Jump to content

GB_Amateur

Full Member
  • Posts

    5,714
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    12

GB_Amateur last won the day on March 8 2023

GB_Amateur had the most liked content!

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location:
    Southern Indiana
  • Interests:
    Finding old coins & native precious metals, researching history
  • Gear In Use:
    Minelab Manticore, Minelab Eqx800, Fisher F75 Black, White's TDI/SPP, White's TRX, Garrett Carrot, Sunray Pro Gold

Recent Profile Visitors

13,731 profile views

GB_Amateur's Achievements

Platinum Contributor

Platinum Contributor (6/6)

9.8k

Reputation

  1. I've taken the liberty of enumerating three things from Mark's initial post that started this thread. It seems most of the discussion has centered on Observation 1. Unfortunately (AFAIK) I haven't seen anyone who typically detects in mineralized ground take part in this discussion. (Where's @Chase Goldman who's detected Culpeper, VA with many detectors?) I can tell you this (as always the caveat 2-3 bar out of 6 Fe3O4 meter reading on the Fisher F75): For in ground test targets, the F75 (13 kHz single frequency) goes from non-ferrous to ferrous as depth increases on high conductive coins (and maybe most/all non-ferrous targets). BUT, in air tests, as the distance to the target increases, the signal stays high tone (non-ferrous), just getting weaker until it finally disappears. The smoking gun points at signal/noise, with the signal being the target getting weaker with increased distance while the noise is ground mineralization, basically staying constant. Eventually the ground wins ==> ferrous response. No ground (air test) ==> no low tone. More bothersome to me is Mark's Observation 3 where the Manticore and Equinox didn't even pick up a non-ferrous target in multifrequency when single frequency (which frequency? Mark never said) does respond for both detectors.
  2. There is a significant difference between countries that circulate $1 and $2 (or equivalent) coins -- e.g. Canada and Australia -- than here in the USA where even the half dollar has gone the way of the dodo bird. This isn't meant as demeaning to those who get a kick out of finding small denomination coins. If you enjoy that, more power to you. But for me, I'd rather find one wheat cent than a handful of clad quarters. I don't see the hobby drying up for old coins and relics as quickly as circulating modern coinage disappears. For sure jewelry today being more likely made of non-precious metals is a real issue, as is the loss of metal detectable native gold. Those are what is causing deterioration for many of the more serious detectorists. Research is still going to be rewarded, though, for coin and relic detecting in particular. Metal detecting companies are selling the dream. When you see an ad, what do they show? Often it's Spanish Colonial era gold and silver, or modern gold jewelry, maybe some nuggets. Do some show a handful of modern coins, IDK, but is that really going to excite very many people? Robert Louis Stevenson, who died in 1894, probably did as much for metal detecting as most modern ads....
  3. Welcome, Zahra! Can you tell us more about yourself and what your metal detecting, treasure hunting, and/or prospecting interests are?
  4. I second that. (and you continued) "...Just didn't think people would have much interest in a PI as a coin detector." Which 'people' are you referring to? 😁 Just like with native gold detecting, there are conditions where a VLF will struggle and a PI shines. The fact that you are impressed with its target ID means it likely has advantages over other PI's that some have used for coin detecting. Besides, aren't you shifting from detecting season to skiing season soon? Time's a wastin'!
  5. I think that was their intent. Recall the video they made a few months ahead of the AT/Max release? A guy with the detector climbing over large boulders in a mountainous area.... Of course Garrett isn't the only one who puts out these teaser videos. Can you say 'Minelab'? With the success of the Axiom, hopefully Garrett continues by releasing a new IB/VLF model which is high performance (and affordable -- one of Garrett's strong suits).
  6. Amazing hunt for must of us, but seems like standard fare lately for you and @Chase Goldman. 😏 Is there a Theodore Roosevelt Museum somewhere? They might be interested in that pin, and/or be able to tell you something more about it. FWIW I actually found a jewelry box, with jewelry, detecting a modern school yard. I felt a bit uneasy wondering if some disillusioned school girl tossed it out in a fit of exasperation after being dumped by her boyfriend.... You guys are wondering why only two (m/l) modern silver coins? Why not put this place on the back burner until I can come visit later this year and help you clear more of that aluminum and iron trash? 😀
  7. I'm impressed they had a transistorized design so early. Commercially available transistors had only been around for about a year and commercially available products (e.g. portable radios) were still a couple years away. (See Wikipedia entry.) Around summer 1969 I bought an electronics magazine containing a metal detector project. I built the PoS. It was not even close to as nice of a package as the one you post from 14 years earlier! Was it not until almost 1960 that the first commercially made transistorized metal detectors came into being?
  8. I see a minimum of three relevant environments for this discussion, and that is quite likely already an oversimplification: 1) saltwater, 2) acidic soil, 3) basic soil. I've talked to some agricultural experts regarding the latter two and both can be found here in the greater Midwest, naturally, but basic dominates. I emphasize 'naturally' because fertilizers are often used to changed the pH (i.e. the acidity vs. basicity) so what you get in the cultivated field could be different than surrounding non-cultivated land. I don't know which side of neutral pH the rest of the country's soils represent. A few years ago I reported on a mysterious copper coin I found which turned out to be simply the pure copper core of a USA clad quarter -- the 25%Ni, 75% Cu outer layers had been completely removed. This coin was found in a decorative pond that was absolutely loaded with rotting leaves. I assume the acidity was quite high (relatively speaking, not at a dangerous-to-human flesh level) in the pond, enough to eat away all of the two out layers. Note that these outer layers are not simply a coating, but rather together make up 1/3 of the coin's weight (and thickness) compared to the 2/3 copper core. What I'm getting at is that the chemistry and eventually the VDI anomalies for Warnicks may be due to different processes depending upon the particular environment the coin has been subject to. (And there's still the wild card that in some apparently rare cases the composition tolerances were off at the mint.)
  9. Isn't the arm cuff indicating a bit of T above background? No electronics there, and not much thermal mass, either.
  10. Thanks for that link. They're missing the version that's shown in my avatar! 😁 I think it's later than any shown there, likely the last of the ring+beavertail design. It has no rivet -- just made from a single piece of thin sheet aluminum with the ring part reinforced by rolling.
  11. Surprised it hasn't at least been smashed. My question is: were you able to detect at this spot? That's a great indicator for coins and relics, maybe more.
  12. Best wishes for a speedy, but most importantly, complete recovery, CPT. I look forward to more of your posts. Walkerrj, thanks for the notice.
  13. Are those the ones shown in the lower left portion of your non-ferrous trash photo -- what I'd call beaver tail with near rectangular pull? Whatever has happened on your coast, it looks like it's been an unusual winter, on the plus side. Hopefully you can keep getting out there while the pickens are good. Oh, where in your photos is the 'wiped' clean nickel candidate?
  14. If pure iron, the weight shown (11.5 lb) would mean a diameter of 4.26 inches for a perfect sphere (with a bit of uncertainty given the uncertainty of the weight measurement). If you bring two large rectangular blocks to either side, everything on a flat surface, and measure the distance between them (carefully removing the ball if necessary) you'll get a more reliable diameter measurement than trying to read a tape behind the ball or deducing the diameter from measuring it's circumference.
  15. Between the two posts you've detailed three reasons: learning time, cost, and storage. In my case #1 drove me to the Manticore over the Deus 2. But, always trying to be open-minded, I'm not sure I made the right choice. Still, I learned from the Equinox that, for me, it takes a long time to really get familiar with a new (complicated) detector. I haven't seen any world beater performance with the Manticore yet, but I don't expect that. Every other time I take it out it gets a bit more comfortable (mentally, that is). I expect that to continue.
×
×
  • Create New...