Test Garden

[sparkydog]

I'm thinking of "seeding" A clean area of my yard with various targets and trash to test detector settings for depth, recovery from trash nulls and ground tracking speed. It seemed simple enough at first but I have a ton of questions arrising as I consider what targets to plant at what depth and how far from my zip tabs, foil and nails. To further complicate matters I want to create sections of high mineralzation using both magnetic and non-magnetic black sand I brought home from my sluicing out west. Has anyone done this or given much thought on how best to create a serious test-bed which would yeild some good insights into the difference between different detectors in different set-up configurations? I'd appreciate any inputs that I could incorporate into a "plot plan". I would like to avoid reduntent situations or omissions while really wringing out various machines and learning how to optomize their settings for various conditions. Before adding my black sand "mineralization", the soil will be loamy, Pa. garden soil with a little clay down deeper. A layer of sand and rock salt is not out of the question and my targets will be clads, silver and even a couple of gold nuggets and pickers in plastic bags.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Treasure of Victoria Peak - Grab it through Amazon!

[Frankn]

Cudamark, If it ignores the ground by not beeping, tell me what other circuit is there that is effected? What you are missing is that the ground is the mineralization. My XLT ground and air test the same. If you would have read my explanation above, you would know why your Minelab doesn't test properly in air test. Frank

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

A History of Mining on the Kenai Peninsula, Alaska - Grab it through Amazon!

[rainyday101]

I have a fresh test garden and it does not give accurate test results. It needs years before it will compare to actual detecting conditions. I can just get the 4" targets and barely some faint 6" targets. Disturbed ground is not the same as undisturbed ground. When I actually used the detector I did find coins deeper than my test garden. If you plan on making one just be aware of this. I was to throw my detector in the garbage at first until I read up on test gardens. Mine was about 2 weeks old when I first used it.

 

[cudamark]

Frankn, if in your example of a 5% return on signal, how is that ignoring the ground like it wasn't there? It's just compensating for it. If you take your XLT down to a salt water beach with iron mineralized wet sand, I guarantee you're going to get less depth than at a park even if your machine is working properly in both locations. You can ground balance all you want but you'll be hard pressed to find a quarter at any depth in the wet sand. My White's VLF machine is pretty close on air vs. ground test also but I get a bit more depth in good ground. My Minelabs are the other way around. I get much more depth in ground than an air test. An air test works fine if you're comparing two of the same detectors but to compare different detectors, you need to do it in the field under conditions you expect to hunt in. A test garden can help in that regard if you can simulate those conditions. If I was going to hunt jewelry at the beach in the wet sand and I had the choice between a VLF and a PI machine (or any other combination), doing an air test would not give me the info I need because the hunt conditions favor one over the other regardless of air test results.

 

[Frankn]

Cudamark, Listen! My point is, you are wasting your time with a test garden! You just proved it in your last post. There is an old saying, "The proof of the pudding is in the tasting." If you want to know what your detector can do, just go out and use it.
By the way, if you will note, My listing of detectors includes a Surfmaster PI. That is what I use at the beach. I know it will pick up fine gold chains because I have found them, I know it will pick up diamond rings at 10" because I have found several, I know it will pull coins from black sand because I have done it many times. Now why would I waste my time on a test garden. Frank

 

[cudamark]

You're probably right Frank, with you, a test garden is likely to be a waste of time.

 

[Frankn]

Cudamark, I know what my detectors can do. Your the one that doesn't know, but don't worry as you actually use that collection you might learn. Frank

 

[cudamark]

I'm quite familiar with my current detectors also. I bought my first detector in 1970 and have found over the years that it's best to use all the info and tools you have at hand to help learn new things. If you've used a particular detector for many years, a test garden for that machine is of dubious value. It's when you get a new one that it can help to have a test garden to compare it with your other machines under known conditions. Sure, you can do it in the field under "real" conditions but it can save time and help the learning curve to try it at home first. Like I said before, this is not the last word in detector comparisons, but a fairly useful tool in tests other than just air.

 

[Frankn]

Cudamark, My gosh, you must be as old as I am. That's about the same time I started with a Whites S63TR Goldmaster. I think the point going back and forth here is that we use different modes of operation to come up with a desired result. The thing is I used a test garden many years ago to evaluate detectors and found that the results obtained from it from week to week varied and therefor were inaccurate whereas the air results were constant. Here in Maryland, the soil seems to change in terms of results, with shifts in ground moisture and humidity . The air results, on the other hand, are fairly constant. That is why in a prior post I referred to ground as a changing factor that I felt should not be introduced into the equation. Your conditions where you live might be more constant. Frank

By the way is that a fish or a car. I have seen both?

 

[cudamark]

Frankn,
Your Goldmaster was miles ahead of my first machine....the Treasure Probe iV. The test garden I had changed all the time too but on any given day, it was still better than just an air test (which I did also). I used soil similar to our local parks and schools. I even had a sand pit with local beach sand and some rock salt and water, as needed, to do the test. I had several hunting buddies at the time and it helped us compare a whole variety of detectors under different conditions. Was it 100% accurate? No Way! As you mentioned, soil mineralization and moisture plays a big part as well as depth and the years the target was in the ground but it was closer to real world than nothing. It was also more convenient than dragging everything you own down to the beach or a park/school to do some testing. I don't have a test garden at my current place and don't miss it all that much now that I have a bit more experience but at times I wish I had one when I try something new.

 

[Normsel]

I think a test garden is a waste of time. No matter how much work you put into it you still know what's there. Depth, soil and detector can all make a difference. if you spend as much time learning your detector in the field as you would with a test plot you will already know. Your never gonna turn it into an exact science because if you could there would be a detector on the market that would tell you what everything was before you dug it. I have spent probably 400 hours in the field in 3 months and the more I learn the more i find and finding as I learn.