Jump to content

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, khouse said:

True.  But once you dig a handful of nails you would use those to adjust your discrimination to you particular site.  I do indeed dig a lot of nails even setting it at 28.  But I don't dig as many as 32 depending on the site.  Basically all you're doing is discriminating out the nails on your site. 

I hear you, khouse.  Makes sense.  Every move toward a lower number of iron reject, you will dig fewer nails, but also fewer "partially masked" coins.  Every move toward a higher number of iron reject, you dig more nails, but also have a better chance at digging a few more partially masked coin.

Anyway, like I said, a very, very good video.  I learned a couple of things about the E-Trac (and probably SE Pro also) in your video.

Thanks!

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites


2 hours ago, steveg said:

If only that were true, auminesweeper.

Actually, Dankowski would say the OPPOSITE is true; at some sites with heavy iron contamination, 99% of targets are actually SO masked, apparently, that even the very best, fastest "unmasking" machines are rendered entirely blind to 99% of the targets, by the iron.  

Dankowski would say that even our best machines are NOT truly "unmasking," we are nowhere NEAR that, technologically.  The only thing we are actually doing is seeing "around" the iron -- I.e. we have gotten a bit better a "separation" -- seeing targets "adjacent" to iron.  But iron SEE THROUGH -- i.e. seeing a target UNDER a piece of iron, is something that NO machine can do, period.

Here is my opinion.  We, as detectorists, are being "misled," in a way, by these videos where people put a coin next to a nail on the ground, and then test various machines' ability to see the coin.  That is NOT "unmasking!"  While tests are valid, in terms of seeing which machines have the best "separation," that is NOT the same as unmasking.  Coins in the same horizontal plane with nails is a "separation" argument.  But put those targets in a DIFFERENT plane -- with the iron in a plane a few inches above the coin, and see what happens.  THAT is where masking starts to be a problem.  Then, slide those coins (in that lower plane) UNDER the nails...THAT is "masked" target, and NO MACHINE AVAILABLE TODAY is going to find those.  We are nowhere near there, technologically...

And thus, to say you will get "99% of targets" with a fast recovery/single-frequency machine is entirely not true, in an iron-infested site.

Steve

 

I posted a video here about a month or two back where one cheap machine was unmasking targets that were on different plains,

Tom is a very skilled detectorist, But as detectorists we all tend to copy the Norm and what others say, That is not what makes finds, In junk filled sites the norm is to use a small coil and a fast machine, and then we here people saying that sites have dried up, 

If I had done what everyone else does I would have never of found the Gold and all the Coins that everyone had missed since 1967 in an area that had seen every detector made since that date due to the Area being a Test site and has been victim to hundreds of rallies ever since,

A good single frequency machine will clear out all the good stuff from a junk filled site when you use both large and small coils, once the targets  are beyond the depth of a VLF then that is the time to use a PI,  If you do what you and Tom say then you will have 10x more targets to dig and using a PI is hard work even in a clean site, But by using the machines in the right order will remove many targets allowing you to hear the much fainter targets and ignoring the loud over loaded signals because the VLF would have already told you that they were junk. Doing what other do will just give you the same results as they got, But if you want to make good finds nower days you need to think out of the box and Do what others are Not Doing.

As for unmasking  we already have technology that can do that, It is just that not enough people know it or know how to do it, This is more about the skill and knowledge of the user and picking the right machine, where some folks get suckered in to buying a certain machine by mate and companies they automatically insist they have the best machine just because they pay top dollar for it,

J. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, auminesweeper said:

I posted a video here about a month or two back where one cheap machine was unmasking targets that were on different plains,

Tom is a very skilled detectorist, But as detectorists we all tend to copy the Norm and what others say, That is not what makes finds, I junk filled sites the norm is to use a small coil and a fast machine, and then we here people saying that sites have dried up, 

If I had done what everyone else does I would have never of found the Gold and all the Coins that everyone had missed since 1967 in an area that had seen every detector made since that date due to the Area being a Test site and has been victim to hundreds of rallies ever since,

A good single frequency machine will clear out all the good stuff from a junk filled site when you use both large and small coils, once the targets  are beyond the depth of a VLF then that is the time to use a PI,  If you do what you and Tom say then you will have 10x more targets to dig and using a PI is hard work even in a clean site, But by using the machines in the right order will remove many targets allowing you to hear the much fainter targets and ignoring the loud over loaded signals because the VLF would have already told you that they were junk. Doing what other do will just give you the same results as they got, But if you want to make good finds nower days you need to think out of the box and Do what others are Not Doing.

As for unmasking I have seen some of the Tesoro's that can and do unmask tiny Gold coins placed underneath Plough Blades etc , So we already have technology that can do that, It is just that not enough people know it or know how to do it, This is more about the skill and knowledge of the user and picking the right machine, where some folks get suckered in to buying a certain machine by mate and companies they automatically insist they have the best machine just because they pay top dollar for it,

J. 

Unmasking a tiny gold coin underneath a plough blade?

Respectfully, J, I will not believe that until I see it with my own eyes.  That does not only NOT match my experience, it does not make physical sense, either.

Steve

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, steveg said:

Unmasking a tiny gold coin underneath a plough blade?

Respectfully, J, I will not believe that until I see it with my own eyes.  That does not only NOT match my experience, it does not make physical sense, either.

Steve

 

 

 

And I think it was either The Tesoro Silver Sabre or the Silver Umax, But it was called the Silver something and it rang clear as a bell

J.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are totally missing the point John. Yes, there are many detectors that unmask as well as can be done with current technology. But unless you are digging ALL targets you simply have no idea what you are missing due to masking and what the percentages are. You can't know what a detector is not detecting. However, tests such as that one Tom Dankowski did reveal that the items masked and still in the ground are quite substantial.

I don't believe the gold coin under the plough blade either. The fact you saw it in a video means nothing to me. Detectors do not violate certain laws of physics. There is a reason the detector did what it did but picking up a small gold coin directly through a large steel object is not the reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

If Tom's way works for you then that's all that matters, quite frankly I think that taking a PI in to a junk filled site first is crazy because a person could be stuck cleaning a 20 x 20 area for days on end while others are zipping around you making finds by the dozen.

The Goldbug Pro is another very clever machine and what it lacks in depth it makes up for in other things.

J.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nobody is advocating taking a PI out and detecting everything John. It is meant as something to learn so that people can become more knowledgeable about what they are doing and what is really going on under the coil.

I am still not buying the gold coin under the plow scenario even if you were standing right there watching it happen. I am not saying you did not see what you saw. I am saying metal detectors cannot detect through large steel to find small non-ferrous objects under the steel. That’s just a fact, so whatever you observed has a different explanation.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok that's fine, I am not asking anyone to believe it, It only maters to those who were there,

Here is a video of how DD's create target masking using a mid priced detector compared to a Childs $100 dollar Toy detector, that shows Iron nails above a coin, but you need to watch it all.

J.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, auminesweeper said:

Ok that's fine, I am not asking anyone to believe it, It only maters to those who were there,

It does matter. By presenting it here you are asking others to believe metal detectors can detect small gold coins through solid steel. I run this forum as a way to present and spread factual information. I will therefore at a minimum challenge what I know to be false or misleading information. Metal detectors can not detect gold through iron or steel, period.

  • Like 1
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...