Search the Community

After you've had the top of the line detector from what ever the manufacturer, it's almost impossible to settle for a lower end machine from the same company. Case in point, over the past several years I've owned, actually remember, seven Fisher F75's, some original and some the LTD mode. I've had the opportunity to try lower cost machines like the Gold Bug Pro, F19, F5, but can say for surety I've yet to find a machine that comes close to enjoying anything like the F75. I recently purchased a new F19 with the intentions of only using for relic hunting, but even though it is a great machine, it still can't fill the void filled by the F75. Just amazing, you get what you pay for, in most cases when it comes to detecting. It's something how companies put out a flag ship machine then do spin offs of lesser performance an features.

I few years ago I was giving a class on "How to Find Gold Rings" with the Minelab X-705 and realized something different about a coupe of the detectors in the class? Most gave the same readout display, but a couple machines were a number off? I went home stumped that night and tried to figure out how the same model of detectors with the same SENS setting and same DISC patterns could give a different reading on the same target at the same depth? Finally I figured out the puzzle and when doing so I actually upped my odds of finding gold rings. So my questions is? Has anyone attempted changing the kHz setting before digging a target to see if the exact same Identification # is given? Or do you think it will/will not do it? Watch the video to see what I learned/taught myself.

Internal-Photos-3643443.pdf

I'm wondering from those of you using detectors much longer than I have what would you say was the first 'smart' detector? Part of this question will be a definition of smart. I think of smart as being a detector that can do more than just 'respond' to a signal. It would do some processing. Certainly smart devices now have chips with algorithms. Would you define smart as a detector with a coin meter? Just wondering. Many definitions of smart devices now say it is a connected device. I'm not very 'smart' so that is why I am asking the question. Mitchel

This post is in part to help newbies and or folks who don't hunt as often. I'm posting it here, as the Equinox is getting many people excited and even Prospectors who are used to running gold machines without depth indication on their units. If it helps you, then great. I'll even post a video I did on pinpointing a few years back that could help some swingers. Reading some posts below, I read a statement Steve H replied to pertaining Pinpointing and signal strength. He brought up a very very valid point that WAY TO MANY people don't understand. Why do I say so, because when all the training classes we do on Coin/Relic detectors, that seems to be one of the points most folks miss. I'll try to explain it again. The depth readout on the screen of most detectors is set from the factory on Coin Size Targets. Remember that bit please "Coin Size Targets" as well as a few other engineer magics I won't go into. But if you remember the above, you'll be fine. So here are two examples I'll use to show the opposite of correct Depth ID (incorrect). A beer can at 12" deep could read .25 coin on readout and depth show at 5-6" giving a strong signal tone. It is actually much bigger than a coin and so that is why it says it is shallower. When I hunt beaches for gold rings or old silver coins and my Depth readout says 6", but I have dug down 8" or more, I am most certain it is not a ring or coin and in fact is a larger target that is deeper. A stud earring could read 4" with a soft chirp weak tone, when in actuality it is less than an inch deep. I enjoy hunting for diamond studs and have learned they are near the surface and not as deep as the Depth Indication shows. Also point of interest for those who don't know. My White's TRX Pointer is much better at finding gold nuggets and stud earrings than my Garrett Carrot. But I do prefer my Carrot when hunting coins/rings size targets. Here is a video that is of an older machine, but the technique is the same. Hope it helps some of you newer users or old salty prospectors converting to new machines.

This is an official Minelab response to a question on their YouTube channel back in late November (overlooked until now): Question from cache mole - "Will Multi IQ obsolete FBS?" Answer from Minelab Metal Detectors - "A very good question! We are generally stating that Multi-IQ obsoletes single frequency detectors, not simultaneous multi-frequency detectors. This really has captured market attention! It is quite likely that some people will become EQUINOX supporters, while others will want to keep using their favourite FBS detector (not too dissimilar to GPX vs GPZ). So the best honest answer to your question right now is: "Multi-IQ has the future potential to obsolete FBS technology." For some users, that may be immediate when they buy an EQUINOX. For others it may be with a future product with Multi-IQ, or an enhancement of it. If you refer to our first TT blog on Multi-IQ technology: https://www.minelab.com/usa/go-minelabbing/treasure-talk/equinox-technologies-part-1 and look at the timeline diagrams - there were/are several generations of BBS/FBS detectors. We are only at the very beginning for Multi-IQ. When EQUINOX is released, CTX 3030 will remain as our flagship treasure detector, having many functions that EQUINOX does not have - Fe/Co discrimination, Target Trace and others. A significant advantage with Multi-IQ is it's FAST. Think of it as the typical multi-frequency performance of a Minelab detector, at the speed of any good single frequency detector you are familiar with. Also, expect no performance downside running in "Multi" compared to a single frequency. Unless in Gold Mode, we recommend "Multi" as the best frequency option. But, you can use a single frequency if you wish, in Park and Field modes." Multi-IQ Technology Explained

Now that I've got your attention ... One interesting alternative I've seen to traditional walkin' 'n swingin' metal detecting is called the Hot Foot Rug. I'm sure many reading this have heard of it. Basically, from the looks of it it's a search coil apparently embedded into a flexible, rectangular carpet-like piece of material measuring from 18" to 6'. The carpet must, of course, be attached to a box, which the user can keep by their side or clip to a belt. The carpet itself can either be attached to a harness and pulled while walking or dragged behind a vehicle, enabling detectorists to cover a lot more ground -- and with less walking required -- than traditional "stick" detecting. The only thing that makes me not even consider buying one is what I consider to be the excessively-high price (then again, in my opinion MOST metal detectors and search coils are way overpriced.) Especially when dragging the carpet behind a vehicle I would assume the user absolutely must use a good set of noise-canceling headphones. I'm very surprised that the device mentioned above is about the only one of its type I've seen for sale. In my opinion -- and especially with so many detectorists being middle-aged and/or retired folks who aren't as mobile as they used to be -- you'd think there'd be quite a variety of such carpet-like search coils available. Does anyone here prospect with such metal-detecting rugs? My main interest is in prospecting for large, deep nuggets and this technique -- especially with my bad knee -- really appeals to me, as the rug search coil can be several feet wide, which dwarfs even the largest traditional round/oval coils. Any feedback or information on such carpet-type detectors would be appreciated.

I was reading the Australian Electronic Gold Prospecting Forum today and noticed a post about detector depth. I was wondering what others think about today's detectors compared to what was available 25 years ago. I read somewhere that (Woody) the guy that does mods to detectors thinks that for outright depth the sd2000 still goes the deepest. I wouldn't know as I've never owned a sd2000 or a gpz7000. Anyway, i found the comments at AEGPF interesting and wonder if anyone here has actually done a depth comparison between the zed and sd2000. Heres the snippet from AEGPF Quote from AEGPF: "The deepest Pi detector ever developed in my opinion was a prototype SD2000 that BC modified for the late Jim Stewart.BC slowed down the clock speed to give a very long pulse and made some other unknown changes to the circuit to cope with higher currents etc. At the time the SD2000 came out BC stated that it was at about 95% of the maximum potential depth that any handheld PI could ever achieve (and still pass emission standards). However, the deepest PI that has ever been made for gold was Corybns detector which detected a nugget of around 10oz? at 3 feet in depth in WA. Somewhere on the forum is a reference to it and I will try and find the link when I have time. "What is interesting is that the deepest nuggets ever detected by a Pi was by a detector used in the early 1980's in WA-Corbyn's wheeled detector! Pictures of it and the depths of some of nuggets he found with it can be seen in Mike Wattones book: Quest for gold.NO Pi detector today could match the depths Corby got on at least one nugget! (4cm nugget at over 36" in mineralized ground)"

Hi, Regarding the VLF detectors.Can someone answer for me what constitutes a VLF with good discrimination?.I feel to discriminate that speed is a factor as well.Otherwise no matter how good,if a target is next to iron it will read off a good hit. The Deus has fast reactivity,so is this now a good discriminator.Between ferrous and non ferrous?. How does this compare to say the Nokta Impact for speed discrimination. Thanks in advance Ash

http://md-hunter.com/new-xp-q-mond-machine-novelty-2018-look-at-that/ Is this for real, why not go with the smart phone?????????

Editors Note: this thread split from http://www.detectorprospector.com/forum/topic/4335-the-reg-wilson-gold-album/ Nice stuff again... I'm having cardiac palpitations seeing all this gold....lol I wonder if you could tell us how your sled was rigged up. That looks nice for some open ground. Keep it coming....

The more I learn (by reading and experience) the more I realize that unmasking is the holy grail future of induction balance (IB) detectors. Dankowski has been emphasizing the issue for years (as your link to a 2000 article shows Dankowski - Beneath The Mask). The sites I hunt are visciously peppered with iron, small and large. That goes for old homesites here in the Midwest and out West, at old abondoned mines, placer sites, and ghost towns. As bad as littering is today, at least we have trash barrels, recycling, refuse collection, and advertising pleas to keep the world a beautiful place. I get the impression that back in the 19th century the thought didn't even occur to them. People can still cherry pick (using strict discrimination) to avoid the trash. If all you're after is recent drops (clad, zinc, and maybe a few pieces of silver jewelry) then go for it. I want old stuff and, as you note, that means dealing with lots of trash. But even careful hunting today is hampered severely by masking. As Tom D.'s report shows, not only don't you hear the good target, sometimes you don't even here the bad ones! How do you know there might be good target being masked if your detector responds as if there is no metal at all within its search field?! It's my impression that masking is just as big of a problem for nugget hunters. Does it just get less attention because most nugget hunting is done with pulse induction (PI) and zero volt transmission (ZVT) technology, which (AFAIK) doesn't offer much discrimination anyway. If you're really going to dig-it-all, including iron, then eventually you're going to find just about every piece of detectable metal within range.

Hello, Does the coal or carbon block the EM signals? For example if the metal object buried and covered by shield of carbon or coal. Does the metal detector able to penetrate this type of materials.

I think I could show more interest in any of Garrett detectors but in my opinion they try to put too much info in such a small area. They could take a lesson from White's and let it pop up on the screen on what you detected. This looks like what Minelab is doing the same as White's with a big and better display so all has no trouble to see. I don't see myself buying anything from Garrett until they do. White's has some for the same reason I wouldn't buy either. The young will buy the small screen but with a large one the younger and older will buy. So detector companies you want your sales to go up then come out with a larger display. Chuck

I was wondering about this new machine to hit the market and do believe other manufactures are also releasing soon, the same or very similar type of technology.I dont belive it s new.Can we obtain a list of the main players who will be releasing something similar so i may do a comparison.I think Fisher has one but dont think the At Max coming soon is the same.I m asking this as im not 100% tech savy but dont believe Minelab is the first here or by any means the best.In saying that ,this machine looks very sweet indeed.Also last point.In regard to reactivity speed ,where does the AT Max come in.Thanks in advance. Ash

So Steve or somebody explain to me, putting aside higher frequency is more sensitive to tiny objects like gold nuggets. I realize that. Does higher or lower frequencies go deeper? is there any difference for general coin or relic hunting? Would one or the other pick up or let me hear better a deeper fainter signal?

I always have one question in mind which is the best frequency for silver and gold jwellary or treassure hord at the same time i know 7 to 15 khz is for silver relics tressure 15khz to upper is for gold suppose if i find a cannal full of silver and gold jwellary which frequency is best suited for it

Looks funny but there is not far between this video and a decent beach detector at least. Just need the digger scoop arm on the back. Kind of like turning a Roomba loose on the beach!

As you know I have been metal detecting for 30 years. I still consider myself a newbie. However, it is with the same old machine. Back when I purchased my machine we were told it will detect everything, it's a do all machine. I new of prospecting machines, but never knew the difference or seen the demand until I came to this forum. So if you have time, please answer these question. I am going to throw these out as I don't really know how to ask the correct question. What if the difference in a gold machine vs a regular machine? What makes them stand out? I know there is a frequency difference, but what make them stand on when looking for gold? Are they just not tuned for gold?

I got my first metal detector in 1986. It was a White's Coin Master 6000 DI Pro. I bought it because I live near the beach and a friend of mine had a friend who was selling them. I didn't know much about detectors and I used it on the beach in the dry sand only for about 3 years before life happened and I put it away. I didn't get another detector until 2010 and it was a ML 5000. Now that I had it I had to start learning about the desert and more about metal detectors. One of the first things that I 'noticed' about a detector is that you don't have to be directly over a target to hear it. You get a sense for a target by coming close. You get a bigger sense for an aluminum can than you do a quarter for instance. I've searched and searched over the years for a way to describe this near to target sense which is much greater in the 5000 (PI) and the 7000 (ZVT) than with the Coin Master (VLF). Today I was reading an email from Kellyco who is the company that services most Minelabs in the United States. They also sell most other detectors and give advice to their customers. The email that I received led me to a reprint of an article: How Metal Detectors Work Reprinted with permission from Modern Metal Detectors. The full article is here: https://www.kellycodetectors.com/catalog/how-metal-detectors-work#more In that article it uses the term Fringe Area Detection and that gave definition to what I had been trying to describe for years. I had tried to say a coil is like a Nerf ball with many targets off the search area and you are drawn to a target like a moth to a flame. As it turns out this is just 'fringe area detection' which lets us push our detectors to much greater finds. I think you will see how many times we have discussed this part of metal detecting without using this term. The fringe area on my 7000 is larger than the illustration shown. Here is what the article says about fringe area detection: Fringe Area Detection Fringe area detection is a phenomenon of detection, the understanding of which will result in your being able to discover metal targets to the maximum depth capability of any instrument. The detection pattern for a coin may extend, say, one foot below the search coil. The detection pattern for a small jar of coins may extend, perhaps, two feet below the search coil as illustrated in the drawing on the facing page. Within the area of the detection pattern, an unmistakable detector signal is produced. This illustration shows the location and approximate proportional size of the fringe detection area in which faint target signals from around the outer edges of a normal detection pattern can be heard. What about outside the detection pattern? Does detection take place? Yes, but the signals are too weak to be discerned by the operator except in the fringe area around the outer edges of the detection pattern as shown in the drawing above. A good set of headphones is a must, if you desire to hear fringe area signals. The next more important thing, is training in the art of discerning the faint whispers of sound that occur in the fringe area. Skill in fringe area detection can be developed with practice, training, concentration and faith in your ability. Develop fringe area detection ability to a fine art and you are on your way to some great discoveries that many detector operators will miss. The ability to hear fringe area signals results in greatly improved metal detection efficiency and success. Mitchel

Steve, Every since you posted that you lose depth when you ground balance, It is in the back of my mind........ "Ground balancing is a filter and not all that different that the way the discrimination system works. The ground signal or salt signal (or both) are identified and then tuned out. The ground effect is still there, but the detector subtracts it from the overall signal. The key word there is "subtracts". Ground balance methods work by subtracting part of the signal, and all subtractive methods create depth losses of some sort the closer any detected item gets to the "hole" created by subtracting the ground or salt signal. Signals are not perfect but spread over a small range, and so eliminating any signal usually means taking out a small range of signals. " I have always tried to keep my detectors ground balanced while using them.... Now I wonder if I should? Can you put my mind at ease......

If somebody has offered you at option: 1. to reduce the weight of your favourite detector by half 2. to increase its depth by 10% What would you choose?

No, I'm not talking about politics and being a Moveon.org trainer. I'm talking about resistivity detecting. Electrical resistivity tomography From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Electrical resistivity tomography (ERT) or electrical resistivity imaging (ERI) is a geophysical technique for imaging sub-surface structures from electrical resistivity measurements made at the surface, or by electrodes in one or more boreholes. If the electrodes are suspended in the boreholes, deeper sections can be investigated. It is closely related to the medical imaging technique electrical impedance tomography (EIT), and mathematically is the same inverse problem. In contrast to medical EIT however ERT is essentially a direct current method. A related geophysical method, induced polarization, measures the transient response. The technique evolved from techniques of electrical prospecting that predate digital computers, where layers or anomalies were sought rather than images. Early work on the mathematical problem in the 1930s assumed a layered medium (see for example Langer, Slichter). Andrey Nikolayevich Tikhonov who is best known for his work on regularization of inverse problems also worked on this problem. He explains in detail how to solve the ERT problem in a simple case of 2-layered medium. During the 1940s he collaborated with geophysicists and without the aid of computers they discovered large deposits of copper. As a result, they were awarded a State Prize of Soviet Union. Andrey Nikolayevich Tikhonov, the "father of ERT" When adequate computers became widely available the inverse problem of ERT could be solved numerically, and the work of Loke and Barker at Birmingham University was among the first such solution, and their approach is still widely used. With the advancement in the field of Electrical Resistivity Tomography (ERT) from 1D to 2D and now-a- days 3D, ERT has explored many fields. The applications of ERT include fault investigation, ground water table investigation, soil moisture content determination and many others. In industrial process imaging ERT can be used in a similar fashion to medical EIT, to image the distribution of conductivity in mixing vessels and pipes. In this context it is usually called Electrical Resistance Tomography, emphasising the quantity that is measured rather than imaged. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrical_resistivity_tomography Here is one unit being offered by Kellyco. https://www.kellycodetectors.com/blog/find-gold-resistivity?utm_source=email&utm_medium=BlogBUTTON&utm_content=BlogGoldResistivity&utm_campaign=MSTRBlogGoldResistivity20170624&utm_term=Lead_SuperBowlGiveaway2016 Mitchel

As a rule do the lower vlf frequencies punch deeper than the higher ones, say 4.8 verses 14khz? But what is the trade off? Are some frequencies better for silver coins? How does iron enter into this? Need to understand how this all fits together! Thanks for any and all answers.

Can someone please explain the differences in a PI machine and a VLF machine in layman's terms or point me in a direction on the site if it has already been posted up some where just trying to learn