GB_Amateur

When did this feature get introduced, or was it there from the start? I searched for 'triangle' in the User Guide that came out with version 2.0 (introduction of Iron Bias F2 option) and couldn't find it. I do see the triangle with '!' to the right of the battery strength indicator in the image that came out with that version of the User Guide, though (hard to see here do to resolution reduction?): While we're on the subject of the User Guide, has anyone seen a new release that includes the new 4 kHz single frequency?

It's even easier when hunting with discrimination 'off' -- what I like to call 'wide open'. (Horseshoe button is a toggle so I don't know what it means when someone says horseshoe 'on' and horseshoe 'off'. Some people mean one thing and other people the opposeite? I do notice that when the detectors turns on it defaults to discrimination 'on'. I wish it would remember the setting when the detector was last on, but after getting burned enough times I've learned to immediately turn it off.) Anyway, back on topic. If not notching out any digital TID segments, the detector tells me with grunts as I swing if ground balance is off too much. (Here I'm talking about when running multi-frequency. I hardly ever run single frequency so don't know about this 'property' with those settings.) Yes, sometimes iron objects in the ground (typically nails) also grunt, but if I'm not sure which it is I just pump the coil up and down in a few different spots. If GB is off I hear the ground while pumping, telling me it's time to rebalance. The advantage going this route is that I don't have to change any settings (hit any buttons) until I've determined that GB is off. Also, pretty sure if the ground balance is off but not terribly so -- in my moderate mineralization soils anyway -- I don't see the far negative numbers on the screen even when I can hear the ground. (100% full disclosure, though, since I hunt by ear until I find a target I want to interrogate, those numbers may be showing up and I just don't notice....) Bottom line: if not discriminating, let your ear signal a ground-balance-off warning.

If I found any penny with an -S mintmark from 1908 thru 1914 it would make my detecting year. I realize you Western USA guys have a lot more -S coins in your ground than we in the Eastern 2/3's of the country do. I've learned that over the last 5 years salivating over the coin finds others have posted. Even the -D's are probably biased out your way, at least from the early days of the Denver mint before they started cranking them out in masses like Philadelphia has been doing forever. Yes, our East coast has older coins than you out West. Here in the Midwest we got nothin' besides corn. 😪

So none of the rings was even silver? That lion ring fooled me -- I'd swear that was silver. What has become of people, buying all this cheapo metal jewelry? "Tell her how much she means to you. Nothing says 'love' like...titanium?"

That is just mind boggling. Forget the silver count/value and sell your time machine, because it appears you've taken a 21st Century detector back to the 1970's. I'm humbled with my modest finds, but that won't stop me from grinding away. 😉 In other units, that's $300 or 600 bank rolls. Have you ever sorted by date & mintmark. I wonder if you can (or already have) filled the 1909 Whitman folder. I think Gerry in Idaho accomplished this feat with his MD finds. Again, to someone who's been coin collecting for 60 years that is mind boggling....

Good catch! Does lower concentration of gold in the alloy make it more likely that these jewelry pieces recovered from salt water?

Dilek, if you'll notice our responses here on this thread, you'll see we sniffed this out from the beginning. You may have noticed even after a few people here tried to help, nothing but silence. I think Steve calls these 'driveby posts'. Reminds me of the woman you sent a (free!) detector to who wanted it replaced and raised a stink when you didn't. She also scammed another member here with a sad story of why she couldn't afford an aftermarket shaft, then after he graciously sent her one (free!) she told everyone in a later post she was going into business making shafts. I realize not every viewer/reader on the internet is as detector saavy as the general reader here, so your concerns are well founded. But you've set up an excellent raport here unlike any other representative of a detector manufacturer. That is greatly appreciated. We know the high quality of Makro/Nokta products and we've got your back.

From page 52 of the User Guide (what I like to call 'operating manual', but Minelab has its own terminology): By 'silver coinage' are you including modern (clad) coins?? BTW, welcome, Dan. If you like discussion of technical topics (with some ligther discussions thrown in for entertainment 😁) then you've come to the right place.

I think you may be mixing up Mitchel and me. He's the better looking one.

Yes, it's a battle, and I'm glad no one is keeping score because I'm losing big time. But like most things, if it weren't a challenge I wouldn't be interested.

There are so many ways coins (and other manmade items) are at the depths found. Sports fields here tend to have been backfilled. I assume yours has, too. That's sometimes the case for schoolyards and even parks, but not always. I found a silver dime at less then 2 inch depth in a home's side yard, although I wonder if that depth can be explained by some kind of reworked soil (e.g. landscaping). It was old and the ground looked undisturbed, but that latter observation only applies for maybe 10+ years at most. I've found modern coins pretty deep, too, in fact in some cases almost as deep as my deepest old coins. Soil density, amount of biomass above (leaves from trees, grass trimmings, etc.) play a variable role. Burrowing animals (especially moles), earthworms, tree root growth/rework, the list goes on and on. I'm getting rid of them by digging 'em up and discarding them. 😁 This year alone (140 hours in the field) I've found ~650 (yes, I keep a count) of the older style ('ring and beavertail', either whole or in parts) and 95% of those were cherrypicked in the USA nickel 5 cent piece TID sweetspot of 12-13 on the ML Eqx. If I dug 14-18 I'm sure I'd have a couple thousand more since most TID there. And I'd get all the more modern square tabs (and plenty more can slaw), too. The aluminum trash that annoys me the most are the aluminum drink can 'punchouts' -- the disk shaped pieces about the size of our USA 1 cent pieces. I don't get that many (less than 1 per hour) but they sound and dTID like the best nickels I ever recover. What really honks me off about them is the trouble the s___heads have to expend to even get them off the cans!!

Excellent historic finds! Is the crucible made of metal (e.g. cast iron)? What detectors were you using? The large, intricately decorated embossed item below the crucible in your photo reminds me of a ladie's hand-held mirror back. (If you show us the other side I'll get a better idea if I'm on the right track. 😁) Really stepping out on a limb now, but could the crushed item below the lock be a candle extinguisher? I like the thimble. My wife has sewn (professionally and as a hobby) since she was in 4H. I've yet to find a thimble. Of course she probably wants a sterling one, or at least one that cleans up and is usable.

I was wondering about that double edge sword -- result of gold prices rising to new heights. In my lifetime I recall two major gold price run-ups -- 1970's decade and the decade of 2000-10. Did detector sales skyrocket simultaneously? The 70's may be more difficult to deconvolve since improvements in technology (both the introduction of VLF band and discrimination) also opened up coin detecting in particular. I have Charles Garrett's and Roy Lagel's Electronic Prospecting with the tantalizing subtitle "GOLD and SILVER... Instant Riches!" First printing was February 1979. I wonder if they even realized how much gold would soon be recovered with these affordable devices. Made me jump as I bought a Garrett Ground Hog (15 kHz VLF) in summer 1979 with visions that unfortunately (admittedly through my choices alone) failed to materialize.

Maybe not right now. I will have more to say later, and I think others will, too. I hope that includes you.

I can't say much about searching for natural gold since, living where I do, I haven't had much chance to do that with a metal detector. And water/beach hunting isn't my thing. Old coin hunting is my area of concentration. Jeff mentions 8-12 inch depth in his area. Simon gets another several inches in his cointopia site. My ground doesn't seem to hold coins at those kinds of depths. I don't remember getting any coin deeper than 8 inches. Having said that, I've only found one 90% silver coin (Washington 25c) and only a couple > 95% copper coins (USA 1864 2c and 1917 Canadian 1c) larger than dime/penny. Even nickels which the Minelab Equinox multifrequency really likes, I still haven't found below 8 inches. So is it my technique or detector that's limiting me? I don't think either, and here is some (admittedly sparse) evidence. My recorded coin hunting time accumlation has reached 1000 hours. The two oldest coins I've found are an 1867 Shield Nickel (Fisher F75) and an 1864 2 cent piece (Eqx 800 as chronicled here). Although the ground hasn't been kind to either, the details show that both these coins were in circulation for a very short time. I.e. if not for the ground damage they would grade Very Fine or higher. The nickel was found near a 19th Century homestead. I don't know when that homestead was established, though. The coin was no more than 6 inches deep. The 2 cent piece history is a bit better captured, I think. Although I found it in a park established ~1920, I was since told that there had been a (pre-deployment) Civil War Union troop camp there. At the time I found it I was scratching my head as to how it got there. Now I at least have a good theory. That coin was only 5 inches deep, even after 'living' there for >150 years (if my CW camp theory is correct). So to get back to Steve's question, simply more depth likely won't help me, at least in my parks and schools. Better separation (unmasking) from both aluminum and iron trash would help, a lot. The Eqx 800 multifrequency has plenty good enough TID for me. It also has the best separation abilities of any of my detectors. But I want more, and I need more if I'm going to find more coins in these trashy (and likely previously hunted) sites.

Here's an inflation adjusted plot. I'm not sure quite their method, but Consumer Price Index (effectively buying power) is the typical normalization method. I snapped this image from here. A couple things worth noting in the plot -- the left hand (Vertical) scale isn't linear. That is done simply to show more fluctuation detail in the lower part where it would otherwise be squished and difficult to see. I think the grayish vertical bands indicate recessions. (Note we are in one now....) You can certainly see historic events in this plot: great depression (in particular bank failures and loss of confidence in $), removal of fixed price of gold in USA (1972), are a couple examples. The long upturn starting in 2000 had multiple impetuses. For starters the technical price was quite low. Then 9/11 happened plus the war that followed; 2008 financial crises just added more fuel to the fire. However, it's a lot easier to interpret after the fact than predict.... IMO, you can always find prognosticators who say something is going to go up and others saying it's going to go down. Then the 'winners' tout themselves afterwards and the 'losers' go off on something else, hoping everyone will forget they were wrong. The commodities futures market is the best indicator (but of course far from perfect). If these predictors of $3000 gold are confident in their predictions they ought to be buying futures a year out. "Put your money where your mouth is." Regardless, those who already hold positions (including many of you who have accumulated over the years) are in good position right now. As to whether or when to liquidate,... Got a crystal ball?

Makes sense. A junkyard or old trash dump is one of the most difficult conditions for a metal detector. I've been invited to three different ones (all on private property) and given up after a few minutes trying. I don't know where to begin. They are prime bottle hunting territory as well. Ever do any of that? Takes a special breed of patient person to get good at such, IMO. I have a school yard where a previous school was razed. I've found quite a bit of copper tubing there, which I don't mind since it's salvageable. A few old coins, which is what I'm after, plus a few keeper relics. There are places where my Fisher F75 would scream in overload over a fairly large area (few feet by few feet) that I just had to move away from. I assumed it was large pieces of sheet metal, but I wasn't going to excavate to find out. Keep at it and report back. In the meantime let's see if we get any more advice on whether or not Iron Bias will help deal with these challenging sites. I know Steve H. has reported some positive results using Iron Bias near old mining structures. (Hope that reports was in among those I linked.) In the meantime I'll continue to experiment when I'm out detecting (maybe this afternoon, or at least tomorrow).

I just did a quick experiment. On my patio I have a table with a 41" aluminum top. With the Garrett Carrott at max gain I was able to get it within 6 inches of the center of the top before it sounded off. If what you were detecting was a large piece of sheet metal then you were getting close. Another possibility, though, is just the surrounding soil itself. I've seen the Carrott get excited near a large conductive graphite loaded rock whereas breaking off a chip of it and putting it near the tip gave zilch response. When my soil is wet, even though it's not heavily ferrous, it will cause erratic falsing with both my pinpointers when they are put several inches into a hole. (I know the trick of turning on the pinpointer which the tip touches the ground but even that doesn't silence under the just described conditions.) My vote is that you were picking up the surrounding heavy ferrous/iron content that you said this local area possesses.

That really hit my funny bone! Dances with Doves has been campaigning for a higher single frequency than 40 kHz and they've allowed for all the way up to 143 kHz(!) but slammed the door shut at 5 kHz low end. When it's time to give us a new one, they choose 4 kHz. Maybe they anticipated 44, or 64 or... (but I guess not 144) kHz? Minelab seldom gets accused of listening to their loyal customers, so I guess they are being consistent. Toast that at the next Codan stockholders meeting.

Well, if that's the case I've missed it, too. For me, iron bias is the most confusing thing about the Equinox. I assume people who have had previous detectors (certain Minelab models, but also some White's models and possibly other manufacturers' models?) with this feature are comfortable with it. I'm not. Not even close. Every time out I experiment a bit and am compiling more knowledge but I feel like I still have a long way to go. I'm looking forward to more reports/discussions here, and I want to be a listener/reader as opposed to a speaker/writer. I will say one thing about your thoughtful post though, and it's based upon both my limited experience but also upon what people hear have said previously: Iron Bias isn't a magic, do all setting. It makes some things a bit better and some things a bit worse. If we didn't have it at all (say IB was locked at a certain value, because AFAIK it's always going to be there at some level), I don't think it would make a huge difference. The F2 settings have a wider range (and FE is in the middle of that range) and I've been playing around with F2=0 and F2=9 (Eqx 800 terminology) and seen anywhere from no effect to moderate effect. Ok, enough of my ramblings. Time for others to chime in. Afterthought: The subject of Iron Bias has come up quite a bit since the Equinox was introduced. Here are three threads (not exhaustive) on the subject. https://www.detectorprospector.com/forums/topic/5104-iron-bias-what-is-it/ https://www.detectorprospector.com/forums/topic/6048-iron-bias/#comments https://www.detectorprospector.com/forums/topic/13285-equinox-vanquish-iron-bias-bug/

Not sure what a 'foundy' is, but presumably some kind of shop that buys precious metals (among other things). We have a lot of those (pawn shops, coin shops, jewelers, etc.), particularly when the price is high and everyone is talking about it. But I question your theory that someone wants to prevent the public from selling. When the price is high, that's when the public is buying! "Buy low, sell high" is the mantra of the experts. "Buy high, sell low?" That's the other guys. Well, somebody's got to do it....

You might be the only person ever to use that combination. (I'm assuming you are referring to Equinox 800, not 600....) Possibly the low sensitivity brought down the iron background to a level that the non-ferrous target was noticeable. How deep was the lighter? I'm not a Bama fan, but I suspect you can find one within, oh, a few feet in any direction you look (if you live in Alabama).

I've noticed it at 5 kHz in my test-stand. (That's with the 2.0 update.) I've never used 5 kHz in the field because I like multifrequency and have only switched to single frequency when the EMI was really bad. But in those cases, 5 kHz was really bad, too. What I've done in the past (coin and relic hunting) to deal with EMI is to step through the single frequencies (starting low at 5 kHz) and stop when I get one that is quiet. (BTW, I'm talking gain/sensitivity set at least at 18. And 22 is as high as I ever go except just to check a really quiet target.) Sometimes it's 10 kHz and when detecting at that frequency I don't remember any up-averaging, but it might have been happening and I just wasn't being very observant. So it appears from your report that 4 kHz was quieter (EMI-wise) than 5 kHz. That's interesting. Were you hunting large conductors in Asia? This is exactly the kind of report I'm wanting to see. Thanks, Jeff. Now I anxiously await more.

It's great for the right conditions, but I don't experience those often (enough). It's like a knife through butter for lush, well watered lawns and fields such as well maintained sports fields. You can cut a square, deep plug which is easy to remove and replace, leaving almost no sign of the turf having been disturbed -- under those ideal conditions. Most of my sites have other things in the ground -- rocks and roots in particular. It doesn't handle either of those at all. (Regardless of recovery tools in use, I don't disturb roots larger than ~1/8 in = 3 mm as I don't want to damage trees in parks and schools.) Also, if the ground isn't sufficiently moist the plug will crumble, defeating the value of this tool for leaving no signs of disturbance. (That's a difficult situation for a Lesche digger, too, admittedly. But if we've had any rain in the previous 2 weeks or so I can typically seal holes without too much damage. When it gets extremely dry I just have to either dig spots with little or no grass or just wait for better conditions.) My town doesn't treat their schoolgrounds and parks like some places. (I"ve hunted with my sister in the Denver area and one park and one school I recall would have been perfect for the Raptor.) As a result it stays in my vehicle most of the time.

I didn't notice any, but I might provide some here, so stay tuned. 😏 Not everything I say is necessarily applicable or even relevant to Minelab updates. Historically there have been concerns/complaints/claims that updates take away features that were desirable to some users but annoying others -- in particular, toning down the max gain/sensitivity adjustment to quiet a detector. As such, updates can cause a suspicious eye to be cast by some. (The Fisher F75 in particular comes to mind. I still don't know if that's exactly what happened, but there certainly was a lot of accusations that it was.) Typically (from my experience) these kinds of updates result in subtle differences. As such, we read varied user reports/reviews of how things have changed. In my experience these reports often either don't stack up, or if they do occur they get exaggerated. Sometimes wishful thinking by users can cut both ways. For example, consider the (apparently still ongoing) quirkiness of the Equinox pinpoint mode. It was noticed from the start, and when the first update (was it 1.5?) was released, some said it was improved/fixed. I never noticed any difference myself. Could be me; could be them.... Those who were hoping for improvement of that 'bug' but didn't notice it got even more annoyed. Another early Eqx complaint was the high conductor --> ferrous wraparound noticed by one vociferous poster in particular for a stack of silver coins. I recall then that some warned that if Minelab tried to cater to such a rare occurrence they might squash an otherwise more useful, more commonly occurring positive performance quality. Seems like a reasonable concern to me. There have been early adopter discussions here on multiple occasions, pertaining to brand new detectors. To one extreme, some wait at least a full year before buying a new detector, just to make sure it's actually what it's cracked up to be, but also to let the bugs get ironed out (with hardware and software updates). That has been my approach to these Equinox updates although not to such an extreme. I wait a couple weeks to read reports, weighing them. Sure, so far the Equinox updates have been benign at worst. Is it impossible this one could have a problem? It is comforting to know that updates are reversible. Personally I had enough trouble installing the first one (three different Win operating systems to get a positive result) that I'm a bit gun shy of having to go that route. But that's me. And I do appreciate the early adopter guinea pigs. (Please don't take that the wrong way. Some people are so fond of guinea pigs they keep them as pets. At least I didn't call you 'white rats'. )