GB_Amateur

Hmmm. I have both the W3 (headphones) and WR (Transmitter & Receiver with 1/4 in. jack so you can plug in your own headphones) and both work in true stereo mode when hooked up to my hifi (music). So why they don't work in stereo mode on your detectors leaves me scratching my head. I've used the W3 with all three of my detectors, but the WR model with only the Minelab X-Terra 705, so far.

Did you (or do you have a way to) measure its density (~specific gravity)? I do this all the time with finds to try and figure out what they are. I just read an article by Kevin Hoagland describing the process, and Chris Ralph has also described it (probably in ICMJ). It's just an application of the Archimedes principle. Basically you weigh the piece first. Then hang it from a sling, attached to a scale, and suspend under water, not letting it touch the walls of the container holding the water. Divide the first (dry) weight by the second (immersed) weight and you've got the specific gravity. (There are some adjustments that need to be made, for example to account for the weight and volume of the sling. But if you don't do that and the sling is properly chosen -- very fine wire or thread -- you still get a decent answer.) Fortunately, the valuable metals in their pure = elemental form can in most cases be distinguished from the common metals. (Alloys are a tougher road, though.) Here are some examples of specific gravities by my named category groupings with Troy ounce prices (some outdated) in parentheses. If no prices then not valuable or better said "not known to be valuable by me." Super Heavies: gold($1210), platinum($960), osmium($400), iridium($745), tungsten, rhenium($86) -- all > 19. Heavies: lead, silver ($17.40), ruthenium ($40), rhodium($920), palladium($773), molydenum -- all between 10 and 13. Moderates: copper, zinc, nickel, iron, chromium, bismuth, manganese -- between 7 and 10. Lights: tin, antimony, titanium, vanadium -- between 3 and 7. Ultralights: aluminum, magnesium, beryllium -- < 3. The reason I bring all this up here is because there is a thriving(?) branch of the jewelry business which makes and sells wedding bands in 'exotic' metals. I found a titanium wedding ring (not valuable), for example. It was stamped 'ti' inside. I don't know how many of the valuable metals are or have been used in jewelry other than the obvious gold, platinum, and silver, but I wouldn't be surprised if some, such as palladium, are. If the density is above 10 and it's not lead, tungsten, or molybdenum you likely have something at least moderately valuable, and if not silver, ruthenium, or rhodium could be very valuable.

Wow, I'm impressed that the CTX3030 can ID those rings with a drill bit running through their centers. I'm guessing the middle one is the 14kt. What is the composition of the one on the left? And how did you figure it out?

(Fantastic article, BTW. Hope I didn't distort what you said by cutting out some other included comments. Just wanted to focus on this one issue.) First off, I didn't notice you mention the VX3, which I guess is because it is such a close variant of the V3i, but I thought the interface was simpler. Secondly, does a user need to wade through (either on setup or during use) all the features of the V3i, or can he just pick the ones important to him and leave the others alone? That would effectively simplify things. The fact that you didn't go into any of these things I just mentioned makes me think 1) I don't understand the concept/meaning of 'feature overload' and/or 2) my (simple) understanding of detectors doesn't come close to how the V3i works. Please, someone out there clear up my confusion.

I've often wondered if anyone has tried tag-teaming. (Obviously the resolution of finds needs to be agreed upon first.) The idea is to provide complementary information. For example, two different detectors and/or two different operators evaluate a signal before digging. This might make a lot more sense for detecting where discrimination is used. If you're going to dig-it-all you probably don't save time. Another situation could occur when a person with a deep but less sensitive (to small gold) detector (i.e. PI) goes over an area and is followed by someone with a more sensitive but less deep (IB). I've seen articles/posts about covering your own patch a second time with a different detector so this is just a variation of that. How about: one person does the gross search for a good patch and the other(s) follow(s) doing the fine location and digging? I suspect something like this has been tried in park hunting and even as a club contest/event to build camaraderie within the club. I've collected a bunch of those colored buried utility indicator flags for marking possible good targets, but I've only used those in a solitaire 'game' to see what signals I get with different detectors. Still, if I had a pard those would also help. Thoughts?

That is a head scratcher. I could speculate on what they are thinking, but so can everyone here. Almost day and a half gone by since you posted and this is the first response. I don't know that I'm adding anything of value to this thread -- maybe better somewhere else. But it wouldn't be the first thread on this site with little or no value. And maybe it gives you some comfort that someone else thinks this is odd. Looking at the pictures I didn't see where the jack is located. Did you? I've seen many complaints here about just the location of connectors on detectors. You'd think if only one, it would be the 6.35 mm (1/4 inch), which is not only more common on headphones, but much more robust if you need an adapter. Yes, there are 3.5 mm male to 6.35 mm female adapters (just looked on Amazon), but from a sturdiness standpoint, going that direction isn't even close than the alternative. Failure (and damage) is much more likely using a small male --> large female. As a peripheral comment, I wonder why there aren't more detectors with BOTH size female connectors built in. The Teknetics Gamma (and maybe all the Tek "frat brothers") has that. It makes a lot of sense from an ergo/user-friendy point of view. I guess a possible downside (and I have no idea if this is true) would be if that somehow deteriorates the quality of the transmission compared to just one. Yeh, it's slightly more expensive (< $1 I'd guess) and car companies have been known to cut out obvious options to save a few pennies, so maybe that's an argument against it. But back to the main topic, regarding rushing out to buy a high frequency (HF) Induction Balance (IB) detector, Steve said something like "be patient" until its release (this month = March?). That advice probably applies to this issue as well. Maybe they'll surprise us and have the larger connector on the production models.

Nice, Mark! That seems pretty long to me. Was it because of the coal waste pieces you mention, or does it help eliminate the signals for nails? I have the TDI-SPP which is locked at 10 us, so won't help me unless I go out and buy a real SL. There is a mod that Steve has referenced which can turn the SPP back into an SL, but it seems a bit ambitious for my electronics skills. Anyway, excellent finds.

(Thread probably belongs in the relics subpage, but I guess Steve can move it.) I did some quick web searching. I think this is British, not US. But probably the era you surmise (US Civil War) could well be right. 'Treble Stand' means 'triple standard'. 'Extra Rich' is some kind of quality designation. Originally gold gilded, but apparently no longer. Here's just one informative webpage: http://www.thebuttonmonger.com/content/July 2011.pdf I found a couple 19th Century buttons myself last year. Even if not valuable (and I suspect they aren't) it's still fun to unearth a piece of history and wonder when it was lost and why it was there in the first place. If you're searching a known battlefield, the answer is easy. Otherwise the mystery may never be solved. And that adds to the aura, IMO.

You are one of the most open-minded people here, so no wondering on my part. Besides being lightweight, TDI-SL is also the least expensive dry land PI (by about a factor of 2 over the ATX, which is either 2nd or close to that for detectors sold in the US). (The Garrett Infinium used to be cheaper, I think, but pretty sure it is discontinued.) To some here cost doesn't matter, but as you have noted many times, to some it does. I appreciate your explanation of the dead spot (never saw that before) and the TDI with stock battery pack is underpowered to begin with, compared to 'competition'. But it still works well (obviously not telling you anything you don't know) and for some of us (specifically me), as well as I need right now. Spent a week in Southern Arizona with ONLY the TDI-SPP (except for the day I forgot to bring it to the field and had to borrow a Teknetics Gamma and go coin hunting). I didn't feel like I was "naked and afraid" in the desert. My goal was to learn as much as I could about that detector and I didn't want competition for it. I had a great time not finding anything, but I'd be a fool to blame the latter on my detector choice. I gotta lotta other learning to do that doesn't involve swinging the detector. That's my weak link, not the TDI. I agree, but I'm not they, and I'll just default to giving them benefit-of-the-doubt. They have the largest advertising reach & budget in the US (that I've seen, anyway), and I suspect their Ace line outsells all other detector lines here (don't know about worldwide). But most decent size, successful companies don't rest on their laurels and I don't think Garrett does, either. They must think a light ATX won't sell enough to offset costs compared to other products they are developing. I hope that's the case, because if they don't take up your idea then at least let's see something new and exciting from them, soon!

That blowup photo shows impressive workmanship for 2500 years ago. Did anyone notice this from the article? "Humbleton and Kania said they had returned their metal detecting hobby, after giving it up for fishing..." I didn't know you couldn't do both, but if so I know which one I'd give up! Hey, RickUK. It's your turn. We're pulling for you to find something at least this good. If these two ams can do this well I can't imagine what you're going to dig up this summer.

Looks professional, and a lot more sophisticated than my MiY (Modify it Yourself) projects. I'm impressed! Either you had some full days off to work on it or this was a multi-late-night project. How does the weight compare with similarly configured (i.e. same coil size) dry-land-qualified PI's? If TDI-SL counts (w/Miner John 5x9), that beats it, but I'm wondering how many others do. Not many (if any) from my observations. Likely Garrett with their full time engineers could do even a bit better (e.g. lighter control box, lithium batteries,...), although that would possibly be getting into the diminishing returns area. Bottom line: great job. You inspire me to get busy before the *real* spring weather takes me outside to use my detectors instead of modifying them.

Thanks, Steve. That was the detail I was hoping to get -- difference between titles and editions, and dates of publishing. Armed with that here are *best* prices I've found on the WWW: Original (1st edition): $65 + shipping. Revised edition: ~$100 + shipping. Advanced Course: $125 + shipping. Unabridged: (haven't even found one for sale on the web). Shipping at book rate (what most used booksellers use, but beware of Ebay sellers who often charge more) is ballpark $5 in US. Those were the best prices. Of the 42 listed (and some are duplicate listings) on used.addall.com megasearch website, 25 are over $200, 10 are over $300, and 6 are over $1000 (5 of the 6 kilo-buck ones are either in Canada or UK). Of course as we all know, it's not the seller's price that determines value; it's the buyer's price. Still, from the above numbers you can see that to get the equivalent of the Unabridged version will cost about $235.

I've seen these books recommended here and elsewhere. I'd like more info on them, and my web searching has only led to confusion. My observations: 1) these books were not widely distributed; 2) they are out-of-print; 3) they are not cheap. I know several of you are familiar with these works. Could you explain the differences among the editions? If I'm going to spend as much or more on these as I do on coils I'd like to avoid duplicate purchases. Thanks in advance.

Better yet, from their point-of-view, why simply lower the price of an (6+ year-) old product when instead you can market a 'brand new' detector? The side-by-side view you show nails it, and apparently not all that subtly on their part. But even that could be a piece of their plan. Minimal investment in new packaging/display, and if a customer happens to notice "hey, isn't this the (more expensive) F70 at a bargain price? Gotta have it!" then all the better. But your other point is, IMO, more than just speculation. First Texas and its ancestors have been at or near the forefront for a long time, but they haven't had a truly new exciting product for quite a while. Show me two bigger names and deserved reputations (or maybe even one) in any MD engineering department than Dave Johnson and Carl Moreland. FT has too much invested in infrastructure, salaries, advertising, and reputation to sit around living off their name while companies like Mak/Nok are exciting the consumers with yearly fresh products (plural). There are going to be a lot of disappointed, loyal First Texas customers if they don't come out with something exciting very soon -- meaning by northern hemisphere summer. And they know that way better than any of us -- I'm confident of that.

Been a couple months since the last post on this thread. In the meantime the weather has gone from unfriendly to detecting in my home region (Midwest) to springlike temps (but dry!) giving many of us several days to hunt. Also, I've since read Tom D.'s exhaustive feedback to Makro/Nokta regarding the new Impact. I can't speak for others, but there is a lot of info there that, IMO, applies to other detectors, not just the Impact, Racer2, and Fisher F75 which he uses for comparison. If you haven't seen it, keep in mind it's not a quick read as it took me several sittings to reach the end. Here's the link to the forum thread: Back to the wraparound issue, I got a chance to try the Minelab 5 inch round DD 18.75 kHz coil this weekend (11 hours total) on the X-Terra 705 in my two standard locations (both municipal parks) where I've hunted a lot in the past 7 months with the Fisher Gold Bug Pro (5 inch round and 7x11 in^2, both DD's) and the 705 with its stock (for coins/jewelry) 8.5 inch round concentric and also the Coiltek 'Digger' 6 inch round DD 3 kHz loop. Just for review, in both locations I've found old coins (Indian Head pennies) and 19th century military buttons. One was previously an industrial site while the other was a farm with outbuildings prior to becoming muni parks. In particular the former farmyard is loaded with iron bits, especially nails but also fencing, implement parts, steel cans, etc. This one has driven me bonkers with wraparound from -8 (most ferrous) to 48 (highest conductor) and even down to 46 (large format dollar) and 44 (half dollar). Most of my previous searching was done with the Coiltek 6 inch, but I do recall wraparound with the ML concentric as well. To my surprise and relief, running with the ML 5 inch @18.75 kHz, even in the worst iron infested spots, resulted in very little wraparound! There was just a bit but it was not only easy to recognize, but so infrequent that I wasn't being confused/overwhelmed. Iron sounded iron and conductive sounded conductive. We can all speculate on the reasons for the huge difference, but given that non-ferrous and ferrous lead to different performance at different frequencies, with associated compression and expansion of response TID regions, this is likely a big factor. I ran at the same gains (23-25) and (for the most part) in the same ground balance phase settings (31-32) via auto ground balance (not tracking). For most of the time I was able to run in coin&jewelry "all metal" (no notching) and with "99" tone setting. Auto frequency shift (to minimize EMI) is almost always +1 in these two locations, independent of coil choice. In no way am I able to compare max depth (still building my backyard test garden) but first impressions are that there isn't an obvious/significant difference in that part of the performance. Next time out (won't be this weekend as there is still some typical February weather forecast) I'll try the stock 7.5 kHz 8.5 in. round concentric again and see if it is in-between in terms of wraparound issues. I haven't had that one on except for a couple backyard tests (backyard is pretty iron free, by comparison) since I first got the detector in August. That will add some more data to my growing notebook.

I read through that thread -- good info and thanks for that. Is this you youtube video you refer to? Interesting that someone else said changing the channel (small frequency shift to minimize EMI) actually reduced wraparound. Another thing I need to try when it gets warmer.

Yep. Some 19th Century US coins as well. Zinc pennies aren't typically difficult to recover, since they are usually in the top few inches. I hate 'em but I'm not about to miss something good to avoid them.

My experience learning the subtleties of the nomenclature very much parallels yours. Another qualification is "positive" hot rock" and "negative hot rock" -- something Steve details above. It is unfortunate that misnomers, which come early in a field of study, become common practice/usage, but it happens all the time, particularly in pure science. It's annoying but, in my experience, nearly impossible to swim against the current. For example, 'gram' is a unit of mass, not weight. But almost everyone (including many/most scientists) say "...this specimen weighs XX grams...". I have a couple large hot rocks (one looks very much like yours!) I found at a GPAA claim between Briceburg and Yosemite in CA, along the Merced River. The description you give of how the TRX pinpointer reacts is exactly what my Garrett Carrot did -- if you can 'surround' the tip of the pinpointer by as much of the rock as possible it will beep. Break off a piece and the check it with the pinpointer -- silence. Both rocks give a 40 ID on my Fisher Gold Bug, which is considered the dividing line between ferrous and non-ferrous, although (see Steve's review of the GB) small nuggets can show up on the iron side of this boundary, so as is always the case, size and shape of the target can have a significant affect on the ID. My White's TDI/SPP ignores these rocks completely, meaning the response pulse arrives less than 10 microseconds after the pulse was transmitted. So the detector is acting just as it was designed to do -- ignore the magnetic non-conductors and the very low conducting materials. (Note: some hot rocks have resulted in signals on the SPP -- uncommon but not impossible -- so in those cases there is enough conductivity to lead to a longer than 10 us response pulse.) Another thing I found with both rocks is that I can get a very low resistance reading (few ohms) probing with a multimeter. This can be interpreted as "highly conductive". One of them has a very dark, matte finish, consistent with graphite, but the other one (that looks like yours) is more deceptive, even showing some quartz veins. Both have specific gravities around 2.7 -- quite typical of many rocks but well below most meteorites (darn...). Although I haven't ruled out the possibility that there is (valuable?) metal buried inside, it seems like a very distant longshot. If you decide to go to the effort (and expense?) of sawing yours open I'd be curious to see a picture of what you find. Another option may be to break it apart but I don't have the equipment to do that with mine. Although I haven't done so yet, I'm sure my non-metal-detecting wife would appreciate a donation to her garden. Brownie points await.

Cors (aftermarket independent coil manufacturer) has made coils which are advertised as operating at all three frequencies. I couldn't find anything regarding this at their website, which either means I'm not good at finding web info or they've discontinued making them (temporarily or permanently). At least one Ebay seller has them -- here's an example ad (they were making them in various configurations): http://www.ebay.com/itm/CORS-Scout-12-5-x8-5-DD-Search-Coil-Minelab-X-Terra-All-Frequencies-/291652981609?hash=item43e7df5369 These cost 1.5 to 2x what you pay for a single frequency Cors coil of the same general design (size and config) but if they really do work at all three frequencies then it's about a factor of 1/2 what you'd pay for three coils. Real time multifrequency detetectors such as the Whites V3I and VX3 and Minelab 3030 give you more options (and don't require a coil change) but at considerably higher initial prices. I already have two 3 kHz DD coils (Coiltek 6 inch and 15 inch, both DD) for my X-Terra 705 plus the stock coin & jewelry 7.5kHz 9 inch concentric. Later this week I'll be receiving an 18.75 kHz 6 inch round DD Minelab coil, but I'll likely be on my way to the Southwest US by then so won't have a chance to try it out until I get back mid-February (weather permitting ). It will be especially enlightening to compare the performance of the two 6 inch DD's because the 'only' thing significantly different is the operating frequency. Personally, changing coils hasn't been an issue for me because I usually am hunting with one purpose (e.g. coins or nuggets) and typically you know which coil you want to use, at least which frequency. Also I often am within close proximity to my vehicle in case I want to do a change. I understand that backpacking your swappable coils is more hassle than just walking over to your vehicle.

I can't read the date on the Indian/Buff nickel, but it kinda looks like 1918/17 (D). That would beat most nuggets that get pictured here.

Of the various things I've attempted in my life, Rudyard Kiplings poem 'If' has applied to every one of them. My favorite line in that poem (of which every line is powerful): If you can meet with triumph and disaster, and treat those two imposters just the same

Agree. But actually my concern was a price increase in the near future from the market $190 (compared to the market $290 that Coiltek retailers were charging). As has been mentioned here before, price reflects more on what the sellers feel the market will bear than the manufacturing+marketing costs. Maybe it's $50 cost for them.... Just bought a used Coiltek, so I should be good-to-go. Thanks for the helpful responses.

Thanks, Bryan. This is exactly the kind of response I was hoping to get here. Show me a site that even comes close in cooperation/assistance among members! What makes me a bit concerned is this: I can understand why Coiltek&Minelab would go into a cooperative agreement here. Coiltek apparently has a superior product and Minelab has the marketing and sales network. What I don't understand (and thus makes me suspicious) is why the price went down so drastically. One thing I've noticed about coils (not necessarily tied to one manufacturer) is how the prices fluctuate. And it's not just the downward direction. It's Minelab's business and decision to set the prices where they feel they will make the most profit in the short run and long term, and we've seen this in the past; it's no secret. But are they going to continue to sell a coil they don't build (and thus share the profit) at 2/3 of what Coiltek was asking, or is this just a hidden introductory offer?

A couple things to consider given your choice: 1) Used ones sell frequently on Ebay for $1500 and occasionally less. One advantage to buying used is that often you can pick one with the exact coil you want, instead of the factory/box stock coil. 2) Steve wrote an article in the January 2016 ICMJ Prospecting and Mining Journal titled "Detector Prospecting Accessories" and the second paragraph begins "One of the first things to consider but that many people ignore is ergonomics." He goes on to describe methods of reducing the arm/elbow/wrist/hand stress. In fact on the first page (page 10) is a picture of Steve loaded down with a Garrett ATX. I don't know for sure, but think the ATX is the heaviest treasure detector on the market. (I qualify 'treasure' to set it apart from military land mine detectors.) 3) To continue on the ergonomics topic, although on the webpage Steve references above he indicates the ATX control box is not hip-mountable, I seem to recall somewhere links/references to article(s) where others have done so (without Garrett's blessing, of course...). However, balance is also a key component so if/when you remove the control box you still need to alleviate the heavy searchcoil torquing the shaft. Where there's a will there's a way. If you're in water you gain the advantage of (upward) buoyant force, but on land, 6.9 lb is nothing to take lightly (another pun :) so I recommend finding a solution equal to or similar to those mentioned above.

I'm considering buying (yet) another coil for my ML X-terra 705 -- 15 inch DD operating at 3kHz. Often Minelab and Coiltek offer complementary (different size/frequency/winding) coils, but in some cases, as what I'm considering, they offer coils that appear to be quite similar. Given that the Coiltek costs about 50% more, I'm wondering if I should apply the "you get what you pay for" standard advice or save $100 for a future coil purchase.