Another Reason To Trust Those Nickels

[bigscoop]

Weight of Common/Modern US Coins (grams)
Quarter – 5.6
Nickel – 5.0
Penny – 2.5
Dime – 2.2

Diameter of Common/Modern US Coins (mm)
Quarter – 24.26mm
Nickel – 21.21mm
Penny – 19.5mm
Dime – 17.91mm

Weight Per-Surface Area of Common Modern US Coins (grams)
Quarter – .2308326 per mm
Nickel – .2357378 per mm
Penny – .1282051 per mm
Dime - .1228364 per mm

Relative Sink Rate of Common/Modern US Coins by Surface Area (Densest First)
Nickel
Quarter
Penny
Dime

The old timers knew what they were talking about, the ability to detect nickels wasn’t simply a matter of its conductive similarity to gold. As can be viewed in the chart above, the ability to find nickels at depths wasn't just a means of insuring that gold would be detected, but this ability to detect nickels also provided a type of measuring stick when in the field.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

How to Research for Treasure Hunting and Metal Detecting From Lead Generation to Vetting - Grab it through Amazon!

[seeker41]

hmmmm, where did you get the sink rate data?

 

[bigscoop]

hmmmm, where did you get the sink rate data?

You can search the web....I found several sources offering the specs of US coins. From there it's just a bit of math; weight divided by surface area or diameter. In the end, the nickel is the densest of the four coins per-surface area so with everything else being relative it would theoretically sink faster & deeper then the others. I thought it was an interesting comparison in regards to the old quarter theory of thought, that they are heavier, which they are, but not when compared by surface area.

 

[seeker41]

ok, makes sense. good post!!!! and gold rings are much denser with far less surface area to restrict sink rates.

 

[bigscoop]

This is what prompted my curiosity - coins from the last couple of hunts with the 12 x 15 SEF. First, notice how clean most of them are, and second...where's the nickels? Is this telling me there's just fewer nickels out there or is it suggesting something else? Still trying to wrap my head around it as this represents a pretty common coin balance/ratio.



PS: Most of these coins were fairly deep and yet they were mostly clean, so it's obvious that they are all sinking pretty quickly.

 

[Sir Gala Clad]

This is what prompted my curiosity - coins from the last couple of hunts with the 12 x 15 SEF. First, notice how clean most of them are, and second...where's the nickels? Is this telling me there's just fewer nickels out there or is it suggesting something else? Still trying to wrap my head around it as this represents a pretty common coin balance/ratio.

View attachment 828307

.

PS: Most of these coins were fairly deep and yet they were mostly clean, so it's obvious that they are all sinking pretty quickly

I would think that the conductivity has to be added to this chart as this determines to phase shift of the returned target.
IIRC: the highest to lowest conductivities are : Silver, Pure Copper, Clad copper coins, zinc cladded by copper, nickel, gold

Also, I have found highly corroded clad zinc pennies: shallow, medium, deep, and very deep
In fact, I have found coin lines on the beach where the copper clad zinc pennies were the deepest on the beach (faint signals).

 

[lookindown]

You will find less nickels even if your hunting where coins don't sink at all...there are less nickels dropped...but that doesn't mean they don't sink faster than the other coins...at a place where coins are sinking fast, nickels should be a scarce target.

 

[ron lord]

Weight of Common/Modern US Coins (grams)
Quarter – 5.6
Nickel – 5.0
Penny – 2.5
Dime – 2.2

Diameter of Common/Modern US Coins (mm)
Quarter – 24.26mm
Nickel – 21.21mm
Penny – 19.5mm
Dime – 17.91mm

Weight Per-Surface Area of Common Modern US Coins (grams)
Quarter – .2308326 per mm
Nickel – .2357378 per mm
Penny – .1282051 per mm
Dime - .1228364 per mm

Relative Sink Rate of Common/Modern US Coins by Surface Area (Densest First)
Nickel
Quarter
Penny
Dime

The old timers knew what they were talking about, the ability to detect nickels wasn’t simply a matter of its conductive similarity to gold. As can be viewed in the chart above, the ability to find nickels at depths wasn't just a means of insuring that gold would be detected, but this ability to detect nickels also provided a type of measuring stick when in the field.

This is all do in a Controlled place not in the wild like the beach. For me in the water from deepest to shallowest is Q,D,N P !! most Gold rings are between Q and N's !!

 

[lookindown]

This is all do in a Controlled place not in the wild like the beach. For me in the water from deepest to shallowest is Q,D,N P !! most Gold rings are between Q and N's !!

I got to thinking about it and the quarters and dimes I dig in the water are usually deeper than the nickels and pennies.

 

[bigscoop]

Sure there are less nickels....I agree. But keep in mind that these are relative densities per-surface areas, and the nickel is the densest so in the same general environment nickels would theoretically sink quicker and deeper.....but not only that, there's also another factor, i.e., which would be the most difficult to detect at depths in a saltwater environment? Again....it would be the nickel. Yes? Point is, as I believe the old masters understood things, is that it doesn't really matter how deep we can read dimes, quarters, & pennies....what's important is how deep we can read those nickels. Maybe this is why most of the nickels we find are shallower then say, quarters and dimes? Could be the vast majority of those nickels are deeper?

Most of the coins I've recovered with the 12 x 15 have been fairly deep, but most of the nickels haven't been all that deep. So, are there just less deep nickels or have I been passing over the deeper nickels because they are much harder to read at those depths VS quarters, dimes, pennies?

 

[TheInspector]

I agree with Bigscoop in that you cannot get around the physics of density and surface area.
When trying to decide on equipment for salt water hunting I decided to go Sand Shark and dig it all. Ironically, I have found more gold rings than nickels in the limited amount of time I have had to detect. This was an 84 hour work week.

Best of luck to all.

 

[lookindown]

Sure there are less nickels....I agree. But keep in mind that these are relative densities per-surface areas, and the nickel is the densest so in the same general environment nickels would theoretically sink quicker and deeper.....but not only that, there's also another factor, i.e., which would be the most difficult to detect at depths in a saltwater environment? Again....it would be the nickel. Yes? Point is, as I believe the old masters understood things, is that it doesn't really matter how deep we can read dimes, quarters, & pennies....what's important is how deep we can read those nickels. Maybe this is why most of the nickels we find are shallower then say, quarters and dimes? Could be the vast majority of those nickels are deeper?

Most of the coins I've recovered with the 12 x 15 have been fairly deep, but most of the nickels haven't been all that deep. So, are there just less deep nickels or have I been passing over the deeper nickels because they are much harder to read at those depths VS quarters, dimes, pennies?

A nickel and dime airtest at almost the same depth...do you think the nickel is harder to pick up in the salt environment...or is that what your trying to figure out?

 

[bigscoop]

A nickel and dime airtest at almost the same depth...do you think the nickel is harder to pick up in the salt environment...or is that what your trying to figure out?

I think in the saltwater environment the nickel is going to be harder to isolate, much in the same way that deeper gold is harder to isolate. Just to satisfy my own curiosity I'm going to do a little testing at the beach the next time I go. (This is what happens when the hunting is very slow. )

 

[dewcon4414]

I dont find nearly as many DEEP nickels as quarters either but it could be because those nickels have already sank below the detectors ability to find them. Also.... ive read and agree the larger the coin the more difficult it is for the Xcal to see it deep for some reason. I get a lot more deep quarters in PP than i do in disc. Note also a nickel is about the size of a 8 1/2 ring..... a detector does take size into consideration. Sink or cover rate is difficult to figure .... again a lot determines IF it sinks or is covered up. None the less i think we all agree the conductivity, size, density, and weight of a nickel should make a look around them since like targets seem to settle together.

Dew

 

[Crispin]

There are less nickels in circulation being dropped. No matter what you spend you will only get one nickel back. Spend 4.01 you get three quarters, two dimes, and four cents. The most quarters you can get back at one time is three. The most dimes you can get back at one time is two, and the most pennies you can get back is 4. If you are going purely by odds... for every one nickel you find you should find: three quarters, two dimes, and four pennies.

Now this logic starts to fall apart as the spending goes higher. Spend 4.81 cents then you get one nickel, one dime, four cents, and no quarters. Thus if change is a random percentage then once you get below 25 cents no quarter, below a dime, no dime. Since 1/4 of the time you will not get a quarter in change then the penny has a 25% advantage over the quarter, a ten% advantage over the dime, and a 5% advantage over the original odds of the nickel. So let us take this into effect.

For every penny you find you will find: 3/4 of a quarter x .75% or 1/2 a quarter
For every penny you find you will find: 1/2 a dime x .9% or 14/20 of a dime
For every penny you find you will find: 1/4 a nickel x .95% or .2375 of a nickel

This is based on pure randomness.

Now if you add in the fact that people are more likely to be more concerned about three quarters in their pocket then three nickels or three pennies in their pocket then that further decreases the odds of finding dimes or quarters vs. the nickel or penny. However, I cannot make a scientific calculation of what this influence may be.

In conclusion: no matter what the weight, density, or surface area is you are going to find less nickels in general.

Hope this helps,
Crispin

Ps. The odds for the nickel is the only fully accurate one vs. the penny. To fully calculate the odds of the quarter this equation must be used ( 3/4 x .75% + 1/2 x .5% + 1/4 x .25%)/ 3 = .2708 a quarter for every penny. This is because across the four percentile specturms you can get a total of 16 pennies and 7 quarters.

PPS. For the dime: (2/4 x .8 + 1/4 x .9)/2 = .3125 a dime for every penny

PPPS: final odds: for every 100 pennies you dig you will find 27 quarters, 31 dimes, and 24 nickels.

 

[bigscoop]

There are less nickels in circulation being dropped. No matter what you spend you will only get one nickel back. Spend 4.01 you get three quarters, two dimes, and four cents. The most quarters you can get back at one time is three. The most dimes you can get back at one time is two, and the most pennies you can get back is 4. If you are going purely by odds... for every one nickel you find you should find: three quarters, two dimes, and four pennies.

Now this logic starts to fall apart as the spending goes higher. Spend 4.81 cents then you get one nickel, one dime, four cents, and no quarters. Thus if change is a random percentage then once you get below 25 cents no quarter, below a dime, no dime. Since 1/4 of the time you will not get a quarter in change then the penny has a 25% advantage over the quarter, a ten% advantage over the dime, and a 5% advantage over the original odds of the nickel. So let us take this into effect.

For every penny you find you will find: 3/4 of a quarter x .75% or 1/2 a quarter
For every penny you find you will find: 1/2 a dime x .9% or 14/20 of a dime
For every penny you find you will find: 1/4 a nickel x .95% or .2375 of a nickel

This is based on pure randomness.

Now if you add in the fact that people are more likely to be more concerned about three quarters in their pocket then three nickels or three pennies in their pocket then that further decreases the odds of finding dimes or quarters vs. the nickel or penny. However, I cannot make a scientific calculation of what this influence may be.

In conclusion: no matter what the weight, density, or surface area is you are going to find less nickels in general.

Hope this helps,
Crispin

Ps. The odds for the nickel is the only fully accurate one vs. the penny. To fully calculate the odds of the quarter this equation must be used ( 3/4 x .75% + 1/2 x .5% + 1/4 x .25%)/ 3 = .2708 a quarter for every penny. This is because across the four percentile specturms you can get a total of 16 pennies and 7 quarters.

PPS. For the dime: (2/4 x .8 + 1/4 x .9)/2 = .3125 a dime for every penny

PPPS: final odds: for every 100 pennies you dig you will find 27 quarters, 31 dimes, and 24 nickels.

And there's the quandary....1.125 quarters for every nickel found....but....I think for most of us this is probably closer to say, 2 to 3 quarters for every nickel found. perhaps even higher. especially along our saltwater beaches. The ratio of dimes, pennies VS quarters that you present seems to be reasonably accurate....but as far as my own hunting goes, I am much heavier in quarters VS nickels....I would say easily 2 or 3 to one and probably higher then that. Would be interesting to see some of the coin counts being kept by those folks who hunt saltwater beaches.

 

[Crispin]

And there's the quandary....1.125 quarters for every nickel found....but....I think for most of us this is probably closer to say, 2 to 3 quarters for every nickel found. perhaps even higher. especially along our saltwater beaches. The ratio of dimes, pennies VS quarters that you present seems to be reasonably accurate....but as far as my own hunting goes, I am much heavier in quarters VS nickels....I would say easily 2 or 3 to one and probably higher then that. Would be interesting to see some of the coin counts being kept by those folks who hunt saltwater beaches.

If you want to go back and look at some of my previous posts I always post the coins found in a neat row. I have a jar of nickels, a jar of pennies, and a jar of dimes. The jar of pennies is almost full. The other 3 are no where near it. If you can offer me a good incentive then I will go home tonight and count the number of quarters, nickels, and dimes I have found in the last year. Not going to count pennies. However...it has to be a good incentive.

Crispin

 

[seeker41]

I also agree that there are fewer nickels lost than other coins so that's a factor. bigscoops original point was that if you are getting nickels or high counts of nickels you should be in range/close to the gold, just like if your finding old sinkers.
bury a quarter, dime, nickel and penny in wet salt sand at the same depths and test your detectors ability to detect each! nickels should be harder to detect and should drop out of detectable range before the other coins.
im too lazy to do this test but will get around to it sometime.
chuck.

 

[lookindown]

I just cashed in 45 dollars in clad this morning. I wish I still had it so I could have done a count. I keep it in a plastic storage case with dividers and it looked like I had twice as many quarters and dimes than I did nickels. I thought it was because there was less nickels dropped...now you got me wondering.

 

[bigscoop]

Here's something else to ponder.....I find "very few" nickels in the saltwater.....most are from the wet sand, and most of those come from higher up on the beach where the sand is firmer. The other thing, I find very few deep nickels in the wet sand, most of them being within the first 8 - 10" or so. Dimes, pennies, quarters,...I'm hitting those at greater depths all the time, especially when I'm swinging the 12 x 15. It's something I've paid pretty close attention to over the last several hunts.