Why Quarters Come In Second At The Beach

[bigscoop]

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Minelab PRO-FIND 35 Waterproof Pinpointer Metal Detector for Experts with Tone ID & Adjustable Sensitivity - Grab it through Amazon!

[FelixtheCat]

I don't think .002 in surface area weight is going to make any significant difference in how much more a nickel is going to sink when compared to the quarter. I do however like your second thought on the conductivity issue. If I'm finding nickels to me that means that if there was a prior hunter there before that missed those then he probably missed any gold as well.

 

[bigscoop]

Beyond the surface area issue, the quarter relationship to gold makes no sense given the noticeable difference in densities between a quarter and 10,14,18,22k gold. Lead would have a much closer relationship, as would some of the other denser metals such as iron. But the density of a quarter isn't even close by comparison. There's just no practical relationship between a modern quarter and gold.

 

[cudamark]

It seems to me that the density theory on sink rate would apply more to fresh drops than old drops. All metals are heavier than water and most are heavier than sand. Eventually they'll all sink until they hit a layer that prevents them from sinking further without help from mother nature. If I'm in an area where all I'm finding is zinc cents, tabs, and slaw, That indicates to me that it's a sanded in area were the light stuff hasn't had a chance to sink like the heavier stuff. If I'm hitting fishing weights, I figure the gold is close by due to their relatively close density. I also find quarters, dimes, nickels, and copper cents there too, because it's usually an older layer where all those metals have had had a chance to reach that layer over time.

 

[bigscoop]

Point is, there are "many" detectorist who still consider the gold/modern quarter relationship as being relevant, when it isn't. Back in the day this held more stock simply because in it's original context it use to be, "if I'm finding silver quarters." Over the years this has morphed into simply, quarters. A silver quarter weighs something like 6.7 grams, or roughly .279 grams per cm of surface area, these "much older silver quarters" also having had enough time to sink much deeper. This was the original context of the belief that quarters presented a good indicator that gold might be found in the same general area. But the modern quarter......it just has no relationship whatsoever. I wish it did because we'd all be swimming in gold. I've spent entire days filling my pouch with modern greenies, usually right after a storm or northeaster has stirred up those deep softer layers of sand and redistributed lighter targets all over the beach. Generally, these are also those hunts where the beach is covered with fine pieces of aluminum, tiny pieces of iron, pieces of wire, tiny screws and rivets, modern coins, light/fine chains, and a host of other lighter items. At least, this has been my experience over he years.

 

[bigscoop]

It seems to me that the density theory on sink rate would apply more to fresh drops than old drops. All metals are heavier than water and most are heavier than sand. Eventually they'll all sink until they hit a layer that prevents them from sinking further without help from mother nature. If I'm in an area where all I'm finding is zinc cents, tabs, and slaw, That indicates to me that it's a sanded in area were the light stuff hasn't had a chance to sink like the heavier stuff. If I'm hitting fishing weights, I figure the gold is close by due to their relatively close density. I also find quarters, dimes, nickels, and copper cents there too, because it's usually an older layer where all those metals have had had a chance to reach that layer over time.

Agreed! Recent drop hunting is a very low percentage game UNLESS you can consistently hunt in high activity areas over firm bottoms. For me, the time to get serious is when you're encountering a lot of those heavy fishing weights, chunks of iron, and similar items, and especially so when you're hunting a high activity area, either present or past.

 

[LawrencetheMDer]

Quarters Don't come in Second, They come in Third.
Just a fun side bar; in terms of count, quarters come in third, second for dimes and first for cents. Nickels are dead last in terms of count.
For example, this year, so far, I have found a total of 699 coins with 359 cents (51%), 160 dimes (23%), 126 quarters (18%) and 54 nickels (8%), give or take. I believe these are typical counts, for me anyways. I love finding nickels but like finding gold better.

 

[bigscoop]

Quarters Don't come in Second, They come in Third.
Just a fun side bar; in terms of count, quarters come in third, second for dimes and first for cents. Nickels are dead last in terms of count.
For example, this year, so far, I have found a total of 699 coins with 359 cents (51%), 160 dimes (23%), 126 quarters (18%) and 54 nickels (8%), give or take. I believe these are typical counts, for me anyways. I love finding nickels but like finding gold better.

While this is getting away from the thread topic a bit, here's some US mint production percentages for you that you can compare against your recovery percentages. Might prove interesting over the years if you want to take the time to do it? Might also be interesting to compare your yearly gold counts against your yearly quarter and nickel count over the years.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Mint_coin_production

 

[jeepGold]

Probably why my last name is Nicholes

 

[Jackalope]

...this year, so far, I have found a total of 699 coins with 359 cents (51%), 160 dimes (23%), 126 quarters (18%) and 54 nickels (8%),

I'll compare your numbers with mine ... I found 843 coins with 418 cents (49.6%), 197 dimes (23.4%), 134 quarters (15.9%), and 94 nickels (11.2%)

These are from Hawaii beaches ... but pretty uncannily similar to yours Lawrence. Wonder now if these numbers hold true for other beaches??

-Jackalope