Super DEEP or Just lucky

[Michigan Badger]

I've been at this hobby now for 40+ years and hope to do it at least another 10.

Lately I've been thinking about depth and my old records from the 60's. Back then I was using a TR machine (Whites CoinMaster IV).

One day I dug a V nickel (still have it) at 4 1/2 inches. Another day I dug a 1936 silver quarter at 5+ inches. In 1983 using a Wilson Newman GBDII I dug 5 Indian pennies in one small area that were 7-9 inches deep. The area was fill dirt around a park restroom. I was using all-metal mode when I made the finds.

My average Indian head penny during the 1980's was just under 4 inches deep and gave a good signal while using my Fisher 1260-X.

Anyway, my point is, these depths are almost exactly the depths I'm seeing today. I'm digging the same types of coins at the same depths and getting about the same loudness of signal.

All of this makes me wonder just how far we have come since the 1960's.

I've read stories on this forum about digging coins at almost unbelievable depths. I have done this myself on occasion. I recall back in 1982 I dug a small silver watch fob that was so deep I was up to my elbow into the hole before I finally brought it up. I was using a Tecknetics (sp) 8500 in all-metal mode as I recall.

Are today's detectors really deeper or is it that sometimes soil conditions are just right and we dig that unusual mega deep find?

I know this thread probably won't last long but I'm just curious what some of you really think about all the hype today over depth.

Badger

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

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

[Ocean7]

well it's clearly not hype but simple fact. When you're digging LC @ 12" or more, dimes and half reales at 8"-9" and getting clear or loud signals on these objects - you can only come to one conclusion, and that is your detector has gotten much better. IMO

 

[Merf]

I think I read someplace [not sure] That a Metal detector was limited on the amount of signal it could put out. [Government regulations]
If this is true then sending a signal through the earth at a limited power output would agree with your observation. Kind of like shooting a bullet into a tree. If the weight of the bullet and muzel velocity are the same then [depending on the hardness of the tree] the depth of penetration should be about the same.
Just my humble opinion. Best luck., Merf

 

[erikk]

I started in the 60's with a D-Tex BFO and then went to a Whites TR 66. At that time I was hard pressed to dig anything over 4-6 inches. I can remember that those mercs at 5 inches were just a whisper. Today I am using an EX2 and a Fisher F-75 and am digging coins @ 12+ so IMHO detectors have definitely gotten better

 

[bakergeol]

Well what we have learned from the many postings here is that anything goes. Old coins are found shallow to very deep. Not only different coin depths at different locations but DIFFERENT coin depths at the same location.

We really don't what is down there deep as we can not detect it. It is a natural tendency to think that all coins are shallow well within the range of our detectors. I remember a post by Charles in which he was describing his experiences with the Explorer and the WOT coil. He decided to detect an old park which had been hit hard for decades by experienced detectorists. The old timers laughed at him for thinking that something could be deeper. Well the laugher stopped when he started posting seated dimes, half dimes, colonials, and 1700's large cents.

The moral of the above story is you just don't know until you try to go deeper. Perhaps the next generation of discriminating PI detectors will allow us to go where no one has gone before.

George

 

[Mirage]

Are you sure you are remembering correctly? Do you have empirical data to substantiate your claim?

I wish I had been detecting in the 60's,70's so I could comment. On second thought, maybe not because I would be old.

 

[diggerfororo]

Hi Guys: I really love this subject. There is an infinite number of reasons that we can find deeper coins at certain times. Believe it or not ,NOT all machines are equal By this I mean that some machines of the same brand and model are better than others. A few of the production models will get the exact or close to exact values of components. When this happens then All of the design spec's are met and you get an exceptional machine, capable of getting better depths and better classification of targets. The gentelman who mentioned power output is right, there is a limit on output. If you have matching components you will have max output, if you don't you won't and power is depth.Also in these reasons is LUCK, SKILL,and the right conditions. A good machine is like a good wife. If you get along well then I would suggest you keep her.

Les

 

[Tall-paul]

i remember only getting around 4-5 inches and when the better detectors came out i was straight back over old ground and finding all there was many finds and yes there is stuff even deeper especially round the old roman site and such,, then you would trench some of the top of and detect and find more deeper stuff,,,,,

 

[Michigan Badger]

I think I read someplace [not sure] That a Metal detector was limited on the amount of signal it could put out. [Government regulations]
If this is true then sending a signal through the earth at a limited power output would agree with your observation. Kind of like shooting a bullet into a tree. If the weight of the bullet and muzel velocity are the same then [depending on the hardness of the tree] the depth of penetration should be about the same.
Just my humble opinion. Best luck., Merf

You're right Merf! Many of us commented about the power output thing back a year or two ago. I started one of the threads myself.

I once was into the 1st Class FCC licensing thing and all that. Anyway, the Feds don't allow (or didn't allow) more than 100 milliwatts of transmit power in metal detectors and other types of unlicensed transmitter products.

Most hobby detectors ever made operated on 100 milliwatts of power or less.

The thing that has changed has been the receiver capabilities; NOT the thing that could drastically increase depth (output power).

Output power is extremely important. Ever buy a 100-miliwatt set of walkie-talkies and try to use them in the woods? You'd do well to be heard 300 feet apart. Buy a 5-watt set of walkies and you might just be able to hear each other a half mile apart (more like 1/4 mile).

There's only so much one can do with 100 milliwatts. One can increase the antenna (coil diameter) or one can add amplification, but this is nothing more than a hearing aid (it doesn't make a signal where none exits).

The improvements we’ve seen over the years are:

1) advanced coil designs
2) signal amplification & filters
3) programmability
4) frequencies
5) various notch adjustments and the like…

I don't deny that these things have given us a little more depth by way of helping us all to better notice an otherwise missed weak signal.

But, the thing that makes for the biggest depth improvement (power output) has remained the same.

As I see it today the competition amongst metal detector manufactures is one of who can squeeze the most out of that puny 100 milliwatts. Or at least make it appear as if their brand is squeezing more out than their competitors machines.

I think today’s metal detector industry is more psychological in nature that actual science. Each company is trying to make us believe that that new paint does make their detectors go deeper. And, because some believe them, to them their machines are deeper. We all tend to believe what we want to believe.

One man’s dowsing rod is another man’s detector.

Anyway, that’s my personal point-of-view.

Badger

 

[Tall-paul]

>>>>>>>>>I don't deny that these things have given us a little more depth by way of helping us all to better notice an otherwise missed weak signal.

But, the thing that makes for the biggest depth improvement (power output) has remained the same.

As I see it today the competition amongst metal detector manufactures is one of who can squeeze the most out of that puny 100 milliwatts. Or at least make it appear as if their brand is squeezing more out than their competitors machines.

I think today’s metal detector industry is more psychological in nature that actual science. Each company is trying to make us believe that that new paint does make their detectors go deeper. And, because some believe them, to them their machines are deeper. We all tend to believe what we want to believe.

One man’s dowsing rod is another man’s detector.

Anyway, that’s my personal point-of-view.

Badger<<<<<<<<<<<


I totaly agree with this statement,,
its like some time ago i was thinking about how some statements can be taken wrong or read in the wrong contect,, like all forums this happens even when you mean no harm to anyone,,, i respect all who metal detect and in other hobbies,, after all we all have our own opinions and reasons for so,, which again should be respected in a certain light..

we have all given ourselves headaches looking over the tech part of md-ing and an overhaull conclusion to the overhaul fact is that adding a fresh look to a certain detector and the extra width screen and the different styled coil and the odd extra button dosent make it better in depth,..

the tesoro cibola i use at the minute, the write up and field test is that its like a hunting hound ready to be unleashed tugging at the leash,,, lmao ,, what a load of crock,, sales talk again,, my cibola goes where i want to put it, and discrimes what i want it to discrim within reason,,,

you can take a explorer ll and stick ip up against a xt50 70 or mxt or prism v and say to the explorer go your deepest on that coin and then same again with the others and you'll pick it same depth all the time,, been there tried it done it,,,

an old friend of mine once said "you cant teach pork"

H/H Tallpaul.

 

[Casull]

Interesting discussion. Anyone aware of a fairly simple way for the end consumer to boost that 100 milliwatt signal? Would be very interesting to try, although that might play havoc with the "balance" of the components.

 

[Michigan Badger]

Interesting discussion. Anyone aware of a fairly simple way for the end consumer to boost that 100 milliwatt signal? Would be very interesting to try, although that might play havoc with the "balance" of the components.

It can be done but would require a heavier coil if the power were increased any significant amount.

The big problem is finding someone to do it. Basically what you'd have is an illegal transmitter that could get you shot (due to interference) if you took it to a coin dig competition!

A VLF detector with 5 watts power and with all the added receive filters, etc., would be a mean machine. This could be done with no problem because they already make hand held walkie talkies that run a long time on AA's and have a total power of 5 watts. I have heard throught the "grape vine" that some have these "homebrew detectors" in Europe for hunting ancient sites but I haven't gotten definite proof to that affect.

Even an old BFO or PI unit with a power boaster final may do amazing things out in more trash-free areas.

If you ever find someone to do it, let me know!

Badger

 

[bakergeol]

Here is an interesting link on the 100milliwatt issue from the Geotech forum/

http://thunting.com/geotech/forums/showthread.php?t=11544&highlight=power+limitation

It appears that the 100 milliwatt issue is a myth.


Quote, "When a metal detector is turned on, the power (measured in milliwatts) is a fixed/constant output, The FCC regulates maximum output/transmit power to 100 milliwatts."

Carl's response
"Sorry, but this is flat out wrong. It's an old myth that has circulated for years amongst metal detectorists, to explain why detectors can't be made to go deeper. I'm surprised Fisher would print that, they should know better."


- Carl



George

 

[Merf]

I think I read someplace [not sure] That a Metal detector was limited on the amount of signal it could put out. [Government regulations]
If this is true then sending a signal through the earth at a limited power output would agree with your observation. Kind of like shooting a bullet into a tree. If the weight of the bullet and muzel velocity are the same then [depending on the hardness of the tree] the depth of penetration should be about the same.
Just my humble opinion. Best luck., Merf

You're right Merf! Many of us commented about the power output thing back a year or two ago. I started one of the threads myself.

I once was into the 1st Class FCC licensing thing and all that. Anyway, the Feds don't allow (or didn't allow) more than 100 milliwatts of transmit power in metal detectors and other types of unlicensed transmitter products.

Most hobby detectors ever made operated on 100 milliwatts of power or less.

The thing that has changed has been the receiver capabilities; NOT the thing that could drastically increase depth (output power).

Output power is extremely important. Ever buy a 100-miliwatt set of walkie-talkies and try to use them in the woods? You'd do well to be heard 300 feet apart. Buy a 5-watt set of walkies and you might just be able to hear each other a half mile apart (more like 1/4 mile).

There's only so much one can do with 100 milliwatts. One can increase the antenna (coil diameter) or one can add amplification, but this is nothing more than a hearing aid (it doesn't make a signal where none exits).

The improvements we’ve seen over the years are:

1) advanced coil designs
2) signal amplification & filters
3) programmability
4) frequencies
5) various notch adjustments and the like…

I don't deny that these things have given us a little more depth by way of helping us all to better notice an otherwise missed weak signal.

But, the thing that makes for the biggest depth improvement (power output) has remained the same.

As I see it today the competition amongst metal detector manufactures is one of who can squeeze the most out of that puny 100 milliwatts. Or at least make it appear as if their brand is squeezing more out than their competitors machines.

I think today’s metal detector industry is more psychological in nature that actual science. Each company is trying to make us believe that that new paint does make their detectors go deeper. And, because some believe them, to them their machines are deeper. We all tend to believe what we want to believe.

One man’s dowsing rod is another man’s detector.

Anyway, that’s my personal point-of-view.

Badger

A good post Badger, I fully agree.

 

[Michigan Badger]

Here is an interesting link on the 100milliwatt issue from the Geotech forum/

http://thunting.com/geotech/forums/showthread.php?t=11544&highlight=power+limitation

It appears that the 100 milliwatt issue is a myth.


Quote, "When a metal detector is turned on, the power (measured in milliwatts) is a fixed/constant output, The FCC regulates maximum output/transmit power to 100 milliwatts."

Carl's response
"Sorry, but this is flat out wrong. It's an old myth that has circulated for years amongst metal detectorists, to explain why detectors can't be made to go deeper. I'm surprised Fisher would print that, they should know better."


- Carl



George

I hold with Fisher on this one. It may be true that the government doesn't enforce in a certain area, but to say that metal detector companies can just do as they please with transmitters is more than I can believe.

There was this big fuss on the Nautilus forum back a few months ago about the 44 volt claim. Someone brought it up that 44 volts was impossible with the battery power. Those who understand these things entered the forum and agreed! It was impossible. Funny nobody thought of that before.

See, the 44 setting on the Nautilus is really a number setting...that's all.

Anyway, I'd sure like to see more power to the coil. No company that I know of advertises more watts out the coil. Know of any?

Badger

 

[muleskinner]

Variable power to the transmit end is an interesting idea. But if you want your detector to be all it can be, I think there should be a way to match the coil to the receiver. I know most people participating on this thread know what I mean. Perhaps a little trim pot at the front of the receiver section would make up for differences in manufacturing of coils.
I think it strange that we can change from a 6inch diam. coil to a 15 inch coil with nothing done to finetune what must be tuned circuits. AS I understand tuned circuits, coils must be the biggest variable from one detector to the next of the same model.
Am I right here you radio guys out there? I mean especially if your changing coils on your machines. You could actually make your machine more "efficient" instead of increasing power, but the outcome would feel like an increase of power.

 

[Jim DE]

Ah look at it this way.....more transmit power + greater receiving sensitivity = more depth and deeper hole to dig Unless it is in the sand 12" is as deep as I want to dig for a pull tab

 

[Michigan Badger]

Ah look at it this way.....more transmit power + greater receiving sensitivity = more depth and deeper hole to dig Unless it is in the sand 12" is as deep as I want to dig for a pull tab

Yep, that may just be the best answer.

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

Peeps: From one that has run the gauntlet of detecting, from the 50's to the present, I can flatly state that the biggest improvement in detectable depth is simply the improved ground matrix cancelling ability.

All of the others are simply frosting on the cake.

Don Jose de La Mancha

 

[doozis]

I remember my old Bounty Hunter in 1982 could get excellent
depth in all metal mode even compared to many of todays top
of the line detectors , but when you got tired of digging rusty nails
at 12 inches and switched to disc mode , you'd be darn lucky to
find anything below 2 or 3 inches in ideal conditions. Modern detectors
get deep even in disc mode , are MUCH lighter and the feedback info
to the user is MUCH better. So in my opinion thats where the greatest
improvements have been. Today , a total noob can go out in the yard with his new detector and come back in a couple hours with decent finds , not so in the old days.

Doozis