Jump to content

steveg

Members
  • Content count

    391
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

steveg last won the day on May 16

steveg had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

446 Excellent

About steveg

  • Rank
    Silver Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location:
    Norman, OK
  • Interests:
    Sports, Metal Detecting, Hunting/Fishing
  • Gear Used:
    Minelab CTX3030
    Minelab Equinox 800

Recent Profile Visitors

1,164 profile views
  1. steveg

    6" Coil On The Way!

    Geoff -- I agree; 6" coils on other Minelab machines (specifically FBS) got really good depth. I'd have to assume similar results will be had with the Equinox 6"...especially with sensitivity bumped up (as a smaller coil usually allows). Steve
  2. steveg

    6" Coil On The Way!

    Dew -- True, you are right of course. I guess I shouldn't have said "the same settings." Given that you are processing less "stuff" with a 6" coil vs. an 11", you can often run sensitivity higher on the 6", in my experience. What I was trying to figure out is that I have a couple of places back in PA which are littered with square nails; one in particular is an old church that dates to 1800, but has burned at least twice -- so the remnants of those burns (square nails, etc.) are everywhere. I have made some good finds there; I got in there for a short while about a month ago while back home, for the first time with the Equinox, and surprisingly managed to pull another 8 Indians; that's more keepers than I ever pulled from this site in one hunt, and I've been hunting it for years! But, the targets are deep; greater than 6" in all cases and often 8" or even a bit more. So the gist of my question was this... obviously the 6" coil will help me to pick amongst the nails at this site, but will it have enough "umpf" to get down to those 6" to 8" targets? It won't do me any good to be able to see around the nails (in this particular site) if I can't get enough depth to see the targets that are down there... So that's where my mind was going when I asked the question. I agree that depth is NOT everything, but at some sites (like this one) it IS important... Steve
  3. Hi all! FINALLY, after a long wait, I have a 6" coil on the way. I'm really looking forward to trying this coil in some really trashy spots I have in mind. A question for anyone that has the coil -- have you done any depth comparisons with it and the 11"? I'm curious as to how much depth would be lost, given equal settings, on a coin-sized target? Thanks! Steve
  4. steveg

    6" Coil Making Me Happy

    Looks like that little coil is "doing you right!" Hope to have mine soon... Steve
  5. Holy cow, Simon -- GREAT JOB! SO cool that you were able to find it for them! I have been on several "lost jewelry" hunts for folks; I have managed to find the item about half the time, and while I HATE it when I'm unsuccessful, there's nothing like it when you manage to find the item for the owner! The way they light up with excitement is priceless! You did a good, selfless thing, sir. I congratulate you! Steve
  6. steveg

    600 Vs. 800 Settings Question...

    Steve and GB_Amateur -- Thanks for answering my question -- very much appreciated! GB -- that mnemonic is perfect! Steve
  7. Hi all. I know I've seen this info before, but I can't seem to find it... I currently have an Equinox 800, and am going to buy a 600 as a backup. I know the 600 has only 4 settings for Iron Bias (instead of 9), and 3 settings for Recovery Speed (instead of 8). Can anyone remind me what the "equivalents" are between the 600 settings and the 800? I THINK I recall that Recovery Speed 1 on the 600 equals 2 on the 800, Speed 2 on the 600 equals 4 on the 800, and speed 3 on the 600 equals 6 on the 800. Is this correct? Meanwhile, I can't remember how the Iron Bias Settings relate. I assume 0 on the 600 equals 0 on the 800, and 3 on the 600 equals 9 on the 800? Would 1 on the 600 equal 3 on the 800, and 2 on the 600 equal 6 on the 800? In other words, is this "chart," below, correct? Reason I ask is, I know the settings that I prefer on the 800, and I'd like to set the 600 up as close as possible to what I run on the 800. Thanks, Steve
  8. steveg

    Problem With Pinpointing

    Propjob -- I totally agree with your idea of using a 6" deep coin as a basis, marked with a golf tee. That's a perfect way to test the pinpoint function, in my opinion. The only other caution is, before burying that coin, make SURE there are no other targets within a foot or so radius -- i.e., bury it in clean ground. You don't need another target nearby throwing you off, when trying to learn pinpoint. I find the pinpoint on the Equinox EXTREMELY accurate (though occasionally a bit "quirky," as it occasionally starts off with very low volume and has to be turned off and then back on to "reset" it; I have a theory as to what is going on when that happens, if you are interested, but don't want to take this discussion off in the weeds at this point). Point being, once you get used to the pinpoint, I think you'll find it very accurate. I do not think that using a coin on top of the ground is the best way to learn pinpoint with this unit, as this is such a powerful, sensitive detector, that a coin "too close" to the coil can throw things off. The coil is very sensitive, including around the edges, especially on a shallow target (one close to the coil). So, that can throw you off a bit, as sometimes you might be picking the target up with the edge of the coil, not the center -- and thus confusing you a bit. That's why I think your 6" deep coin idea, in clean ground, will be a much better way to learn. One thing I want to point out; you said something about trying to "dispel the notion that targets are read off the tip of the coil." I'm not sure what you mean here, but I think you may be confusing a couple of things. Here's what I mean. As I'm sure you know, there are two different ways to pinpoint that many people use; the "X" method, and the "wiggle back" method. Of course the "X" method involves invoking pinpoint mode, and then sweeping left to right over a target, finding the "loudest" sound, and then turning 90 degrees, and sweeping perpendicular to your initial sweeps -- finding the "loudest" signal from THAT angle. Where the two "loudest" sounds overlap (from your two sets of sweeps) is your target location -- in the CENTER of the coil. I'm sure you know this. Then, there's the wiggle-back method, which involves NOT using the pinpoint mode, but just regular "search mode." When you hit a target while searching, you simply "wiggle" the coil left and right, drawing it slightly toward you, very slowly, while still wiggling left and right. Right where the target's tone "ceases," while drawing the coil slowly back toward you -- the target will at that point be located right off the FRONT TOE of the coil. Is this perhaps what you are thinking, when you said something about "the notion that targets are read off the tip of the coil?" The "hot spot" of the Equinox coil is right at the center, where the lower rod attaches to the coil ears; the only thing I know of that's been said about a target "being read off the tip of the coil" is when doing the "wiggle-back" pinpoint method... Steve
  9. Happa -- I agree with Chase on the buried coins -- which will also help to see if you might have a faulty machine. I doubt you do, though; but, some testing might be in order. MEANWHILE, I would DEFINITELY make it a priority for a little while to go back to what you used to do, and "compare signals." YES, your Safari vs. their E-Tracs and Explorers would have given similar tones on a buried target, when comparing signals in the past -- but, that's why I think comparing signals now, with their FBS compared to your Equinox, would be so immensely helpful. YES, the sounds are different on FBS vs. Multi-IQ, but you would be comparing a "known" (FBS sounds on a deep coin) with an "unknown" (Equinox sounds on a deep coin), which should really, really help you to learn the "unknown." In other words, if they locate a deep, likely-to-be-wheatie target, and call you over to listen, you can listen with THEIR machine, first (and you'll of course recognize the target's sounds given your prior experience with FBS), and then, work the target with your Equinox, and listen closely to how the machine behaves. This will help you to figure out in your mind "what sounds like THIS on an FBS machine sounds like THIS on the Equinox." Yes, I have dug deep wheats that are down into the zinc range, and the same with deep Indians. So, you could be passing over some. They also sound much more subtle, at depth, than a shallow penny sounds. I at times will even get some occasional high-tone chirps mixed in, from certain angles, on a deep wheatie or deep Indian -- i.e. much higher than what you'd expect for a penny. Bottom line, burying targets at different depths and working them with your Equinox, and ESPECIALLY "comparing targets" with your FBS hunting partners, should move you quite a bit closer to having success with your Equinox. Don't lose confidence; I promise you that the Equinox (at least, one set up properly and working properly) will find coins every bit as deep as your buddies' FBS units, in most types of ground (including everywhere I've hunted). And for what it's worth, my machine of choice for many years was an Explorer, and I run a CTX now alongside my Equinox...and so when I say the Equinox is every bit as deep as FBS, it's a statement I feel confident in stating after through testing and experience with both Multi-IQ AND FBS. Steve
  10. Happa -- Not sure what to tell you, as I'm hitting wheats and Indians to really good depth with mine. I know for sure what I'd do in your case, though; on your next hunt, ask your buddies to call you over when they hit a suspected deep wheat, and give a listen with your Equinox. "Comparing signals" is, to me, one of THE BEST ways to learn things, and is especially helpful when you are hunting a new machine. Listening to those targets "in the wild," should really help you with respect to the Equinox "learning curve." I will assume, if you have the machine set up reasonably well, that you will hear the same targets your buddies are hearing with FBS units, BUT, they may not sound quite the way you expect them to, on your Equinox. Deep targets are much more subtle and less distinct that shallow targets, as would be expected. It may just be that your ears are not yet attuned to listening for deep targets on the Equinox, like they were with your Safari. IF, however, by chance, you CANNOT pick up those deep wheats that your buddies are getting with their FBS machines, it would be time to look at your settings. And if it's not the settings, then there may be something more serious going on, but no need to go there at this point. Barring an issue with your machine itself, I am confident, based on my experience with the Equinox in different types of dirt/different states, that it should be every bit as deep, and similarly capable, of hitting deep copper coins as an FBS unit is -- ESPECIALLY when running Park 1 mode. Steve
  11. steveg

    Software Update Under Progress

    I appreciate the info, Sinclair. Glad to hear there's an update being worked out, to perhaps fix a few of the little "quirks" the machine has. Not that it's not a real nice machine already, but any improvements Minelab might make, would likely mean that much better of a machine, from my perspective. Steve
  12. steveg

    Minelab Equinox Vs Silver Hoard

    The CTX acts the same way, with stacked coins...that much conductance seems to screw with the ID algorithms... Steve
  13. I have found that faster sweep speeds on Minelab FBS machines will increase falsing, and I do notice that a bit on the Equinox as well. If I am working in iron with the Equinox, I always slow down my sweep speed. NOT the machine's recovery speed, but my SWEEP speed. Steve
  14. Yes, some great finds, indeed! Glad to see you having so much success with the Equinox! Super job digging the silver coins -- which sound like they have been elusive for you before! Meanwhile, I'm still waiting for my first gold -- CONGRATS on yours! Steve
×