pi machines

[findit]

anyone use one on land other than the beach?

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Agony and Death on a Gold Rush Steamer: The Disastrous Sinking of the Side-Wheeler Yankee Blade - Grab it through Amazon!

[U.K. Brian]

I don't think I would agree that the discrimination is weak.

A detector designer has a choice with deep/weak signals.
He can take the XLT route and indicate these iffy signals as iron, so every one says isn't Whites great producing a machine so you don't have to dig any iron. But your passing over lots of good items as well.

or

You have machines where they have taken the not as popular (because its hard work) option of indicating the weak targets as good which means digging far more ferrous but picking up good finds at the same time but your then accused of producing an iron magnet.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

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

[Tom_in_CA]

Brian, on the one hand, you seem to agree to the "trade-off", by acknowledging that Fisher chooses to lump those iffy TIDs into the "good" category "just to be safe", as opposed to Whites (XLT for instance), that chooses to put those iffy TIDs into the reject category. You acknowledge that this will, of course, mean that the Fisher user would therefore be fooled more often (albeit "safe").

Yet your opening line is: "I don't think I would agree that the discrimination is weak." Seems to me, that if a person can't really discern deep nails vs deep coins (aside from some risky tedious sound/pinpoint tricks), then YES, that to me, would be defined as "weak discrimination". I don't know how else to define it.

BTW, using the XLT as an example (or using an Explorer, and simply lowering you iron mask way low into the potential false signal category, etc...) you can open up more #s down into the iron range, and open up +95, etc... and accomplish about the same thing. Ie.: some nails, depending on the way their bent, how deep they are, moisture of the soil, size of rusty clump, etc... you can indeed get a signal off other discriminators, from rusty iron. Just depends on your setting. And XLT, Exp users, etc.... do indeed chase a lot of those cross-over signals, when they are in a relic mindset, chasing super deepies, etc... But on the other hand, with the CZs, where those fringe iffies are just automatically put into those categories, seems you have much less user info. Ie.: either beep, or no beep, with no inbetween audio or cursor movements to make judgements from.

 

[bakergeol]

I have a question... I have a video by Fisher ...called..Advanced Treasure hunting Techniques...with Thomas Dankowski he shows in a test garden the Fisher CZ-3D picking up loud and clear a dime at 11 inches...so that is as good as a PI detector and cheaper and a lot better discrimination right or wrong.

Gadabout Jim

We are fortunate to have Tom and Brian respond here as they both have an incredible amount of experience with different detectors. Together they have probably found more individual gold coins than the entire membership of TN.

From the above discussions you are starting to see where PI addicts such as myself are going. It is more than just depth or that a PI will work much
better in mineralized soils.

All VLFs read ground mineralization so all good targets start to read toward the iron end the deeper you go. As Tom and Brian have pointed out at extreme coin depths for VLFs there is an "iffy" zone where coins may read as iron. Now a PI is different than a VLF. It is not effected by ground mineralization to the same degree as a VLF. If you can detect a coin at 10" with a TDI using the high conductor coin setting you can not confuse it with iron whereas it may be in the "iffy" zone of a VLF. No one wants to dig a deep hole and produce damage if one does not have to.

You are correct in that VLFs today rule as coin shooting detectors. They are cheaper ,have TID and easily adjustable discrimination. Discriminating PIs are still in the frontier stage of development. However, when someone introduces a deep, discriminating PI with accurate TID to depth VLFs will lose their #1 position. TID numbers on a true discriminating PI will probably be more accurate for deep coins than a typical VLF as it is less effected by mineralization.


George

 

[TerryC]

Yes, I have. I own a Fischer Impulse 8 and a Garrett Sea Hunter. I have not yet lit the Garrett up but have used the Fischer 100's of hours on land and water. It is a dynamite detector in salt and fresh water, even at depth. I also use it for land but because it has no disc, you really don't want it for land use. It will detect a dime at about 8" on land.