Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation


About osbod007

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location:
  • Interests:
    Motorcycles, airguns, prospecting, metal detecting
  • Gear Used:
    Whites GM4B, Tesoro LST, Vaquero, Sovereign XS2-pro, Compadre, Uni-probe, Black Widows, Sunray Golds

Recent Profile Visitors

1,978 profile views
  1. "A second detector for friend to tag along". If they're "tagging along" your activity probably wont be in the gold nugget search mode. The outing will be for a 'fun adventure'. Get something inexpensive that produces like a Compadre, Silver U-max, or Ace 250. I still on occasion take out my Compadre just because it brings a big grin to my face. It's light, dummy proof and finds the goods with the least amount of frustration. And they probably don't want to dig much more than 6 inches.
  2. phrunt, I agree with you on Minelabs short sightedness in the after-market coil strategy. I'm sure it was a marketing ploy originally to bolster their in-house sales of their own competing detectors (Nox vs Monster). But ultimately it may come back to bite them. When Whites took on Detech to supply their own in-house coils it was a big 'gold star' for both companies and the reciprocal effects served the MD community for the greater good. My hopes are that Garrett will follow suit in some way.
  3. I guess my first leaning would be to the detector that has more optional coils available. Sven mentioned about Deeptech, the DTVG accessory coils came out so slow he oft the machine before he was fully able to appreciate the machines capabilities. Minelab was very slow with the Nox accessory coils. I think if Garrett quickly either produces coils for the Apex or accommodates someone like Detech to produce aftermarket coils, they'll steal the show.
  4. Wow Sven, Just down to 12 grains. That tells me what I wished to know. Thanks for your responses. I probably wont go there. And.....Oh yes Kac, In 'hot' ground the SAT is real slow to return on the Tejon. With the pinpoint switch pulled it is better but the DNA of the machine is just different. The Lobo ST is quite unique in that it has ground tracking yet is quick in recovering it's threshold. To ground balance it takes two pumps of the coil and then on the third pump its ground balanced. Sweeping, the tracking seems to aggregate over about a 2- 2 1/2' sweep span. On the swing in detecting this is enough time to hear a small target, pass over it several times or more to verify it, then hit pinpoint to hone in on it before losing it.
  5. Thanks for your reply Sven. I emailed Dave over the Pond at Pentechnic's Detectors, the offshoot of Tesoro making the Lazer Trident machines, see if their company could accommodate me and this is their response; Hi Don, Thanks for your email. The audio mod needs a replacement processor and unfortunately I have no more left. They were programmed by Tesoro but as you will know they are no longer in business. Sorry I haven't been able to help. Regards Dave So, not being a techy at this point I'll just have to adapt. …..BTW..... How is the DTVG X performing for you, and have you had a go at finding small gold (1-3grain) nuggets with it? I had the Tejon thinking it might out perform the Lobo ST in depth but the SAT speed was way too slow in recovery on going over bad ground with hot rocks. The Vaq is within a hairbreadth of performance to the LST but touchy on the GB. Both have little problem seeing #8 birdshot in bad ground. Looking at the DTVG X. Thanks
  6. I have found that my Vaquero is a good honest all around detector that fits much of my detecting style and needs. I would like to do the high tone audio mod. Contacted Keith Wills and he does not do this mod. Is there anyone currently doing this upgrade?
  7. Flycatch, That's funny and a good observation. My Lobo ST (AM) does close to the same thing on a small target at it's extreme edge of detection. Left to right a soft signal, right to left almost a null or no signal, I scrape off a bit of top soil and give it another pass. I then investigate if the signal improves. Jeff is right about small bits of lead for practice targets.
  8. Thank you for the very good write-up and details on this detector Mike. I also had one for a short time. The fellow that I bought it from had both the Outlaw and Bandido II uMax . His take was the performance of the two were nearly identical but the Bandido had a much sweeter tone and that made it slightly favorable to identifying targets. Unfortunately in my soil (SoCal) it didn't have much punch, sold it to a fella in the Great Lakes area and he reported back to me how pleased he was with it's performance. Again, thank you for taking the time to do the write-up and post.
  9. You might want to post over at the Dankowski forum and see if Keith Southern chimes in and can help. He is by far the most knowledgeable and experienced with the Tejon.
  10. What coil do you have installed? That big 10X12 is an antenna. Put on a smaller one like the 5 3/4" or even an 8" and see if it calms down. The bright side, at least you can maintain a threshold, here in SoCal the ground I so 'hot' I can't maintain a threshold with the 5 3/4 WS no matter how slow my sweep speed.
  11. I guess I'm a little weak on imagination. I never conceived that our hobby could be so inspiring. Good job, well done.
  12. What are your goals? What are your expectations? Never heard of anyone having a concern over the volume and the threshold breaks. First:..#1... Learn the Machine.....…..Random notes...……. The original BBS coils were a bit heavy and sometimes unstable Great performance using an 8" Tornado coil and a Detech SEF 10X12 or 13" Ultimate coil which should cover 95% of your needs. Later if you're feeling manly and want to really dig deep get the 15" WOT coil. If you have the digital ID meter it will help speed up the slow learning curve for recognizing the tones associated to the target responses. Ron in Mich. makes an affordable 180 VID meter. The original VID meters are heavier, about 2X the price and read out 1-550 VID numbers. With a mod they can be converted to 180 meters which most have found this number scale to be more stable and user friendly The control box is a very sensitive piece of electronics: hint if you open it up and fold back the shield, touching the component board could XXX out your machine. The only control box mod I know of is one for adjusting the internal pot for increasing the tone and that is posted on youtube by Keith Southern. I did install a remote PP toggle in the rod for my index finger. It allows me to carry the control box back under my elbow for better weight balance. I can toggle between the discriminate mode and the all metal PP mode with ease. The wiring has a M/F plug at the box so I can add an extension when I remote carry. This thing is heavier than I prefer so I use a harness.
  13. IDdesertman, Sorry for the misleading intro. The gold classifier of the Yankee Fork Dredge may be for small gold. My interest is North in the Fairbanks Alaska Goldstream Creek near Fox where the old Gold Dredge No.5 operated and still sits. It is possible that the trommel classifier in No.5 dredge may have been sized for larger gold. I have not been able to find the spec.'s of the trommel to know for sure. I do know that larger gold did exist and exited with he tailings. The tailing piles are still all 'active' claims.
  14. Discrimination not so much, in these tailings piles depth and area coverage would be my preference. I have watched a number of vids posted from down under where they have a very large PI coil attached to a GPX5000 and this arrangement being pulled behind an ATV. Looks humorous but the results seem to speak for themselves. The nox in all metal with a really large coil would probably be the ticket except for the pendulum weight factor having to swing it over a very large area of landscape. (yes, I know, I'm a whimp).
  15. I've been looking at the spec.'s on this dredge and it shows the trommel classifier to have holes of a maximum of 5/8 inches. This dredge was built and put into service around 1939-1940. I would believe that the late date of manufacture and historic operating experiences would have dictated the design spec.'s to recover the vast majority of the gold available. That said the larger gold would have been ejected out of the fan tail in the pilings mix. I have detected tailing piles north of Fairbanks with my Tesoro LST and due to the low mineralization and favorable conditions I was hitting 22 lead at around 10 inches but no gold. A target greater than 3/4" is sizeable so I would presume maximum depth and large area coverage would be the best plan for recovery. That along with a coordinated dozer push to keep the overburden to depths of less than 2' I think would be ideal. My question might be which detector would be best? Low mineralization and targets greater than 3/4" and large area coverage.
  • Create New...