Axiom At The Beach Part 2

[Pyriteboy]

Took the Axiom out for another quick spin before the rains this afternoon. I ran through all the combinations of speed and modes on sensitivity 2 to re-check my findings from the other day. The beach I went to is on the extreme end condition-wise; that is to say the sand is heavily mineralized and there is lots of airplane traffic. The first photo is near the bottom of the slope, and the second photo was taken mid- slope. Again, I ran the machine in a silent search-type mode to eliminate some of the ground noises. As before, Mode= NORMAL & Speed= Medium was slightly more workable than Mode= SALT & Speed= SLOW.

SENSITIVITY.................2

MODE............................Normal

SPEED...........................Medium

THRESHOLD................-8

The bottom of the slope was workable with the 13 x 11 DD but going up the more mineralized slope rendered the Axiom too unstable. Most beaches are not this mineralized, so this is the worst-case scenario. The Axiom, fitted with a smaller DD coil, would be able to handle this ground. I use an Eric Foster designed Goldquest Aquasearch v.2 and have to dumb the machine down at times here. Even then, the threshold is still a bit ratty and you have to work slow. To be fair to the Axiom, I will next go to a beach that is not so extremely mineralized and see how it performs. So far, I am not disappointed with how the Axiom has fared with the 13 x 11 DD coil.

-Jerry

[Valens Legacy]

So what was in the hole?

 

[mn90403]

I know a beach that fits those conditions of planes and the worst black sand of any beach I've ever been on.  There are places on it where I can't detect with my 800/15.  It has defeated other detectors also.

[Pyriteboy]

8 hours ago, Valens Legacy said:

So what was in the hole?

 

Oh, just coinage VL....

[Steve Herschbach]

Interesting results, thanks. I have had to use Normal instead of Fine in heavy black sand, but have not had to deal with salt at the same time. Interesting that Salt is not working better for you than Normal under those conditions. Part of the issue here is the Garrett DD is hotter than a normal DD coil so does not give the results one might expect when comparing to other DD coils. I would actually like a standard DD coil for the machine for just that reason, but it also opens the possibility of the smaller mono possibly working better than you might expect. Or not, but worth a try. I love trying to figure out new detectors! Every data point helps, so thanks for sharing. 

Reminder to everyone that the default sensitivity setting of 4 would be the top end setting on many detectors, so settings of 2-3 on the Axiom are to be expected in tough situations, and are still quite powerful.

[Pyriteboy]

9 hours ago, mn90403 said:

I know a beach that fits those conditions of planes and the worst black sand of any beach I've ever been on.  There are places on it where I can't detect with my 800/15.  It has defeated other detectors also.

Yes is has...I have seen people walk off the beach talking to themselves......

1 hour ago, Steve Herschbach said:

Interesting results, thanks. I have had to use Normal instead of Fine in heavy black sand, but have not had to deal with salt at the same time. Interesting that Salt is not working better for you than Normal under those conditions. Part of the issue here is the Garrett DD is hotter than a normal DD coil so does not give the results one might expect when comparing to other DD coils. I would actually like a standard DD coil for the machine for just that reason, but it also opens the possibility of the smaller mono possibly working better than you might expect. Or not, but worth a try. I love trying to figure out new detectors! Every data point helps, so thanks for sharing. 

Reminder to everyone that the default sensitivity setting of 4 would be the top end setting on many detectors, so settings of 2-3 on the Axiom are to be expected in tough situations, and are still quite powerful.

Yea Steve, I forget that the Garrett DD is more sensitive/hotter than the traditional DD's we see on the Minelab GP/GPX series detectors. Again, a 12 x 10, 11 x 11, or 8 x 12 DD would do the trick here where I am at. To be continued.....

[Bill (S. CA)]

I have an Axiom that I have used several times on our beaches here in S.CA with the 13" X 11" DD coil.  These beaches were heavy with black sand.  Like you, I ran the threshold at -8 because the ground noise, despite repeated ground balancing, was too high for me.  Running the detector silent allowed me to crank up the sensitivity beyond 4 to 6/7 most of the time and even 8.  Perhaps if I had a better PI ear I could have had an audible threshold but I tested several deep targets and they all rang out solid regardless of the threshold setting. 

The Axiom is a powerful beach detector and given the right environment I would use it. However, while I was out there the Deus II guys were running circles around me because they were discriminating and I wasn't.  I did compare signals and could not find a target that the Deus II could not find, and  vice versa.  A couple of guys were struggling a bit with their Equinoxes because of the black sand but I didn't get a chance to compare signals with them.    For me, the Axiom I think will be a suitable "2nd pass after using a multi-frequency detector" or a tough environment detector.  Please don't flame me if you are a "PI's always gets better depth" hunter.  I have no desire to reopen that Pandora's box again.  This is just my two cents based upon what I observed in real world hunting situations.

I have yet to try the Axiom on the dry for microgold and will post those results after a few hunts.  I have high hope for it given it's terrific sensitivity to small gold.

Bill

 

[Pyriteboy]

On 1/17/2023 at 3:36 PM, Bill (S. CA) said:

  Running the detector silent allowed me to crank up the sensitivity beyond 4 to 6/7 most of the time and even 8.  Perhaps if I had a better PI ear I could have had an audible threshold but I tested several deep targets and they all rang out solid regardless of the threshold setting. 

Hi Bill, curious if you tested the same targets at sensitivity 4 and then at 7-8. If so, was the target response louder at the higher sensitivity?

 

On 1/17/2023 at 3:36 PM, Bill (S. CA) said:

I have yet to try the Axiom on the dry for microgold and will post those results after a few hunts.  I have high hope for it given it's terrific sensitivity to small gold.

I am guessing this detector will do well in that role....

-Jerry

[Bill (S. CA)]

I did and no it was not louder.