Jump to content

Recommended Posts

We all have seen many videos comparing  metal detectors , changing the coils, frequencies and all kind of settings so they can maximize the capabilities of the "machines"! 

But what about the same machines abilities to detect larger targets like a 20x20 cm or 40x30cm  on greater depths?? 

Am in the only one Qurious about it 🤪 

 Have someone seen something about it?? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Nik11 said:

But what about the same machines abilities to detect larger targets like a 20x20 cm or 40x30cm  on greater depths??

What are you searching for that is of such a size?  Most people (looking for smaller items, like coins or natural gold) would prefer those large targets gave minimal response as they 'polute' the area around them causing masking and thus missed good targets.  Well, we can wish all we want but it's not happening, thanks to mother nature (aka physics -- the universal rules).

People who are interested in large, deep targets use either two-box induction balance (IB) detectors or the pulse induction (PI) detectors with the strongest pulse currents.  I assume the videos you refer to are comparing IB/VLF detectors -- deep large target recovery not being their strong suit.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Large items are generally easier to detect to great depths so we don't usually spend a lot of time discussion the detection of the larger objects.    

We tend to focus on small item detection because those are the hardest to detect and most affected by masking and ground minerals.

We tend to call large object hunting, "cache" hunting and and most any good detector with a larger coil will detect those target sizes deeper than you would want to dig by yourself. 

I'll just throw this out there.....holes deeper than your waist are unsafe to dig alone.  You need a buddy for deep hole digging.   And real excavation requires some forethought before you hop down in there...even bulldozer scrapes....you need a buddy.
Mike

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello!! 

Well to be honest ,it s not like I am looking for something. I recently start engaging with this exciting hobby!! 

You could say that I just wanna know about the different capabilities of different detectors etc....

Something bigger could be an ammunition box or a just any box sized object !! 

I also came across with some of Garrett's detectors....like  Gti 2500 or ATX deep seeker or  ATmax!!They claim to go deeper for" larger" objects as well for  smaller coin size!! 

Ps: thanks for mentioning the PI and IB detectors 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

5 minutes ago, Mike_Hillis said:

Large items are generally easier to detect to great depths so we don't usually spend a lot of time discussion the detection of the larger objects.    

We tend to focus on small item detection because those are the hardest to detect and most affected by masking and ground minerals.

We tend to call large object hunting, "cache" hunting and and most any good detector with a larger coil will detect those target sizes deeper than you would want to dig by yourself. 

I'll just throw this out there.....holes deeper than your waist are unsafe to dig alone.  You need a buddy for deep hole digging.   And real excavation requires some forethought before you hop down in there...even bulldozer scrapes....you need a buddy.
Mike

Hello Mike!! 

Thank you for the addition info!! 

Well I bet they do, but also sounds  REALLY interesting don't you think?!?! To dig something out as deep as your hight.... It's crazy!!! 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, GB_Amateur said:

What are you searching for that is of such a size?  Most people (looking for smaller items, like coins or natural gold) would prefer those large targets gave minimal response as they 'polute' the area around them causing masking and thus missed good targets.  Well, we can wish all we want but it's not happening, thanks to mother nature (aka physics -- the universal rules).

People who are interested in large, deep targets use either two-box induction balance (IB) detectors or the pulse induction (PI) detectors with the strongest pulse currents.  I assume the videos you refer to are comparing IB/VLF detectors -- deep large target recovery not being their strong suit.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Nik11 said:

I also came across with some of Garrett's detectors....like  Gti 2500 or ATX deep seeker or  ATmax!!They claim to go deeper for" larger" objects as well for  smaller coin size!!  (empahsis mine)

First off, if by 'they' you mean the Garrett advertising creators, you need to take that (along with any other company's advertising) with a grain of salt.  Deeper than what?

The GTI-2500 has a two-box attachment, so that fits in with my earlier post.  The ATX is a ground balancing PI so also fits my earlier post.  I don't know if it has a high current pulse as the Minelab GPX's, but pretty sure it beats some of the GBPI competition such as the no longer manufactured White's TDI/SL.  As far as the ATmax, I think they are getting into more hype-advertising than solid evidence would support.  Is it a good IB/VLF?  Yes.  Is it deeper than its competition?  Many would argue 'no'.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Nik11 said:

We all have seen many videos comparing  metal detectors , changing the coils, frequencies and all kind of settings so they can maximize the capabilities of the "machines"! 

But what about the same machines abilities to detect larger targets like a 20x20 cm or 40x30cm  on greater depths?? 

Am in the only one Qurious about it 🤪 

 Have someone seen something about it?? 

Hi ,

Most of the metal targets , perhaps 99,9% of them , are small/medium sized targets , this is the reason why experienced users do not bother with the 0,1% big sized targets , because the probability to find one is very low.

Considering the depth , do not expect more than 20inches for a 20x20 cm or 40x30cm ammunition box when using  a single coil vlf detector like an Equinox , Vanquish , Garrett , Deus etc ... With a PI like a Minelab GPX you will go deeper but you loose the iron discrimination , and apart from the GPX price , you might find not very funny to dig on a tin can at 30inches deep ... 🙂

HH

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

From top class detectors  and 11"-13" coil .. you can realistically detect a larger coin at 40 cm, a military buckle at 65 cm, a field bottle at 90 cm, and a military helmet at 120  and more cm ...

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

450 grams of silver depot can be detected at 85-90 cm ...my Tek.G2 in Test...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The NATO 20x 30cm ammunition box with the Two-box can be detected 150 cm in the ground.

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Oh my! 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Steve Herschbach changed the title to Is It All About Small Targets Only??
22 hours ago, EL NINO77 said:

From top class detectors  and 11"-13" coil .. you can realistically detect a larger coin at 40 cm, a military buckle at 65 cm, a field bottle at 90 cm, and a military helmet at 120  and more cm ...

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

450 grams of silver depot can be detected at 85-90 cm ...my Tek.G2 in Test...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The NATO 20x 30cm ammunition box with the Two-box can be detected 150 cm in the ground.

 

 

That's interesting!! Nice videos , thanks 😁 

Never had in mind the Teknetics 😬

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Similar Content

    • By ColonelDan
      99% of my detecting is done on central Florida beaches. Since it’s impossible to establish a well stocked test garden at a public beach, I sorta brought the beach home with me and developed my own private beach garden!
       
      I cut slots in two large empty chlorine tablet buckets at various depths as shown from 2 -16 inches. I then filled one with New Smyrna Beach sand and the other with soil...for the few times I land hunt around here.

       
      I embedded numerous examples of ferrous and non ferrous targets into paint stirring sticks. I also have several blank sticks I use for gold and silver jewelry as well as artifacts that I don’t want permanently attached to a stick.

       
      I then insert the target(s) in the slots, each at its desired depth, and start scanning.
       

      This allows me to rapidly change the targets, depth and relative position of each.  I can now test for sensitivity at depth as well as separation of ferrous and non-ferrous targets in a variety of scenarios using actual beach sand where I do my detecting.
       
      If I want to test in wet salt sand, I just soak the bucket sand with authentic sea water that I also brought home from New Smyrna Beach...and the Atlantic Ocean never even missed it.  😉
       
      Works for me.....
    • By Steve Herschbach
      I always have my ears perked up for something new in metal detectors and metal detecting technology. I’m not educated enough to really get deep into the technical side of it, but I have a general layman's knowledge of the subject.

      A couple years ago Carl Moreland, the Engineering Manager for White's Electronics, was interviewed on a radio show. I tripped over a reference to the interview on another forum and checked it out. It is very long, and near the end Carl dropped a bombshell. At least I thought so, but it went unnoticed and uncommented on in the metal detecting online world. I thought about posting it on a forum back then but decided to wait and see what developed. Here is the applicable portion of the interview:

      Relic Roundup Radio Show, January 17, 2012, Interview with Carl Moreland, Engineering Manager, White’s Electronics
      http://en.1000mikes.com/app/archiveEntry.xhtml?archiveEntryId=260469

      Transcript beginning at 50:57 mark:

      Carl Moreland - “I can mention one technology that we’re working on because the patent has already been published… or the application, not the patent hasn't gone through yet. We’re working on something called half sine technology, which has actually been around since the 1960’s in geophysical prospecting applications. This is where instead of transmitting a sinusoidal signal you actually just transmit half of the sine and you can do that at extremely high voltages and high ? rates and so on. It’s technically not pulse induction but it’s not VLF either and it is a time domain method. And with that we can get really good depth and we can even get target id information and do discrimination and so forth.”

      Can you see why I perked up at that? I am still amazed it did not get any notice at the time. Nothing happened for a long time. Then I got this PM from Rick Kempf recently:

      Sent 29 January 2014 - 09:04 AM

      Was looking for info on my new SD 2100 this AM when I sort of fell down a rabbit hole of old forum posts and emerged reading Whites new patent. About the first thing I noticed was that you were cited in "prior art".

      Here's what they cited: http://www.voy.com/76600/7/475.html

      The patent is here: http://www.google.com/patents/US20110316541

      Is this something you knew about? Just wondering.

      Rick Kempf

      I told Rick, yeah, heard about that. It was the patent finally being granted from the application Carl mentions in the interview. It was fun getting a mention in a patent though I think it was just the examiner studying up on the subject and finding my old post helpful in simplifying the subject.

      For a long time the Holy Grail in metal detecting has been something that combines the target identification of an Induction Balance (IB or more commonly known as VLF) detector with depth of a Pulse Induction (PI) detector. There have been many promises and false starts over the years, and that was one reason I kept the radio interview mention quiet the last couple years. Frankly, I had half forgot about it until Rick brought the patent being granted to my attention. Notice the title:

      Hybrid Induction Balance/Pulse Induction Metal Detector

      A new hybrid metal detector combines induction balance and pulse induction technologies. Target signals are generated from a transmitted wave that has both induction balance and pulse current inducing characteristics and uses pertinent sampling of the receive data. Combining the two data sources provides eddy current target identification while excluding ground permeability and remanence obscuration.

      Is it time to sing Hallelujah? Well, there is a big gap in between getting a patent and bringing a detector to market. Many patents get filed and you never even see something directly related to the patent. Maybe it looked good on paper but does not pan out well in reality for numerous reasons. So just because White's was granted this patent does not mean something is around the corner. However, they have been working on it for over two years already obviously. And it has been some time since White's put something new out. I do not count remakes of the MXT etc as new. So I think there is reason to be hopeful we may see something one of these days.

      John Earle is one of the unsung heros in the industry. He had a hand in many of the best products at Compass Electronics before moving over to White's after Compass went under. To this day I have never used a VLF that goes any deeper than my old Compass Gold Scanner Pro. John was one of the brains involved in that, as well as the White's Goldmaster 3, regarded by many as being the pinnacle of the analog development of that model line. I was fortunate to have met John at the factory some years ago. He is listed as the inventor on the new patent. Half sine technology is also mentioned in an earlier patent filed by White's, again with John listed as inventor at http://www.freepatentsonline.com/7649356.pdf

      Looks like serious stuff brewing. Bruce Candy of Minelab makes mention of half sine technology in a patent application at http://patents.com/us-20130154649.html which makes me wonder about the new "Super Gold Detector" he is working on. But it is this most recent patent by White's that seems to put the finest point on it. Maybe the Holy Grail of detecting is soon to be a reality. The fact it is White's certainly gives me more hope than what we have seen in the past.
      Edit May 2015 - see also White's patent for Constant Current Metal Detector
    • By kac
      Found this patent that Whites filed and got a patent on in 2014 on a hybrid IB/PI machine.
      https://patents.google.com/patent/US20110316541A1/en
      Curious if anyone heard anything about this. Maybe Garrett will take it on?
    • By NV-OR-ID-CAL-AU
      I know we have had some great advancements in VLF metal detector's over the recent past, but I am hoping that we can keep some of the older design features that seemed to work well. 
      My favorite new technological features being offered in VLF's are Multi-IQ and single frequencies options, fully programmable settings, waterproof, noise cancel, USB chargers, li-ion batteries, Bluetooth headphones, prospecting & coin/relic options, and lightweight. Really a great job by the inventors of these detectors.
      IMHO I hope we do not lose some of the past designs that worked well, such as the ergonomics of the balanced s rod that would separate in three places for backpacking, the hip mountable brain box, the detectors that would not fall over when put on a little bit of an uneven surface, the 6.5 inch elliptical concentric or double DD coils for great access in rocky areas, the 1/4 inch headphone jack, the spare interchangeable battery pack that takes regular batteries to serve as a back-up for the li-ion battery pack, and higher frequencies options.
      I would like to see what else had worked well with other detector user, seems like we are always buying aftermarket parts to retain some of these older features where possible. 
    • By schoolofhardNox
      Not sure where this belongs on the forum, (or if it even belongs here), but this seemed to be the best category to discuss this. Ever since information on the GPX 6000 started to trickle out, I had this nagging feeling something in detecting has changed for those of us who like the thrill of getting to know a new detector. I never would have envisioned the GPX line morphing into a simplified detector. After having the GPX 5000 for a bunch of years now, and using it for relic and beach hunting, I could not imagine relying on a machine that adjust everything for you. I get it that money talks, and when you are a publicly traded company, you go for profit first, and then deny it 😄 And now that there market has switched to an area that probably has very little experience with detectors, the GPX 5000 must have been daunting for them.  So they cater to that market. But I was hoping that a new GPX would fix some of the issues that the 5000 had. I was naive. Minelab has never kept the good parts of their previous machines and just added the the things that needed improvements. On the E trac, the best part of it was the depth it had in finding deep silver,  in long tones, multi. Also the bouncy numbers helped ID deep Indians. When the CTX came out, it lost some of that fluety tone and they tried to straighten out the numbers to a number 12 line. So a two dimensional screen that worked well was transformed into a 2 dimensional screen that bunched most targets on one line. The The EQ comes out and squashes out the numbers even further. So why I thought the 6000 would not do the same is beyond me. I guess I'm disappointing that the "trend" is to make machines where the manufacturer decides on how your machine is going to be set. I hope someone in my area gets a 6000 and is willing to bring it to the beach to compare settings on deep silver. If it wins, then I will eat my words. I know I will get some slack with people saying it's a gold machine, not a relic or beach machine, but to them I would say.... you should be worried when a company controls your ability to fine tune your machine. Thoughts?
    • By Steve Herschbach
      I'm looking for a Compass metal detector catalog that includes the Compass Gold Scanner, and Compass Gold Scanner Pro models. The full line catalog, and this would be about 1990-1992 or thereabouts. I'm adding a few key older metal detector catalogs to the Downloads Area to provide basic info on older models. I do not need a ton of catalogs, just key years where major model changes occur, as things moved slower back then.
      If the catalog was in pdf format that even better, but Googling only turns up a couple older catalogs, nothing I can find covering the Gold Scanner era. I am more than happy to pay for a print version if need be, so I can scan into pdf and put up for people to download.
      Thanks in advance for any help. 
      Me and my Compass Gold Scanner, back around 1990:

×
×
  • Create New...