Tom_in_CA

I  would also point out that there's a lot  of fabulous videos (typically coming from overseas Russia area) that do indeed show amazing feats and depths on coins, or various circumstances.    But the devil is always in the details.   For example, I can make a very tantalizing video, if I wanted, of a gpx 4500 or gpz 7000 that  can be shown to get a quarter to nearly 2 ft. deep.    Eh ?   And it would be hard to argue with video evidence, right ?    And  that's easily a foot deeper than standard coin machines on a quarter, right ?    So who could argue with that type of extreme depth, eh ?   The  worked out parks will 'come alive again' , right ?

But as you would easily know :  The devil would be in the details :   There is no way in heck that the gpx 4500 or gpz 7000 is  something you're going to take the park, or school or ghost town, etc.......    You will quickly get a "dose of reality", and reach for your standard discriminator machine  .

4 hours ago, Kioti said:

Bricks are not soil, let alone anything like mineralized aussie soil. 

........

Those videos prove nothing, in fact I just found them inconclusive and the beeping annoying. 

^ ^ this ^ ^

Reminds me of a dealer demo. I saw one time, back in the late 1980s or very early 1990s, of someone showing off a device called the "iron  eliminator" .    And in his audience table demonstration, he attempted to show that it was not hampered by ground minerals, by taking a bag full of super mineralized sand .  So mineralized that I think a magnet would even stick to it.   And he puts a coin on the other side of the bag, and demonstrates that his device *still* gets the coin.    The audience was spell-bound.   Until a wise  person in the audience pointed out that all he had merely done was tune the machine to  *JUST* that singular bag/sample.  Such that anything out of *THAT* norm would ....sure ..... cause a beep.  But that's not the real world were the moment your coil goes a few more feet in any direction, then presto, it's no longer the same ground.

ssheeesskk.  And to think us USA hunters "knock ourselves silly" to find a coin from the 1800s.   Doh !  🥵

As you and others have noticed:  The road was recently graded.   I realize that you & RJ still think it's a "period loss", by virtue of .... perhaps .... it had been buried, and then brought-to-the-surface by the heavy-equipment blade. 

I suppose that's possible.  However, .... I notice you're still waiting for a gun ID buff to chime in, on the ID.   If it turns out to be modern then .... it's just a modern loss.   But even if it's old, then be aware that people still have old  guns in use, even to this day.   For example, when I was a kid, my neighbor was still hunting with his grandfather's turn-of-century rifle.  

I work in road construction, and also do a  lot of demolition hunting (ie.: "following bulldozers" when they're in old-town districts).   And to me, that gun seems like something that'd only been there a few years, dropped perhaps after the last road-blade dozer had gone through there.  I might be wrong, but .... just sayin' ....

And for clarification sake:   One of the "$5's" that I counted (in my "eight") was actually an 1829 British Sovereign gold coin.   Found at an east-to-west migration stopping spot .  It is the equivalent of a USA $5 gold.  And was found in the context of gold-rush era east-to-west migration spot finds.  Ie.: Mexican reales, super-early seateds, etc.....

15 hours ago, Gerry in Idaho said:

Tom,  You certainly have the upper hand on GC's than most of us.  Just for info to know their denominations, could you tell us how many of what?  I found an 1852 $2.50 with Explorer and an 1903 $5 found with Explorer-II detectors.  Wondering if most folks finds the smaller or larger ones?  Also, if you don't mind mentioning what detector did you find this one with?  

You are correct, as in the amount of them found.  Most of my clients have only found 1 and a few scored 2.  The daddy/daughter duo found over 10 at one site, but I count that as a Cache since they were all found same day in about a 20 foot area.

Detail on your Eagle is Stunning, so hats off to you.

Gerry, as with Andy I say :   It is an honor to get an input/reply from an industry/hobby-respected voice like yourself .  To answer your questions :

Two $20s, three $10's, eight $5's, one $2.50, and two $1's.

And no, the "larger vs smaller" (as if TID/selective -ness , ie.: cherry-picking disc have anything to do with it) are not a factor at all.  Instead, the total factor is:  Location location location.

This one was found with a Minelab Explorer II

Yes I do not count caches (or "scattered caches" ) as the same type find.  For purposes of gold-coins-found.   In the same way that people don't generally count gold coins in jewelry (in bezles) as "gold coins" .  And count them as "jewelry" instead.   

16 hours ago, Andy Sabisch said:

Superb coin there . . . . definitely shows you know your equipment and how to find the sites that hold the targets you are looking to find.  Congratulations . . . . . now get out there and find 4 more to make a nice even number . . . 20 has a nice ring to it!  😁

Andy, it is an honor to get feedback from a respected industry/hobby leader/voice.       Yes,  you're not the first person to say that I need to shoot for 20 !   First gold coin was found in very late 1994.  So that makes for about 1 gold coin every 1.6 yrs average now, eh ?     I'll be reaching 20 GC's by the time I retire at 65-ish , haha

16 minutes ago, Cal_Cobra said:

Huh?  Not sure what your bone is here? 

Ooops, sorry, I didn't put enough smiley-laugh icon emojis there.   That was meant to be a joke.  

sweet !

41 minutes ago, Cal_Cobra said:

Tom's coin was quite a surprise, and comes with quite a funny story to boot!  I really should've stopped by that rock pile, ironically how many times have we walked right past that rock pile?

Brian, why don't you just come on out and admit that you screwed up .  Eh ?  😝  And besides, you got the last 2 gold coins in our "back-pocket sites".  So:  It was my turn anyhow, eh ?   🤣 

4 hours ago, Mark Gillespie said:

Fantastic coin.  I've never found one and wonder just how I would react.

It's all about location. Don't be looking for a gold coin in a school yard.

Yup.  I know we all love to talk about and compare tech toys.   But at the end of the day, the better coins are usually always a function of :  Location location location.   This one was actually shallow, for example.  I think it was even in a gopher  hole mound, practically on top ! 

1 hour ago, Elbert said:

Outstanding find Tom. Congrats. Can't wait to again see your displays. I imagine they have increased since the last time I viewed them.

El

El, you are welcome to come to Monterey any time.   It's been awhile since you've seen my trays.  They're all in blue-print style drawer/cabinets.   Where each pullout is stocked with shadow boxes, of various themes and locations.    Bring the wife over, and Sheila & I will take ya to dinner here.

1 hour ago, strick said:

Nice work...seen the post first on the the FB forum...Got the chance to hunt with Brian once..he knows his stuff..maybe a vid coming out on this find? 

strick

Yes, Brian is fun to hunt with.  Hard to beat his passion.  Knows how to appreciate the history, the targets & the challenges.    Not one of those types who let the machine rot in the closet.   Good researcher too.

Of the two period coins we got on this hunt, neither was captured live on video dig.  Just Murphy's law I suppose.   We DID capture a bunch of digs (taking turns to film each other, in the certain zone where zero new targets exist).   But as Murphy's law would have it, those all turned out to be things like toe-taps, buckle "keepers", metal slag, etc.....    Which all would have made for "filler" material, surrounding a coin dig or two.  But alas, .... the coin digs weren't captured.

If Brian wants to make a video, I still have 13 clips of filler material.  Then  the 2 coins can just be still-shots, eh ?

alaskaseeker, coil-power, thanx for looking and helping us relish our finds.  👍

And happa54:  How do you know we weren't south of the Santa Barbara line ?   🤣

9 hours ago, Kickindirt said:

dang man thats a lot of gold coins congrats!. I've got a lot of catching up to do. Im still at only 1 lol. Were u using the explorer II im guessing?

Yes.   Using the Minelab Explorer II

Hey there GB-amateur :  Yes, one of your Philly mints snuck across the Mississippi river, to CA .  I feel SSeeeooo bad 😞    I will eat a 2nd jelly donut tomorrow morning for penance.  ok?   Then will you absolve my conscience of all guilt ?  🥵

No, none of my 16 gold coins were CC mint.  But I was hunting with a buddy, back in the late 1990s, who got a rare CC $5 gold (I forget what year) only ~20 yards away from me.  At the time, I think we valued it at 8 to 10k value.  I'm sure it's more now.   I also saw a private mint CA gold found right near me.  Moffat, if I recall.  In each of those 2 cases, both those guys were at sites that I took them to.   (ie.: my research, my permissions, etc....)

thanx guys for the "high-5's".  Especially coming from some  of the most respected names and figures of our hobby/industry !

nice !

Aside from the fabled fellows who were the first ones to ever hit Camp Floyd ("Johnston's Army") in Utah, I don't know of anyone in the USA who's got this many.  Not counting caches, that is.  Ie.: Just counting fumble fingers individual losses.    I know  several guys in CA that I hunt with, who have 2 or 3 or 4-ish.  And one buddy of mine who's at I think 8 so far (but one of them was from his current location in Australia).

There are more found on the west coast, than on the east coast.  Lots of theories have been advanced as to  the reason for that.  But that's for another thread/topic.  🙂

Hey guys, I haven't done a show & tell on this particular forum yet.  But a few friends I know  here aren't necessarily members or readers of some of the other forums.   So here is my latest trophy show & tell.  Got this @ last Saturday, on a hunt with Brian "Cal Cobra".  An 1881 P $10 gold.   This is my 16th gold coin of my career so far.   Brian also got an old coin from this trip, but .... we'll let him chime in with his 🙂

This site has, so far, given up a Spanish reale, an 1829 bust dime, some 1800's foreign coins, an 1853 seated quarter, gold rush buckles, etc...   And oodles and oodles of period "whatzitz" that keep us on the edge of our seats.   All I can say about the location is:  "In California"  🙂

Paul, thanx for the clarification.   And as for the recent $10 gold, it's my 16th gold coin.   I'll go ahead and put a show & tell post on this forum too, in a minute.

Paul, you never cease to amaze me.   You definitely earned those seated halves !   Congratz.  

This wouldn't happen to be the same location, as the picnic site we were asking you to look into, would it ?   Nearby, but not the exact same site, right ?

Also:  Did you see the 1881 P $10 gold I just found this last weekend ?  It's on FMDF now.  

Welcome from coastal CA .   The Garrets of the mid 1970s were among the best of that era.  Wasn't till the later 1970s that Whites pushed them off that throne.  

thanx for allowing me to sign up.   A very-respected industry voice's forum, no less !   This forum was pointed out to me , by a fellow on another forum, because he wanted me to chime in on a thread about long-range-locators.   (which I have done now already).  

I've been md'ing since about age ~14, in the mid 1970s.   Live in Monterey, CA, work in Salinas, CA.

"... Being a science nerd type I don’t believe in either dowsing or ghosts....."

This is where it almost gets comical with them.   Because a lot of them distance themselves from any sort of supernatural explanation, lest it get lumped into a category of spooks, occult, mystical, religion, etc....    And .... no no no, we can't go THERE, right ?  Because, gee, what's next ouija boards ? seances ?    Thus ... no no no,  we can't go there.     So what they will say is :  That the explanation is totally scientific in nature.  Nothing to do with spooks, or spirits, etc....

And, in the effort to show that it's scientifically based, they will even offer various explanations.  With $20 high-sounding words.  About the attractions of objects, etc.....   If someone with a scientific background goes to try to dismantle the explanations (showing that they hold no merit), then they resort to this :

That dowsing is:  Un-discovered science.   After all, science once thought the earth was flat.  Right ?   And science once said that heavier-than-air flight was impossible.  Right ?   Well so too is dowsing simply "Un-discovered" science.    And some day, science will come along,  and be able to explain how it works.  But .... rest assured, it's totally scientific.

But then, in the same discussion threads/blogs/forums :   OTHER dowsers will start rambling on about things that .... border on the mystical and occult explanations.   Ie.: that it takes "faith" and "belief", "auras" and other such buzzwords that start to sound almost new-age, or religious  .   And when you point out to them that their peers have said it's "totally scientific" (So as-to-point-out their internal contradictions within their camps), then they have the following wonderful compromise agreement within their ranks :

"Who cares HOW it works?"  It doesn't matter whether this side of the aisle (the "science" explanation camp) is right, or the other side of the aisle (the supernatural explanation camp) is right. The bottom line is:  That it works.  And thus they see no internal consistency problem with the multitude of conflicting explanations , that pop up within their ranks.

Hey there Steve, thanx for letting me join your site.   Got prompted , from a fellow on another forum, to come read what you'd written about LRL's.  Because that person know I was a rabid skeptic on that subject, haha. 😇    I Enjoyed GB-amateur's video link.

To comment on what you've written on the subject, I've lifted the following quotes from you.   And wonder if you could take-a-crack at the common "push-backs", that the believers offer, to what you're saying .   My comments, following each of your quotes, is their  typical responses .  So I'm just playing the devil's advocate, to see how you'd respond :

 "... For me these devices have always failed the most basic test... the experience of hundreds of thousands of prospectors and treasure hunters around the world...."

"Huh ?  What do you mean they 'fail the tests' ?  There's scores of testimonials of success.  I mean, gee, haven't you see the advertisements of guys posing next to the jars of coins that they found ?  Photos don't lie after all, eh ?   

And no, it's not random eventual luck.  They will say they've found goodies without a "detector to pinpoint", thus ruling out eventual random odds.    

And if you point them to staged double-blind tests that have been done, they will dismiss those too.  For very simple reasons:  
A) Those dowsing/LRL test subject persons weren't qualified or experienced enough.    B) The tests were rigged to make-certain that the dowsers/LRL failed.   C) Durned those sun-spots or lunar burps or EMI after all, that must've been present that day.   D) You can't count an isolated singular test.  I mean, after all, do MD'rs find a gold ring or gold coin every day they go out ?  No, of course not.  Then why the double-standard expectation for dowsing and LRL ?  

 "... If it works, the use soon spreads to other prospectors....."

 IT MOST CERTAINLY HAS "spread to other prospectors".   Why do you think that there is historical mentions of dowsing that goes all the way back to ancient times ?   If it didn't work, then .... by golly .... they wouldn't have been doing it and spreading the word to others.  And people wouldn't have continued the practice .  Thus the word, and usage, did indeed "spread".   There's scores of people doing it in present times.  So how can you say it hasn't "spread" ?

 "... Except for a few obvious promotionals, the success stories of people using LRL devices are glaringly absent....."

That's got a bullet proof rationale :  The reason you don't hear of too many caches and treasures and riches being found by the LRL/dowser gang, is easy:  Because they're after "big game".  Not a few individual nuggets here  and there.  Not singular coins like the lowly md'rs.   Heck no.  They're after the big-ticket caches !   

And as such, they therefore keep mum and secret about their finds. Because, since they're so big, then ... gee ... they don't want to open themselves up for the chance that thieves might target their home.  And the IRS would come knocking on their door for  taxes.  So they keep mum and aren't boasting.   Loose lips sink ships after all.  But rest assured:  It works, and treasures are being found.    

 "... And just in case anyone thinks I am close-minded about something I have never tried, I have a set of dowsing rods and have tried it. ...."

And you know what that means, don't you ?  It simply means you weren't doing it right.  And/or didn't practice long enough.  For example :  If you took a newbie md'r and a skilled md'r, out to an old park , who is most likely to find old silver with their detector ?   Obviously the skilled md'r, who has years of experience.  Right ?  So why the double-standard for LRL/dowsing ?  

Thus the fact of someone testing /trying it, and coming away with no results ... NEVER means:  "It doesn't work".  Instead, it always/only means:  a) You need more practice, and b) you were doing it wrong.   See ?