i need to know the depth capability of this metal detector in some one knows

lookin4mula

Tenderfoot
Joined
Apr 8, 2014
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Golden Thread
0
Primary Interest:
All Treasure Hunting
help for beginner about metal detector

I'm new to this and am looking to start metal detecting soon but i heard most beginners metal detectors can only scan up to 6 inches deep

is that true or does this specific model can go deeper than that? (not including wet ground) Model: Barska BE11638 Winbest Pro Edition Metal Detector

id really appreciate it if someone could tell me how deep this model can go if you know because i need to know if it will find anything at least a foot in the ground (which is how deep i think most people would bury something in a rush)

and if anyone is looking to metal detect in Richmond hill area, im new to this and could use some help

also what are your thoughts on metal detecting in Ethiopia? I've been researching and its a very historical land
 

Last edited:
It depends on what you are trying to find buried a foot in the ground. If you're looking for a tank, then yeah, it will probably work. Can you be a little more specific on your intended use?
 

i understand that it will find anything within 6inches but i wanted to know for example if there was gold or silver buried by anyone they wouldn't bury it as little as 6 inches deep it would be like 1 foot minimum

so would i be able to find gold or silver (coins or jewellery) at 1 foot in the ground in summer weather for like forest areas? of not the how about in wet muddy conditions?(after it rains)
 

I let a good target signal go last week, it was suppose to be 6 inches deep, the ground had rocks and a hard clay that was like a cement, I only got 3 inches deep and gave up. If I was to dig 12 inches on anything it better be a good result.
 

Wouldn't most detectors find large targets at a foot? Relic diggers do that all the time.

I found a gold religious metal at 10+ in. In sand next to a cement wall with rebar in it.

They have 2 box detectors that go deeper.
 

i understand that it will find anything within 6inches but i wanted to know for example if there was gold or silver buried by anyone they wouldn't bury it as little as 6 inches deep it would be like 1 foot minimum

so would i be able to find gold or silver (coins or jewellery) at 1 foot in the ground in summer weather for like forest areas? of not the how about in wet muddy conditions?(after it rains)

depends on the size of the "gold and silver". Are we talking single coin size? tobacco tin sized? jar sized ? toaster sized? etc....
 

Ethiopia? Many places have history, Ethiopia would not be hign on my list…...
 

I've dug relics at 3-4 feet, coins at from 1"- 18". There are many variables but a decent machine can hit coin sized targets at 8+ inches depending on coil size and ground conditions.
 

I'm going to ruin everyone's day.

Lets assume there is no mineralization in the soil under our detector coil. And, lets further assume we can detect changes in frequency of a few tenths of a Hz (cycles per second for us old geezers). With that in mind, an old fashion BFO detector can detect metallic object (of a specific size) deeper than any other methodology, including a PI machine! Anyone may challenge my hypothesis, but you'd best have your guns loaded if you do.
 

i understand that it will find anything within 6inches but i wanted to know for example if there was gold or silver buried by anyone they wouldn't bury it as little as 6 inches deep it would be like 1 foot minimum

so would i be able to find gold or silver (coins or jewellery) at 1 foot in the ground in summer weather for like forest areas? of not the how about in wet muddy conditions?(after it rains)

Every detector will signal stuff it reads. If you Dig Every Signal you will be a busy camper. Whatever the depth keep scanning the hole and it will take you deeper than you want to dig. Discard the trash so you or others will not have to dig it again. Fill your holes and try another area.

Forested areas, under brush, tall grass and weeds can be a PITA. You will need to clear the area or use a slim coil to snake between the grass. Best time for me is fall when the stuff is dry. Use a weed whip and rake to clear an area then detect. Digging can be difficult. You need the right tools for your area.

Large coils can sweep fields easier but you still must dig the signal to really know. My rule of thumb is the depth of my digging tool. Six to eight inches is all I care to excavate. Clay, rocks, junk..

Colorado has mineralized soil and magnetic rocks. Black sand. Plus Caliche in most S/W States. Impossibly difficult for most hand tools.

What I'm getting at is adequate detector discrimination. Being able to adjust your detector to "ignore" certain objects. And select depths you are willing to dig. Program your sounds till you get a feel of what is there. Is your gold coin on edge, flat or is it a lead fishing sinker. BOTH sound the same to me. The only way to know is dig.

Successful treasure hunters (not myself) use all-metal settings, and then zero in based on their experience. They usually rely on the tone generated. Cover a lot of ground and find detecting pal good stuff. Books can give some good tips and do's and don'ts but a experienced pal is worth buying lunch for. I collect historical artifacts. Because that's all I find. Some guys find rings all the time, or silver coins or jewelry and IMHO they have gone to school on previous finds. Again just experience.

It is vital to retune your detector every time you start a different area. Your last saved settings may have worked on damp earth but not where you are now.
Good hunting.................
BB
 

I'm going to ruin everyone's day.

Lets assume there is no mineralization in the soil under our detector coil. And, lets further assume we can detect changes in frequency of a few tenths of a Hz (cycles per second for us old geezers). With that in mind, an old fashion BFO detector can detect metallic object (of a specific size) deeper than any other methodology, including a PI machine! Anyone may challenge my hypothesis, but you'd best have your guns loaded if you do.

That's interesting. When my new Tesoro PI machine arrives, I'm going to test it head-to-head against my old Bounty Hunter BFO machine.
 

Well Boatlode, make sure the soil isn't mineralized! In any case, there is a very technical reason I said what I did.
 

Well Boatlode, make sure the soil isn't mineralized! In any case, there is a very technical reason I said what I did.

Understood. I'll do a dry sand test with the same object.
 

thanks very helpful, only problem is i dont know to many ppl my age who would be interested in metal detecting
im gonna check my old elementary school and the forest surrounding there, i hope no one has been there before cuz ive never seen a single person metal detecting in my area

again really helpful gona try going at night in the park and soccer/baseball feilds
 

Well Boatlode, make sure the soil isn't mineralized! In any case, there is a very technical reason I said what I did.

Ok, I did the dry sand comparison today, 1973 Bounty Hunter I vs. 2014 Tesoro Sand Shark. Test target was a silver dime 6" deep. Sand Shark signal was much stronger than the Bounty Hunter I.
 

Ok, I did the dry sand comparison today, 1973 Bounty Hunter I vs. 2014 Tesoro Sand Shark. Test target was a silver dime 6" deep. Sand Shark signal was much stronger than the Bounty Hunter I.
I know it will pick up a 1/4" long piece of rusty field fence at 18" deep. Been there and did it!
 

I'm going to ruin everyone's day.

Lets assume there is no mineralization in the soil under our detector coil. And, lets further assume we can detect changes in frequency of a few tenths of a Hz (cycles per second for us old geezers). With that in mind, an old fashion BFO detector can detect metallic object (of a specific size) deeper than any other methodology, including a PI machine! Anyone may challenge my hypothesis, but you'd best have your guns loaded if you do.

Alan, I think I know what you're referring to. Those old BFO machines might have been lousy for hunting invididual coins (hence quickly replaced when TR's and VLFs stormed the market). But you're right: They made PERFECT cache hunters. Because while they might have been wimpy on individual coins, nails, etc... yet they read JUST FINE on jar and toaster sized items. And when you think of it: If a person's goal were cache hunting, then by logical definition, they DON'T want to be bothered with nuisance little things. Like coins, tabs, foil, nails, etc.... So in essence, "more sensitivity" (at least to small things) is NOT what you want in a cache hunting goal. That's why 2-box machines are commonly cited as the tool for that job. NOT necessarily because they can pick up a toaster any deeper than a conventional machine necessarily, but because they're not bothered with anything smaller than tennis ball or soda can sized object.

So those old early all-metal BFO machines, some of which could scarcely reach an inch on coins, probably found more caches than all the modern machines combined. Because let's face it: what do we all do when we hear that over-load signal? We pass it up saying to ourselves: "durned that hubcap anyhow". But in the old days, those guys using the first primitive machines, those were amongst the ONLY signals they were going to hear.

The part where I would differ from you, is to take the above truth, and say that therefore those BFO machines got caches deeper than various current coin/relic machines can. I'm not so sure I'd go as far as to say that. I'm betting today's machines can go deeper, of course. But the difference is, you'd go plum crazy trying to use a super sensitive coin/relic machine (or some super hyped up pulse machine, etc...) for cache hunting, because you'd be perpetually bedevilled hearing every last tab, nail, foil-wad, zinc penny, etc...
 

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom