TID Information

[Smudge]

I currently use a Tesoro Golden uMax which has impressed me on several levels. I very much like the notch discrimination which allows me to keep smaller gold rings while knocking out many types of garbage.

I especially like how it allows me to identify screw caps. I think I have only dug 2 or 3 since I got this detector.

I am still digging a good number of pulltabs, which I don't mind so much (I have a pull tab collection going).

My only problem is that crushed aluminum cans and especially "can slaw" ring out loud and clear as coins (sharp high tones).

I don't really use TID detectors, but i was wondering if anyone used a detector out there that helped them to positively identify can slaw and aluminum cans before you dig.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

How to Research for Treasure Hunting and Metal Detecting From Lead Generation to Vetting - Grab it through Amazon!

[Sandman]

Afraid not....Since the conductivity signal is the result of the signal from the surface of the target, any crinkles in the can or foil enhance the signal. This is why your ears are more important that what a screen says it is. It boils down to your fun threshold.

 

[Lowbatts]

Not a big difference in the overall scheme. I've been trying to attribute some differentiation between simple bands and those with settings of any size. Since simple bands are plain, they offer the least amount of surface variability, facets, or as Sandman points out, crinkles such as with canslaw.

If you have a machine with a higher spread on the low to mid range target values as with my F70, then it may be possible for some separation between targets. A simple band, layed flat in the ground seems to give one solid locked-on TID value in my limited experience of about 20 rings since I've been using the F70 over two years. Those with facets will have some TID bounce and of course overall the TID range will vary due to ring size and carat value as well.

I dig the junk signals that bounce if they are or seem deeper than the general trash layer in the area and pin point sizing indicates a ring size target for the depth reading. But for the more shallow signals, I only dig those targets with a solid, one to two value TID range in the given range for gold rings.

All pull tabs exihibit some range variability greater than one digit so far that I've noticed and unfortunately some do fall into my two-digit range of acceptance. That and the fact that pull tabs vary across the low-to-mid TID value spectrum makes it tough.

I'd have to hear more from someone that has noted a similar experience with simple bands to say I've got a partial answer though, my return just isn't enough to prove out my thinking yet.

Of course this does not apply to upper range targets for me, almost all my silver bands, large settings or even other configurations such as crosses and chains seem to fall into the 79-81 range without regard to varying facets.

I plan on working this notion through in the next couple weeks as some sports fields become available and will give me some relatively clean ground to work with but of course the proof is in the mixed environment. Still on the fence there. I'm thinking this line of thought applied to a stronger rig like a T2 or F75 might yield more verifiable results.

 

[Smudge]

Hmm. I was afraid of that. Thanks for confirming.

 

[DirtAngler]

I have an Etrac, and though fairly new with it, have found trash signals like alum. can pieces can come in all over the place number wise. The problem is that gold jewelry can and will fall in these ranges as well. The Etrac emulator program for gold jewelry shows a very wide range of conductivity numbers for gold. Then on top of all this, other targets in the area and/or ground mineralization can vary the TID. If you don't want to risk missing something good, the old saying about not knowing until you dig it, is very true. JMHO. GL and HH.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

I agree with everything the other responders say here so far. I half-expected, as is usually the case, that someone would come on here saying that "aluminum sounds different" (in tone, sounds, softeness or boldness, or whatever) than good targets. If you ever hear someone tell you that, present this challenge to them: take them out to an ag. field where plows have made can-slaw of hundreds of different aluminum cans, and spread them all around to kingdom come. Have them show you how they can pass up can slaw, in favor of *only* good targets. My hunch is, that their claims will quickly go silent.

 

[Coin Digger]

Crushed or shredded aluminum cans, and the like, almost always sounds and reads like a good target.

The best way I've found to tell the difference is by outlining the target it pin point mode. If it outlines big chances are it's not a coin.

Learned that little trick with my Classic 3. Give it a try.

 

[gleaner1]

Never let a deep signal go by. No! I mean never go by a deep signal. The shallow game is a tough game.

 

[U.K. Brian]

A detector with permanent depth reading like the Whites 6000 series 2 (not a D.I. model) will indicate coke cans, large alloy etc.

Just locate a target. Back the coil away until the depth reading fails to register and then approach the target again.
If the meter starts to register before the audio kicks back in then its larger alloy scrap or similar.

 

[otie]

With my deleon, i get a 95 or silver reading, i switch over to all metal, while xing the target i raise and lower the coil, this helps me size the target for a better jugement. i will still dig this as it may be a coin spill two or three quaters or dimes all with in half or inch apart you just never know. my two cents hope this helps otie