Pocket Full Of Kryptonite (pennies)

[GB_Amateur]

You guys are giving my observations too much weight.  I think there are variables that can affect the digital TID's on the Equinox.  For example, I've noticed that Field 2, 50 tonex gives TID's a bit lower for nickel-zone targets.  That works in my favor for beavertails since they will slip down to 11 (usually with some 12) and tip me off that it's not a nickel (reading 12-13 in Park 1, custom 5 tones).  Nickels almost never hit pure 13 in Field 2, 50 tones and when Park 1 (or Field 1) 5 tones shows 12-13, Field 2 50 tones will often show solid 12.  So could IHP's respond similarly, i.e. different dTID's depending upon Mode and settings?  I feel a lot more confident with my nickel discrimination techniques because I spent almost all of last year in a park that was loaded with pulltabs of every kind (digging 1400 of them and ignoring a lot more than that).

Nearby trash (the ever present nails...) and possibly even the ground mineralization could possibly (in my limited knowledge) have an effect on the dTID's.

As I mentioned in another thread, I try to use signal strength (both the tone volume and the visual bar "depth meter") to help me decide if a 20 or 19-20 is worth digging.  Now 18-19, since I have those set for a medium tone, is a tougher call.  Maybe I've missed some IHP's....  And we all know that old coins can be shallow, even though typically they are not.

 

[GB_Amateur]

1 hour ago, F350Platinum said:

18?5 (who would drill a coin through the date)....

It's worse than that.  You just know deep down this was an 1875.  🤬

[kac]

Nice going. Looking at the plotting it seems you missed a few spots....

[F350Platinum]

1 minute ago, kac said:

Nice going. Looking at the plotting it seems you missed a few spots....

That's the "when it works" caveat. 😀 I use it with GPS Locker Pro which makes it a bit more accurate. Once yesterday and once today it started messing up. A restart of both fixes it.

I always make the search area a lot larger than what I actually search too. Sometimes I get bored and go outside the box if you will. Did that today and found a button.

[Tiftaaft]

3 minutes ago, GB_Amateur said:

You guys are giving my observations too much weight. 

Well deserved GBA.  

I do think ground conditions could alter the TID, so it would make sense that the different modes, with their individual secret sauce of custom frequency mixes and such .. could and probably do have a similar impact.  When I finally find my next IHP (it has been a bit of a dry spell for me) I will be able to speak better about it.  I may be trying to convince myself that the ID is lower than 20 since I haven't dug any at 20 in recent memory.  And just to add relevance to your comment GBA... I would have been running Field 2 when I found my last one, so that may have been why I recall it giving me a TID below 20.  

Sometimes it feels like raking water.  😉

~Tim

[kac]

I think the alloy content of the IH's and many of the old coins varied quite a bit so the id's should be different. Old metallurgy wasn't that precise. With modern metallurgy we have incredibly accurate trash for coins.

[F350Platinum]

17 minutes ago, GB_Amateur said:

It's worse than that.  You just know deep down this was an 1875.  🤬

Most likely, and the reason for the hole. Who wouldn't want to wear one? 🤔🤣

[Tiftaaft]

3 minutes ago, kac said:

incredibly accurate trash for coins

They have it worked out to a science for sure.  

[GB_Amateur]

3 minutes ago, kac said:

I think the alloy content of the IH's and many of the old coins varied quite a bit so the id's should be different.

There is some variation but I don't think it was due to inaccurate metallurgy.  A good study would be to take coins that haven't been in the ground and measure their dTID's.  (I did this for Warnicks and reported the results but that's a different era.)  The 95% copper part is pretty accurate, IMO.  And the mint intentionally wouldn't say exaclty how much of the remining 5% was tin and how much was zinc.  I don't know why, but maybe they wanted their metals suppliers to have some leeway.  After ~1962 until the Zincolns took over the 5% was all zinc.  Those dTID 25-26 (in Park 1, anyway).  The earliest (first one or two decades?) Wheaties appear to all be in the low 20's, at least the ones I've found.  It seems to make sense to me that the more tin in that 5%, the lower the dTID.

[kac]

Didn't the content vary over the years? I have found IH with very low numbers and some with high numbers. Think I need to check and sort by year the ones I have and see what the differences are.

You know way more on the coins GB.

Updated, just looked it up and they had 2 different alloys over the years which may explain much of the variation on the IH's anyways.

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

How accurate the mixes where are probably negligible on the machines ability to tell the difference other than the major change of alloying between the 1859-1864 and 1864-1909.