do coins. Some people float better than others in water, or in quicksand, and it's because of their weight-to-mass index, just like the weight-to-mass index of coins as compared to that of the soils. Soils are made of minerals, sometimes metalic, but minerals just the same, and if the soils has a great deal of iron in it it will soon become the same density as the nickel or tin or copper, etc that the coin is made out of. Essentially, the coin begans to "float" at a level consistent with the same density weight of the soil. It finds it's "floating" level.
It's just a matter of logic.
Now in the case of the Coinmaster 3000 I think it is a PI. It could be one of the earlier White's ground-cancel ones too, but that's not important. Older PI's and phase-shift detectors are notorious for not staying tuned, especially because of their age and problematic infancy. A TR with induction balance will not stay tuned to the ground for a very long time, and then it has to be attended to once again. It goes with the territory for the TR's (transmit-receivers). I own a White's 6000 di and I couldn't use that thing on the ground to save my soul, and I envy anyone who has such nerves of steel and muscular control that they could scrub the ground with such a heavy searchcoil. At 6' 1" and 210 I could not ever manage to keep the coil running along that smoothly without rattling it or scrubbing it - at any time of my life.. Anything that coils hits or is bumped against gives it fits and causes it to false and make noise. And the old "swingers" as in the case of the White's 3000 were NOT supposed to besed that way, they were designed to specifically NOT be used that way. That is some old technology at it's best though, and thankfully we have evolved from that type of configuration with several refinements and improvements, especially with Fisher, White's, and Minelab. Tesoro has a different method of dealing with mineralization, but their manual ground balance controls could use a bit of work. Their auto GB is premium though, bettering their manual ones in most soils.
After the invention of Westinghouse Corporation and it's Ground Cancel discrimination - an automatic threshold apppeared. This was done when George Payne invented phase-shift technology to overcome even more of the affects of iron and sodium mineralization in the soil. In fact, in more heavily mineralized soils metal detectors are still quite similar to the ground-cancel ones we used more than 25 years ago, save for a few refinements for controls, and more bells and whistles.
EZ $$$
TerryC
Gold Member
- Jun 26, 2008
- 7,797
- 11,183
- Detector(s) used
- Ace 250 (2), Ace 300, Gold Bug 2, Tesoro Cortes, Garrett Sea Hunter, Whites TDI SL SE, Fisher Impulse 8, Minelab Monster 1000, Minelab CTX3030, Falcon MD20, Garrett Pro-pointer, Calvin Bunker digger.
- Primary Interest:
- Metal Detecting
Easy,
I'm going to stick my neck out..... don't get me wrong, because at the end of this post I will ask you a legitimate question. It appears you have the credentials to back up what you write. So much so that some of the posters seem to think you are smearing your knowledge in their face(s). Sorta like "information overload". Some of the posts of the last 5 months have turned my ideas of certain brands around and others on their head. I own 7 machines, mostly Garretts. All the replies above aside; all your explanations aside (which are hard to follow but undoubtedly correct), if I wanted to narrow my "coinshooting" machines to just three, mainly for parks and other soils, what 3 should I pick... buy? I will not settle for a "general" answer because your backround demands a better answer than that. If you are concerned with anyone calling "foul, paid ad monger, USA (China) basher, etc, simply e-mail me the answer at [email protected] I follow your posts and do consider your advice pinnacle. TTC
I'm going to stick my neck out..... don't get me wrong, because at the end of this post I will ask you a legitimate question. It appears you have the credentials to back up what you write. So much so that some of the posters seem to think you are smearing your knowledge in their face(s). Sorta like "information overload". Some of the posts of the last 5 months have turned my ideas of certain brands around and others on their head. I own 7 machines, mostly Garretts. All the replies above aside; all your explanations aside (which are hard to follow but undoubtedly correct), if I wanted to narrow my "coinshooting" machines to just three, mainly for parks and other soils, what 3 should I pick... buy? I will not settle for a "general" answer because your backround demands a better answer than that. If you are concerned with anyone calling "foul, paid ad monger, USA (China) basher, etc, simply e-mail me the answer at [email protected] I follow your posts and do consider your advice pinnacle. TTC
EasyMoney
Sr. Member
- Sep 15, 2007
- 476
- 7
- Detector(s) used
- Primarily my Fisher cz-70 and Compass Relic & Coin, plus many others
Well Terry, I try to put information out here for the benifit of those who can't quite understand the more technical or complex form. In other words, I try to bridge that gap to help people - not hinder them. This is why I normally refer to other even more qualified individuals than myself - and their advice - and that's why I write scrolls instead of simple less explanetory quips and quotes, so that people can refer to the Masters of the industry later on - if they have other questions. Additionally, I like to help people find the best detectors for their uses and to help them avoid blowing their hard-earned money on a detector that they someday will hate and wrap around a tree or stab with a bayonette (both of which I have seen after I came in behind them and found an expensive ring that they missed).
As you may have figured out already, I have no real brand favorite, and I like the cheap Chinese ones as well as the real spendy ones, and maybe even a bit more sometimes in some places. All I can say is which I prefer. The first half is a matter of preference - and the other half boils down to common reason.
My preferences are as follows:
And the reason I have left out Minelabs is because most are severely over-priced for their mediocre depth in my soil, and their slow performance, although they do have many followers in other parts of the country. Additionally, Minelab never did need to use different freq coils, the same affect could have been achieved via a toggle switch and a small chip or old-school R/C circuit. MIneab just wants our money, that's all. The reason I omit Nautiluses is because they are designed for particular type of hunting which I seldom become involved in - and I would really have no need for them except to play with them now and then. The reason I have omitted most Garretts is because they use antiquated circuitry tha disallows decent performance in my high iron soil, even with Garretts after-market chip designed to help that problem somewhat.
My preferences;
PI: White's new TDI
Multi-frequency: Any Fisher CZ
Tot lots: Compadre, Silver uMax, F-2, HP-1030, and 1236 x-2
Deep targets in open fields: F-75, T-2, White's TDI, cz3d,
All around hunting: F-70, Silver uMax, and Compass 13.77 Khz, M-6 and MXT
Salt beach hunting: White's TDI, Garrett Infinium
Gold nugget hunting: Fisher GB2 or Compass au2000
If I needed to chose only two detectors or could only chose two detectors, they would be either a cz3d, a Silver uMax, a Compass Relic & Coin, or a cz-70, and the other choice would (only) be the White's TDI PI, hands down. But with three allowed it all changes. Then there is cross-over performance to be considered.
As you know I already said that each person has different results than another - with the same detector. It's half preference and half knowledge, not much else.
For 3 detectors for you? I wouldn't know, but I don't think you would like to switch from using Garretts, or am I wrong? Your soil will decide much of that for you, but most people who buy Garretts complain a lot about medium depth, at best. They also complain about hot rocks and having a lot of trouble with highly mineralized ground. I have only seen 3 Minelabs and two Garretts in use in my hunting in Oregon, Washington, and California in the last 20+ years. And it's because of their lack of performance here. I do see a Garrett now and then in a pawn shop though. Minelabs too.
For me?
Tot lots and general coin hunting; American Hawks HP-1030
Salt beach or deep open field hunting; White's TDI
Nugget hunting; Compass au2000
But that's because I live in a very high mineralization area and all the above handle bad ground the very best. Every different area has different detector requirements because of many, many variables, interference included.
Hope I answered your question.
Easy $$$
As you may have figured out already, I have no real brand favorite, and I like the cheap Chinese ones as well as the real spendy ones, and maybe even a bit more sometimes in some places. All I can say is which I prefer. The first half is a matter of preference - and the other half boils down to common reason.
My preferences are as follows:
And the reason I have left out Minelabs is because most are severely over-priced for their mediocre depth in my soil, and their slow performance, although they do have many followers in other parts of the country. Additionally, Minelab never did need to use different freq coils, the same affect could have been achieved via a toggle switch and a small chip or old-school R/C circuit. MIneab just wants our money, that's all. The reason I omit Nautiluses is because they are designed for particular type of hunting which I seldom become involved in - and I would really have no need for them except to play with them now and then. The reason I have omitted most Garretts is because they use antiquated circuitry tha disallows decent performance in my high iron soil, even with Garretts after-market chip designed to help that problem somewhat.
My preferences;
PI: White's new TDI
Multi-frequency: Any Fisher CZ
Tot lots: Compadre, Silver uMax, F-2, HP-1030, and 1236 x-2
Deep targets in open fields: F-75, T-2, White's TDI, cz3d,
All around hunting: F-70, Silver uMax, and Compass 13.77 Khz, M-6 and MXT
Salt beach hunting: White's TDI, Garrett Infinium
Gold nugget hunting: Fisher GB2 or Compass au2000
If I needed to chose only two detectors or could only chose two detectors, they would be either a cz3d, a Silver uMax, a Compass Relic & Coin, or a cz-70, and the other choice would (only) be the White's TDI PI, hands down. But with three allowed it all changes. Then there is cross-over performance to be considered.
As you know I already said that each person has different results than another - with the same detector. It's half preference and half knowledge, not much else.
For 3 detectors for you? I wouldn't know, but I don't think you would like to switch from using Garretts, or am I wrong? Your soil will decide much of that for you, but most people who buy Garretts complain a lot about medium depth, at best. They also complain about hot rocks and having a lot of trouble with highly mineralized ground. I have only seen 3 Minelabs and two Garretts in use in my hunting in Oregon, Washington, and California in the last 20+ years. And it's because of their lack of performance here. I do see a Garrett now and then in a pawn shop though. Minelabs too.
For me?
Tot lots and general coin hunting; American Hawks HP-1030
Salt beach or deep open field hunting; White's TDI
Nugget hunting; Compass au2000
But that's because I live in a very high mineralization area and all the above handle bad ground the very best. Every different area has different detector requirements because of many, many variables, interference included.
Hope I answered your question.
Easy $$$
bazinga
Silver Member
EasyMoney said:
Please tell me how I am deceived into believing this? I would love some elaboration on this. My detector is pretty awful at air testing. Ask any Explorer user and they will state the same. I have found coins at deeper depths than my machine will air test them at. I can detect a coin, then dig down to it, leave it at the bottom of the hole, and go over it again and hear nothing at all from my machine. Please explain this.
I am not doubting your background, nor the science behind all of this. But in real world application, these are the results that I get.
EasyMoney
Sr. Member
- Sep 15, 2007
- 476
- 7
- Detector(s) used
- Primarily my Fisher cz-70 and Compass Relic & Coin, plus many others
I'm sure this subject is completely worn out by now by most physicists and soil scientists, but in order to understand this oddity, you must first understand that the minerals in all soil (including pure silica, mica, Fe, Ca, etc) are magnetically aligned. Very much like the molecules are aligned (+) and (-) in a magnet. This soil is called "the soil matrix". A soil matrix is the entire area of soil in question, and it's entire compound of all minerals of any type, including any plant life in it, and water too.
Once you understand this concept then you can more easily understand that if you took a chunk (dug the hole out of the dirt) of the magnet out, then you would have a whole lot of the magnet gone, leaving little more than a shell, and a shell that has had it's magnetic field disrupted and weakened too. A magnet with it's inner guts gone would leave a very poor field, a shell of it's original configuration or shape or power, one that has much less value as to it's magnetic properties and potentials to be re-magnetized (detected).
So in view of how the soil matrix behaves as to it's ability to receive a signal or a magnetically induced field (created by the sending AKA primary coil), we can more easily understand why when soil is taken out of a hole, that it has - in lay terms - "really messed the whole thing up". This is also why using clay or glass or paper containers as "test pots" as a depth test method - is about as useful as mammouth mammaries on a male monkey. It is perhaps the worse way to test the depth of a detector period, with a "test garden" being the second worse way to test depth or detector capabilities.
Now if you doubt that - then try bringing some soil from another place after you test several detectors in it - when it was in it's natural state of having all it's molecules alligned magnetically (AKA north and south), and then bring it home and put it in "test pots". You will have some very surprizing results, some that will nearly astonish you.
So the answer is, that when you dig a hole and pull a target out of it and then put it back in the hole, covered or UN-covered, you have disturbed the soil matrix and it's magnetic polarity and it's ability to conduct electricity, and you likely will not be able to detect it, especially if it was a deep target.
Finally, the best way to understand why a VLF or Multi-freq detector cannot possibly in any way detect any fairly recently buried coin, naturaly or unnaturally, deeper in the ground than in the air is to first understand what the field it puts out looks like. A VLF does not read eddy current, but a PI does, and a PI can and does read items deeper in ground than in the air. In fact, any signal really intense enough for your vlf detector to recognize a dime-sized object past 20" in air would probably be totally illegal, since it's power is regulated by our US Government. Now if you have a detector that reads 12" in air then it's ability to detect past it's own radiated field is limited to that realm alone - and nothing short of inducing more power (gain) into it will change that. In other words, it is impossible because it cannot read that far.
It's a lot like us and our arms; Our arms can reach out just so far away from our body. In order for us to be able to reach out any further we need to grow our arms longer, stretch them, or get closer to what we are reaching for. There is no other way to do this.
Time for a good cup of hot coffee and an even better sleep.
Ciao bella, amicos mio.
EZ $$$
Once you understand this concept then you can more easily understand that if you took a chunk (dug the hole out of the dirt) of the magnet out, then you would have a whole lot of the magnet gone, leaving little more than a shell, and a shell that has had it's magnetic field disrupted and weakened too. A magnet with it's inner guts gone would leave a very poor field, a shell of it's original configuration or shape or power, one that has much less value as to it's magnetic properties and potentials to be re-magnetized (detected).
So in view of how the soil matrix behaves as to it's ability to receive a signal or a magnetically induced field (created by the sending AKA primary coil), we can more easily understand why when soil is taken out of a hole, that it has - in lay terms - "really messed the whole thing up". This is also why using clay or glass or paper containers as "test pots" as a depth test method - is about as useful as mammouth mammaries on a male monkey. It is perhaps the worse way to test the depth of a detector period, with a "test garden" being the second worse way to test depth or detector capabilities.
Now if you doubt that - then try bringing some soil from another place after you test several detectors in it - when it was in it's natural state of having all it's molecules alligned magnetically (AKA north and south), and then bring it home and put it in "test pots". You will have some very surprizing results, some that will nearly astonish you.
So the answer is, that when you dig a hole and pull a target out of it and then put it back in the hole, covered or UN-covered, you have disturbed the soil matrix and it's magnetic polarity and it's ability to conduct electricity, and you likely will not be able to detect it, especially if it was a deep target.
Finally, the best way to understand why a VLF or Multi-freq detector cannot possibly in any way detect any fairly recently buried coin, naturaly or unnaturally, deeper in the ground than in the air is to first understand what the field it puts out looks like. A VLF does not read eddy current, but a PI does, and a PI can and does read items deeper in ground than in the air. In fact, any signal really intense enough for your vlf detector to recognize a dime-sized object past 20" in air would probably be totally illegal, since it's power is regulated by our US Government. Now if you have a detector that reads 12" in air then it's ability to detect past it's own radiated field is limited to that realm alone - and nothing short of inducing more power (gain) into it will change that. In other words, it is impossible because it cannot read that far.
It's a lot like us and our arms; Our arms can reach out just so far away from our body. In order for us to be able to reach out any further we need to grow our arms longer, stretch them, or get closer to what we are reaching for. There is no other way to do this.
Time for a good cup of hot coffee and an even better sleep.
Ciao bella, amicos mio.
EZ $$$
fmrUSMC_0844
Bronze Member
- Sep 4, 2008
- 1,567
- 1,104
- Detector(s) used
- Whites MXT Pro, Whites TDI, Keene A52, Calsluice, Gold Hog Piglet
- Primary Interest:
- Metal Detecting
By the way I skim my coil right on the top of the ground. not enough to bump it around though.
deepskyal
Bronze Member
- Aug 17, 2007
- 1,925
- 63
- Detector(s) used
- White's Coinmaster 6000 Di Series 3, Minelab Eq 600
- Primary Interest:
- Metal Detecting
The White's 3000 is a TR and you are 100% correct about it staying balanced for long...if at all. It's a wonder I stuck with metal detecting at all after my experiences with it.
But it was my first machine, I used it, found some stuff with it...which back in the early 80's there was more to find than now...then I upgraded when I could afford it.
I'm always open to new ideas...even being the stubborn geezer I can be at times.
I'm still learning all the fine points of the DFX and use my 6000di pro when I dont feel like challenging my brain.
But I'll try the off the ground thing with the DFX. Heck...maybe I will find more with it. It's just...old habits are hard to break.
Al
But it was my first machine, I used it, found some stuff with it...which back in the early 80's there was more to find than now...then I upgraded when I could afford it.
I'm always open to new ideas...even being the stubborn geezer I can be at times.
I'm still learning all the fine points of the DFX and use my 6000di pro when I dont feel like challenging my brain.
But I'll try the off the ground thing with the DFX. Heck...maybe I will find more with it. It's just...old habits are hard to break.
Al
OP
OP
Mr.Jody
Hero Member
- Thread starter
- #58
Well Easy, its a BH, not 49 bucks though,but not far from it...lol its the quick silver.I have found rings and gold with it, so dont laugh to hard.BUT, If I hold it above the sand(beach) it will not work right,if i drag it on the sand, works as it should.Any thing other than the beach or freshwater, it just goes bonkers,so I only go to the beach or to fresh water creeks now with it, and no I didnt get the main box wet.I need about one more good trip to the coin collector to sell my "junk", then Im upgrading,to which one, I have no idea yet.
Uncle Willy
Jr. Member
- Oct 5, 2005
- 93
- 1
Depends on what detector you are using. Most coils are to sensitive for "scrubbing". I always scan with the coil an inch off the ground.
Bill
Bill
EasyMoney
Sr. Member
- Sep 15, 2007
- 476
- 7
- Detector(s) used
- Primarily my Fisher cz-70 and Compass Relic & Coin, plus many others
Jody it sure sounds like your detector is running a bit too negative if it makes noise and inch or two above the ground. There should be a pot inside to adjust it.
#1 Bring up the threshold to where you can hear it, inside when findng the pot.
#2 Re-adjust the ground balance (inside) just to where it has a slowly increasing or slowly getting louder sound .. as you raise the coil off the ground. Remember and mark EXACTLY where you found the original factory settings of these two pots and you can always return it back to that point if you need to. If you have a volt meter you can do this more accurately.
You could always install a manual ground balance pot if there is none on it. Most are 2 or 3 wire configurations.
Hope this helps.
Easy Money
#1 Bring up the threshold to where you can hear it, inside when findng the pot.
#2 Re-adjust the ground balance (inside) just to where it has a slowly increasing or slowly getting louder sound .. as you raise the coil off the ground. Remember and mark EXACTLY where you found the original factory settings of these two pots and you can always return it back to that point if you need to. If you have a volt meter you can do this more accurately.
You could always install a manual ground balance pot if there is none on it. Most are 2 or 3 wire configurations.
Hope this helps.
Easy Money
Top Member Reactions
-
2866 -
2009 -
1574 -
1546 -
1123 -
1033 -
1014 -
999 -
949 -
861 -
706 -
546 -
544 -
493 -
395 -
394 -
E
378
-
354 -
331 -
298
