Jump to content

steveg

Member
  • Content Count

    729
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

 Content Type 

Forums

Detector Prospector Magazine

Detector Database

Downloads

Calendar

Everything posted by steveg

  1. Chase -- I hear you, LOL! This weather is ridiculous! I try to leave this weather behind, in Oklahoma, when I come up here to visit in the summer. Somehow, it followed me here! I'll see if there's a way we can hook up in the fall, for sure. I look forward to it... calabash -- thanks! 🙂 Steve
  2. GB_Amateur -- I am going to try and give a bit more info about my opinions on iron bias (I mentioned earlier that my Recovery Speed 2 was a typo -- I was set on my normal Recovery Speed 3, during that hunt). My idea on the iron bias, is that after hearing detailed input from Tom Dankowski, who was instrumental (from a design perspective) in having the new "F2" iron bias scale implemented in the Equinox via the most recent firmware update, I knew I wanted to give the "minimum iron bias setting" a try. While that may not be the best setting for a newer detectorist, NASA-Tom is adamant that if you "ease your way into" lower and lower iron bias settings with time, and let your ears do more and more of the work, that there is "intelligence" built into the Equinox's audio that will allow you to learn to decipher the iron "falses" from the true high-toning non-ferrous targets. Armed with the information that IF one uses their ears carefully, giving oneself time to learn, that it is not only possible, but likely, that one can learn to do a BETTER job of indicating which targets are iron and which are non-ferrous using your EARS, instead of the machine's algorithm, I decided to try it. After updating the machine, I went pretty much straight from FE=0 to F2=0 (I made the transition over a couple of hours' time, during the course of a single hunt). And I must say, after several months of running F2=0 exclusively, I fully agree with NASA-Tom's premise. It is extremely hard to explain/describe, but I feel that I have really learned how to decipher what the machine is telling me, when hunting for non-ferrous targets within sites littered with rusty iron. I am unable to put it entirely into words; it's just something that with experience, and careful listening, you can begin to almost "intuitively" identify what targets are just iron masquerading as a possible "good target mixed in with iron," and which ones are ACTUAL good targets, mixed in with the iron. I wish I could explain it more clearly, but I can simply say that for me, F2=0 allows the USER to learn to make an accurate diagnosis, instead of letting the algorithm try to do it for you... My advice is to try it, and give it the necessary time (digging lots of targets, of course), and see if it doesn't "click" for you, the way it did for me. Steve
  3. Thanks, gents! Much appreciated! Cal -- I hear you, LOL! What I wouldn't give to dig a gold coin! Chase -- I'm still here, for now, but this is a relatively short trip; I'm hoping for another one this fall, and that one might allow me a bit more detecting time, than this one... 😉 Steve
  4. GB_Amateur -- SORRY! Recovery speed 2 is a typo. I was hunting with Recovery speed 3. I used to use 4, but have moved to 3 and that's now what I use any time I am old/deep coin hunting. More info to follow later, on the iron bias questions... Steve
  5. Mike -- thanks! Yep, I did finger the half dime during the day, smiling each time, LOL! Yep, I'm sure it's the same feeling for me as when you dig a good ring (though yours are -- in terms of dollars -- much more valuable!) Thanks, Dan! Digging Seated coins never gets old; living in Oklahoma, there are very few; most of the ones I dig are during trips to PA, and I enjoy every one of them! GB_Amateur -- I was using the EQX 800, Park 1, recovery speed 2, F2 setting at 0, sensitivity 25. Ground balanced (at 11 on this site), and noise cancelled (though there was very little EMI -- hence the ability to run the sensitivity maxed out). There are a fairly large number of scattered square nails, and various blobs/chunks of old rusty iron, left over from the former/burned church, so lots of high-tone falsing that needs to be worked through very slowly. There is not a ton of undergrowth/vegetation here, as it's a fairly mature section of forest with tall trees, and thus the canopy blocks enough sunlight to minimize vegetative undergrowth. The obstacles are largely a thick layer of fallen leaves, and a ton of old logs/branches laying around, plus scattered tiny saplings -- overall resulting in a difficult hunt in terms of coil control. And of course, lack of coil control means more falsing, etc. -- so it's not an easy site to hunt. The half dime was roughly 4" to 5" deep, the large cent probably 6" or so. It's hard to determine depth much of the time, since the underground root matrix (and the dry soil we have right now) means popping a plug is impossible. The dirt crumbles, and trying to get your shovel back out of the ground, through all the roots, means most of the dirt falls back in the hole, and thus there's no telling where the coil originally laid, in terms of depth. Anyway, there is a layer of organic material/topsoil a couple of inches thick in most places on this site (deeper at times), and then a layer of relatively dense, yellowish clay mixed with shale, just underneath. So, the coins I've dug here are generally not all that deep, impeded by the clay/shale layer. The half dime was generally reading about 20 to 21 in the ground, though there was some iron nearby so some low-tone grunting was mixed in. I had to clear out the leaves, and a nearby log, to achieve enough coil control, to confirm if the target was indeed non-ferrous, or if it was a masquerading piece of iron. The large cent rang higher in tone/number of course, but again with iron around, it was a jumpy-ID type of target -- lots of numbers in the upper 20s, and bouncing into the mid to upper 30s, but then plenty of iron grunts mixed in. Neither coin was a nice, clean target, in terms of tone/ID. Sounds like you have a great site to check out, hopefully soon! My advice is -- sweep SLOWLY in this type of site (this minimizes iron falsing, with the square nails, which for me are much more difficult to deal with than regular modern nails), and when you hit what you think is a possible non-ferrous target, work it carefully and analyze closely -- listening very carefully. Rotate all the way around, vary your sweep speed over the target as you interrogate; kick away some grass/dirt/leaves from over the top of the target and re-sweep, seeing if the tones and ID numbers change, etc.. In other words, employ all the "tricks" you can, to discern whether it's non-ferrous, or ferrous trying to ACT "non-ferrous." But once you feel it's non-ferrous, DIG. I dig almost ALL suspected non-ferrous targets on those types of sites, because there are usually surprises... Hope that helps! Steve
  6. Thanks, 2Valen! The second one is a Braided Hair Large Cent, 1839. Thanks! Steve
  7. This is why I like vacationing back home in Pennsylvania! 🙂 I only dug two coins today, on a two-hour hunt at the site of what used to be a mid 1800s church, but is now just forest, and a small, old, adjacent cemetery... --Steve
  8. I know some of my customers have asked this question, but I have not tried the supports myself. Maybe someone will chime in... Steve
  9. Phillips_R -- THANKS! 🙂 Bash -- that is some terrific news; I just LOVE to hear that! A full days' swinging, and your shoulder being relatively happy? Makes my day! 🙂 Steve
  10. THANKS, beatup, for the compliments! I am glad you are enjoying the shaft -- and glad you mentioned the cam lock in particular. That was a MAJOR focus of the design, and probably THE key component that I knew I needed to "get right," in order to achieve all of the improvements I was seeking to make (as compared to the stock shaft). Customers seem to really like the cam lock design I settled on, and I'm really glad my focus there, during the design stage, seems to have turned out to be a success! Thank you! Steve
  11. Thank you all, for the kind words! I really appreciate it! Steve
  12. Bash -- WOW! THANK YOU for the wonderful review! I am so glad you are pleased with the shaft, and I enjoyed working with you to try and provide you with exactly what you were looking for! Working with you was quite enjoyable, and so the feeling is mutual! Thank you very much for taking the time to share your thoughts! Happy hunting! Steve
  13. Thanks, Dan! 😉 GB_Amateur -- I totally agree with you, and know what you mean by "filling the slots" in the old coin books! 🙂 Yep, most coins that come out of the ground won't have any numismatic value, but it's the excitement surrounding the next find that keeps many of us going. I totally agree! 2Valen -- complaining? Not sure what made you think I was complaining! That was a fun hunt, and it's rare for me to have a "two Barber" hunt, OR a "four Indian Head Penny" hunt when hunting Oklahoma dirt, so I was very pleased... Thanks! Steve
  14. GB -- LOL! Unless it was an '09-S VDB, I don't even think much about "key dates" on copper coins; most of them come out of the ground in bad enough condition that they don't maintain any value, unfortunately... Steve
  15. GB -- LOL! Thanks for the kind words. I think the wheatie you are referring to is a 1915-D, BUT -- the magic wand that turns the coin into a Merc, should have no trouble changing the 5 to a 6, right?! 😉 Steve
  16. Thanks guys! Mark -- indeed; the dirt in this site (and many, in this area) is not particularly kind to copper coins... Steve
  17. ...a pretty good day by Oklahoma standards! These came from a grassy area between an old hospital, and an old church; my hunting buddies managed some other goodies -- including two Mercs, a couple of IHPs, several wheats, and a Buffalo nickel. Steve
  18. Dan -- TERRIFIC! Excellent job! Steve
  19. Steve and Dan -- Thanks guys! It makes me happy to know that you both are well-pleased with the shafts/counterweights! I appreciate you both! Steve
  20. kac -- I have been trying to get in contact with the production supervisor at Garrett. I've called, but haven't reached him yet. I'll keep trying... Steve
  21. kac -- I agree, I thought so, too. The solid yellow color there, is actually a tube I am experimenting with for a shaft for an MX Sport -- that's the exact color of yellow used on the Sport. I'd need to get the exact color of yellow used with the Apex, if I wanted to precisely match the Apex color scheme. However, like you said, that gold braided one seems like it would look good, with the Apex. Obviously, some waiting (for release of the unit) and some experimenting are in order. However, as I said, I am pretty confident that the shaft system on the Apex is the same as on the Ace/AT, and so I should be able to offer shafts for the Apex, as soon as it is released. Thank you for your interest! Steve
  22. Hi all! Yep, I COULD make something like this, but the gentleman who used to make them is still around; he goes by the screen name "khouse" on Dankowski's forum. I saw a recent post from him, where he mentioned possibly starting to make them again, so I will of course refrain, and respect his "intellectual property." Perhaps I can chat with him, and see what his intent is... Meanwhile, it has been on the drawing board to begin producing a carbon-fiber upper "S-shaft" for Garrett machines for awhile now, though there are some logistics -- that involve a sizeable up-front investment -- that have prevented me from doing so thus far. That's why I am only doing the lower two shaft sections for the Garrett machines, for now. However, if/when I do begin offering the upper shaft as well, I will certainly be extending the length of it (and would then offer the counterweight system that I've used with the Equinox shafts, as well...) Steve
×
×
  • Create New...