Jump to content

GB_Amateur

Member
  • Content Count

    3,628
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    8

 Content Type 

Forums

Detector Prospector Magazine

Detector Database

Downloads

Calendar

Everything posted by GB_Amateur

  1. Yes, I recall you said previously that Field 1 is your default but thought Park 1 may be just as good. But Beach 2? Here is a snippet from the manual (version 5 from late 2019 which may not be the most recent release): Note where it says "...Beach 2 has a lower transmit power..." which I interpret as possibly negatively affecting overall sensitivity (and thus depth) in non-salt laden environments. AFAIK Minelab has been reticent in regards to the differences in various modes when it comes to inner workings. Are different frequencies transmitted in different modes? Oscillosc
  2. I think there's a key setting you haven't mentioned here (unintended omission I suspect) and that is search mode. I think I know which search mode you are detecting in since you've stated it at least once previously in a different thread. I'm particularly sensitive to this as I've noticed quite different dTID values in different modes comparing both ferrous and non-ferrous targets. I can't say that this is caused simply by mode choice as other settings (particularly recovery speed and possibly Iron Bias) have an effect. To reach a strong conclusion (more than just a 'feeling') I would need
  3. I wasn't anticipating details to this level of scientific relevance, but that's one of the advantages to asking a question as contrasted with stating an observation/opinion to start a thread. Being a scientiest (more than just 'at heart') I'm pleased and intrigued by the direction this thread has gone. I think @jasongis one who will be particularly interested in this as he takes a scientific approach to prospecting and gold recovery. Thanks to all who have responded so far and will continue to respond. I may chime in at some point with my thoughts and motivation (specifically the ones
  4. Nice review, Chase. Is it accurate to break the latency into three categories (from longest to shortest) as follows: 1) standard Bluetooth, 2) APTX LL, 3) all proprietary systems mentioned? And more specifically, do the proprietary systems have similar latency, within say 10%?
  5. That's to reduce the chances that other detectorists know you are searching the area?
  6. I think 'coin' is a stretch. More like a token. I remember back in the 60's these types of tokens were made and distibuted by various manufacturers and merchants as advertising collectibles. Gasoline companies, grocery store chains, even bottling companies got into the act. Assemble a full set and cash in for a premium/prize, etc. Interesting find, probably dropped ~50 years ago would be my guess.
  7. Also the cost of converting 95% copper pennies to 100% copper ingots must be folded into the value, as well as profit margin for the smelter. But after all that there is still a premium for the possessor. The legality is a separate (but concrete) issue. It goes along with the finders-keepers and antiquity laws discussions/threads. IMO it's the least logically defendable law of the three given it serves no purpose other than to maximize the circulation of a worthless denominational coin.
  8. Your problem, Steve, is that you're an engineer at heart trying to wear marketing clothing. 😁 IMO they could have called it something completely new, like Geo6000 or GS6000. Get the GPX and GPZ owners thinking they need this new instrument. (Maybe I should take my own advice and keep my science/engineering/tech mouth shut....) Having been around some marketeers, I know they take things like this seriously, especially names. They proudly pop the buttons off their shirts sitting around the table, beaming over their clever names. So what happened here? Back to basics. ML has made it
  9. Around where I live it's illegal (trespassing) to even step onto railroad property or right-of-way (except at crossings). An acquaintance who is a photographer (also a detectorist) said in his town the RR has charged people with traspassing just for showing a photograph (I think on Facebook) of a railroad track that was taken while standing on the RR right-of-way. Another "Big Brother Is Watching" thing to look out for. Maybe not every RR company is this zealous, but I've heard for years they don't like people putting anything on the tracks.
  10. I've seen an argument that USA coins are exempt from these 50 year, 75 year, 100 year or whatever is written in whichever law. The 'reasoning' is that since any USA minted coin is legal tender still today, the antiquities law can't be used to override that principle. I have no idea as to the strength of that argument. Is there a legal precedent where this was applied (and which prevailed) in court? That would be nice to have on one's side but it might take a fresh court challenge to find out.
  11. What about the antiquities laws? (Which one? Take your pick.) What about claiming metal detecting finds as income on your tax returns? With the rare exception that some zealot or enemy makes it his/her vendetta to turn you in (and insist you are prosecuted), the 'authorities' don't really care. Unless... there is considerable value involved, meaning (just my WAG) 10's of thousands of dollars or more. Someone beach hunting on the Florida coast finds a coin from a Spanish galleon? Yawn. Someone finds the galleon? Here come's every Tom, Dick, and Harry (public or private). When th
  12. Wow, I didn't realize Uber has gotten into real estate! Sounds like a fantasitic opportunity. 'Besty' or not, as much as it seems this shouldn't be necessary, IMO you should strongly consider putting in writing what happens with the finds, including what 'high value' means and also how that value is determined. If "the thrill of the hunt" is the only thing you care about, then OK. I have a similar opportunity I plan to be able to work on at the end of this summer. I hope we both get the chances to show our discoveries (here on the forum) before the year is out, no matter how modes
  13. This is a topic relevant to every(?) form of detecting -- ground coverage. I'll list several questions concerns I've had but any replies of course aren't limited to these, nor do they need to address any of them. Just tossing out some ideas to prompt further discussion. 1) What methods and efforts do you apply to ensure full ground coverage in the cases where that is one of your goals? 2) Is your sweep a straight line path or an arc? 3) How long is your sweep? 4) How much do you overlap consecutive sweeps in the direction you walk? 5) How much do you overlap side-to
  14. I recall (but my memory could be off) the late Fred Mason posting this web-based headphone test. A couple years ago I ran the tests on several sets of headphones I owned at the time. My conclusion was that headpones that sound the best for music (what I think this test was designed for) don't correlate with what my ears say are best for metal detecting.
  15. Mayfly, the narrative you posted leaves out a lot of details. 1) Did you buy new or used? 2) Did you buy from an authorized dealer? Online or in a brick-and-mortar store? 3) Did it come with a warranty? The cause could range from improper setup, poor coil connection, even a faulty unit (and that's only the start of a list of causes). Was there a startup guide or quick checkout instructions in the manual? (I'm assuming it came with a user manual. If not -- see 1 and 2 above. Regardless, you should be able to download a manual from the Garrett website -- click here.)
  16. First, I did a quick calc and the size bar you indicated would weigh 121 kg (267 lb) if pure gold. That size bar would have to have a specific gravity of about 9 (right around copper) to weigh 125 lb. So even accounting for less than pure gold (e.g. if someone just melted a bunch of nuggets and/or fine gold) it would still be heavier than that. You didn't say how deep you expect the gold to be, other than you want the coil to be able to be submersible to 24". Would auto tracking work at the presumably slow speeds you will be moving this raft? And would the detector be required to
  17. Bluemask, add my name to the welcome wagon! The best detector is always the one you have in your hand. I look forward to seeing some of your finds.
  18. You may have missed this post in another subforum. A quote from that post (by OP Jerry Perez): I didn't see this one coming. GPAA News by Kevin Hoagland mentioned this intro news this month.
  19. I was thinking Z-Lynk wireless also. If the release is really only a month away I wonder how much tweaking they've done. OTOH they have owned the rights for about a year now and they possibly got to work right away. I like the word 'first', although that might be Kevin's choice of words more than Garrett's. The 24k was the most obvious re-issue since Garrett doesn't have a detector running at higher than 20 kHz (right?). And the 24k was White's best creation in quite a while. Now I'll remind them of my hope -- reissue the Bullseye TRX. I see NickeldNdimed already beat me
  20. I've told this story before here so maybe people don't want to read it a second time. (Too bad...😏) My parents owned farmland that was located above (as in many hundreds of feet above) an astrobleme. One summer about 40 years ago some geologists from the University of Kansas came by to study it. My dad was one of those outgoing people not afraid to strike up a conversation with anyone. (He'd have done great with permissions if he were a detectorist...). He invited one of the geologists to our house for dinner and I tagged along. The geologist mentioned that one of his colleagues was ou
  21. You know you're reading/listening to a geologist when a word like that slips out. A lot of times people get into a rut around here saying if you find a responsive rock that isn't in a known meteorite field (like Gold Basin) that it can't be a meteorite. You've just shown that isn't true. There's a chance of finding a meteorite anywhere on the planet. Chances are miniscule, but then we detectorists lust after recovering rarities, right? I wonder how many experience those and then decide "chances are against it..." and toss that once-in-a-lifetime find aside. Do you think you were
  22. I wish I had a (Buffalo) nickel for every time I've thought that!! Nice finds! A Carson City coin rarely shows up in the East (and not many in the West, for that matter.) You've again shown how persistence (still) pays off when metal detecting.
  23. I haven't done any air tests with the 12"x15" DD coil. Personally I just live with these slight variations (that may be just my imagination). I emphasize I did not notice a shift in dTID, only a spread (wider range of values for a given in-ground target). Maybe it's the extra weight and/or less accurate pinpointing that leads to worse coil control in my case. If I get a chance (on a day I can't get out and do real detecting 😁) I'll try a couple air tests. I really need to get my in-ground test setup working but air tests are a lot less time-consuming, with their known limitations.
  24. Multi-IQ (maybe multifreq in general) has been shown to hold dTID's to greater depths than single frequency detectors under the same conditions. That may mean we see differences for relative coil performances in the ML Equinox that don't show up on other detectors. And note -- one must always take ground conditions (especially mineralization) into account. Coil control (including speed of swing) supposedly can affect dTID accuracy. At least that's what I've read (and experienced). Larger coils have different magnetic field patterns, including the strength of the field as a function of
×
×
  • Create New...