Jump to content

Gold And Aluminum


Recommended Posts

This has been said many times, but there is nothing like seeing it.  I can’t tell the difference between those particular two, in any orientation, either by sound or ID (on Vanquish 440).  Are there any tricks of the trade to increase the chance of differentiating the right-size gold ring from a modern beer can pull tab?

D7FD7228-CAC4-43A0-A79A-A8D548AB4F65.jpeg

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites


From my point of view, even at a similar if not equal VDI number, those finds are usually not "friends".

I mean rarely You can find it togheter in the same spot, unless on the dry where things can be a mess.

Usually on the wet and the surf a good division is done by the water motion so You can expect the pull tab far and higher from the low tide line and conversely the ring lower down from there to...Anywhere....

I repeat, usually...So dig it all still is a good advice, trust me...

You can see also today a bottlecap reject on the D2 and not a Pulltab reject....Same VDI results by shape and size...Sorry...

By the way, editing this reply I forgot to write the number 7, which again means nothing to trust to, but usually on the ctx this is most of the time a pulltab shown at 12.07...

On the Vanquish I think must be an higher value due to the different VDI scale.

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand (from careful data collection a US guy did many years ago) that rings like that, with a 'heavy' part, tend to sink in the ground with the heavy part downwards. This means they are more likely to be 'on edge' , whereas 'staytabs' have no real weight bias, and will be randomly oriented in the ground.
So, focusing on the 'ring on edge' may possibly help increase your odds, from very slim to slim.
It depends if you're going to repeatedly visit a particular park or not. If you intentionally leave 50% of the ringpulls because they don't sound 'finger-ringy', they are still there to bother you next visit, and the next.
  • Like 7
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/11/2022 at 9:07 AM, mcjtom said:

This has been said many times,...

And so has the following, but worth repeating:  any action taken to avoid digging a signal will result in some good targets being left in the ground.

Coins are the most consistent target because their size, shape, weight, and composition are carefully controlled during manufacture.  Yet, even the dTID's of those can be affected by factors such as orientation, depth, ground mineralization, nearby metallic targets, and time spent 'stewing' for decades in the chemically reactive soil.  Objects that are less uniform (gold rings being an excellent example) will have dTID's even more disparate.

Native gold detecting is probably the opposite extreme to coin detecting when it comes to uniformity of desired target, and successful detectorists in that subfield are the most averse to using any target recovery avoidance.  Sometimes even they are forced to, but they have to be dragged kicking and screaming into that abyss.  😁  Still, some (successful) jewelry detectorists give them a run for their money in their dislike of discrimination.

  • Like 8
  • Thanks 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice Ring.

I'd say you are on the first step of understanding what a gold jewelry detector feature set requires. 

 If you can't see a difference in phase shift, then you have to rely on audio, both disc mode and all metal mode.  Does the 440 allow you to hear the audio difference between a tab and gold ring?   Does your all metal mode allow you to hear the difference between a tab and a gold ring?   Does coil height over the target matter?   

If you can't see the difference then you have to rely on audio responses to give you clues.

HH
Mike

 

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/12/2022 at 8:23 AM, GB_Amateur said:

And so has the following, but worth repeating:  any action taken to avoid digging a signal will result in some good targets being left in the ground.

Coins are the most consistent target because their size, shape, weight, and composition are carefully controlled during manufacture.  Yet, even the dTID's of those can be affected by factors such as orientation, depth, ground mineralization, nearby metallic targets, and time spent 'stewing' for decades in the chemically reactive soil.  Objects that are less uniform (gold rings being an excellent example) will have dTID's even more disparate.

Native gold detecting is probably the opposite extreme to coin detecting when it comes to uniformity of desired target, and successful detectorists in that subfield are the most averse to using any target recovery avoidance.  Sometimes even they are forced to, but they have to be dragged kicking and screaming into that abyss.  😁  Still, some (successful) jewelry detectorists give them a run for their money in their dislike of discrimination.

Couldn't agree more on all you said. I will never forget when I hunted behind a guy with a Nox when they 1st came out and before I got mine. And I was using my DF. He was leaving an "X" in the sand behind him. Which I dug just to see what they were. 95% was trash. I got 2 junk rings and a $700 SS watch. I've learned that many of these "discriminated trash" signals can be a cellphone or even a rusty junk chain with a gold ring on it. Ya never know , till ya know. 

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/12/2022 at 8:23 AM, GB_Amateur said:

Native gold detecting is probably the opposite extreme to coin detecting when it comes to uniformity of desired target, and successful detectorists in that subfield are the most averse to using any target recovery avoidance.  Sometimes even they are forced to, but they have to be dragged kicking and screaming into that abyss.  😁  Still, some (successful) jewelry detectorists give them a run for their money in their dislike of discrimination.

I have seen gold nuggets, and even .22 shell casings, read ferrous sitting in plain site on the very worst of ground. That will ruin you forever on discrimination. I’ve dug literally ounces of gold investigations other peoples abandoned dig holes. It’s not always they tossed trash back in the hole - they gave up on nuggets, large ones, because the machine said they were no good!

The detector sees everything, target plus ground, and if ground ferrous is high enough, it will override the low conductive non-ferrous signal, flipping them to ferrous. Same thing happens with VLFs in high magnetite content beaches. The more filtering employed, the worse the problem gets. If it’s any consolation, it turns aluminum signals into ferrous signals also. :laugh:

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Amazing how you pull the old posts into the new inquiries and keep everything relevant, Steve.

I still have those books and I still periodically re-read them.  Maybe the only thing that's really changed since I first posted the book list is that I also combine them with user manuals...comparing feature set attributes to loss characteristics since my jewelry detector selection is more varied now and I have a greater choice in what detector to use and where to use it.   I find it keeps the old information fresh, adds to the enjoyment and keeps me energized and positive.   Even when I can't get out very often. 

HH

Mike

 

 

 

 

   

  • Like 4
Link to comment
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
×
×
  • Create New...