Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 09/27/2019 in all areas

  1. Tried the new program out on a midnight foray at the beach at low tide. Settings - Nox 800, Beach 2, FE2 - 4, Recovery - 4, Sensitivity - 18. Still dug a lot of small wire, lobster trap pieces and coins. Wasn't sure if I liked new settings or not until walking out and hit scratchy -4 signal, 8 inches down signal turned to 6 and found this. Will give it another shot.
    6 points
  2. Prior to testing the new Iron Bias F2 update at Daytona Beach this weekend, I ran a few preliminary tests using a silver quarter and a bottle cap; first an"air test", then using my beach sand test bucket. Just to ensure a degree of controlled conditions, I ran Beach 1 and Beach 2, recovery at level 3 in both tests adjusting only the iron bias level. The first test was simply placing the two selected targets on the ground and running my coil over them using the original 1.7.5.FE settings and then each level of the 2.0.1 F2 settings. The difference was stark. The new update performed as designed by clearly ID'ing the bottle cap with an iron grunt while hitting on the quarter with the familiar high silver tone. I did notice that the closer the two targets were in proximity to each other the tone was a "compromise" between the grunt and the high tone. In any case, 2.0.1 performed the Iron Bias function much better than 1.7.5 FE under those "air test" conditions. I then moved the test to my beach sand bucket. The bucket shown here is filled with sand taken from New Smyrna Beach. I also have several gallons of actual sea water taken from that same area that I use to soak the sand prior to conducting my wet salt sand tests. Disclaimer: I've noticed that New Smyrna Beach doesn't appear to have experienced any adverse environmental effects from this lack of sand and salt water since I brought it home! I used the same two targets for the test as before: the silver quarter and the bottle cap: I inserted the bottle cap at the 3 inch level and the quarter at the 6 inch level at angles that placed them close to each other in the center of the bucket...the cap being obviously above the quarter and closer to the surface than the quarter. I found that under these conditions, I had to adjust the F2 level in order to achieve distinct tonal separation. It wasn't as clear cut as in the "air test" scenario. Under these conditions, I found F2 at level 3 was best at separating the two targets. Preliminary Observations: 1. The 2.0.1 F2 does ID/separate iron much better than 1.7.5 FE...have no fear there. 2. Given the need to adjust the F2 level in order to achieve the best result, I suspect this will be true when I get on the real beach this weekend...I'll keep that in mind. I'll use my test sticks to determine the best setting for the area I'll be hunting. My test sticks: A gold ring, a bottle cap and an iron washer (not shown) I bury these in the wet salt sand and then adjust my settings accordingly to achieve the best level of performance. 3. One important reminder. Leave your phone in the car. I forgot to leave it in the house on my first run and my wireless Quest headphones soon reminded me of my forgetfulness with all the chatter! More to come when I return from the beach...the actual battlefield test!
    4 points
  3. Hello everyone I'd like to document my expeditions this year. This will be my first season of being an "Electronic Prospector". I've studied most of the summer and am ready to go. I still need to learn more about Geology but I'm hoping this will come with time in the field. I look forward to posting my adventures/expeditions with you all 🙂 --Garik
    3 points
  4. Just completed testing the latest software upgrade 2 on the Equinox 800. Impressive improvements on the Iron Bias discrimination. Check out the video I made when detecting gold with the new upgrade 2.0 installed. NB: According to the newly updated Equinox user's guide (Page 52), running in F2 mode "disables" the old "FE" mode, and vice versa. IN other words, you can't run an FE setting, and an F2 setting, at the same time. If you set an F2 setting, then the old "FE" setting is inactive. Then, if you set an FE setting, that deactivates your F2 setting.
    2 points
  5. As a Geotech1 regular, we've discussed this complicated issue. The depth that eddy currents penetrate depends significantly on the frequency you're applying, so higher freqs do indeed 'see the skin', and lower freqs penetrate much deeper. But the other relevant variable is the target metal: specifically the electrical resistivity ( or conductivity ). Good conductors, like copper, silver, don't support much skin penetration. And lousy conductors, like most cupro-nickel alloys have much deeper skin depths. For the mathematically inclined: The skin depth varies with the square-root of the resistivity. So for example a metal that has resistivity 4 times greater than pure copper will have a skin depth 2 times greater than copper. To use real data, coin cupro-nickel has a resistivity about 20 times that of copper, so skin depth is about 4.5 times greater ( square root of 20 ). Currents flow 4.5 times deeper into the metal. So your typical machine will see 'all' of a 5 cent cupro-nickel coin. But probably only the outer 0.5mm skin of a silver Morgan Dollar, for example. And the cladding on a clad 25c coin contributes little to the overall response. And, yes, magnetic characteristics are important, too. Iron/steel/pure nickel are ferromagnetic, and really don't support deep currents at all, and it gets worse as test frequency increases. This is why high freq machines like the 100 kHz Compass models ( Yukon, 66 ? ) can 'see through' small iron. At 100k, they only see the tiniest skin of a nail, which makes the nail very 'small'. - meaning the nail doesn't give much signal itself, plus it doesn't distort the magnetic field much, so there's less masking, and other targets become visible.
    2 points
  6. https://www.minelab.com/equinox-software-update-2-0
    2 points
  7. 4 coins on the right all stacked about 7" down. 2 cent 1867, 2 cent 1864, Indian head 1866 and Flying Eagle 1857. Other IH was on a nearby trail 1906 2 cent pieces look like large moto. Looks like that lucky charm I glued on my tejon is still working :)
    1 point
  8. Went to the summer camp and detected where an early building burned to the ground, a bed of nails and a layer of blackened earth. After comparing the "old" iron bias setting of 0 against the new F2 mode set at 4 I can honestly say there is absolutely no difference in audio or TID intelligibility. None Nada zip. Same ole falsing and jumpy TID. Can't yet say on iron rings or bottle caps but it appears the nail handling is not improved one iota. Tom
    1 point
  9. Occasionally I've read that an eddy current (set up by a metal detector's transmitted signal and which generates a magnetic field to be 'received' by the detector's circuitry) in detected objects are confined to that object's surface. If true this can be relevant for materials of mixed metals (no, I don't mean alloys) such as some coins and some crown caps, as well as plated objects like cheap jewelry. There is a simple exposition common to US coin hunting which disproves this contention. The US 5-cent piece ('nickel'), with the exception of 4 years during WWII, is an alloy of 75% copper (Cu) and 25% nickel (Ni). Modern US clad dimes and quarters (and some other denominations, all minted after 1964) are a sandwich composed of a pure copper layer in the middle 2/3 of the coin and two surface layers (each 1/6 of the coin's thickness) composed of the same Cu-Ni alloy as the 5-cent piece. The US nickel's numerical target identification (TID) on every(?) metal detector is considerably lower than a clad dime. Example 1: MInelab Equinox -- nickel hits 12-13 and clad dime 25-26, typically. Example 2: Fisher F75 -- nickel approximate TID = 30. Clad dime approximate TID = 70. Yet a US dime is smaller in both diameter and thickness than a US nickel. If only the Cu-Ni (outer) layers of the dime contained the eddy currents then the TID of a clad dime should be lower than that of the nickel, not higher. Conclusion: at least some of the eddy currents are in the copper core of US clad coinage and thus we can generalize that eddy currents aren't simply confined to the surface of metallic objects.
    1 point
  10. You are correct. It is a misconception to believe that eddy currents generated by the transmitted magnetic field exist only at the surface of a metallic target. Eddy currents exist as far as the transmitted magnetic field penetrates the target. The penetration depth is a function of many factors including the frequency of the transmitted field, the thickness of the target and the target’s magnetic and electrical properties. So the penetration depth varies significantly depending on the type of metal. In the case of the clad coin, the magnetic field easily penetrates past the thin clad layer into the copper “core”. The larger mass and conductivity of the copper core dominates in terms of signal strength over the thin, lower conductive clad and so the detector primarily “sees” a high conductivity target and registers a target ID appropriate to that higher conductive metal.
    1 point
  11. Ok Jim I just got off the phone with Jack was his name and he said at this time it will be sold only with that detector. Oh but dig this ! I ask if it was a dual field coil and he said no . It’s a folded and that’s the word he used eight that will be more sensitive to small gold than the dual field coil. If you have a question ask for Jack. Now you know the rest of the story said Paul Harvey. Chuck
    1 point
  12. Looking for more information I Googled HI-Q, encountering articles on building higher output coiled antennas. So antenna technology or research translates to metal detector coils? Hence the new patents? The name intrigued me. Mentions of different materials, copper and coatings, spacing, different frequencies, thickness of wire etc, in the antenna article. Good luck to White's if they have managed a step forward. Karelian
    1 point
  13. This morning I woke up with a start of a cold and nearly didn't get up . I had updated my Nox to the 1.7.5 and wanted to give it a try . I was going to take my ET but as it was raining I thought better not . So at around 7.45 am I got a Bus to the beach and when I got there the tide was in and it was rough . I had other things to do so I did them and at about 11 am I got to the beach and started to detect. I immediately got my feet wet . So my cold will be double Man Flu by morning tomorrow LOL. I started to find a slow but steady trail of coins below a cut and I covered about a mile then turned around and went back in case . I found on the way back 3 rings together . I think its a Russian design . Found a Gold one a few years ago . This one I think is Silver but I need to get it checked. After finishing the beaches where I searched , I went to another beach to the East and a few more coins came up , but not many . I found a US Dime and another large coin of some sort with a hole in it . And a 50 Euro Cent . After walking another mile and feeling knackered I went to a shop and bought some food and headed home . My total was ÂŁ32.77p , the ring and the 3 foreign coins . I found out about the version 2 update so that's been done now for next time. Most of the time I use my ET , its easier for the beach . I just know the targets better . But the Nox has its place and did well today. I wont be out till the end of next week now . Its going to be wet most of the time and I am working anyway . Also today I reached a target I was aiming for the year ÂŁ1400 so I will pay a donation of ÂŁ200 to Cancer research at the end of next week . Total coinage for the year so far is ÂŁ1425 and Pence. Way down on years gone by but its now getting pretty cashless out there and in a few years it will be baron for coinage unless a storm opens up the beach . So far I have had 12 Gold rings (1 return) 1 Platinum (return) , 1 Gold Pendent (too be checked) and 36 Silver rings this year . Plus a few other Silvers ranging from chains to ear rings and things .
    1 point
  14. Excellent day. Funny about the man flu part (not that your sick), my wife is the same way. I could have the sniffles and on the couch for me. She just shakes her head.
    1 point
  15. White's evolution vs revolution. Given the reality of the fires that impacted Miner John it is clear White's has been forced to make other arrangements, taking the opportunity to repackage the Tdi SL. Same machine with just a new coil? 'New Patent' could mean it is not a folded mono or duel field coil but something new. Something to get excited about? Need user input and better photographs of the new coil.. White's needs to step up and communicate with customers. Karelian
    1 point
  16. At old relic sites I've detected iron tools, like axe heads, hatchets, hoes, picks,giant spikes, and the like and they seem to come in around 13-14 on the EQ800, but the sound is dull not twinkley like a nickel or a nice sized 14K ring around that tid range would come in audibly.
    1 point
  17. Jim I do believe you hit the nail on the head about Mine John’s coils . I’d forgot about that and I bet they were buying as need be . Then with all the tan metal housing they has to come up with what we see now . I think it’s a great buy for someone wanting a pulse detector with two coils. The trouble for us that already has the detector we just need the new coil . You could say the two coils is half the price of the total value of the package. Maybe next time they will call me for my opinion before they do something next time. haha Chuck
    1 point
  18. Hey Jim If we could get near one with a Pinpointer maybe we could find out. That way we could test for that little center coil. I don’t think I’d want to take a saw to one to find out . Chuck
    1 point
  19. All images restored. Phew!
    1 point
  20. Link deleted since Findmall Forum update broke all old links
    1 point
  21. Gotta give them props for putting such an update out there that addresses some user complaints or concerns. However, if not for all the competition would things be different? Competition and alternatives equal a win for the consumer.
    1 point
  22. Waiting for someone to give a review. Is it just the coil that was improved are maybe something in the control box like higher voltage? Not so sure about the camo box . I could sit it down and may never find it again. Here we are with another big question mark. New detectors from here there and everywhere and not enough money to buy them all . Chuck
    1 point
  23. I doubt it’s anything anyone need worry about.
    1 point
  24. Glad i wasn't out today . My cold is the worst affliction known to all Men that know . Man Flu , Women know it as an itchy nose LOL My next search on the beach will be next Thursday sometime. If dry it will be the ET , if wet it will be with the Nox .
    1 point
  25. YouTube video showing F2 from Slow n Low: I'm doubting F2 is going to do much of anything for iron that sounds off as iron in the first place (nails). It appears the value of F2 is in helping to differentiate targets containing iron that sound like good targets (crown caps) from actual good targets.
    1 point
  26. Currently traveling for work so I won’t be able to do the update for a few weeks. Have to say I’m more excited about the “low” setting for the back light than the new “fe” setting. “Steel” bottle caps are so different over the years, constantly varying alloys have been used, that they seemingly will always present a problem to DD coils. The EQX is already an awesome machine so one would have to think that if ML thought an update would help it probably does help in the right situation, just have to find out what that situation is!! Never the less it will be something new to tinker with and test!!!
    1 point
  27. If you're a gambling man, make sure to receive favorable odds (such as lay 20 to win 80, or better) before you bet the Minelab side. If there are more positive enhancements they could have just told us what those were instead of stringing us along.
    1 point
  28. I have this test I use to determine the effectiveness of discrimination vs masking on detectors. I silicone a silver dime inside a plastic lined crown cap(to make certain their is insulation between the silver coin and the alloy cap), in this case a Bud Ice bottle cap. I used both FE standard and the up dated FE2. At FE standard: FE 1 and 2 the dime was barely discernible showing an occasional 21-23 among many lower numbers. Beyond FE 2 the target became what I think is an averaged number with only a flicker of 20 to 21 on the screen. At FE 2: FE 1 and 2 the dime was very there showing 25-28 with the occasional 29 with a smattering of low number blips. Beyond FE 2 the dime faded quickly. I was impressed with the new discrimination but as always there are trade offs. So now the disclaimer, this is only one type of bottle cap others may have different results, surface tests may not indicate results in the ground. I urge others to try it for themselves but I think FE 2 is a clear advancement, at least for me when used sparingly.
    1 point
  29. I hunt with FE at 0 nothing else so why compare settings I don't use? F2 4 was stated by Tom D to be the end all and for a lot of situations I'm sure he's right as he knows a lot more about detectors than myself. If the new F2 settings helped in beds of nails that would have been great, but they don't. F2 apparently helps on round iron and bottle caps I'm sure a lot of people will like that.
    1 point
  30. Some quick Iron Bias info from the updated manual to get started: Only available in Multi, Iron Bias FE and Iron Bias F2 profiles are independent (ie. choose one or the other), Iron Bias F2 is best used in All Metal mode, default setting for F2 is 6 (for 800 / 2 for 600) in all detect modes. Use a quick press of the Accept/Reject to toggle between either Iron Bias mode.
    1 point
  31. Updated EQX manual is out. Download from Minelab site. English version 4901-0249-5-EN: FE / F2 settings on page 52.
    1 point
  32. I set the settings a little different than before. I turned the threshold way down and the target volume way up. My beach tonight didn't have as much black sand as normal but I do think I set it up so the targets didn't have to be as interrogated as much as I normally do. There were a couple of targets together in a hole and I didn't hear them both distinctly but I did hear them as odd. I wish I would have tried the cap reject feature. I used Beach 1 on the wet sand and I thought it was good. When I went to the dry sand I switched to Park 1 which I don't normally use. Most of these bottle caps came it at 16 if new but the rusty ones would go as low as 10. I noticed last night that my pennies had jumped up recently to many of them being in the 25-26 range. That happened a couple of times tonight but the few pennies were mostly around 20.
    1 point
  33. I never expected the Vanquish to be a competitor of the EQX even when I first got wind of it. Given Minelab's statement that the EQX would "obsolete all single frequency machines" I saw it more as an obvious X-Terra replacement and an super upgrade to the GoFind. I'll get the 440 for my granddaughter for just that reason...an upgrade to her GoFind 40. Yes, I wish it had been waterproof but when the time ever comes that she actually enters the surf to detect, an EQX will be in her future. Until then, weather/water resistant it will be. Just the view from my foxhole...
    1 point
  34. Was nice day with the t2 going over some sidewalk strips.
    1 point
  35. Steve’s Mining & Metal Detecting Journal Hi Josh and welcome to the forum. I don’t keep a diary in general, just notes when I am on trips. I have a pile of little notebooks... whatever was handy at the time. Sometimes it’s just notes on a piece of paper. It does not take much. When I got started at all this as a teenager I got in the habit of keeping a tiny notebook and making simple daily notes. Just reminders of key events of the day, note about weather, whatever. In some cases I would get more detailed in geology observations about where I was finding gold. I also have been a photography bug since early on, and simply taking lots of photos can be a trip journal. I normally did both and sure regret the times I did not. There are entire trips I know I made to Chisana but basically I don’t remember them at all since I took no notes or photos. That was revealed to me when I wrote up this thread. There was never a huge plan behind it all but in retrospect it is one of the best things I ever did. Forty years later what do we really have anyway? It’s either memories or nothing. Those notes and photos are far more valuable to me now than any gold I ever found. Sharing them on the internet is a way of insuring they get out there for posterity. Long after I am gone the stories will be archived on a server somewhere. These days it’s even easier. A cell phone can both take the photos and the daily notes, and that’s just what I did on my U.K. trip last fall I really encourage everyone to record any special events via a journal and photos. You will thank yourself years later and regret it if you don’t.
    1 point
  36. Thanks for the kind words. I've been prospecting since the mid 1970s, and ended up getting a degree in Mine Engineering at the Mackey School of Mines - part of the University of Nevada. Yet even though I got my degree, I kept up panning, dredging and otherwise prospecting out in the field - because I enjoyed it. What you know makes all the difference when you get out in the field, and as I was looking at the books available, I saw that most were written in the 1970s and 80s and did not include a lot of info which I thought they should. So I spent 10 years working off and on to produce a book that had all the info I thought a book on prospecting and gold mining should offer, including all the new info on metal detecting, because the world of technology has changed since 1980. The book has been a big success, in the 4 years since it came out, I've sold more than 6000 copies. Its available at most prospecting stores and through Amazon.
    1 point
×
×
  • Create New...