POLL: Can Some Detectors Match Air Test Distance In Ground?

[Michigan Badger]

Recently I read that a certain brand VLF detector gets the same (or nearly the same) depth in ground as it does in an air test.

I've read this same thing about other models.

This got me to wondering if this is common, rare, or impossible.

What do you say?

Do tell all.

Badger

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

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

[mirage hunter]

I have to agree also!!

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

DR.ÖTEK Metal Detector, Waterproof Gold Detector, Pinpoint & Terrain Modes, Professional Metal Detector - Grab it through Amazon!

[mirage hunter]

A I dont know option on the poll would be a good option also!!

 

[bakergeol]

Hi Badger

I have never believed that a unit could get greater depth in the ground than in air tests. I am excluding the concept of "halos" as I don't want to go in this direction.This idea was promoted mainly by Minelab for the Explorers in which they claimed that the machine worked better with a soil matrix than in air. However, looking at George's air tests the old XS did excellent in air tests. I felt it was more of a marketing method than true science. After all if you are showing a client the most expensive metal detector in the shop- a $1200 Explorer SE and the client expects it to be the deepest also. Sort of like " Yes other cheaper detectors air test just as well as the Explorer but the Explorer gets MUCH greater depth in the ground". I have nothing against Explorers as I regard them as currently the BEST coin machines.

Air tests are good for determining if your detector is working correctly compared to other models. I remember a while back a new buyer of my model complained about poor performance. It turns out he had bought it on E-bay and a previous owner had "tweaked" it and simply dumped it on E-Bay.

With regards to ground tests compared to air tests. Probably a PI which is not affected to the same extent to mineralization as VLFs will be the closest.

Best Regards
George

You're right. I know Georgi has long argued that air test is greater than ground depth. I won't print here what he says about the Minelab argument.

Anyway, I agree with you and plan to add a new Minelab to my detector arsenal soon. Now I have to make up my mind which model? What would you suggest?

But, as for the soil matrix argument, I don't buy into it either. I'm a believer in technology, not...well you know.

But it's very clear from so many testimonies on here and elsewhere that Minelab makes a very excellent detector (maybe the best) so there we have it. One can't hardly watch a YouTube treasure video without seeing an Explorer being used.

Oh, I'll still keep one of my Tesoros around just in case

I'll always be a Tesoro lover.

Badger

Badger

It is hard not to like Tesoros. Good price, light weight and easy to use. You don't have go through an incredible long learning curve and you can swing one all day. They do need to put a TID meter on some of their top brands such as the Tejon. It would make it more popular with the coinshooters and be one heck of a deep coin machine.

If you have several detectors already- I would until the end of the year before buying a high end machine. Dave's PD coin/relic version should be out by then and it is going to be light weight and priced competitively with ML's Explorers. We have to wait to see if it will blow the competition away with regards to accurate TID with depth and pure depth potential. Time will tell.

I also expect Minelab not to be sitting on it's laurels and will introduce new machines. Kind of hard for me to believe that the Ex SE was the result of all those years in product development for their new flagship high end machine.

Best Regards
George

 

[Michigan Badger]

Ya George that PD does look interesting but I heard it was going to be closer to like $3000.

It's been a while since I've used a Minelab so I hope they've come a long way. But then I only had the 2005 Excalibur 1000 and one can hardly judge the whole lot by the performance of one model. I didn't care for the depth. The machine itself was simple to learn but my Excal couldn't detect a silver quarter at a consistant 6 inches. I sent it into Minelab and it checked perfect. It wasn't a matter of learning the machine. I mean it wouldn't get any kind of sound on any coin at any decent depth.

I bought mine along with two other fellows who used to be active members here. Floater, Rod, and me all got ours at the same time from KellyCo. They gave us a free detector with the purchase. I took an Ace 150 that got better depth than the Excal. I later sold the 150 to a guy in Russia. I found a buyer for the Excal and sold it for about $300 less than I paid.

Next I went to Nautilus which at first I loved. The depth was unbelievable! I got the machine during dry hot weather and it was supreme. Than came cold wet weather and everything went down the tubes. I couldn't get that bugger to coil balance worth a flip. I sold it and bought another new IIB. It had the same problem. It loved dry hot weather but hated water and cold.

Then last year I returned to Tesoro...YES!!!!!! WOW!, it was so good to be back home. The sweet Tesoro smooth sound and awesome depth...YES!

But maybe all of us back in 05 got Minelab lemons, who knows? Maybe it was just a bad run? I do know that some very respectable people here swear by Minelab so it's time for another try. Probably this time around I'll love it. We'll see.

But I'm also keeping my eye on that new PD.

Badger

 

[erikk]

Ya George that PD does look interesting but I heard it was going to be closer to like $3000.

It's been a while since I've used a Minelab so I hope they've come a long way. But then I only had the 2005 Excalibur 1000 and one can hardly judge the whole lot by the performance of one model. I didn't care for the depth. The machine itself was simple to learn. My Excal couldn't detect a silver quarter at a consistant 6 inches. I sent it into Minelab and it checked perfect. It wasn't a matter of learning the machine. I mean it wouldn't get any kind of sound on any coin at any decent depth.

I bought mine along with two other fellows who used to be active members here. Floater, Rod, and me all got ours at the same time from KellyCo. They gave us a free detector with the purchase. I took an Ace 150 that got better depth than the Excal. I later sold the 150 to a guy in Russia. I found a buyer for the Excal and sold it for about $300 less than I paid.

There had to be something wrong with your Excal. I have the 800 and the 1000 and they both will read a dime at over a foot. I dug a gold ring yesterday that took me 4 scoops to get it out. Granted I am in the water and had some back fill but I am using a big scoop so I know it ws well over a foot and probably closer to 2.

Next I went to Nautilus which at first I loved. The depth was unbelievable! I got the machine during dry hot weather and it was supreme. Than came cold wet weather and everything went down the tubes. I couldn't get that bugger to coil balance worth a flip. I sold it and bought another new IIB. It had the same problem. It loved dry hot weather but hated water and cold.

Then last year I returned to Tesoro...YES!!!!!! WOW!, it was so good to be back home. The sweet Tesoro smooth sound and awesome depth...YES!

But maybe all of us back in 05 got Minelab lemons, who knows? Maybe it was just a bad run? I do know that some very respectable people here swear by Minelab so it's time for another try. Probably this time around I'll love it. We'll see.

But I'm also keeping my eye on that new PD.

Badger

 

[Michigan Badger]

There had to be something wrong with your Excal. I have the 800 and the 1000 and they both will read a dime at over a foot. I dug a gold ring yesterday that took me 4 scoops to get it out. Granted I am in the water and had some back fill but I am using a big scoop so I know it ws well over a foot and probably closer to 2.

I agree. Too many guys have told me what you've wrote. Maybe it was a coil issue or something. Darn, I wish I had known that back then.

Badger

 

[jeff of pa]

I will go here:

Because of the Halo Effect NO

a coin in the air cannot produce a Halo Effect.
& since nobody detects the air for Floating coins,
to me it''s a No Brainer.

and Yes certain detectors need to analize
the ground around the object in conjunction
with the object. again NO

And I do believe there are some detectors that get better depth
in the air, But I don't know what types those are.

 

[erikk]

There had to be something wrong with your Excal. I have the 800 and the 1000 and they both will read a dime at over a foot. I dug a gold ring yesterday that took me 4 scoops to get it out. Granted I am in the water and had some back fill but I am using a big scoop so I know it ws well over a foot and probably closer to 2.

I agree. Too many guys have told me what you've wrote. Maybe it was a coil issue or something. Darn, I wish I had known that back then.

Well, they still sell them and they are top notch IMHO

Badger

 

[shepcal]

My .02 worth-
I don't look for coins anymore, the antiquities law and the enviournentalists (sp?) you know? I look for gold nuggets, because I live in a prime area for these. I have 5 detectors for different purposes. My main is a ML4000. The others are ML or Whites. I believe I get better depth in the ground on all, than in the air; which is what matters right? To me, that's all that matters!
To those who are still arguing this point, are you the ones that agree with the advertising on TV "it tells you what it is and at what depth"? Personally, I say that's BS! A coin on edge will read different than one flat.
Looking for nuggets, one learns to dig all. Some can hack it, some can't- bottom line. There are those that badmouth the minelabs. The bad points from my humble opinion are, can't see porous (SP?) gold (which isn't in my area) and the price. I'd love to see an American company compete; but don't see it in the near future. Whites is supposedly coming out with a mid priced PI detector, which will be good, but don't see it comparing with the 4000! The 18000,CZ5,Explorer, MXT; I'll let anyone borrow; but not the 4000!

 

[Michigan Badger]

My .02 worth-
I don't look for coins anymore, the antiquities law and the enviournentalists (sp?) you know? I look for gold nuggets, because I live in a prime area for these. I have 5 detectors for different purposes. My main is a ML4000. The others are ML or Whites. I believe I get better depth in the ground on all, than in the air; which is what matters right? To me, that's all that matters!
To those who are still arguing this point, are you the ones that agree with the advertising on TV "it tells you what it is and at what depth"? Personally, I say that's BS! A coin on edge will read different than one flat.
Looking for nuggets, one learns to dig all. Some can hack it, some can't- bottom line. There are those that badmouth the minelabs. The bad points from my humble opinion are, can't see porous (SP?) gold (which isn't in my area) and the price. I'd love to see an American company compete; but don't see it in the near future. Whites is supposedly coming out with a mid priced PI detector, which will be good, but don't see it comparing with the 4000! The 18000,CZ5,Explorer, MXT; I'll let anyone borrow; but not the 4000!

Good post and thanks.

Is that really you in your avatar picture? Cool photo that looks like a treasure hunter.

Anyway, all major brands are good for their designed purposes. Sometimes we get a bad example but that can happen with any brand.

Best to you and hope you find lots of gold.

Badger

 

[luvsdux]

I tend to be dubious as to claims of depth equal to air test. Also, tend to question the idea of a "halo effect" on coins as most are #1. small and #2. typically of stable composition that does't leach heavily into the soil. That said, I very definitely believe in a Halo effect around iron objects and other metals that tend to leach into the soil as I have actually gotten signals from the surrounding soil after the object was removed. My two cents.
HH
Bill

 

[bakergeol]

I tend to be dubious as to claims of depth equal to air test. Also, tend to question the idea of a "halo effect" on coins as most are #1. small and #2. typically of stable composition that does't leach heavily into the soil. That said, I very definitely believe in a Halo effect around iron objects and other metals that tend to leach into the soil as I have actually gotten signals from the surrounding soil after the object was removed. My two cents.
HH
Bill

I completely agree with Bill on his points. I have dug silver coins which had been in the ground 150 years and they were in the same condition when dropped. If leaching does occur why aren't silver coins unrecognizable as metal would have to be dissolved from the coin to produce a halo?

Perhaps copper artifacts which have been buried for 2000 years could have a halo but I can't believe recent copper coins would have one. Again all copper coins would be completely unrecognizable as their surface would be dissolved by leaching.


Just bored here
George

 

[Shortstack]

I do believe there are some detectors that get better depth
in the air, But I don't know what types those are.

That would be the Jetco Mustang BFO, but I don't think they're being made anymore. Though, you might be able to snag one on eBay.


ROFLMAO!!!!!!!!!

 

[Michigan Badger]

Bigger Doesn't Mean Deeper (always)

Here's something I've wanted to write here for a couple years now but held back trying not to start something. Well, maybe now is the time.

Anyway, the essence of the halo theory is that the target "seeps in the soil" thus making a bigger target thus making it detect much deeper.

This theory is easy to disprove simply by testing targets of different sizes in ones coin garden.

Not all detectors are the same I suppose but, the machines I've tested get about the same depth on silver quarters as they do on silver dimes (buried). My Tejon got a little better depth on nickels than it did on silver quarters.

The things that make for a depth difference are the type of metal being detected, frequency of the detector, and the condition of the soil around the object--not leaching into the soil.

I think this whole leaching into the soil thing got started when someone noticed that buried iron that has partially corroded away can leave a rust residue in the soil. It almost looks like a "halo" around the object but what it really is is metal that has simply rusted away.

Here's an interesting little test.

Dig a 5 inch deep hole and drop a penny into it.
Now try to detect the penny. Was the signal a little weak?
Now cover the coin with dirt and test again. Was the signal a little better?
Now press the soil over the coin down to pack it. Was the signal much louder?

This may not always work but I tried it today and it worked exactly like above.

Compressed soil means a much louder signal.

I firmly believe that fresh buried coins of the same metal sound the same, or very close to those buried 100 years.

 

[bakergeol]

Re: Bigger Doesn't Mean Deeper (always)

Here's something I've wanted to write here for a couple years now but held back trying not to start something. Well, maybe now is the time.

Anyway, the essence of the halo theory is that the target "seeps in the soil" thus making a bigger target thus making it detect much deeper.

This theory is easy to disprove simply by testing targets of different sizes in ones coin garden.

Not all detectors are the same I suppose but, the machines I've tested get about the same depth on silver quarters as they do on silver dimes (buried). My Tejon got a little better depth on nickels than it did on silver quarters.

The things that make for a depth difference are the type of metal being detected, frequency of the detector, and the condition of the soil around the object--not leaching into the soil.

I think this whole leaching into the soil thing got started when someone noticed that buried iron that has partially corroded away can leave a rust residue in the soil. It almost looks like a "halo" around the object but what it really is is metal that has simply rusted away.

Here's an interesting little test.

Dig a 5 inch deep hole and drop a penny into it.
Now try to detect the penny. Was the signal a little weak?
Now cover the coin with dirt and test again. Was the signal a little better?
Now press the soil over the coin down to pack it. Was the signal much louder?

This may not always work but I tried it today and it worked exactly like above.

Compressed soil means a much louder signal.

I firmly believe that fresh buried coins of the same metal sound the same, or very close to those buried 100 years.

Hi Michigan Badger

I agree with your basic philosphy- I confess I am also a halo skeptic.

With regards to your coin test. Perhaps the answer is that the detector was ground balanced to the ground on either side of the coin. Perhaps ground balancing to air in which GB is almost not used would produce the same loud response to the coin in the hole with no dirt.

Interesting test
George

 

[Ocean7]

Here is a site for the new Fishers Intelligence booklet, that explains it pretty well...
Goto page 16 of this pdf file under " Ground Moisture Content & The Halo Phenomenon "
http://www.ronsdetectors.com/downloads/fishintel.pdf
The way I read it, is that the moisture in the ground can help, or hinder your detections, depending on what type of metals you are looking for...

I firmly believe in 'the halo effect' as long as the ground is not too water logged. Guess it all depends on your field experience. Burying coins proves nothing unless you wait 50 to 100 years for the halo effect to take place. IMO

 

[bakergeol]

Here is a site for the new Fishers Intelligence booklet, that explains it pretty well...
Goto page 16 of this pdf file under " Ground Moisture Content & The Halo Phenomenon "
http://www.ronsdetectors.com/downloads/fishintel.pdf
The way I read it, is that the moisture in the ground can help, or hinder your detections, depending on what type of metals you are looking for...

I firmly believe in 'the halo effect' as long as the ground is not too water logged. Guess it all depends on your field experience. Burying coins proves nothing unless you wait 50 to 100 years for the halo effect to take place. IMO

I always love a good argument. I agree that wet conditions will enhance the detecting range for coins. I also liked Dan's other articles on iron masking and coin depth but disagree with his "halo" views.

In fact it is hard to find people who disagree with the halo theory. In fact a lot of people disagree with Dan in that they believe that gold also produces a "halo".

However, there are a few out there that agree with Michigan Badger that soil conditions are the real reason.

One argument is if the coin in question could produce some minute traces of conductive residue in the ground around the coin could it even be detected by a detector? One guy on the Geotech forum menitioned an experiment in which he ground down a penny into very small filings. After glued together they produced a much weaker signal than a regular penny. Would not a dissolved coin produce a WEAKER signel than a normal one?

There is another view from Qiaozhi on the Geotech forum. Qiaozhi believes in "halos" around ferrous objects but dismisses "halo"s around non ferrous coins.

http://www.thunting.com/geotech/forums/showthread.php?t=11433&page=12

A good quote from Qiaozhi in which he questions if the residue produced around coins is conductive.

"There is also another fact against the halo effect theory regarding non ferrous objects.
The patina of all coins is not electrically conductive. Therefore any oxides formed around a coin under the ground will be also non conductive as they (the oxides) will originate from the coin alloy. Non conductive materials can not contribute to any detectable signals for they will not accommodate the occurrence of Eddy currents. Without Eddy currents they can be no metal detecting at all."

So in his viewpoint if oxides actually formed around coins (which is a debatable topic) they would be non conductive and would not aid in detecting the coin. Is he correct in this view? I do not have the background for an answer to this question.


I guess some myths die hard (I am saying this just to create a little interest).

George

 

[Ocean7]

well I think any coin in the ground for a very long time produces a halo. This can be often verified by the fact that once you disturb that ground around that coin (when deep) - you can no longer pick up that coin at it's original depth. All you hear is silence. Where did the coin signal go

I have experienced this effect with both VLF and multiple freq. detectors esp. on very old coins (over 100 years). Since silver and copper is a good conductor of current - is it possible that with time and proper water conditions that it starts to build a charge like a battery, and therefore emits a field that an electro-magnetic field picks up

It seems to me that this would be very possible esp. with large coppers. Of course I will concede that possibly no halo effect is produced and something else is going on here - if you can envision that a halo effect might indeed be possible.