Jump to content

GB_Amateur

Full Member
  • Posts

    5,842
  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Forums

Detector Prospector Home

Detector Database

Downloads

Everything posted by GB_Amateur

  1. I still don't have a Coiltek NOX 10x5 and don't know if I'll be getting one. But that doesn't stop me from speculating on what I would do if I got one and saw the dTID shift. Here's a solution I think would work for me. I start by stating my coin detecting stragegy. 1) All of my 20th Century coin detecting of parks and schools is done in Park 1 with everything customized in 5 tones. Thus factory resetting every time I swapped the coil would be a major PitA. 2) I'm pretty sure (wish Minelab would say...) that if you mimic every setting in Park 1 and Field 1 to match, the detector will perform identically. So..., I use Park 1 for the 11" coil and and Field 1 for the 10x5 coil. 3) If there is a difference in TID that affects my 20th Century coin searching (which is basically dTID's of 12-13 for USA nickels and 19 and above for all other 20th Century USA coins in Park 1) then I'll have to learn & memorize what dTID's to set my Field 1 for when using the 10x5. Again, this should only affect my medium-hi tone region (USA nickels) and the start of the high conductor coins (low edge of High tone being set for Indian Head cents). When I detect sites that might contain 18th Century coins I just use 2 tone mode and dig all (or most) above dTID of ~6 (USA nickel 3 cent piece being the low edge for the high tone). So if nickel 3-center dTID's vary depending upon coil I can still use both Park 1 and Field 1 as above.
  2. Here's something it took me almost 3 years to learn -- I can (and will) only use one detector at a time. Yes, sounds trite and almost insulting, but it's true. It appears you are mostly (or even exclusively -- you didn't make it clear) going to be gold prospecting/fossicking, and in an (wide?) area around Las Vegas. You already have an excellent tiny gold IB/VLF detector. (You haven't said how much experience you have with it.) If you buy another detector for finding tiny gold, what will you do with your GB2? The real diversification move is to own one IB/VLF and one PI. You indicate that money isn't burning a hole in your pocket, and that buying a new $1k+ detector (don't forget the auxilliary coil costs) will have an effect on your detecting budget. PI's cost more, but prices always come down eventually and there are some good deals even now in the $1k-$2k range on high performance, used Minelab PI's, not the latest and greatest, but very good performers. If you're the kind of person who can sell for close to what you buy for, then getting more detectors (and liquidating others) is an option, but obviously don't expect to get what you paid.... If I were in your shoes, knowing what I know now and not what I didn't know 6 years ago, I'd learn the GB2 while finding gold with it and save up for a PI to complement it. But I'm the first to admit that what's best for me isn't necessarily best for someone else. I wish you positive experience as you go forward.
  3. Seems like you asked this question in another thread yesterday, but apparently didn't get any answers? I don't have much experience here -- have hunted for and found small gold with the Eqx 800, but living where I do, I get little chance for that. The fact that you already own the Fisher Gold Bug 2 has a signifcant impact on your title question. IMO you should sit tight and get some more opinions. I have mine but the people who have used all three (GB2, GM1k, Eqx) are the most capable at answering, not someone like I who knows only one. BTW, Gerry McMullen (Gerry in Idaho -- here's his dealership website) answered this a few months ago right here on this forum. When I'm in the market for a new detector, Gerry is where I start.
  4. Was there a date associated with that message? There's a bit of confusion (on my part, anyway) between the first sentence: and paragraph 2: Maybe the 'several weeks' means for later (larger) shipments? Or maybe in their meaning 'several' and {2,3,4} weeks are the same thing. And what about the Southern Hemisphere? It's peak of summer there. Anyone in Australia have one, or is XP showing solidarity with Novak Djokovic and punishing you ingrates?
  5. XP coils are way different than any other manufacturer's coils in that the 'guts' of the detector are actually in the coil housing, along with the windings. So, no, in the case of XP the aftermarket coil options are m/l impossible.
  6. Good to keep a detecting log -- if you keep it up-to-date (add info after every detecting session. before the next one) it's pretty easy. I don't post to show off as there are many here who do much better than I do. It's a good way for me to cyrstalize my thinking on what's happened over the year (including what I've learned -- very important) but most significantly, what improvements I will make in the next year. My first year detecting (after returning from a 45 year hiatus) I think I found one Indian Head Penny and one Mercury dime. Had a ball every minute, mostly finding junk but making mental notes about what I saw and heard. I learned a lot and I've learned a lot every year since. Getting your coil over the good stuff is 80%+ of success at this endeavor. Working on that 80% (i.e. finding good sites to detect) is time well spent. It's like playing a sport -- the practice & prepration is the work and takes most of the time. The game is the most fun part -- not just the scoring (making finds) but the satisfaction you get from realizing the learning and researching are what led to the success.
  7. Excellent effort, and the results show it. Did this house ever have a wood floor? Did you get a chance to detect any of the structure before the wall facia was removed? Do you know what the jar is at the top of your first photo? (Metallic?) Given the amount of surface iron (and alloy), did you 'sweep' it with a magnet? I agree with strick -- there's likely more there. Hope you get more chances before it comes down (leaving even more iron trash from the nails, etc.) But even after it's completely gone, as long as it doesn't get backfilled you should still be able to do some fruitful searching. I'm envious!
  8. Welcome, Zord! Not only do you have historic places to detect there, but also at least one very good detector manufacturer. Enjoy the ride.
  9. Lead shot (various sizes) also makes a great nugget test target, but they should be flattened to be about the shape of naturally occurring tiny gold. Yeah, can't beat a natural piece of gold but likely not as easily to locate one beforehand and I don't feel bad if I lose one of my lead imposters (which I have done).
  10. Mine comes it at 3.10 lb (= 49.6 oz = 1.41 kg). Here's how mine is configured (from top to bottom): 1) Added padding to inside of arm cuff (narrowing it so it doesn't slop from side-to-side when I swing). 2) Added tennis grip wrap to grip. 3) Added section of foam pool noodle on grip, in contact with control unit (held on with an 11" long cable tie) which leads to less of a death grip, eliminating hand and forearm fatigue. 4) Modified shaft as follows: upper shaft section is stock; middle S-shaft section and lowest shaft section are slightly modified ML X-Terra 705 shaft sections. I use a 1/4" hex head plastic bolt with wingnut, not the Eqx stock bolt and nut. Two velcro straps secure the cable to the shaft. 5) Stock 11" coil and cover but with added (epoxied in place) bakelite washer on one ear only to repair break. I think most of the extra weight (compared to stock and especially compared to aftermarket shaft outfitted versions like Jeff's above) is in the shaft. I tried using a 1/4 lb (= 4 oz) counterweight (full $5 roll of USA dimes) inside the upper end of the shaft but it didn't seem to improve the balance enough to be worth carrying the extra weight, so I ditched it. Many (including I) are of the opinion that balance takes precedence over weight as long as the weight isn't too much. (How much? Depends upon the person swinging.) My Eqx configuration {weight+balance+minimized torsion from S-shaft} combination is very good for my typical 3-4 hour hunts and my style of swinging, etc.
  11. Have you run the Eqx 11" stock coil over that same testbed? I'm curious how it compares to the 5"x10" Coiltek NOX under these challenging conditions.
  12. Don't beat yourself up, ks. Looks to me like you are doing things just fine, particularly keeping an open mind. True, there are multiple ways to learn, and not every one works equally well for everyone. In my case I always start out by reading the detector manual twice when I get a new (to me) detector. I also reread it after a couple hunts. Then I refer back to it from time to time. You can be confident what you read in it is true, but don't expect it to be a graduate level textbook. Learning to be sensitive to the sounds coming out of the detector has been for me the most difficult part of detecting, and I continue to work on that every time out. But, IMO, every output a detector posesses has value at some time or other. It annoys me when people make flipant statements here which include "I never do that..." as if you're an idiot if you use some particular 'hint' a detector is capable of making. Fine, they don't; goodie for them -- here's a medal. But they shouldn't discourage others from doing it. For me, learning is part of the fun of detecting, and it's one component of the endeavor I never get 'skunked' doing.
  13. I was thinking it's a radioactive source. Hope you're done having children if you were carrying it in a pants pocket.... ? (Seriously, if it were radioactive there should be a tag/sticker indicating such.)
  14. Here's a link to a large club in Denver. There was one in Colorado Springs recently, so hopefully it's still there. Chris Davis is the former president of the Eureka Club (the one I linked) and also a member of the Colorado Springs club. I would get in contact with him. He's very friendly and outgoing. I'm sure you'll be welcome in either (or both). I've attended some of the Eureka Club events (meetings and hunts) -- they are a great group of people.
  15. Going from selectable frequency to simultaneous multifrequency isn't simply a modification.
  16. It's become a tradition of mine to write up a year-end summary of my detecting experience, and since most of my detecting is for coins and relics I keep it in this subforum. My plan for this past year was to experience some new detecting types (via longish trips) and find some new local sites to coin hunt. Thanks to Monte and Oregon Gregg I was welcomed to their June Ghost Town hunt in NE Nevada where I met about 20 like-minded, ambitious, and friendly detectorists. Besides co-organizer Gregg (unfortunately Monte was unable to attend), Utah Rich and Tom Slick were among the attendees who are members and posters here. My 6 days produced minimal coin finds but some decent relics. Next to the camaraderie I most enjoyed learning about a new kind of detecting in a site, soil, and intended target combination I had never previously experienced. In addition to that part of the trip I also spent some time in the Denver area, getting to hunt with the local Eureka club and particularly valuable -- meeting Jeff McClendon and picking his brain on the operation of the QED. Also on this trip I spent a couple days on a National Forest GPAA claim 8-9000 ft. up in NW Colorado. Unfortunately I came up empty handed (as far as gold) but learned quite a bit about site reading *and* how to deal with remote, rugged mountain roads and terrain. In August I headed East to NW Massachusetts on a 'blind date' (not literally, but was generously well taken care of by the land owners who I had never met) detect of an 18th Century homestead. Even dealing with hurricane Henri I was still able to get in several hours of detecting, finding my first USA Large Cent -- oldest coin to date -- 1803. I'll be writing up more on that in a couple days. On the way home I accepted an invitation by member dogodog to detect one of his old coin sites. Even though the heat and humidity was up there we still got in four productive hours with silver finds (mine a Merc and he did even better -- two silvers and a gold ring) along with lots of converstation/discussion. Just another perk of belonging here with such friendly, generous, and accomodating members. The other 10 1/2 months of detecting were done locally. (No photos in this post as I've shown many of those finds previously.) I did accomplish one of my 2021 New Years Resolutions of finding new sites. Eight of the 16 local sites I detected this year were ones I had never hunted. Another writeup I'll be posting shortly focuses in on one of those (muni park) and why I think it might have been previously unsearched. Now for some what I consider *key* statistics of these local hunts: 266 hrs of swinging at local sites, 104 Wheat pennies -- new record for one calendar year, 36 'other old coins' (silver content coins, Buffalo and earlier nickels, Indian Head Pennies) -- second to last year's record of 43, One interesting contrast between last year (where most of my detecting was done in a single, large park) and this year in regards to specifically silver coin finds -- 22 in 2021 vs. 27 in 2022, and more disparate are silver dimes -- 11 vs. 20. Magnifying the silver dime arena, I found 11 Roosies this year compared to 3 last year and 4 in all previous years. (OK, for those of you who stuck around, here's your eye-candy fix -- my 27 silver finds of the year: ) My goals this year include another trip West (ghost-towning and gold prospecting), another trip to that Massachusetts Colonial site, and locally getting enough guts to ask for permissions to private properties. I know of one that (if undetected) is going to be a real 'silver mine' but I need to 'practice' my people skills first so that one may have to wait for 2023.
  17. Welcome to the forum, GnshpCSO! (And welcome home to Colorado.) You've settled in a great state for all kinds of metal detecting. Well, except maybe saltwater beach detecting. You'll have to cross the western border to find some of that.
  18. Not trying to cause steveg to miss any sales, but I think some White's lower shafts work with some Tesoro coils. (My TDI and Vaquero, for example.) They use different diameter bolts (nominal 3/8" for White's and 1/4" for Tesoro) but I think you can deal with that.
  19. Excellent chronicle and photos, Hugh. I particularly liked your delineation of the different days and detecting history of the various sub-sites you hunted. Those are enlightening to me as I also try to figure out the detecting history of sites I hunt.
  20. Good news. On looking through the Bowers book on Lincoln Cents I did find the breakdown of tin and zinc for the early Wheats! On pages 18-19: ...On July 14, Secretary of the Treasury Franklin MacVeigh officially approved the design. Standards remained the same as for the Indiana Head cent: diameter: 0.75 inch (with a tolerance of plus or minus 0.0025 inch), weight 48 grains (with a tolerance of plus or minus 2 grains), bronze alloy of 95% copper, and now, specifically, a slight alloy change to 3% tin and 2% zinc. The administratively approved thickness of a finished coin was 0.062 inch. In practice, it varied due to the height of the rim. (emphasis mine) I also thumbed through Richard Snow's A guide book of Flying Eagle and Indian Head Cents but could not find any indication fo the breakdown of the 5% tin+zinc. (Note, I have the 2006 edition and it's been revised twice. Maybe later editions have the info we're seeking?) It's tantalizing that Bowers above said "...and now, specifically, a slight alloy change..." implying that it was different previously. Was he referring to the IHP composition or maybe just patterns for the production Lincoln cent?? Here's a summary of the latest(?) breakdown secondary metal content of USA 95% copper small cents: Indian Head Cents from late 1864 through 1909: tin+zinc (still unknown) Lincolns 1909-1941: 3% tin, 2% zinc. Lincolns 1944-46: 5% zinc. Lincolns 1947-61: 1% tin, 4% zinc. Lincolns 1962- early 1982: 5% zinc. And now for some exceptions or at least cloudy info. I left out 1943 because these were zinc coated steel. However, what about 1942? Bowers says (maybe I should use 'hints' -- on bottom of p. 229) that at least some of the 1942's were also 5% zinc, not the previous composition. Now for the most unreliable info of this post. I vaguely recall seeing data (possibly XRF data) that not all of the 1962 cents were of the (then new) 5% zinc but rather some of the previous composition (1% tin, 4% zinc) were still minted. If I find that detail and reference I will post later. I'm now more interested than ever to see if I can notice a difference in VDI for the different eras of small cent production -- specifically for the 95% copper years. That will have to be done with coins that weren't in the ground to dispel any concern that the chemicals in the ground have had a permanent effect. I'll move that task to near the top of my ToDo list. ?
  21. @rod-paSorry to hijack your thread. That coin was in great condition when dropped and still shows most of its detail, which is surprising. My 1864 didn't fare nearly as well in the ground. I've mentioned this before but worth reapeating(?) -- almost 80% of all the USA 2 Cent pieces were minted in the first two years of 1864 and 1865. Your 1865 has a bit lower mintange (13.64 million vs. 19.85 million) compared to the 1864. Nice find!
  22. Here's what it says in Bowers's 2008 A Guide Book of Lincoln Cents on page 206: In 1947 the alloy was modified slightly to add 1% tin to 95% copper and 4% tin. This combination was used through 1961, after which zinc was not used until the entirely different cent stock of 1982. This is the first I recall the fractions of tin and zinc called out when both were used. I need to dig a bit more and see if I can find out anything earlier. But even the great Q. David Bowers erred here, saying the 5% from 1962-82 had no zinc. In fact it was the opposite and he says that later (p. 229) referring to the 1962 mintages: The alloy was changed this year from 95% copper, 5% tin and zinc (as it had been since 1946) to 95% copper, 5% zinc. Even that statement seems contradictory (the 'since 1946' part) as that makes it sound like the 1946 cents had tin in their composition. I just confirmed in the 2022 Redbook that 1946 was still (along with 1944-45) 5% zinc with no tin. (BTW, Bowers is the Research Editor for the 2022 Redbook.) No wonder it's hard to figure this out, if the expert's expert gets things mixed up. I also have the Flying Eagle and Indian Head Cents book in the series so I'll look closer at that (as well as the Lincoln cent book I've been quoting) to see if the 5% non-copper is broken down for any other years besides 1944-1982. (Postscript: I've found more pertinent information which I put in a post later in this thread.)
  23. I'm going to disagree on this one. With the exception of 1943 (steel) and 1944-46 (95% shell case copper and 5% zinc), all small cents from mid-1864 (when they switched from the 12% nickel composition) until 1962 are specified 95% copper, 5% tin and zinc by the US Mint. From sometime in 1962 through mid-1982 (when they switched over to the dreaded Zincoln composition) there was no tin, so, yes the full 5% was zinc during that time. This info can be found in both the Red Book and Bowers's A Guide Book of Lincoln Cents. What is confusing and maybe left intentionally vague by the mint is what exactly is meant by "5% tin and zinc". My speculation/hypothesis (which I've yet to confirm from research) is that since the mint didn't manufacture the sheet metal for coins but rather bought from suppliers, they let those suppliers adjust that 5% as they saw fit to facilitate their own manufacturing methods (and or account for differences in metals prices). Does that vagueness lead to variations that we detectorists can discern? Quite possibly. Once again, a good X-Ray Fluorescence analylisis would help. I just wish the devices that measure that didn't cost many thousands of dollars....
  24. This doesn't make sense to me given the symmetry of the windings. I've seen similar things said about the location of objects when pinpointing with the 11" stock Eqx coil. Do you mind going into more detail (e.g. sources)? I'm not trying to start a debate. We read and hear a lot of claims about performance of detectors, and I for one am responsible for some of those claims! Unfortunately not all of them are reliable, including some of mine.... As always I'd like to see others chime in. This isn't a case of Cal_Cobra under the interrogation lights. ?
×
×
  • Create New...