GB_Amateur

That's the 'printer' version which is not so easy to read on a display. I do notice the 'rev.5 050420' (4 May 2020) document tag. So according to the F19 manual we're not supposed to use any rubber washer/gasket when attaching the coil to the shaft?? I wonder if that's something specific to the 5"x10" coil given the conflicting instructions for other coils (5" and 7"x11") in the Gold Bug Pro manuals. I'm sticking with Carl's recommendation and my own experience.

Those $1 USA brass coins are always a surprise find for me, although not as big of a surprise as a half dollar in my case. I've still yet to recover a Susan B. Anthony (clad) dollar. I tend to be more open-minded at the beginning of a hunt, meaning I'll dig targets which tend to be out of my 'favorites' regions (coin TID's) and then get pickier as the day progresses. This definitely has to do with fatigue, back pain, etc. The worst thing that can happen (short of injury, of course) is the loss of concentration that can occur later in a hunt. When that happens to me I take a rest break (5 minutes or so) and if it continues I just pack it in. Paying attention to all the subtle hints is what brings in the tougher finds in many cases and concentration is required for that.

When I turn it on (without holding down any buttons) it flashes "5 15 10 00 27". I'm pretty sure the first two numbers are month and year of manufacture. I bought it in August 2015. Unfortunately my Ground Grab / Pinpoint button has developed a problem and is flaky (at best). As such I can't do the firmware query as Steve outlined in his Dankowski forum post.

I'm going the extra distance here to provide some (unsolicited) advice. Given that I'm not a numismatic professional your friend should take this with a grain of salt. However I hope he reads it over and give it some consideration. Let's start with the playing field. 0) Most of what I'm going to relate is from Q. David Bowers's A Guide Book of Half Cents and Large Cents. I suggest your friend get a copy and read the relevant pages to get an idea of the richness of the collecting market for early dates, particularly his 1794. There are 37 pages on that dated coin alone. 1) Professional grading ('Certification') has a huge amount of clout, especially when done by either NGC or PCGS. Unfortunately coins found in the ground, particularly those with high copper content, fall into a category of "environmental damage". That's a broad brush stroke and although it is a strike against a coin (and its value, generally) with this designation, it's not as bad as many perceive IF the coin is rare. And the good news is your friend's coins are rare due to their condition. (More on this below.) 2) The accepted mintage for this year is 918,521 -- by itself not impressive. However, in general and particularly true then, coins were minted for one reason and that is to be circulated for commerce. As such the survival population is much less. According to Bowers's listing of 65 (my count) known 1794 die varieties, somewhere in the 25,000 to 35,000 range (my count) survive. Even that number isn't particularly impressive. Keep in mind the vast majority of those are in much lower grade than your friend's, though. Quoting Bowers: The appeal that 1794 Cents possess has prompted hours of discussion among collectors of the series and has motivated otherwise busy individuals to travel tens of thousands of miles, write innumerable letters, and spend tens of thousands of dollars in their quest for needed varieties. ...There seems to be a special aura surrounding the pieces, a quality which has aroused a fierce desire on the part of those who lack certain varieties and a pride of possession for those who own them. (emphasis mine) 3) Regarding rarity, this quote from Bowers drives home the point: Most 1794 cents show extensive wear, with typical grades ranging from Good to Fine. In proportion to demand, VF examples are scarce, EF coins are rare, and AU coins are rarer yet. (Emphasis mine. Note: EF and XF are used interchangeably, standing for the "Extremely Fine" grade.) OK, now to the specifics of your friend's two specimens. Let's start with line 1 in the report -- S-62 (Sheldon variety 62) in XF condition. Bowers estimates only 75 to 125 of this variety still exists in all grades. Further, I quote: This variety is known from EF to Mint State, but is a rarity at any high level. In other words, the number of survivors in the highest grades (EF and above) is far less than the 75 to 125 estimate. Yep, we're talking rarified air. On to line 2 of the report. This one is more vague but that translates 'more intriguing'. There is no die specification, but the grade is even higher: "AU details". That alone is pushing this coin further upwards into the atmosphere. But why no die designation? I can only speculate. It could be they just didn't want to take the time to figure it out. (The other specimen was easy -- even I was able to recognize it back when you first showed a photo.) But another possibility is that it's not one of the more common varieties (for example, Bowers lists four with estimates of 'thousands'). They may have even been afraid to specify if it appeared to fall into one of the most rare die variety categories. Could it even be an undiscovered die variety? (That would be crazy exciting but I don't think a new variety has surfaced for a few decades so very unlikely, although not impossible.) In terms of value, this is tough because of the 'environmental damage' label. However, as I've been emphasizing, rarity can be forgiving of that 'scarlet letter'. IMO, your friend should not even consider selling this second coin before getting its variety determined by an expert (a greater expert than the person who graded the coin at the certification service). So how do you find such an expert? First off, the local coin shop is unlikely to be able to help. The topic of die varieties is not the typical concern -- far from it. Sometimes they'll even denigrate a coin rather than to admit they aren't knowledgeable enough to provide the information needed. The right person is very likely a member of the (somewhat) exclusive Professional Numismatics Guild (PNG). You can search their site for a member near you who specializes in US coins. Even if s/he isn't a specialist in early large cents s/he should be able to advise on how to find such a person, possibly even recommending one.

Thanks for the followup! Interesting that they categorized the first one as S-62 die variety but gave no die variety specification for the second (better conditioned) one. XF and AU -- pretty amazing. They wouldn't grade them fully because of the environmental damage. That's unfortunate, but given their 'detail' grading and the condition rarity of 1794 large cents, these are still extremely valuable IMO. Oh, and nice finds in your photo, too. ☺️ Will you two continue to detect there?

Kinda strange. My Gold Bug Pro hardcopy manual assembly illustration (supplied with the detector) shows "Single Rubber Washer" similar to your GBP manual. Also on page 34 titled Relic-Hunting and Coin-Shooting with the Optional 11" DD Searchcoil it states: "DO NOT install a rubber washer at the searchcoil conncetion point." Now, what about the 5"x10" coil?? FWIW I've always operated mine with both washers, regardless of coil. (I have 5", 5"x10", and 7"x11".) I wouldn't do that if it didn't fit reasonably well; I don't force things. I wonder if these recommendations of zero or one washer have something to do with ease of rotation and reduction of wear.

In an air test at max sensitivity, my GP Pro stock w/5"DD coil in Discriminate Mode (All Metal mode doesn't show digital target ID but rather ground balance setting) gave dTID readings in low 90's for USA 90% silver dollar, 1 ozt 99.9% silver round, and 1 ozt 99.9% silver rectangular bar. I stacked those three on top of each other and it still read in the low-mid 90's. That's one sweet detector that's so easy to set up. It doesn't have quite the depth of the modern multifrequers, nor features like noise cancelling that many detectors have. But for turn-on-and-go-find it's a workhorse, and the coil availability is also excellent.

One complaint of the Gold Bug Pro early on is that because you couldn't hear electronics noise when you maxed out the sensitivity (100%), that FT had intentionally limited it -- a kind of idiot proofing in the eyes of experienced users to minimize complaints from inexperienced users. Thus one possibility is that for the later released F19, Fisher took that into account and gave it more umph. Another possible explanation is that you just happened to get a hot unit. (All speculation here.) I'd be surprised if the Time Ranger Pro' sensitivity/gain is shackled even further. Do you think your F19 is as sensitive as your Tek T2? If not then the idea they intentionally kept the gain low so as not to interfere with high end detector sales (e.g. Fisher F75) doesn't really hold up. (And yes, they run at different frequencies -- 13 kHz for the F75 and T2.) I'll fire up my GB Pro later today and report on the large silver coin test. (Done -- see next post.)

I don't recall that. I need to dust it off and fire it up to find out. Mine's never been modded by me or the factory since I bought it in August 2015. BTW, does either of yours have the 3.5 mm socket for the small headphone plug? They advertised for a while that the Bug came with both sockets but mine only has the 1/4 inch. The Teknetics Frat brothers (e.g. Omega) did have both sockets. I thought that was a really nice feature.

AFAIK, yes. I have the same manual that DetectorProspector has available for download which I'm pretty sure I downloaded from Fisher's site years ago. The file mod date on my computer is 2019-08-11 (that's August 11) which should be when I downloaded it since I've never modified it. On the last page of my manual (and the downloadable one) -- the page with all the Fisher accessories -- you will find at the bottom "MF19 rev1 021015" and presumably that's the date it was created: 10 Feb 2015.

The original F19's came in two camo varieties -- green and pink. Presumably the latter were for women? When they eventually released the non-camo models the price for those were lower (maybe $50 less), even though they kept the camo model prices higher. I'm not much of a camo person. I prefer wearing orange so that 1) hunters can see me, and 2) if I get lost, searchers can more easily find me. If wild animals are more likely to notice me, all the better! I ended up buying a Gold Bug Pro instead of an F19 because at the time only the camo models had been released. Aesthetics? Yep.

Steve has the F19 manual archived here. I went to his Detector Database, found the model, looked at the bottom of that page to find his links.

OK, Simon. I know you often identify detectors in photos, on TV shows, etc. I see three here. What's your conclusion of the model families? (IMO, one is easy; I have a guess for one, but the third I have no clue.) Others should chime in, too. I just address Simon because it was his post and I know he's done similar ID'ing previously.

'Disappointing' is too mild of a description for this. I assume you are dealing with Minelab of the Americas. But also presumably the data you uploaded went to an all-encompassing international (headquarters) database? If ML keeps shooting themselves in the foot they soon won't have a leg to stand on....

Which search mode?

Finally(!) competition is biting Minelab in more places than one. If Garrett comes through as many are hoping/expecting, that's likely one more chunk out of Minelab's hide (err, bottom line).

Probably not simply that as since 1866 the weight (8.359 g), the composition (90% gold, 10% copper), and the diameter (21.6 mm) have been held uniform. However, the diameter did change in 1866 and both composition and weight were different prior to 1839. Is the $5 piece you're referring to have a date earlier than 1866? Back on the general topic of Manticore ID values, I often wonder if mode choice in particular, and other variables like recovery speed have an effect. It would seem that the calibration isn't perfectly linear from one group of settings to the next so to make a perfectly matching VDI scale would take a lot of effort on the part of detector designers/prototypers/manufacturers.

I'm in agreement, at least in a theoretical view. Training takes quite a bit a lot of input data. But maybe detectorists could collaborate, uploading results to common database website. There may also be a downside to this, acceptable by some but maybe not by others. That is the partial (or more) removal of the skill of the detectorist. Here's a loose comparison which probably instigates its own debate, but I'll go with it anyway. How much gold is $1 worth? I'm not going to look up the spot price but recently I think I've seen USA $2400/ozt so I'll go with that -- at least its ballpark for this argument. Divide those two numbers and you get 1/2400 of a troy ounce of (pure) gold is worth $1.00. 480 grains (abbreviated 'gr') per ozt, so a grain of gold is worth about $5.00. 1 gr is about 0.065 grams (abbreviate 'g') so 0.013 g of gold is worth $1. Folding in purity of nuggets, let's say 0.015 g. Do people get satisfaction from digging an 0.015 g of gold? Many do; however it's obviously not because of the monetary value but rather the difficulty of doing that, both from a skill standpoint but also in some sense the rarity of even this size nugget's findability. Compare that to the accomplishment of finding four USA 25 cent pieces (aka 'quarters'). Yes, some see that as an accomplishment and this isn't meant to demean anyone. But for a lot of people there is a big difference. OK, now create a tool that is so good that the novice and the seasoned veteran have the same chance of finding a tiny nugget. (They still have to be placed in the right spot, another skill which isn't equally shared....) Does that deteriorate the feel of accomplishment for some. (Yeh, I know, the detector manufacturers don't give a rat's a__ if they lose a hundred experts for every thousand novices they gain.)

I think this falls in the category 'the rich get richer', but before anyone labels that comment as 'envy', the only thing I'm envious of is being someone who puts as much effort into the entire endeavor (including research) as Andrew. Sometimes people get lucky, but no one gets *that* lucky. Well done (again). Did soldiers in that area & time period get paid in small denomination gold? I recall an article by Tom D. about the subject but his was for pre-CW (~1850, Florida) soldiers when (according to him) only the highest ranking received gold; the others silver.

Sounds like the class was well worth it! Ditto what Simon (phrunt) said about confidence -- that's one of the things (and most important, IMO) the class gave me. Well done by the teachers and the student. Those are pretty good size for a well hunted area. Did you find them in the burn barrel vicinity or did you have access to some other spots? Manticore+M8 are getting more tantalizing as a small native gold finding system.

To be clear, I'm not charging for a service. I'm helping out a friend/acquaintance or even stranger. (In the last case I certainly limit my effort, but even for the other cases there is only so much time I'm willing to expend.) To me it's like getting asked to find a lost valuable such as a jewelry ring. As such I'm not going to the courthouse, etc. The property owner can do that. But here are some things I've 'learned' from my limited experience: 1) Get as much info from the land owner as possible. This includes asking about where s/he thinks it is -- hopefully based upon a past viewing. Ask for the locations of other known corner markers. This helps in two ways: a) if adjacent corner markers it can get you in the ballpark, and b) if you can see one and test it with the detector, assuming the same material or type of object was used for other corners you'll get a good dTID value to watch for. 2) Unless the marker has been driven deeper by unscrupulous persons (e.g. when putting in a sidewalk), it shouldn't require a high sensitivity setting so turn it down and go after the strong signals. 3) Other common good detecting practice such as choosing the right coil (e.g. if near fences, light poles, etc. where a small coil is best) go along with the technique. I've certainly found property markers by accident when detecting, as I assume many of you have done as well. Sometimes they sound off with a high dTID -- possibly bronze or brass or maybe a steel rod but with a brass cap. Yesterday's markers showed a red underlined 64 with iron grunt (only) on the ML Manticore so clearly a purely ferrous target.

Welcome back, Herb! I'm sure there's still some keepers out their with your name on it. I look forward to you sharing the results of your 'therapy'.

Very nice plot, but more info would help. E.g. pulse characteristics, how long after the pulse was the field measured, how was the field measured? Could you provide a reference? Was the pulse generated by an actual commercially available detector running in a mode, etc. available to owners?

Get ready for a deep discount sale on (some) Minelab PI's. 🤣