Question about diving detector and beach detecting.

[Lasivian]

I'm curious which plan you guys would suggest. I've only used VLF, and this would likely be PI. Also have not done much beach of diving hunting. But I plan to do a lot of both in the near future.

#1 Should I get a detector for diving and just also use it on the beach?
#2 Should I get a diving detector and a second one for on the beach?

Thanks!

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Family Maps of Hinds County, Mississippi, Deluxe Edition - Grab it through Amazon!

[ColonelDan]

If you get the right detector, you can use it for both. Two that immediately come to mind are the Minelab Excalibur II and the Fisher CZ-21. Both have been used successfully in both environments and both are rated at 200-250 ft depth.

A PI is also a consideration for the beach but I personally prefer the VLF. I used a PI on the beach a few times and was digging in excess of 22 inches for a bobbi pin....good depth but no discrimination.

If you want two detectors, I would still recommend the Excal and/or CZ for diving and either an Equinox 800 or 600 or the CTX 3030 for the beach.

Just the view from my foxhole....

 

[Jason in Enid]

If you go for the excal, plan on also buying a straight shaft with under/behind the elbow mount for it. The factory setup will kill your arm as a land hunter

 

[cudamark]

How deep are you diving? 10' or less and I'd get either the Equinox or the CTX. Deep diving and the Excalibur is hard to beat. Any of those will work great on the beach too. The Equinox would be the lightest, The CTX has the best target I.D. and the Excalibur the best depth. All three discriminate nicely. PI machines also have their place, mainly areas where there is not a lot of undesirable iron targets. They don't discriminate well, so, you will be digging lots of deep iron junk. Most PI machines are not great beach machines for the same reason, plus most are fairly heavy and not all that balanced or ergonomic. If you are set on one, go to a detector store or borrow some from friends or club members, swing them and see which one feels the best. As of the present time, if I wanted to get a PI, it would probably be the White's TDI Beach Hunter if I didn't plan on going any deeper than 25 feet. For deep dives the Garrett Sea Hunter will go to 200 feet. For serious underwater work, the J.W. Fisher machines or the Aquascan machines would be the way to go.....if your pocketbook can handle it.

 

[Jason in Enid]

How deep are you diving? 10' or less and I'd get either the Equinox or the CTX.

I would suggest that you dont pick EITHER if you are doing anything more than wading. They are great, "rain proof" detectors, and great and wading but there are far too many reports of failures from people actually taking the control head down 5 - 10 feet.

 

[Lasivian]

A PI is also a consideration for the beach but I personally prefer the VLF. I used a PI on the beach a few times and was digging in excess of 22 inches for a bobbi pin....good depth but no discrimination.

Huh, i've never detected a saltwater beach, but I heard VLF was very poor in saltwater.

 

[Lasivian]

The Garrett Sea Hunter was the one I was looking at for diving. I can't see going below 100', and it's supposedly good to twice that depth.

I was thinking that saltwater beaches would need PI. And I was thinking people might have some reason to keep the water detectors in the water that I didn't know.

If VLF would work I would just use my Whites XLT.

 

[CASPER-2]

XLT is great on land not good on sea bch or in saltwater

 

[CASPER-2]

I started water hunting with Whites PI - did great but I dont mind digging the trash I started land hunting with a non discriminating machine
I use CZ21s now in the water and have done okay
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC9z25g56LhkEv_fdD_Gglsg/videos


http://www.treasurenet.com/forums/members/29748-albums.html

but other friends here have done great with other machines

 

[CASPER-2]

Some of these articles may help you - some may inspire
click pages to enlarge for better reading

https://www.flickr.com/photos/casper-2/

 

[adamBomb]

The Garrett Sea Hunter was the one I was looking at for diving. I can't see going below 100', and it's supposedly good to twice that depth.

I was thinking that saltwater beaches would need PI. And I was thinking people might have some reason to keep the water detectors in the water that I didn't know.

If VLF would work I would just use my Whites XLT.

A lot of this depends on the beach, conditions, and your expectations. A PI will work on the beach but you will be digging fish hooks, tiny pieces of metal, BBs, hair pins, etc. unless the beach is very clean. For this reason, the most common beach machines are multifrequency machines, such as the ones mentioned in this thread - CZ21, Equinox, CTX, Excalibur, and a few others. These machines will disc out a lot of that garbage iron so you aren't digging as many bad target.

If I were you, I would look at the CZ21 or Excalibur as they work for both. Otherwise a PI and multifrequency option works too! In that case I would get a PI, like the one you mentioned, and probably an equinox.

 

[Jason in Enid]

Huh, i've never detected a saltwater beach, but I heard VLF was very poor in saltwater.

Not all "VLF" are the same! Its true that single frequency VLFs generally suck at salt beaches, but multi-Frequency VLFs are great.

 

[CASPER-2]

I hunt in all metal most of the time - many times bad signals have turned out to be good and i have gotten lots of goodies
following others cranking their discrim.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/casper-2/6831926593/

3 guys went over area where this was found - they passed up junk around it


this one a guy had gridded over the whole area i could see with my mask on holes all around
i went over and dug some trash and pulled this out - i asked guy later if he was cranking his discrim. and he said yes to much trash
i think its worth it to take out trash - these are just some better examples - happens a lot

 

[cudamark]

Huh, i've never detected a saltwater beach, but I heard VLF was very poor in saltwater.

With single frequency machines, that would be true. Multifrequency machines are what we're recommending here.

 

[RustyGold]

Excal for the water.
Equinox for the damp & dry sand.

 

[Lasivian]

Great info here. I very much appreciate it.

I'm thinking that my XLT and a Sea Hunter might be enough. I'm planning to sail around the world, and most likely would be primarily detecting remote locations with very little trash on the beach. (And frankly I can suffer trash digging in sand. It's finding pulltabs under turf that drives me nuts. Tho the sea hunter seems to have discrimination)

This plan also has the benefit that the XLT is already paid for rather than buy a dual freq VLF (Which I can always add to the mix later)

Thanks!

 

[ColonelDan]

Lasivian, In 2015, I tested the discrimination capability of the Sea Hunter for Kellyco. Sparing you the details, below is the final summary from that report....just FYI.

"The more you crank up the discrimination the more you lose depth and that loss is compounded when the target is small. If you're primary interest is in eliminating junk and only digging a few inches or going after super bowl rings, by all means crank up that discrimination knob. However, I obviously concur with both Garrett and the others; the best setting for the Sea Hunter Mark II is the lowest level of discrimination possible in standard mode. To get the most out of the Sea Hunter and being reasonably confident of not passing over potentially good targets, I'd start off with zero discrimination and prepare myself to dig a lot! In this setting, the Sea Hunter is a solidly performing waterproof PI machine at a great price point. But as I always say, that's just the view from my foxhole. Your results may vary."

 

[Jason in Enid]

Great info here. I very much appreciate it.

I'm thinking that my XLT and a Sea Hunter might be enough. I'm planning to sail around the world, and most likely would be primarily detecting remote locations with very little trash on the beach. (And frankly I can suffer trash digging in sand. It's finding pulltabs under turf that drives me nuts. Tho the sea hunter seems to have discrimination)

This plan also has the benefit that the XLT is already paid for rather than buy a dual freq VLF (Which I can always add to the mix later)

Thanks!

No, that XLT wont serve you for beach hunting. Get one of the multi-freqs, they are superior on land and beach.

 

[CASPER-2]

in the 90s the seahunter was popular and guys were hammering the waters around here with them - guys were bragging they had cleaned many spots out using them - when i got my PI PRO i went to these spots and guys said i would not get much if anything - I killed it - PI was pulling stuff twice as deep as they had gotten
old pic of silver and gold from 1995-2004 - i'd say 95% is from water with whites PI's and land finds were with XLT - never hit a virgin spot - all is from following
others - went slow - all metal - dug deep and try to take everything out - good and bad
https://www.flickr.com/photos/casper-1/2232964459/

Lasivian, In 2015, I tested the discrimination capability of the Sea Hunter for Kellyco. Sparing you the details, below is the final summary from that report....just FYI.

"The more you crank up the discrimination the more you lose depth and that loss is compounded when the target is small. If you're primary interest is in eliminating junk and only digging a few inches or going after super bowl rings, by all means crank up that discrimination knob. However, I obviously concur with both Garrett and the others; the best setting for the Sea Hunter Mark II is the lowest level of discrimination possible in standard mode. To get the most out of the Sea Hunter and being reasonably confident of not passing over potentially good targets, I'd start off with zero discrimination and prepare myself to dig a lot! In this setting, the Sea Hunter is a solidly performing waterproof PI machine at a great price point. But as I always say, that's just the view from my foxhole. Your results may vary."

 

[CASPER-2]

these are some that are in the pic from link in previous post - all from late 1990s and early 2000s from water with PIs
these i think are all older finds - no fresh drops in these pics
https://www.flickr.com/photos/casper-1/2376565965/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/casper-1/2376565783/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/casper-1/2376565689/

in fact the fresh drops were removed - every newer gold ring was pulled for these pics hence the empty spots