flakmagnet Posted March 6, 2018 Share Posted March 6, 2018 Has anyone compared Park 2 with either Field 1 or 2? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tnsharpshooter Posted March 6, 2018 Share Posted March 6, 2018 8 hours ago, flakmagnet said: Has anyone compared Park 2 with either Field 1 or 2? Yes I have. I find park 2 to be deeper generally. My soil medium mineralized. And I have watched a video of a gent testing Equinox in real mild soil, seems park 2 deeper there too- they tested only on higher conductive coins though. My test in my area show park 2 deeper on both a nickel and higher conductive coins. Field 2 I have used and have had some extraordinary performance using. Seems it loves polluted sites of iron. This is where I got my ah ha moment using. I tested park 1 and field 1 for depth, but for actual detecting I use park 2 or field 2 depending on the site and my targets of interest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flakmagnet Posted March 6, 2018 Author Share Posted March 6, 2018 Thank you! What I was thinking. Park 2 is what I want to try next. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bado1 Posted March 6, 2018 Share Posted March 6, 2018 I haven't done anything in Park 1 or Field 1 yet. I've used Park 2 and Field 2. My impression of Park 2 was that it is more geared to sifting through modern trash like aluminium and jumps on the higher conductors. Field 2, on the other hand, Is very "sparky" especially when the Iron Bias is set to zero and the speed set to 6 or 7. I used Field 2 on a site that is polluted with mostly old iron trash and hot rocks from rail road track ballast. It was very immune to the hot rocks. I found that if I raised the Iron Bias up to 2 that it was less "sparky" on this site. Bringing the IB up seemed to make the tones more mellow... or made it report the tiny iron bits less (?). Field 2 jumps all over the mid and lower conductors like lead and copper. Dean Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GB_Amateur Posted March 6, 2018 Share Posted March 6, 2018 Would someone please explain 'sparky' or post a link to an explanation or video? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackpine Posted March 6, 2018 Share Posted March 6, 2018 Sparky: slightly unstable but useable, due to reacting to every little bit of metal and minerals in the ground. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martygene Posted March 6, 2018 Share Posted March 6, 2018 1 hour ago, GB_Amateur said: Would someone please explain 'sparky' or post a link to an explanation or video? sparky is when the detector is very sensitive and can chirp very easily. some folks like it that way but it is so sensitive that you hear lots of chatter. others like a quieter machine and turn the sensitivity down a little. l hope this helps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mountain Mike Posted March 6, 2018 Share Posted March 6, 2018 I have taken quite a few notes on as many tests as I care to watch. It seems pretty universal that testers in are saying park2 is special. In separation, iron, and depth of both high and low conductors. I'm pretty sure this is the mode that I'm going to be the most interested in testing. The park 2 anomaly is not lost on me. Only actual field work will truly answer that question for me though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cal_Cobra Posted March 7, 2018 Share Posted March 7, 2018 On 3/6/2018 at 5:31 AM, bado1 said: I haven't done anything in Park 1 or Field 1 yet. I've used Park 2 and Field 2. My impression of Park 2 was that it is more geared to sifting through modern trash like aluminium and jumps on the higher conductors. Field 2, on the other hand, Is very "sparky" especially when the Iron Bias is set to zero and the speed set to 6 or 7. I used Field 2 on a site that is polluted with mostly old iron trash and hot rocks from rail road track ballast. It was very immune to the hot rocks. I found that if I raised the Iron Bias up to 2 that it was less "sparky" on this site. Bringing the IB up seemed to make the tones more mellow... or made it report the tiny iron bits less (?). Field 2 jumps all over the mid and lower conductors like lead and copper. Dean Dean what kind of soil are you dealing with where your located? Our NorCal soils are mild to wild with mineralization. My EQ800 is slated to land today, and my buddy are and I going to do a small road trip to hit a few sites over the weekend. Ones an older park, ones an old site I've never been to, so no idea as to iron or modern influence yet (suspect it has a fair bit of modern trash) mixed with oldies and likely some iron too. Thanks, Cal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bado1 Posted March 7, 2018 Share Posted March 7, 2018 3 hours ago, Cal_Cobra said: Dean what kind of soil are you dealing with where your located? Our NorCal soils are mild to wild with mineralization. My EQ800 is slated to land today, and my buddy are and I going to do a small road trip to hit a few sites over the weekend. Ones an older park, ones an old site I've never been to, so no idea as to iron or modern influence yet (suspect it has a fair bit of modern trash) mixed with oldies and likely some iron too. Thanks, Cal Cal, I'm right next door to you in AZ.. Just like you...mild to wild. The place I recently hunted in Field 2 is moderate. I don't remember the Equinox GB number though. I think that you will love the Nox in your iron polluted sites. Dean Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now