Hot Dirt Relic Hunting And The Unvarnished Truth Regarding VLF Induction Balance Detectors (and Other Opinionated Musings By Chase)

[Steve Herschbach]

I don't know Chase.... some authorities insist a PI cannot be used to do what so many use PI detectors for at Culpepper! 

Truly terrific report, and I mean that. Our detector explorations have mirrored each other, though for me it is gold, you it is relics. The concept is the same. High value targets in trash at depth. What do you do? The truth is that if the targets are high value enough - you need to get them - then you will eventually arrive at PI no matter what. I've been chuckling at Tarsacci claims since day one, as anyone thinking a Tarsacci is as deep as a good Minelab PI simply does not know what they are talking about, and such claims are over the top. Yes, Tarsacci hits as deep as a White's TDI SL, even deeper, so the claim is not false. But it sure is not including top tier PI detectors either.

I have a trash site with gold nuggets scattered through the site. This is common - camps were built close to the best gold, and often on top of it. Everyone hates digging trash, so I tried all the best VLF detectors. You can always pull stuff out of trash with a VLF, so people think they are finding stuff. And they do. But they are leaving a lot behind, probably more than they found. I finally got fed up with the VLFs, and hit the same area with a GPX 6000, digging every target. A magnet on a three foot digger makes it efficient, no bending over. Get beep, make it move, stab with magnet, move on, unless nothing on magnet.

There was more gold found doing that, more than I found before - even after I cherry picked out the gold with VLFs, simply due to masking. No matter what people think, if you are in a ferrous bed, and leave the ferrous in place - probably 50% or more of the targets will never be found until the ferrous is removed. No VLF will get the job done even halfway well, and that's a fact. A fact that PI people exploit to great effect. There will always be skeptics, but if the targets have value, using a PI and digging all targets is the only way to know you are not leaving half the goods in the ground. I'm not exaggerating. A simple flake of ferrous on the surface can block a 1/4 ounce nugget a few inches below with ease. Detector do not see though metal to find metal - in general they find the first metal they see. New fast recovery machines help a little, smallest coils even more, but anytime you have two or more items under a coil at once, things will go sideways.

What that means from my perspective is that VLFs are second tier tools used only when I can't get a PI to do the job, and that boils down to groomed areas where digging endless holes is not allowable. I've done all the same VLF comparisons you have done, and your views 100% mirror mine, and so I certainly confirm every word you have said through my own personal experience. I still have a Tarsacci, but it is oddly stuck in a gray area for me. No matter which way I turn with a VLF, it will never get the job done entirely. So if in the end I am going PI anyway, the VLF I use is more about being versatile and efficient. You can make a case for any of them depending on the situation and personal preferences. For me the 12" x 15" coil on the Equinox is a killer combo for a lot of my hunting, and so it wins just by having a certain coil I need that the other machines lack. It can be something that simple. Or Equinox being water resistant, where Deus is not. Whatever. From the PI perspective, all VLF decisions are hair splitters as to which of the less capable machines you want to use. In my world the VLF rides shotgun for the PI, and really only comes out for oddball situations, or park use.

Again, great report, literally could not have done it better myself.