GB_Amateur

(Quoting same section as Phrunt did, but coming from a different angle.) I find this statement accurate as well for A) coin hunting in trashy sites (and that's all sites where I've found old coins) and B) even for experienced detectorists, not just 'beginners'. Now I elaborate: A) the bigger targets (usually 'trash' but this just means the targets you aren't after) slam your brain hard. It takes concentration to ignore them, and in some cases it can help to just remove them. For example, most (not all) strong hits in the 19-24 zone of the Equinox (you know the zone for your detector) are either Zinc pennies or aluminum screwcaps. But those are typically close to the surface and quickly removed, so even if you're only after, for example, higher TID's you may benefit from removing them anyway. This allows two things -- 1) deeper targets which are truly masked by the large target now have a better chance of being heard/detected, and 2) with the loud target out of the way, your brain can more easily pick up the subtler weaker target. B) I notice that I tend to be more attune to all sounds when I first start out. As the hunt progresses, mental fatigue sets in. Being able to recognize the latter and refocus helps alleviate that to a certain extent. Sometimes a short water/snack break or even just sit-down-and-rest break helps. But even then I'm not as sharp as when I first started. I'm confident this has cost me some good (but soft/subtle) targets later in my hunts. You often see, and for good reason, the advice to recheck a hole after recovering a target. What you read/hear less often is to take step back and reswing over the entire left-to-right swath you have just detected before proceding forward to unsearched ground. Especially after removing a large target (treasure or trash) you give your brain a chance to notice a signal that might have been there all along but from which you were distracted by the loud one. All of this is related to the reason (besides unmasking) why hunting a previously hunted site can sometimes pay unexpected dividends. But there is also the possibility that the previous detectorists just didn't get their coils (centered) over that good target. Thorough ground coverage is not as easy as mowing the lawn! Of course some people have just better trained themselves to listen carefully and distinguish, and maybe these techniqus are unnecessary wastes of time for them. I do know they've helped me.

Welcome, spandexlurch! (Please create a post here to tell us more about yourself.) Here's a link that will help address your questions:

No and yes. There have been a lot of posts here on detectorprospector.com (in the hundreds I'm sure) about how the Minelab Equinox works, and those include oscilloscope traces showing the transmitted frequencies of different Multi-frequency modes. I suggest you do some searching and reading if you are interested into going deeper into this than what I say below. Here's a good starting point. Bottom line is that in the modes common to 600 and 800, multi-frequency operation is the same so should lead to the same performance when settings like recovery speed and iron bias are set equivalently. That picture in the Minelab literature of the five frequencies, and all the talk about 3x and 5x only pertain to single frequency selections, not multifrequency. The operator's manual for the Equinox (which is common to both and details the differences between the two in terms of accessories, features, and settings) does a nice job distinguishing between what you get / don't get for your $650 (600 model) and $900 (800 model) USA prices.

I may have missed it. Which type is the Nokta/Makro Pulse Dive? Nice review.

If you haven't watched this Chris Ralph video on setting up your new detector, might not be a bad idea. He has made a series of these half hour videos and one is his pitch for why to get the Gold Bug Pro (F19 is all that and more). But you already pulled that trigger!

Generally an IB/VLF and a PI complement each other. In Gerry McMullen's class he shows how different detectors are better/worse for different types of naturally occurring gold. (That demo includes the aircraft carrier Minelab GPZ7000.) And there's Steve H.'s mantra (paraphrased): "use a VLF when you can and a PI when you have to." Don't undervalue discrimination! $400 for a new F19 with 5"x10" is a very good deal. Cabellas seems to have these sales occasionally with prices that are better than the MAP (agreed upon "Min Advertised Price"). Supposedly that's OK as long as they don't advertise them. Not your problem, for sure. Enjoy that new detector!

Could it have a crack/break that makes it hard/impossible to set up a good eddy current? You only showed us the reverse, but the amount of detail (not much wear) makes me think you should be able to see the last digit of the date. I get that you might need a magnifier. I used to search through coins super fast as a kid, capable of picking out every tiny detail; now even my corrective lenses aren't enough. 👓👓 (four eyes, heck! Maybe six or eight.) Thanks, as always, for photos & videos, allowing us to live vicariously through you and your AQ (and Excal).

It's amazingly lightweight for its size. It's the only Detech coil I own so I don't know if their other coils are lightweight as well. This is how every open coil should be. Interesting that White's collaborated with Detech, for the MXSport and MX7 coils, possibly others(?). They did some things right (IMO). I suspect Detech would be thrilled to do that.... (Been down this dead end path before, haven't we? I'd settle for a 5"x10" closed coil. Doubt we get that, either. Come on, Nokta/Makro!)

Got out to my test garden finally (weather is bad and I'm sensitive/allergic to chiggers but finally toughed it out -- I may pay for that in a couple days). I'm going to give an intro and if you're not going to read it (and heed it) then you probably shouldn't read the rest, either. Introduction to and Fundamentals of Metal Detector Depth Measurements One of the most often asked questions about detectors, new and old, is "how deep will it detect?" That's an easy question, too easy. The only appropriate answer is "that depends...". Let's take a look at what this depends upon, in not necessarily the order of importance: 1) Target goal -- coins, large jewelry, small jewelry, gold, platinum, or silver jewelry, natural gold nuggets (and what size), non-ferrous relics, ferrous relics, large caches, small caches...? (I'm sure you can think of more.) 2) Natural ground conditions -- wet, dry, how mineralized (i.e. Fe3O4 content), salt content, ground phase, surface rubble, hot rocks, cold stones? 3) Site conditions -- ferrous & iron trash, aluminum trash, lead shot and/or bullets and fishing sinkers, gun casings? 4) Electromagnetic Interference (EMI) -- too many to mention; you've just got to figure out a way to work around it by adjusting your detector, etc. 5) Detector options -- what coil(s) do you have or plan to use? 6) How do you determine if a target signals or not? Other factors also exist, such as the skill and (very important) objectivity of the detectorist doing the test. These are impossible to quantify but should not be ignored. Now that we've defined parameters, let's get on to the test I actually performed. Obviously I didn't cover all possible situations! Conditions of this test 1) Target -- (two different) -- 5 inch deep USA Memorial Cent (95% Copper, 5% Zinc) and 6 inch deep USA Jefferson 5 cent piece (25% Nickel, 75% Copper). 2) Natural ground conditions -- pretty dry (but not like late summer desert). We've only had about an inch of rain in the past 4 weeks. Fe3O4 reading of 2 to 3 bars on both the Fisher F75 and Fisher Gold Bug Pro. This could roughly be characterized as 'moderate mineralization'. Grass covered smooth ground with no rocks that my detectors are sensitive to, and no known salt content. 3) Site conditions -- Around these two buried targets I've removed all background metal that any of my detectors are sensitive to. 4) EMI -- now we're getting to the painful part. Residential neighborhood and close to my house, so I have to deal with various sources of EMI. I'll discuss more below when I talk about the settings I used. 5) Detector options -- Since I'm doing a comparison test I chose coils which are roughly equivalent -- for the F75 I used the Detech Ultimate 13 inch round; for the Equinox 800 I used the Minelab 12" x 15" (largest of the three available coils). As mentioned, using square root of height X width for an eliptical, that gives 13.4" as the equivalent round coil in the case of the Equinox elliptical. I consider that close enough, and the best I think I can do finding coils that match these two detectors. 6) How do you determine if a target signals or not? This has to be subjective. I used a threshold technique in all cases, listening for a clear signal above threshold (similar to how native gold detectorists typically hunt). In most cases I could squeeze out another half inch, maybe hearing a warble, but when that happened I backed off that half inch and confirmed I was getting a clear signal -- then recorded the clear signal depth. For the Equinox I had the added feature that I could look at the digital target ID and see if I was getting something close to expected there, although in the end my ears were just as good of an indicator, and maybe more objective. My depth resolution was 1/2 inch, meaning that was the smallest increment I used. That's also my estimate of the measurement uncertainty. My method was to stack up wood 'shims' next to the target (not covering the target sweetspot, if that even matters) -- slightly off to the side. Thus the coil rode the top of the shim pile. Note that each coin was only a certain depth in the ground (5" for the 1 cent, 6" for the 5 cent) and thus this is a kind of hybrid ground+air test. The values below are the total target-to-coil distance, so the sum of depth in ground plus coil height above ground = shim stack height. Detector Setups (modes & settings). Fisher F75 Ltd ("black") Motion All Metal mode, Ground Balanced, Gain = 99 (max), threshold just above silent (a bit wobbly), internal speaker. (This was the only mode and settings used. I'll comment later on why.) Minelab Equinox 800 -- 3 setups (all ground balanced separately): a) Field 2, multi-frequency, recovery speed = 5, iron bias FE=0, no discrcrimination (all 50 channels open), 2 tones, gain = 22 (highest I could operate and not be swamped by EMI). b) Gold 2, 20 kHz single frequency, recovery speed = 5, gain = 25 (max). (Note: EMI was terrible in multi-frequency, even with lower gain.) c) Gold 2, 40 kHz single frequency, other settings same as b) above. Results. For the 5" depth-in-ground 1 cent (high conductor) the F75 picked it up 1/2" deeper than the 800's a) and b) settings above (I didn't measure for c) settings). That is, total target --> coil distance 11 inches for the F75 and 10.5 inches for the Equinox. So slight edge to F75, but right at the (estimated) uncertainty limit. For the 6" depth-in-ground 5 cent (low conductor) the order of performance (worst to best were as follows): Eqx setting a) -- 11 inch total target --> coil distance. F75 & Eqx setting b) -- 13.5 inch total ------------------- these two tied in depth. Eqx setting c) -- 15.5 inch total -------------------- clear winner for these conditions! Summary, Conclusions, and final comments. I emphasize that these kinds of tests depend strongly upon conditions. I've tried my best to define what conditions and settings I was dealing with / using. In particular I had to conform to the EMI environment present. The F75 was slightly better (but at the limit of uncertainty) for the high conductor. Half an inch, at least in my book, isn't much and other factors (e.g. target ID accuracy) could easily outweigh this small increment. But the F75 did outperform, slightly. For the low conductor, the Eqx 800 in Gold 2 mode and operating at 40 kHz was the clear depth winner by 2 inches. The most surprising thing to me is that Gold 2, 40 kHz clobbered Field 2 Multi by 4 inches! Previous testing has shown that the discriminate processes of the F75 are noticeably inferior depthwise for my test garden. I did try the F75 in non-motion all-metal, a mode that today is almost unheard of (but it was standard back in the late 1970's), although many detectors use this mode for their pinpoint function. In some air tests I've done with large objects (Weber Kettle charcoal grill where you measure not in inches but in feet!) this mode is super sensitive but because of its instability with time and other quirks it's not a commonly used mode and I was unable to get it to stabilize (it may have been picking up on nearby iron trash in the ground which the other modes and detectors were insensitive to). The Equinox in particular has hundreds to even into the thousands of setting combinations. I chose the ones I thought were both most appropriate and also most sensitive to the targets, within the EMI limits of my site. I'm not interested in investigating further unless there is a big gap (oversight) in my tests. One final point about the Equinox vs. F75: as pointed out in the initial post in this thread the F75-plus model sells for $650, which turns out to be the same price as the Equinox 600 (and $250 less than the Eqx 800). But the 600 model doesn't have a gold mode, so it looks like if you lock the dollar cost to being equal (ignoring the cost difference when buying larger coils for both F75 and Eqx 600 where the Ultimate coil in USA is about $50 cheaper than the ML 12"x15"), the F75 has a bit of a depth edge in my test garden, and particularly my EMI environment. Of course depth isn't everything, to most of us anyway. And as always YMMV!

Can't speak to the authenticity, etc. of the standard model you found for $250. But don't pay $650 for the Pro since the Fisher F19 has all the features of the Fisher GB Pro and then some, and new you can find it for $450 total (ConUS shipping included) on Ebay. That's with the 5"x10" coil. If you want the 7"x11" coil instead, the Bounty Hunter Time Ranger Pro (same features as F19) should be available for $400 from some dealers. (If it were me I'd pay the $315 for the used F19 I mentioned above before I'd fork out $450 just to get a warranty. But that's me.) There has been quite a bit of discussion here as to why Fisher wants more for the Gold Bug Pro than the F19. Apparently it's all in the marketing. Just one more reason to come here and get the real scoop before committing you $.

I got a chuckle out of this detail from the ad Steve linked to: Well, they got it half right -- purple is opposite yellow on the color wheel. But why isn't the pan purple? As many know (except maybe XP's upcoming customers...) naturally occurring gold comes in various alloys and thus colors. I actually have a purple pan (also green, red, and blue). There are a lot of black pans around, but for me, I get some confidence in seeing black sand peeking out as I get down to the later steps. For those who are so experienced they can pan blindfolded, I guess being able to easily see the black sand doesn't matter. I do like the looks of the "snake skin texture" but as to whether it actually is an improvement over the more conventional surfaces... Just saying so doesn't make it true. Of course I don't know, but do they? It's amazing how many new ideas (gimmicks?) for just gold pans pop up. "I have a clever idea, and I'm smart, so it must be revolutionary!" One last nitpick. Take a look at the batea photo above in Steve's initial post. See the beading of water on the surface? The first thing you're supposed to do (and most of the plastic gold pans come with instructions on this) is to clean the surface to get rid of the injection mold release agent. (They could do this at the factory but I guess that's a cost they don't want to pass on....) If you don't, it adds surface tension to the water and the tiny gold will float and be carried away as you pan. So they're showing us a veteran gold panner using this batea and they haven't bothered to properly clean it first. We can be a tough crowd here at detectorprospector.com, especially to the marketers.

Hopefully just an honest mistake.... Two used Gold Bug 2's (each with 2 coils) sold for between $500 and $600 each within the last week. They looked to be in very good shape. (Pretty sure Fisher still doesn't honor warranty transfers on most detectors so that wouldn't be relevent.) That 'original Gold Bug' as it's often called doesn't come close in used prices realized. The Gold Bug 2 is still at least close to state-of-the-art. As Simon and Steve mentioned, the 'new Fisher Gold Bug' (of which there are many varieties -- base model, Pro, F19, Teknetics G2, Teknetics G2+, Bounty Hunter Time Ranger Pro -- see Steve's Database) all run at the same frequency as that one shown in the photo -- 19 kHz, and with quite a few features. Here's a used F19 (manufactured just 8 months ago, and appears hardly used) for sale (fixed asking price, not up for auction) for $315 (includes conUS shipping). That one comes with the 5"x10" closed elliptical coil which is preferred by many of the gold detectorists who use these detectors.

(from the website you linked:) Garrett in New Zealand Garrett products are distributed throughout New Zealand by Tactical Solutions Corp trading as Garrett New Zealand. We will continue to deliver the quality products and service that the Garrett brand stands for and has stood for since 1964. Don't really know what that means, though. Just curious: do you have a Value Added Tax (VAT) on metal detecting equipment in NZ? I see that even discounting for the exchange rate you are still already paying a premium over MSRP compared to us.

Do you have a Garrett dealer in NZ? Because if not it sounds from your other threads that you wouldn't be getting one anyway, except maybe arriving on a Kon Tiki raft (which is faster than some of our carriers, apparently). Or maybe swept on shore after Tom Hanks crashes another FedEx jumbo jet in the South Pacific. (OK, he was just a passenger.) I appreciate ELNINO77 for posting this. Not his fault that Garrett is disapponting us with hypocritical and misleading fluff.

Nice dime, Norm, but it's mssing your state's mintmark! (Just looked in the Redbook -- 1901-S is one of the lowest mintage and most valuable issues.) Were you using the 11 inch coil on the Eqx? Always interesting to hear/see evidence of separation. I wonder how good the Garrett Apex is going to be with separation. That's the one thing that could convince me to buy one.

This webpage helps answer, and it looks like instead of the USA nickel alloy composition (25% Ni, 75% Cu) the Canadian mint used nearly pure nickel from 1968-1999 for dimes, quarters, and halves. Pure nickel is ferromagnetic so presumably these are attracted to a magnet also, besides those minted 2000 and onward which are primarily steel (boo!). I may have found some Canadian dimes in those 99.9% nickel composition years -- I'll see if I can find them and check with a magnet. Or maybe one of you would... Update: just checked a 1975 Canadian dime with a magnet. Yep, they attract! So although that won't tell you if it's iron (2000-present) or nickel (1968-1999), it should in most cases (I don't think 1982-1999 5 cent pieces which were same alloy as US 5 cent pieces) tell silver from non-silver. All the valuable stuff I learn here everyday....

I think Brent Weaver should stick to engineering and leave the marketing BS to the marketing 'experts'. I found myself early in the broadcast thinking "what did he just say?" and then laughing derisively. I think there were two other comments later in the interview which gave me similar eye-rolling responses. I was contemplating whether Scott Adams could use some of this interview in his Dilbert comic strip. One thing I learned was Weaver saying that the multi-frequency modes use frequency(s) higher than 20 kHz. I wasn't aware of that -- any of you? It will be nice when these get into the hands of non-choir members. Then we'll hopefully get some objective answers. One thing that has me wondering (here we go -- start a rumor) is Steve Moore's closing statement about people getting their hands on the Apex at Detectival. Does that mean 'we' won't have them before then? Hopefully he was just playing to his audience -- meaning you don't have to buy one to try it out if you show up at Detectival.

National Forest campgrounds are just as bad. I was on a GPAA claim last year in New Mexico and right next to the campground was a dry creek. I thought "good place to get the detectors tuned up..." -- well, if tuned up to trash is the goal. Every time there is a heavy rain the campground surface trash gets washed into the creek. Actually this happens on private land around my home as well. Recently(?) there's a new hobby for the garbage dispensers in our USA National Forests: target practice. Not sure what they are practicing for, drunken revelry contests? I doubt it's for a worthwhile activity (i.e. legal hunting). I experienced that at another GPAA claim on NF land near Idaho Springs, Colorado. Besides the empty casings there were 'clay' targets for shotgun practice laying around. I've got another thing they could practice -- picking up their f___ing trash! Well, at least they don't make any noise to disturb those who go to the NF to enjoy nature.

Sounds just like my parks. I used to think because I found oldies that I was the first. Now I know a lot better. In my case I think (for most of my good finds) they just never got the coil over the target. Occasionally it's because of masking and sometimes disrcrimination choices. But, yes, I mostly get the clad, Zincolns, and of course lots of trash. Reminds me of that Jerry Reed song (and if you think it looks dated, well when he was singing this those early detectorists were cleaning out my parks!). I realize 1) you aren't talking about dry land hunting (with IB/VLF's) and 2) beach&water hunting is a very different ballgame. For example, on the large bodies of water, storms can change things a lot (for the good, I take it, in the case of heavily hunted sites) -- as you vets have shown me. One of the things that intrigues me about posts here on detectorprospector.com is even for detecting applications which aren't my bread-and-butter, there are still often enough common properties that teach me something about my sites. OK, sorry for the hijack. I think you've said Lake Tahoe is too small for storm recirculation to play much of a role. Glad you've got the latest tool -- one of the few advantages of being late to the party.

(From the article:) Tell her to move that pick farther away from her finds. She's making me nervous!

Welcome, xlbsa! I must confess: now that you are here we are going to be asking you to identify some Chinese coins that show up in our soil occasionally.... I hope you are ready to be one of our experts!

I don't think a magnet answers the question. Wasn't there a period from mid-60's until ? during which Canadian higher denomination coins were (non-magnetic) nickel alloy? When in doubt, the dates help. If I read it correctly, yours is 1955. Good news! My recollection is that Canada jetisoned the use of silver very close to the same time (maybe exactly the same time) as the USA -- 1965 being the first mintage year of base metal coinage for 10 cents and up here. The Canadian 5 cent pieces have an even more checkered history, I think. Besides that weird polygon shape (nine sides = nonogon?) I seem to recall some odd alloys thrown in there early on. Might have been the WWII years. Where are the Canadian coin metal detecting experts when we need them? Speak up!

I think you just wrestled the title away from Tim Saylor. (Rather, he relinquished it in awe.) Impressive!

Thread split from here ................................................................ You mention the Garrett headphones -- specifically the ClearSound model mating well with the MDT in terms of good audio. Those are on-ear type and a lot of detectorists prefer over-ear. Have you tried their MS-2 model, which is only $10 more? I wonder if they use the same speakers or if Garrett just buys various 3rd party headphones and puts their logo on them, in which case probably not. I have some MS-2's and for the price ($30-$35 including shipping in USA) they are quite good, IMO. I still prefer Sunray Pro Golds (standard version and Minelab compatible version) because for one thing they fit tighter and thus block out ambient noise better. On the downside they cost about $100 more.

Actually "Priority Mail International Parcels" are part of the United States Postal Service (USPS), not United Parcel Service (UPS). Two very different companies but easy to mix up. Here is what a Google Search says (directed to USPS site😞 Priority Mail International® service is a reliable, cost-effective way to send documents and merchandise to more than 190 countries. Priority Mail International offers outstanding value and is priced lower than our competition's published rates for international shipping. Average business day delivery of 6 to 10 days. (Average number of days may vary based upon origin and destination. Simon, you may have suffered from the pandemic side effects or maybe just from poor service. I had a package make it to my local post office (meaning all they had to do was load it into the delivery vehicle to get to my house) and it sat there 4 days. Unfortunately these kinds of things happen, and although there is typically no (legitimate!) excuse for it, I also think there isn't much you can do. Postscript: actually I didn't put the sad face emoji in this post but apparently the detectorprospector.com website editor did it for me, and appropriately. It's a lot smarter than I thought! Steve, maybe there's a new revenue source -- very intelligent editing. (Ok, this one is my doing.)