the myth of the 90 degree turn to dig or not to dig??????

[Terry Soloman]

I have never heard of anyone doing a 90-turn to rule out a target. The technique is a pinpointing technique for beginners, not a target ID technique.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

DR.ÖTEK Metal Detector, Waterproof Gold Detector, Pinpoint & Terrain Modes, Professional Metal Detector - Grab it through Amazon!

[Mike G.]

Like Charles, I also walk around the target using the first 2-3 inches of the tip of the coil to try and isolate the good target from the bad. Even though it works great sometimes pulling a good signal out of the nails nothing is set in stone when it comes buried targets in old sites so I end up most of the time digging anything that resembles a good hit.

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

The 90° turn is done on Minelab's BBS and FBS detectors, when using these detectors you get nulls on iron, if you rotate 90° and sweep again and there is a target by the iron it will signal on re-sweep. I have found gold rings in same scoop with iron by doing this.

Sent from my P008 using Tapatalk

 

[CharlesUpstateNY]

For iffy signals I dig inconsistency, I dig weird. If a rusty nail falsing is behaving like they are supposed to behave and turning to iron at 90 degrees, if the machine gives me nothing else I'll keep walking. But any deviation from this classic rusty nail behavior in tone or ID I'll investigate further.

One of the more enjoyable parts of detecting for me is to find the most godawful worthless nobody would ever dig it signal and dig something good. lol That is the path to the dark arts of understanding your machine.

I once dug a plug because my machine nulled in all metal, which technically that can't happen so what the hell? No tone no threshold dead silence, weirdest damn thing I ever saw. Turned 90 degrees and hear 2 rusty nails ID'ing as iron, they were about a foot apart and pointing at each other. Turned back and between them was this null. Target was 2 silver quarters go figure. lol

 

[Terry Soloman]

The 90° turn is done on Minelab's BBS and FBS detectors, when using these detectors you get nulls on iron, if you rotate 90° and sweep again and there is a target by the iron it will signal on re-sweep. I have found gold rings in same scoop with iron by doing this.

Sent from my P008 using Tapatalk

OK, but I have not had that experience using Minelab and Fisher multi-freqs. Besides, why would you turn 90-degrees, when you can just sweep the coil forward and backward, rather than side-to-side?

 

[Treasure_Hunter]

OK, but I have not had that experience using Minelab and Fisher multi-freqs. Besides, why would you turn 90-degrees, when you can just sweep the coil forward and backward, rather than side-to-side?

Not saying you have to physically turn 90°, just re-sweep at a 90° angle from original sweep.

Sent from my P008 using Tapatalk

 

[Calabash Digger]

There was some doing exactly that Terry I dont know where it started but some were doing it. The guy I bought ny first detector from done it and he was a dealer ... lol

I have never heard of anyone doing a 90-turn to rule out a target. The technique is a pinpointing technique for beginners, not a target ID technique.

 

[vferrari]

OK, but I have not had that experience using Minelab and Fisher multi-freqs. Besides, why would you turn 90-degrees, when you can just sweep the coil forward and backward, rather than side-to-side?

You can sweep up and down with a concentric/coaxial coil because of the circular/conical detection field, but the thin sliced active detection field of a DD runs down the center diameter spine of the coil and slices into the ground like a hatchet blade or the cross section of half a football with the base where the 2 "D's" intersect, so you have to sweep side-to-side from a different angle to get separation on the target.

 

[Terry Soloman]

You can sweep up and down with a concentric/coaxial coil because of the circular/conical detection field, but the thin sliced active detection field of a DD runs down the center diameter spine of the coil and slices into the ground like a hatchet blade or the cross section of half a football with the base where the 2 "D's" intersect, so you have to sweep side-to-side from a different angle to get separation on the target.

I guess we just disagree.

 

[vferrari]

Hey, at least we agree if we're using concentrics. 1 out of 2 ain't bad, Terry Lol.

 

[Professor of Engineering]

Many people I see spend "20 minutes" moving around, changing settings and reading the numbers, me if the tone is right...dig,dig and dig and off to the next signal!

IMHO: "Keep it Simple formula" Keepers = number of holes dug - junk

 

[CharlesUpstateNY]

Agree if the tone is right, but if the tone isn't right?

 

[Calabash Digger]

Thats site specific! It your on a old site and your down to digging iffy signals you might be suprized at what comes out of the ground.

 

[Professor of Engineering]

Calabash digger said it best!

Determining when to dig has a component of being site specific. When relic hunting, I dig almost every signal and many times have been pleasantly surprised.

IMHO: Metal detecting is not a perfect science having many variables that need to be dealt with to be successful at each site; knowing your machine and experience are two key components to being productive.

Just some of my thoughts...

GL & HH

 

[CharlesUpstateNY]

Detecting is nearly infinitely variable, hence I spend some time (not on every target) experimenting on both solid signals and iffy signals before I dig when hunting inland. On the beach I just dig and move.

Solid Signals - I tend to run my machine hot and unstable. It can be useful to learn how far I can back off the settings at a given site and still retain a solid signal, or how quickly a solid signal breaks up then vanishes.

Iffy Signals - Pretty much the opposite trying different settings and strategies to see what improves the signal.

Discombobulating Myself - Taking the time to occasionally experiment with different settings/strategies eventually every rule of thumb I established over the years proved wrong! lol At least some of the time. The machine ALWAYS does X on target Y, after all it did X on Y 200 times in a row...until one day using the machine a bit differently it did the opposite.

The weird behaviors of a machine mostly center on discrimination. Discriminating iron or trash can result in missing a good target, but the exact opposite can also be true, maddening. But only discovered by taking the time to test targets before they are dug both in all metal and using discrimination.

Just my 2 cents worth. May not be as applicable to the Deus, dang the thing is a target separation monster I was shocked how sharply it was separating targets in my first test hunt.

 

[Jeff H]

Detecting is nearly infinitely variable, hence I spend some time (not on every target) experimenting on both solid signals and iffy signals before I dig when hunting inland. On the beach I just dig and move.

Discombobulating Myself - Taking the time to occasionally experiment with different settings/strategies eventually every rule of thumb I established over the years proved wrong! lol At least some of the time. The machine ALWAYS does X on target Y, after all it did X on Y 200 times in a row...until one day using the machine a bit differently it did the opposite.

I also like to do some experimenting over targets. And I have come to the same conclusion as you Charles. There are no certainties, only probabilities and likelihoods and occasional head scratching moments of disbelief

I had one this weekend actually. I found a large shallow tombac on the iron infested lip of one of my most pounded cellar holes. What had me shaking my head in wonder was that I had just wandered over to the cellar hole from the woods and I had the 11" coil on and my deepest program loaded up. I'm talking TX3, Sens 95, Reactivity 1. Why did that make it diggable when me and a dozen other detectorists had hit that cellar hole with every machine, coil and program setting under the sun ? Those settings are "supposed" to be useless at an iron choked site. The only certainty is that there are no certainties.

 

[vferrari]

I also like to do some experimenting over targets. And I have come to the same conclusion as you Charles. There are no certainties, only probabilities and likelihoods and occasional head scratching moments of disbelief

I had one this weekend actually. I found a large shallow tombac on the iron infested lip of one of my most pounded cellar holes. What had me shaking my head in wonder was that I had just wandered over to the cellar hole from the woods and I had the 11" coil on and my deepest program loaded up. I'm talking TX3, Sens 95, Reactivity 1. Why did that make it diggable when me and a dozen other detectorists had hit that cellar hole with every machine, coil and program setting under the sun ? Those settings are "supposed" to be useless at an iron choked site. The only certainty is that there are no certainties.

Actually those settings are just fine even for thick iron. I would only question them if the soil were mineralized (then bump Tx power down) and/or you had a lot EMI in the area (bump both TX power down and sensitivity down). Apparently, neither applied, so you were good to go. Reactivity of 1 is probably a good place to be for maintaining separation while maximizing depth. If anything, would have bumped reactivity up a notch if more separation was needed at your site. I know the iron sifter program backs down on sensitivity and ups reactivity, but that doesn't mean a strong deep program will not work in thick iron. Probably, the key is how you have discrimination set up and tones (presuming minimum disc and full tones). I am going to do some experimenting on Ted's two-tone unmasking program to see how that works in thick iron once the underbrush thins out and I can get back to some of my bad iron trash sites.

BTW - not familiar with the term tombac other than knowing it is a brass type alloy. Are you describing a specific tombac object or is that common name for a coin made of that type of alloy (Canadian?). Thanks.

 

[G.A.P.metal]

tombac buttons - Google Search

 

[Jeff H]

V, I was referring to the tombac button. Pretty common at the 18th century sites. It is a brass alloy that can contain a handful of different metals. They are usually greyish or silvery looking depending on the amount of zinc content. They hold up well in the ground.

The point I was emphasizing along with Charles was that "conventional" settings are not the final word in any situation. In heavy iron, the conventional wisdom is small coil, low TX and high Reactivity. That is fine for sniffing out a lot of targets but it will still leave a lot behind. What surprised me wasn't finding the tombac with the deep settings, as I had hunted the iron with those settings with the 9 inch coil, but what surprised me was that it hit hard on the 11" coil but not the 9". This is an inch diameter button that was only 3 inches deep. The 9 inch coil usually eats those up! I was using a 3 Tone with Disc at 6.

 

[HuntinDog]

You have to get the coil over it no matter what size or setting.....