The Great Debate Of Discrimination, Iron ID And Target #'s When Detecting For Gold. (long Read)

[Gerry in Idaho]

The great debate of DISCRIMINATION, Iron ID and Target #'s when detecting for Gold.  The war of words is about to begin.  So lets try to stay on point and be courteous of others ways/ideas or skill levels for those who are newer to the game.

This is an open end post and all who respond, reply, ask questions, disagree and or partially agree is 100% totally fine and discussion desired.

So many times I’ve heard from the Experts who detect for gold, they say “Dig It All” and to never used Discrimination.  So I guess there really is no debate?  Just do what the Experts do and live with the results.  Is that such like good advice from so called Experts.  So if this is the case, then why do the detector manufactures offer it (discrimination or ID) on their machines?  VLF Gold type detectors have had Iron Identification on some models since the 1980’s and I also know earlier General Purpose detectors offered DISC as far back to the early 70s.  I imagine those of you who have been around for longer than I could even know of detectors with such capabilities  go back before the dates I mentioned?  Heck, even Minelab Pulse Induction detectors in the 1990’s provided Iron DISC feature. 

So are all those manufactures and variety of detector models, just selling us bells and whistles?  Remember what so called Expert says, “dig it all”.  The manufactures have to know something?  Maybe there are times and or locations that Discrimination and or Iron ID is indeed a needed feature?  Maybe the models with such are for dummies who know nothing as they have never spoken with an Expert?  Could said Expert who does this for a living be wrong?  Well most certainly not in his mind anyway.

I’m going to give you my reasons why I end using detectors with the Iron ID or Discrimination features and I’ll even go into detail of using both the traditional VLF’s and the more robust Pulse Induction power detectors.  I’m not an Expert and I do not do this for a living (well I do not hunt gold for a living), but I do sell detectors as my full time job.  So since I’m not an Official Full Time Prospecting Expert, does that mean the knowledge I have of various detectors not count?  That is to be debated down the road.  I will say this though and those who know me for many years know I can back up my words with the amount of gold and the sizes of gold I have recovered. 

1^st off,  when you are out there detecting, I want you to do what you are most comfortable with and what has provided you success on previous trips.  I’m not here to make you change your ways.  In fact, those of you who are just as happy with your results and not using DISC., I totally understand you are not about to change your ways.  That’s totally fine with me…I’m happy for you. It’s the rest of the folks who are newer to the game of Electronic Prospecting for gold and or even those who are experienced hunters that have decent success…but you are wise enough to realize at times ..just maybe there is a better way at doing it?  This article is for those folks.

The average guy who goes detecting a few times at the same locations with a little jingle in the pouch.  Your success at those sites tell, you’re doing it correctly so you’re quite pleased, happy and not willing to change your ways of thinking or doing things.  I’m fine and happy for you.  But, sorry that is not me. 

I’m all about Adventure and Travel with detectors in hand.  I enjoy new detector technologies and trying to find ways to make them perform better for the task.  I like gold and the varieties of gold I pursue is quite varied when compared to many other folks who chase it.  I don’t know if it’s because of my knowledge and skill level of gold detecting or just that others are stuck in a pattern and don’t know any difference?

My travels in pursuit of gold have guided me to more states than most (NV, OR, ID, MT, SD, WY, AZ, AK) 8 to be exact and 2 different countries (Australia and Mexico).  I’m not counting gold jewelry and coins/artifacts (my list would be much larger), just natural Au gold in it’s raw form.  All the states and countries I mentioned, I have had success with my metal detectors.  In fact, I have yet to hunt a state and not find gold with a detector.  CA, CO and UT will eventually get checked off my list.

OK, back to the Discrimination/Iron ID discussion and why I want it on my detector tools.  Why I feel DISC and Iron ID are of desired features on a metal detector and there are many times when they need to be used.

Those features save me time and energy.  Both Time and Energy are something I desire more and more each year and seem to get less and less of.  A detector with the features of DISC and Iron ID can save me Time and Energy when digging.  When I use a detector with such features, I get to SELECT the amount of targets I want to dig. 

Here is a typical situation I experience many times in my hunts.  I hunt gold where gold has been found and I like to detect in such sites.  Here are the main sites I prefer to hunt and use DISC and or ID machine.  Old hand placer workings, Ore dump piles, and Dredge Trailing Piles. These golden grounds were proven producers at one time and they leave plenty of targets for us. 

Old hand placer workings (6 pics below of Au digs using PI DD coils with DISC or VLF's with VDI Readout)  In OR, NV, ID, MT, and SD. The problem is most of the targets are trash and many of the trash items are man made iron.  My DISC and Iron ID capable detectors save me time/energy in these gold rich locations.  Using common math to show.   How many times will that person dig in an hour?  How many hours a day will that person hunt?  How many days on that trip will they swing the detector and dig targets?  Let’s say a person can dig 10 targets an hour and 6 hrs a day = 60 targets for the day.  On average, average site produces 15 non ferrous targets and 45 iron targets.  So of the 15 non ferrous targets, lets say 20% are gold (3 pieces of gold) of the 15 nonferrous targets and of the total 60 digs.  In Eastern Oregon those numbers are pretty close.  Here is where I like the ID.  I can save Time and Energy by not having to dig 45 iron targets.  I now am digging more non ferrous targets than the average guy  so my gold count goes up.  Say I saved T&E on those 45 iron targets so I still get the 15 Nonferrous, but the extra T&E allows me to dig 15 to 25 (not 45) more targets that are Nonferrous.  I’ll be extremely on the cautionary side and say I only dug 15 more NF targets.  That ends up 2X my gold count for the day and also still saved me T&E.  Plus as well all know, the extra boost of finding more gold seems to earn me a little more Energy.

 

Ore Dump/Hardrock Piles- (5 pics of success using VLF's & their Identification systems) Many areas I hunt in NV, ID, MT, OR and I’ve seen many in AZ have such hard rock ore dumps.  Do you know the preferred detector for this kind of gold?  Do you know if you take a target identification VLF and use it at such sites, you can recover more desired nonferrous targets.  I select only certain VLF type detectors for these sites.  Iron ID is nice and if that is all I have then most certainly, I use it.  But I know (from previous testing) that certainly VLF gold capable detectors can go a step farther and provide me with even greater odds of Success at gold and saving me T & E.

Dredge Tailing Piles – (8 pics of gold using VLF's & their ID features) Love hunting these locations and my success in Tailing Piles of ID, OR, AK, NV is golden.  Some of my largest gold recoveries are from such piles and the funny part is most all of them were recovered with VLF detectors using Iron Discrimination.  Why you ask?  Because in dredge tailing piles, even a VLF detector can pick up a rail tie spike at 12” down.  Even a VLF can hear a rusty prospectors tobacco tin or smashed sardine can at near a foot and a half deep.  Even a VLF detector can hear at depths of 2 feet down for a rusty grease bucket or lid to a 55 gallon drum.  How about the 55 gal drum itself…well I know for a fact some VLF detectors will respond pushing near 4 feet down.  Are you man enough to dig those monster holes in loose rocks and gravel?  If you have never attempted it, good luck.  The material you are digging keeps caving in as you go down and the next thing you know…after 45 minutes, you have a 4 foot wide and 3 foot deep hole.  Only another foot more to go.  Oh those days…can kill an old mans ego for the whole trips…I’ve seen it happen.

As you can see from the Success pictures, the ability to use Iron ID on Pulse Induction & VLF detectors has proved golden. Now, taking today's newer Identification ID machines a step further saves me much time on pursuing only the best and most probably signals to dig.  No, there’s no magic to it, but I’ve learned a lot more than most about different kinds of gold and how it reads on these ID machines.  So many of the sites I currently hunt, the bigger solid nuggets are gone and have been for 10+ yrs.  But there’s still some of that specimen stuff the older technologies missed. 

Sites I enjoy detecting are the trash areas most others try for an hour or 2 and then they walk away is discuss.  They’re tired of digging holes and finding iron nails, boot tacks and shovel heads.  Sure, I dig a few of those shovel heads, but not as many as most others do.  I’ve spent the time in the field and learned.  I’ve purchased most of the newer technologies and tested/compared each to see how they stand.  No one detector does it all, but I know this.  I quality PI and a new technology VLF sure does cover most bases.  After all, I can tell you with fact, that the last 5 yrs, my gold finds are better than most and the majority were recovered using my techniques in the locations I mentioned.  It’s hard to beat what works and puts the gold in the safe.

Knowing where and how varying gold finds register on your VLF detector is crucial.  Here’s an example of what most folks encounter when in the field at an old gold producing site.  Ore dump piles, are full of rail tie spikes and blasting caps.  Also seems to be a beacon for lead bullets of a variety, but usually .22 and 9MM slugs.  Many of my gold recoveries from these sites, the newest of VLF gold detectors can ID the difference between such targets. Also, the majority of gold specimens in a certain pile, seems to ID the same #’s or very close to it.  Yes it does take practice and time to learn, but in the end, you have knowledge to be selective and save time/energy.

Hand working placer digs has a bigger variety of trash items and one some of my locations, the gold is thicker, more dense and reads different.  I usually use VLF ID’s to help identify and ignore the high conductor targets while concentrating on the lower ones.  Most gold (not all) will read in the low to possibly medium range.  Even using a Pulse Induction detector with Iron DISC is possible and quite rewarding.

Dredge Tailing piles are a lot like hand placer workings, but they provide even a bigger variety of trash.  These piles are the hardest to learn and use a PI detector.  I prefer a VLF for most of the tailing pile hunts I do, as the machine itself is much lighter and easier to swing on side hills all day.  Besides I don’t want to dig 2’ or 3’ deep holes and those occasional 4’ ones will practically kill you.  On the rare occasion there is big thicker gold (Ganes Creek, AK).   I recommend if you swing a PI, you better have a quality VLF detector handy to help ID as you dig.

So many varieties of gold and the areas, terrains and methods they were minded in the US.  Australia and other countries of the gold bearing regions are different and those of you from there may not see any use in my techniques and style of hunting or the detectors I use.  That’s totally understandable and I have no issues.  But if you do have hard rock ore dumps and hand placer workings with trash, it might be worth the time to swing PI and DD coil or a VLF with good target identification.

I look forward to hearing from those who use my techniques and I also want to hear from others who might have things to add.  What is most important about this post and discussion is the actual discussion and sharing of knowledge.  After all, that’s why were on here right?

Thanks for your input and reading.

[JCR]

This is going to be an interesting thread.

[mn90403]

Gerry,

You ARE an EXPERT.

Mitchel

[Norvic]

Top insights Gerry to start this this thread, I`ve not used iron reject/discrim at all in my 45 plus years, mainly because there is not any need for such out in the unworked fringes where an occasional horseshoe/nail/bullet/pellet is encountered. Aged legs are dictating those long searches in rugged country via shanks pony are near over so part of this season on day trips I`m amongst the junk in closer to the mines/settlements.

I will be following this thread with much interest to pick up any hints from those who work such areas that may help the Manticore or Axiom w/. DD score amongst the junk without losing what`s left of my sanity from our crazy fever. Young fellas get out into the unworked fringes whilst your legs can...... it can only drive you crazy but.... when you score... tis magic no.

[Gold Catcher]

Great topic, Gerry, this one never gets old. VLF disc certainly has improved over the years, but you need to be very mindful of when and how to use it. Experienced detectorists like you know when to use it sucessfully. But many less experienced operators abuse it to an extent where they miss most if not all gold. The large gold specimens that you show are probably not representative of what most people usually find in the field when they go on their club claims, and small(er) gold in mineralized ground are mostly missed when using discrimination. Also, depth is detrimental to discrimination as I am sure you know. Countless times I have recoverd small gold nuggets that read as ferreous on the meter, in particular when encased in iron rich soil. So, IMO discrimination is generally not a good strategy, with exception of certain circumstances where it can come in handy. But it takes experience and knowledge to use it properly. But for more serious gold nugget hunting, in particular at the detecting edge, discrimination is totally useless, and this is the reason why none of the high end modern ML gold detectors even offer that feature. Witout a doubt you know all this, so I am speaking more to the newcomers who might not be familiar with the technical limitations of discrimination, in particular when gold nugget shooting.

GC

[Gerry in Idaho]

10 hours ago, mn90403 said:

Gerry,

You ARE an EXPERT.

Mitchel

Detector Expert....I know more than most.

Gold Prospecting Expert... Not exactly when compared to those I know who do ti full time.  I sell detectors for a living and provide knowledge from my near 50 yrs of swinging them.  I don't hunt gold for a living and I don't get checks from the manufactures.  I have a select few customers who do hunt gold for a living and I'll warn most, it's sometimes a rough, solitude life with a different mindset. 

[abenson]

Well I certainly don't consider myself an expert gold prospector. There are many people on this forum that have found more gold in a day than I've found in a year. But I have used both PI and VLF's detectors for beach, relic and gold prospecting enough to know when each should be used. Right tool for the right job. I doesn't scare me to wander into a sea of trash with a PI and a small coil, if the reward is big enough. But at the same time if a VLF will get the job done I'm all for using one.

At sites with high mineralization I see little sense in using a VLF no matter what the target size is. Unless the trash is so thick you can't swing without hitting 3 or 4 targets. If I used a VLF at those types of sites I'm confident I would be leaving more behind that I would find. Example the last small gold nugget I found with the 6000 at about a inch deep, the Manticore was calling it iron laying right on top of the ground. Do I dig everything I hear on a PI? No, I make a dig discission off what the target sounds like. Do I miss gold doing that probably, but that's my form of discrimination with a PI. If there's lost of trash, put on a smaller coil.

Some of the best finds I've made over the last 10 years have been with a PI. I'm in the camp of using a PI with no disc.

[jasong]

"Learn the rules like a pro, so you can break them like an artist". - Picasso

Aphorisms like "dig it all", "low and slow", etc are good for people detecting club claims, heavily worked areas, old patches, etc. For those detecting a wide range of different environments and doing exploration, it's often more about figuring out when and where to break the rules and how to adapt to changing, new environments in order to maximize yield (aka - your total gold take per unit time spent). 

[dirtman]

Everyone has one............

An "opinion" 😁🧐

As for myself, no screens, no readouts, no "automated opinions or guesses.

Time spent on my machine and total guidance from my ears. In other words "the sound" 😎👍🎯⛏️. 

[snakejim]

I'm with Gerry 100% on this topic. Back in the day we dug it all, and only had a magnet on a pick as a discriminator. Digging a hole 3 foot deep for a rusty can was a total waste of time and effort. Today, I use all the features of the detector I'm using as a time saver and it works well for me.

snakejim