Jump to content

Recommended Posts


Wow, Steve; you sure do a bunch of work and thinking for this forum and all the others you contribute to.

Nice job explaining these various facets of detecting.

I find the higher the sensitivity on my 3030 the jumper it gets;plus many more spurious signals. Also every change in the settings affects the readouts more or less...and finally, my ears tell more than anything else whether I will dig or not. All exactly as you wrote.

thanks

fred

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Great post Steve.

I am new to this forum, but not to detecting. I am primarily a jewelry hunter. 

I Live by the VDI numbers. They are invaluable when you hunt with 0 discrimination. The information contained in those numbers are staggering. Only many, many hours in the field will give you their full benefit.
But they are still, as any type of discriminator, only a guide. There are so many variables on any given day, that nothing is written in stone. 
I use them more to tell me what groups of metals may be tripping the bell at that moment and what I might expect to find when I dig out the target.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello plidn1,

Welcome to the forum. Jewelry is my main gig when not nugget detecting as I like gold any way I can find it. There are lots of VDI strategies a person can employ when jewelry detecting. My favorite book on the subject is "DFX Gold Methods" by Clive Clynick. It features the DFX but the methods apply to any target id detector. Just so happens my DFX with Bigfoot coil is my favorite turf jewelry detector but the CTX is catching up.

post-1-0-18840700-1410188719_thumb.jpg

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I am also new to your site. I have a Gold Bug DP and am interested in any information because it came with a small booklet of info. I will be hunting down that book you had mentioned by Mr.Brockett. I just joined a gold prospector club last month because of my detecting intrest. I do thank you for all your effort devoted to this site.

Goldguru

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Goldguru,

Welcome to the site. Thank you. The truth is the site keeps me from climbing the walls when I am unable to metal detect. If I can't go metal detecting the next best thing is yakking with like minded people about metal detecting!

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

Steve,

 

Great read!   I intend to try some of your tips.  Especially lowering the sensitivity.

My F75 is a case in point.  Now I am getting somewhat of a handle on this machine, largely because of the tips you shared on using it in the goldfield with success.

 

Thanks for  your very interesting post, and all you do to make our detecting time more enjoyable as well as (hopefully) productive.

 

Gary/Largo

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Gary,

If there was ever a detector put out that needs a light touch on the sensitivity it is the F75.

I really do not like detectors that are kept "safe" by the manufacturers limiting the sensitivity control. They are the ones you can just run anywhere anytime at max sensitivity. That is like owning a car that you can drive anywhere any time with the pedal floored. Nothing extra, no extra speed, just slow and safe all the time.

The reason manufacturers do that is guess what? You give people a sensitivity control that runs to max and they max it out all the time when they should not. Which leads to complaints of unstable performance and noisy detectors.

The F75 is a machine with all the stops pulled off, so you can run it flat out if conditions allow. But the only time I have ever used mine where that was possible was running all metal mode in rural locations free of electrical interference. All metal mode generally runs smoother and is friendlier to high sensitivity levels.

But get the F75 into town and instead of running at full out 99 sensitivity I am running in disc mode and more like 60-70 on the sensitivity. I seem to have a lot of electrical interference in my local area and the ground is pretty hot in Reno, so the F75 can get pretty chatty if I run the sensitivity too high. And the bottom line is if you experiment with it you only lose little or nothing for depth coming off max sensitivity. Getting rid of all the noise makes it easier to discern real targets, though they may be a bit fainter in response than at higher sensitivity levels.

Another good tip is that smaller coils tend to be quieter and tolerate higher sensitivity levels than large coils.

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

Hi Steve,
 
A couple of years back, I had borrowed an F75 from a friend, to help me decide if it was a machine that I might be comfortable with, the result was, I found two silver rings as well as some other trinkets. I do have a good range of coils for my F75, a small round, a 9 inch elliptical, as well as a 11 inch dd, which is the stock coil.  Find out how pleasantly easy the F75 was to negotiate, easier than my White's XLT, which I liked very much, I opted to purchase a like new F75 Special Edition.  The machine is so well balanced and screen easy to negotiate in either all metal, or discriminate... Plus it runs for HOURS /up to around 40, or so, on four AA batteries...  Don't you wish the SDC 2300 could do that??
 
I have been trying that new F75 SE a little bit, at a city park near me.There are unforgiving power lines running along the street, so that adjacent lawn near to those power lines very likely don't get hit by higher end detectors, so that area might be a better target for a machine without all the bells and whistles, such as my Troy Shadow with a small coil.  It has a neat and unusual feature, a coin check button, which can tell you with good certainty, if a signal in the coin range is or is not a coin.  So, I will be taking both machines to the park.

 

Sorry for the convoluted subject matter...

 

Gary/Largo

  • 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 WhiteRabbit
      Hello, now here’s an opener that might just get me banned on my first post!
      Bear with me, my intentions are pure :)
      Does anyone know if it would be possible to jam an MD signal? The reason I ask is to combat the evident problem we have in the UK with “nighthawks”, illegal detectorists.
      Over here, any landowner can grant permission for detecting on their land (with caveats, known historic sites are protected by law). What often happens is that such a permission is granted and a detectorist innocently sets about his / her business. Someone less scrupulous spots this person and assumes there may be something important there, so shows up at night with a couple of friends and the landowner awakens to a field / lawn full of holes, then bans metal detecting.
      Historic sites are also looted.
      Just an off the wall question, how tricky would it be to build a device to block this on a piece of land? Anyone any ideas?
    • 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?
×
×
  • Create New...