GB_Amateur

2 hours ago, strick said:

send directly to minelab now there is a thred on the forum about the recent switch

strick 

I'm ignorant as to how the Garrett ATX responds to targets but I hope it's at least a meteorite or better yet, a gold nugget.  But the 'smart money' is on an old can or broken piece of tool.  (Is the ferrous vs. non-ferrous indicator 100% reliable?)  Still, you know what they say about "the thrill of the chase" so you've got that going, regardless.  I look forward to the report of your upcoming revelation.

Did I understand right -- 11 silver coins previous hunt and 14 this time??  I realize the saltwater has been mean to them but do you ever check the dates+mintmarks?  Regardless, good work as always.

19 minutes ago, schoolofhardNox said:

I’m going to keep going back until conditions change and the fun dries up. 

Most people would include weather as a factor in 'conditions', but not you!

25 minutes ago, schoolofhardNox said:

It's easier to find Walking Liberty halves than those Franklins for some reason.

My hypothesis for that is the same as for the Roosevelts vs. Mercs -- fewer coins minted, but worse, fewer years for them to be lost before all silver was removed from circulation (by the public, not the gov) in the late 60's.

Welcome the Manticore Users Club!  Lots of good advice so far.

On 1/26/2024 at 11:17 PM, fishersari said:

...Don't treat it like an equinox....

I'll go one step further -- don't think of it like any other detector.  Sure, it makes noise when there is metal in range and that noise is loaded with info, but it speaks its own language.  Here are a few more recommendations:

0) Read the manual cover-to-cover before your first adventure.  After a few hunts, go through it again.  In the second pass you can skip sections you know you won't use, but you don't know which those are if you haven't been through it completely once already!

1) If you are on land, set the sensitivity at 17 (or lower, not higher).  I know this may be counter to other detectors -- only halfway up the scale -- but in my experience so far (test garden and field) the Manticore is every bit as deep on 17 as my Equinox 800 at 22-23, and in some settings it's (measurably) a bit deeper.  People on beaches (without black sand present) can crank up the gain for better depth but if there is even moderate mineralization (like I have) you just end up deteriorating the Digital Target ID (and 2-D screen Target Trace) by turning up the sensitivity.  That's my experience (and others', too).

2) There are an encyclopedia's worth of sound settings on the Manticore, at least compared even to the Equinox.  Don't get discouraged if the factory settings (and there are many of those already depending upon mode) aren't to your liking.

3) If your Manticore isn't running the latest software update (there has been only one made available to users so far), you are OK at first but I would consider getting it upgraded fairly soon.  (Pretty easy to do.)  Although the upgrade doesn't have a lot of changes, there are some and easier to learn once than unlearn and relearn, IMO.

Enjoy your new tool!

23 hours ago, Ringtail said:

2 silver coins,

I understand with rare CW items in your pouch that a Standing Liberty Quarter takes a back seat, but you're teasing us not showing the obverse.  From the picture the back side looks detailed (low wear and not corroded).  Do you mind posting a photo of the front side?

Good to hear the Manticore with 15" coil is producing at unexpected levels.

3 hours ago, kadir6141 said:

There is no change in distance.

What do you mean by 'distance'?

On 1/21/2024 at 5:59 PM, HardPack said:

Could Garrett have an annoucement regarding a 2024 release later this month?

I think the real one is actually located in Las Vegas at the Golden Nugget Casino (downtown) although I'm not sure they display it on a regular basis.  Last time I was at the Nugget (Nov. 2021) it was not out.  27.2 kg (60 lb Av.) is what the real one weighs.  I wonder how realistic the weight is for this replica.  (My guess is: not very.)

If someone goes to the show, be sure to ask about a new detector for 2024, if they're not explicitly revealing that info.

Welcome back to detecting, Zed!  That Legend, being a modern high-end multifrequency detector has a lot of (virtual) knobs, so probably will take you longer to bond with than your Garrett 1350.  Read the manual (more than once), stick with factory settings until you get your confidence up, don't get aggressive with the gain (these detectors do well with moderate gain) and read and ask here.  There are many Legend posts and users here who are glad to help.

56 minutes ago, kadir6141 said:

I made a 45cm mono coil for TDI SL. inductance 300uh 3.5R. But the distance is the same as the original dual field coil. There is no change in distance. What could be the reason for this or what method should we do?

Is this an air test, and what is your test target?  Please give as much information about your test setup as possible.

1 hour ago, schoolofhardNox said:

That size probably went through leather, if that is what they are.

These show up a lot (in my experience, that is) in Western ghost towns which were active in the second half of 19th Century well into the 20th Century.  They may also have been used in clothing (i.e. woven fabric).  That's my guess.  Made of copper alloy, they sure ring up nice (i.e. moderately high conductor) on a detector!

On 1/16/2024 at 2:08 PM, Steve Herschbach said:

the reality is the Gold Monster totally dominates everything else. Who other than Nenad even uses a Gold Kruzer? A used 24K on our classifieds never did sell, even at a bargain price and with testimonials. Nobody wants a Garrett 24K. It seems Minelab has come to dominate so much that anything other than a Gold Monster is almost irrelevant.

On 1/16/2024 at 2:08 PM, Steve Herschbach said:

I guess I could to a large degree just toss the guide out and tell people get a 6000 or 7000 and/or Gold Monster and be done with it. And in the end that’s pretty sound advice. It kind of rankles on me because I think competition is good for all of us, but is there really any competition in the world of the serious gold prospectors, other than Minelab vs Minelab?

I certainly can't speak for the "serious gold prospectors" but my story may still be relevant.  When I got back into detecting in 2015 I was looking for a gold detector and I found your guide from an internet search.  Having been gone from the endeavor for 30+ years I didn't know what 'Minelab' even was.  A bottle gas company?  (Oh, that's 'Mineweld'.)  But your guide was exactly what I was looking for and I bought a Fisher Gold Bug Pro based upon your recommendation of three (ML X-Terra 705 and Garrett AT/Gold being the other two) for a very good gold detector that could find other items (e.g. coins) and wouldn't break the bank.  What are the chances I ever would have even joined this site if I hadn't found that guide?  But obviously it was written not only by a knowledgeable person but also an open-minded and thorough one.  Checkmark, checkmark, checkmark.

When I buy a detector (in particular) I look at three things:  performance, ergonomics, price.  It has to meet all three (subectively, I admit).  Your guide and your detector database cover all three.  Checkmark.  One thing I don't get hung up on is "name brand".

If someone was wanting to get into detector sales and could only choose one brand then the "big name" Minelab is the easy solution.  But that's not this site.  If that dealer wanted to cater to the "I don't want to think or adjust" crowd then maybe the Monster is the one to sell.  However, that isn't what this site is about, AFAIC.  Sure, there are all types and you welcome them.  But what sets this site apart is people who go deeper than "turn on and go."  And some of those people are beginners who don't really have a clue (as I was 8 1/2 years ago).

Minelab is obviously playing off their reputation but people here aren't exactly drinking their Kool-Aid.  Better yet, finally they are getting serious competition from XP, Nokta, and Garrett.  Do they have the objective advantage today they built their reputation on?  Not in the IB/VLF world, that's for sure.  From what I can see your full guide is as meaningful as ever.

On 1/15/2024 at 8:37 AM, F350Platinum said:

It was taco'ed when I dug it, but it straightened itself out later 🙄

All by itself -- impressive!  😏  Care to give us more details?  Appears to have some stretch marks (err, stress lines), before and after.  The reverse looks much nicer than the obverse so I assume the reverse was facing down for, oh, 1 1/2 centuries.  Very nice find, regardless.  I'm envious.  As happens a lot, it seems, the coin was high grade (XF?) when dropped but the (fertilized?) soil hasn't been kind over all those decades.  About how deep was it?

https://www.detectorprospector.com/tags/qed/

6 minutes ago, Ndplumr said:

If nothing else, this new hobby has got me reading more books again.

Would you mind posting the full name (and author, if appropriate) of that book/pamphlet titled "GPS Coordinates of Historic..."?

17 hours ago, phrunt said:

Holy crap, I started watching her video at 14 minutes and she was swinging that coil way off the ground, it's a wonder she finds anything that's not the size of a coke can, I turned it off then, as that to me is a typical Youtube marketer and not a serious detector user.

It's great to hear Garrett have something baking in the oven,...

I'll be blunt (not picking on you, Simon):  if she doesn't know how to use a metal detector, how do we know she's even plugged into Garrett headquarters enough to be able to (confidently!) predict they will have a new detector available in 2024?

I've only been around this game (in the internet age, anyway) for 7 1/2 years now, but I'm running out of fingers counting all the predictions of new detectors "arriving this year" that haven't materialized.  But "hope springs eternal...."

51 minutes ago, Jeff McClendon said:

I know Deus 2 really well. I don't know the Manticore really well yet and I don't have the larger Manticore coil so I don't want to get too much into overall depth.

Well said, Jeff, and thanks for your reply.  As time goes on and you get more familiar with both detectors, hopefully you will be able to report on more side-by-side comparisons of known (e.g. test garden) and unknown ("in the wild") targets.  It's quite likely (IMO) that any difference will show up in difficult conditions -- difficult mineralization or difficult trash environments.  I guess this last sentence is a summary of all the top-of-the-line IB/VLF detectors over the past 15-20 (or maybe longer) years:  in less demanding conditions they all work well but when the going gets tough, certain models out-perform others.

How does the database get populated and kept up-to-date?

On 1/9/2024 at 3:08 AM, Jeff McClendon said:

Deus 2 with the 13X11" coil has made all the difference for me as far as hitting deeper silver US dimes which are 18 mm, 2.5 gram coins. With that coil it is beating the Manticore with 11" coil by an inch on in ground wild targets.

On 1/9/2024 at 10:51 AM, Jeff McClendon said:

I have also used the Manticore 11" and Deus 2 13X11" simultaneously on wild targets. I have not found one that the Manticore misses but the target responses are notably better on Deus 2 with the 13X11".

This is not the comparison sub-forum, I realize, but the first statement caught my interest.  An inch is a lot.  For many posters I would just blow off such a comment, but not you.  Could you expound a bit on your experiences that led to this conclusion?  Also, the second quote doesn't appear to be as extreme/significant in its comparison.  Am I missing something?

Nice solution!

Title says 'M8'.  Photos are for M11.  But if you are asking about a similar protection system for the M8, I agree with others that your pictured solution appears to be quite stout, and sufficiently so, IMO.  If you wanted to go a bit further, cover the foam block with a similiarly/appropriately sized box.  Cardboard would be an easy method.  Wood or (if you really want to go the extra mile) aluminum would likely protect even against airline baggage-handling gorillas.

7 hours ago, Valens Legacy said:

...Remember that some of the "Junk" items could be hard to find costume jewelry. Some of the old items can be as much as the real stuff or higher.

Good point, but how do you find out?

The rightmost ring in my 'junk' photo was a particular surprise because of how attractive it is.  My eye said it would contain precious metal (more than just the gold plating).  I haven't tossed it (or sold at a yard sale) so it still could work out that I've misevaluated it.

50 minutes ago, Steve Herschbach said:

Not sure at all on that one as link icon is present and functioning as I type. Tested Here The editing icon list truncate depending on device used and orientation of that device, so a person on a phone sees far less options than a person on a widescreen device (PC or iPad held horizontally).

To be more specific, I could click on the link icon but that would just result in a spinning arrow-ring.  The same thing occurred when I tried to use the'@' symbol to find and post a site member's name.  It wouldn't narrow down the search as I type (the normal result) but just give me the spinning arrow.  I can't say that these occurrences are due to a problem with the software, though.  I just don't remember experiencing such in the many times I've used these features in the past.

I also just made a very long post in the Jewelry sub-forum.  Fortunately it went through but I was unable to use the link icon during creation.  So I think some of the gremlins are again present.

Although these pieces weren't found with a detector, I think what I relate here is relevant to this site.

Background:  This past summer my wife was aiding a friend who was downsizing as the result of a divorce.  She had several jewelry rings that had been accumulated over the years but didn't remember their history.  Likely some were family hand-me-downs and others were gifts or even purchases she had made herself.  Her feeling was that they were of little value but my wife asked me about them and I said I would dig deeper.  Thus initiated this rather detailed study.  I probably spent upwards of 25-30 hours, maybe more, with this investigation, but it was certainly a learning experience and I enjoy those (if I choose them myself 😀).

Items:  I initially broke the ~25 rings into two categories -- those that were (by eye) clearly junk and those that might have precious metal content.  I don't have a photo of the first group of half-a-dozen or so.  Those were in fact put in a yard sale for ~25 cents each.  The second group was given the royal investigation treatment as follows:  1) search for maker and purity marks, 2) measure weight and (with Archimedes method) specific gravity [initially with stones included but later after their removal in cases I was able to do that], 3) find their air-test VDI's with the Minelab Equinox 800, and 4) perform an acid test on those that were still considered to be gold after steps 1-3.  Here are photos starting with the gold candidates:

Silver rings (all marked either 925 or 900):

Junk rings (as concluded from multiple tests, not from simple inspection):

These photos were taken shortly before shipment to the refiner so in most cases you'll see that the stones have been removed. 

Investigation & Preparation:  Initially I did the specific gravity determination with stones in place and then tried to estimate (subtracting with guesses to volume and weight of stones) the metal-only specific gravity.  In most cases I was later able to remove the stones and then repeat the S.G. measurements which were more appropriate/accurate.

I used three methods of removing the stones:  1) when held in place simply by 'prongs' (is that what jewelers call them?) a needle nose pliers was good enough to bend the prongs until the stones fell out.  2) In many instances the back side of the ring had a small hole accessing the stone so I used a somewhat sharp punch (only as sharp as required) to knock them out.  3) In a couple silver ring cases the stones were glued in place.  For those I used Lacquer Thinner (a mixture of several not-so-healthy petroleum derivative chemicals including acetone, methyl-ethyl ketone, xylene, toluene, methanol,...) -- easily purchased at hardware stores -- to dissolve the adhesive.  Note that Lacquer thinner will dissolve most plastics and many wood finishes so care should be taken.  Fortunately for me this worked quite nicely in this instance and the stones just fell out.

Shortly I will show a spreadsheet with all the data.  For the purposes of the shipping manifest, though, I defaulted to the stamped purities even though I was in some cases dubious that they were 100% accurate based upon the specific gravity measurements.  I'm pretty sure the refiner has better methods than I to determine purity and will conclude pricing based upon their findings.  No deception was intended.  (I did not include S.G., acid test, or VDI data in the manifest, BTW.  I highly doubt they would use my values or trust them if it's even something they would use in their determination methods, and if so they surely would make their own measurements independently.)  Here are the shipment contents:

Basically each gold ring was it its own bag.  Silver rings were in two bags sorted by purity (92.5% vs. 90%).  Each bag included an index card with metal type (gold or silver), marked purity, and weight.  A separate summary itemized listing is shown at bottom.  (Thanks go to Jeff McClendon for advising me on steps to take in preparing the shipment.)  I sent them via USPS Priority Mail, insured, to Midwest Refineries , also suggested by Jeff.  (Sorry but as I write this the link icon isn't working.  You can easily find their website by a Google Search.)  The total shipment cost (postage + insurance) was $25.  I think I insured for $600 -- can't remember.  Surprisingly and gratefully, I shipped on a Friday and had a check in hand the following Thursday!  Here is a screenshot of a spreadsheet with measurement/identification details:

Hopefully you can read it.  There are three specific gravity columns -- initial measurements with stones still present, my estimate correcting for stones, and the final measurement after stones were removed.  As you can see, based upon the gold and silver spot prices on the day of shipment (upper right) and assuming marked purities (one exception being the tiny 18k ring) and no refining/recovery/processing costs I concluded the (unrealistic) total precious metal content value of $901.94.  Also shown is the returned check amount of $747.00.  I was pleased and my wife's friend (recall she thought all were junk) was overjoyed.  Take note of the Equinox VDI values.  All silver and junk rings (recall these latter were not shipped) have high VDI's (in the case of silver, being up in the neighborhood of USA silver dimes, quarters, even halves) while the gold rings are at highest around USA nickels and going down to near iron (1 being the lowest non-ferrous reading on the Equinox).  The rings gave different readings depending upon orientation and I just listed the highest value I got from the three orientation measurements.

Another thing you may noticed in the 'comments' column are the details of the acid testing.  IMO this isn't a clear indicator as hopefully you can see.  In some cases there was no dissolution (meaning the purity was as high or higher than indicated on the acid bottle), in some cases the metal streak didn't appear to dissolve until I gently absorbed the liquid with a paper towel, in some cases the metal dissolved in ~10 seconds, in some cases 1 minute, in some cases it neither dissolved nor would it wipe/off or absorb.

In particular, although I've found specific gravity vs. purity tables on the internet, I suspect there are more devils in the details than these tables imply, particularly for white gold.  The actual alloy contents are likely the reason.

Here is a photo of the removed stones:

The lower tray are the ones that either gave good readings on a gem tester or otherwise appeared to be of actual quality.  The upper are, from my conclusion, glass or low grade minerals.  BTW, for one of the rings I punched out ~50 tiny stones!  That large orange item might be authentic amber, IDK.  It exhibits layering which I wouldn't expect from a fake, but what do I know?  The two pearls passed the 'tooth test' (not sure if that is reliable) and the green stones may be jade.  They came from the 18k yellow gold ring.

Summary:  This is my first (maybe last?) attempt at selling jewelry.  I certainly went to more effort than is required, but again, I wanted to take advantage of this learning experience.  As to whether the relative return (~83%) is representative of such sales, many of you are a better judge than I, but I felt it was quite reasonable.

16 hours ago, Chase Goldman said:

They are still in stock.

Not 16 hours later. 

That price is more in line with a high quality set of traditional MD headphones.  Sure, we all want to pay as little as possible but I find this price more palatable.  Some (many?) of us have cabinets full of headphones and already have a favorite pair.  So getting a module which makes those compatible with a detector choice makes sense, IMO.

Here's a link I used to find the page:

https://www.fortbedfordmetaldetectors.com/Minelab-WM-09-Wireless-Audio-Monitor ?keyword=WM 09

Someone here likely knows what that is.  I think you should alter your post title to get more eyes on the post.  Also, it's really more relevant to native/natural gold detectorists than coin and relic hunters.  As such the general forum is more likely to get noticed by those people.