Question about ground balance and tracking

[tnsharpshooter]

Agree with most of what you say above TN and a lot of it mirrors what I said in my post except the admonition to bob or pump the coil to determine mineralization. I disagree that you have to bob or pump the coil to ascertain an accurate mineralization bargraph reading. I hunt frequently in central Virginia, in highly mineralized red clay, and simply sweeping the coil across the field gives you a pretty good indication of the mineralization index. You don't need to bob or pump to know that the bargraph is accurately reflecting the degree of mineralization, this is backed up by the fact that when I shift to a non-plowed, wooded area a the same site, where the mineralization is typically lower or even non-existent. While it may be possible to get a localized mineralization reading by bobbing or pumping the coil where you are standing, I do not recommend doing this because mineralization typically varies significantly over just a few meters of ground and walking and sweeping gives you more of a feel of the "average" mineralization of the site you are searching. We may be talking past each other because of differences in the terminology used, but I stand by my position that sweeping the coil is sufficient for mineralization determination and is probably better than just pumping it in one spot. I apologize if I am misinterpreting what you are saying.

Well, if sweeping the Deus coil and giving value to what the minerlization index meter is telling me,,,you know what that means??

When I sweep around here I usually get no bars or dots.

But when I pump coil I get around half scale.

And my Deus depth sure isn't like those folks who live near it seems myrtle beach SC or northern Va.

So just by my Deus capability in my soil,,seems my soil is mineralized.

I have also done comparisons in a site 80 miles south of me.

Using Deus and F75.
75 upon pumping coil showed 5 bars,,this ground is highly mineralized,,we are talking PI turf here.
Deus upon sweeping,,minerlaaization index meter maybe a dot or 2.
But pumping Deus coil yielded 3/4 scale, sometimes a little more in the index meter.
Deus depth in this site on coin sized limted to 8" depth max,,and likely not on dimes, maybe IHs and bigger.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

A Handbook of Civil War Bullets and Cartridges - Grab it through Amazon!

[CharlesUpstateNY]

Particularly on the hills such as Washington Park, Mt.Tabor et al: Bob

Yeah Mt. Tabor IS a volcano lol. I hiked up to the top of that mother last weekend...by that I mean I drove my truck up to near the top then took the stairs. My Se Pro was total FAIL up on top, its one big sheet of iron bits. I'll be hitting it again one day soon with the Deus. There are some deeper targets on Mt. Tabor slopes I dug a brass padlock up there once with a 15 inch coil that was deeeeep. But man but what an iron/trash heap.

 

[vferrari]

I used the mineralization meter extensively yesterday in my attempt to avoid digging crown caps after reading it will spike over a cap. I tell you I was ready to cuss this trick for not working like the silencer FAIL trick. But dang if it didn't work quite well. I dug a bunch of targets I thought may have been a crown cap but the meter wasn't spiking on, none were caps. Then found a couple that pegged the meter, moved the coil off target it dropped back down, back over the target it pegged again, dug it to confirm and yep crown cap. Now that's more shallow targets right on deeper targets below the crown cap zone I'd probably dig regardless. Also have to consider co-located targets coin/iron mixing together, again there I'd let depth be the guide to dig/not dig. I have dug silver fused to iron. Once depth is below the modern trash layer I'll dig some pretty god awful signals.

Very interesting. I haven't noticed this before, will have to look for it next time I am dealing with crown caps.

 

[CharlesUpstateNY]

vferrari that's good to know because I feel like a fool pumping the coil up and down like I'm listening to Lady Gaga dance music.

 

[tnsharpshooter]

See this link page 13 on proper use of interpreting minerlization meter.
New Deus owners take notice here.
http://www.xpmetaldetectors.com/telechargement/Instruction manual/DEUS_V4_MANUAL_UK.pdf

Btw, when sweeping the meter can detect/indicate a ground anomaly.
Could be ferrous or nonferrous object.
You pass on targets based on this meter's behavior,,oh well.

More food for thought here.
Remember the only way to judge mineral levels using Deus is bobbing the coil, reading meter.
Ground phase changes may or may not indicate minerlization changes.
Ground phase readings should NOT be a guide for mineral levels,,and as such don't think because a bud of yours ground reads the same you can use the same settings and get same or similar performance.

Case in point,,there is this gent,,he test detectors and post videos.
His ground phase readings on the exact same detectors and coils I have reads about 10-12 higher ground phase wise.
But guess what,,when he pumps he gets very Same/similar readings to what I get in my area. (Multiple detectors btw)

So when in a site, don't be afraid to check for possible changes in minerlization levels.
Reactivty setting/silencer settings could be changed and get you some better depth.

Bottlecaps problems try this.
Sweep cap (targets) with coil going forwards and backwards,,after target is found with side to side sweep movement and listen.
Experiment using some caps and coins.
See if you notice anything.

 

[vferrari]

See this link page 13 on proper use of interpreting minerlization meter.
New Deus owners take notice here.
http://www.xpmetaldetectors.com/telechargement/Instruction manual/DEUS_V4_MANUAL_UK.pdf

Btw, when sweeping the meter can detect/indicate a ground anomaly.
Could be ferrous or nonferrous object.
You pass on targets based on this meter's behavior,,oh well.

More food for thought here.
Remember the only way to judge mineral levels using Deus is bobbing the coil, reading meter.
Ground phase changes may or may not indicate minerlization changes.
Ground phase readings should NOT be a guide for mineral levels,,and as such don't think because a bud of yours ground reads the same you can use the same settings and get same or similar performance.

Case in point,,there is this gent,,he test detectors and post videos.
His ground phase readings on the exact same detectors and coils I have reads about 10-12 higher ground phase wise.
But guess what,,when he pumps he gets very Same/similar readings to what I get in my area. (Multiple detectors btw)

So when in a site, don't be afraid to check for possible changes in minerlization levels.
Reactivty setting/silencer settings could be changed and get you some better depth.

I NEVER make dig/don't dig decisions based on the bargraph so I do not "pass on targets because of this meter's behavior". ",,Oh well" right back at you. I use the bargraph to get a general sense of the mineralization of a site when I start to search the site and make decisions on whether to lower Tx POWER accordingly or to engage ground notch and don't really pay much attention to it after that other than to note whether I have ventured into a less mineralized area such as the woods and reverse my adjustments accordingly. I never said you shouldn't pump the coil, either. You said, and I quote, "If you were monitoring by sweeping,,this is no good." and I vehemently disagree with this statement. Bargraph should give you a satisfactory reading of mineralization at a site by sweeping as well as by pumping (as stated in the manual) and I personally prefer sweeping over a site vs. pumping (despite what the XP manual says) because it would be more indicative of the site's AVERAGE mineralization rather than the local mineralization where you are standing which can be influenced by hot rocks or even iron in the vicinity of the where you are pumping. This is analogous to being able to ground balance your machine by pumping or by using the GB tracking algorithm and sweeping the coil. To sum up, you basically said it was wrong to determine mineralization by sweeping and I am saying you can do either pumping or sweeping and I prefer the latter. Hope this helps you better understand my position.

 

[Bob in Oregon]

Yeah Mt. Tabor IS a volcano lol. I hiked up to the top of that mother last weekend...by that I mean I drove my truck up to near the top then took the stairs. My Se Pro was total FAIL up on top, its one big sheet of iron bits. I'll be hitting it again one day soon with the Deus. There are some deeper targets on Mt. Tabor slopes I dug a brass padlock up there once with a 15 inch coil that was deeeeep. But man but what an iron/trash heap.

LOL... I know it’s a trash heap.... I used to play in it when I was a kid over 50 years ago ... now I’m playing in it again....... 😀
Ironically, I was there this past weekend also. One of the several areas mentioned in my OP regarding the broad mineralization swings is at the very top of the park near the middle of the grass island just north of the statue and south of the staircase.
Found a very old lead bullet between some large tree roots, a handful of recent vintage coins and enough caps and pulls to keep the local recycling plant doors open this week.......
I’m reasonably certain there’s still old coins still hiding in the dirt on these hills.... if I can get through the crust......
I’m taking notes from every post on here... best detecting I’ve had 👍
Best,
Bob

 

[tnsharpshooter]

I NEVER make dig/don't dig decisions based on the bargraph so I do not "pass on targets because of this meter's behavior". ",,Oh well" right back at you. I use the bargraph to get a general sense of the mineralization of a site when I start to search the site and make decisions on whether to lower Tx POWER accordingly or to engage ground notch and don't really pay much attention to it after that other than to note whether I have ventured into a less mineralized area such as the woods and reverse my adjustments accordingly. I never said you shouldn't pump the coil, either. You said, and I quote, "If you were monitoring by sweeping,,this is no good." and I vehemently disagree with this statement. Bargraph should give you a satisfactory reading of mineralization at a site by sweeping as well as by pumping (as stated in the manual) and I personally prefer sweeping over a site vs. pumping (despite what the XP manual says) because it would be more indicative of the site's AVERAGE mineralization rather than the local mineralization where you are standing which can be influenced by hot rocks or even iron in the vicinity of the where you are pumping. This is analogous to being able to ground balance your machine by pumping or by using the GB tracking algorithm and sweeping the coil. To sum up, you basically said it was wrong to determine mineralization by sweeping and I am saying you can do either pumping or sweeping and I prefer the latter. Hope this helps you better understand my position.

When I post on detecting forums.
I try and post thinking anyone needing info can benefit.
Even the folks taking part in thread.

I gave my examples of what I have witnessed in the field and how sweeping gives incorrect reading/levels.
I posted link to version 4 Deus manual.
The manual says how to do.

Folks can believe me, you or the manual.

Bottom line is,,when anyone is trying to help a fellow Deus user, knowing their approx mineral levels based on "proper use of mineralization index meter" can be very important/helpful.

Btw post #25 here was not directed at you personally.
Rather Deus users in general.

 

[vferrari]

When I post on detecting forums.
I try and post thinking anyone needing info can benefit.
Even the folks taking part in thread.

I gave my examples of what I have witnessed in the field and how sweeping gives incorrect reading/levels.
The manual says how to do.

Folks can believe me, you or the manual.

Bottom line is,,when anyone is trying to help a fellow Deus user, knowing their approx mineral levels based on "proper use of mineralization index meter" can be very important/helpful.

I agree with you that folks on the forum should hear the different opinions and make up their own minds. You say there is only one way to do something based on your field experience. I say that based on my field experience you can do it either of two ways and I have a personal preference (sweeping).

BTW you told Bob he did it the wrong way ("If you were monitoring by sweeping,,this is no good."), yet he was showing, correctly, that his site was mineralized and that was also corroborated by Charles. Why do you say what he was doing was "no good"? You said that sweeping would not give you a mineralization reading, but Bob's experience, my experience, and Charles experience demonstrates that sweeping does give an approximate mineralization reading. So what am I missing? Are you saying the bargraph reading be ignored because it was generated while sweeping the coil? Just kind of lost here.

I am assisting Andy Sabisch with instructing an upcoming Deus bootcamp session and will ask him if it makes a difference whether you sweep or pump the coil to get an approximate mineralization reading and post back with the answer. Hope that helps.

 

[tnsharpshooter]

I agree with you that folks on the forum should hear the different opinions and make up their own minds. You say there is only one way to do something based on your field experience. I say that based on my field experience you can do it either of two ways and I have a personal preference (sweeping).

BTW you told Bob he did it the wrong way ("If you were monitoring by sweeping,,this is no good."), yet he was showing, correctly, that his site was mineralized and that was also corroborated by Charles. Why do you say what he was doing was "no good"? You said that sweeping would not give you a mineralization reading, but Bob's experience, my experience, and Charles experience demonstrates that sweeping does give an approximate mineralization reading. So what am I missing? Are you saying the bargraph reading be ignored because it was generated while sweeping the coil? Just kind of lost here.

I am assisting Andy Sabisch with instructing an upcoming Deus bootcamp session and will ask him if it makes a difference whether you sweep or pump the coil to get an approximate mineralization reading and post back with the answer. Hope that helps.

When I said "no good" what I meant is when sweeping, whatever the meter is reading can be inaccurate, not show the proper levels of minerlization.
Hence if a person bases their mineralization of their soil on this "reading", they may select wrong reactivity, silencer, tx power, freq, etc settings.

A big difference in soil that reads half scale when pumping vs 3/4 scale when pumping.

Also the meter when sweeping can have rises and falls due to hot rocks, iron, nails, nonferrous targets, etc.
So again here a person may indeed think their soil is more mineralized than it really is.

 

[G.A.P.metal]

Well here in south central N.Y. my soil is so mellow/neutral/sweet the only time is that meter is noticeable is on a hot rock,then it spikes to the top.
This is an interesting thread, but i can add nothing to it.
Gary

 

[vferrari]

When I said "no good" what I meant is when sweeping, whatever the meter is reading can be inaccurate, not show the proper levels of minerlization.
Hence if a person bases their mineralization of their soil on this "reading", they may select wrong reactivity, silencer, tx power, freq, etc settings.

A big difference in soil that reads half scale when pumping vs 3/4 scale when pumping.

Also the meter when sweeping can have rises and falls due to hot rocks, iron, nails, nonferrous targets, etc.
So again here a person may indeed think their soil is more mineralized than it really is.

TN - I think we are in violent agreement of most of the facts here. It is really a you say PO-TA-TO, I say PO-TAH-TO argument. lol. There really is no simple, single correct answer here.

You, for some reason, are focused on getting the most accurate ground mineralization reading possible. I agree the most accurate ground reading for the 9 to 11" PATCH OF GROUND UNDER YOUR COIL (provided there are no anomalies below the surface such as hot rocks or chunks of iron) would likely be obtained by pumping where you are standing vs. sweeping where you are standing, just as if you were trying to obtain a GB measurement. The question is what you are going to do with that most accurate of mineralization readings? There is no precise mineralization balance setting you can make with that reading, unlike what you can do with ground balance where accuracy matters. But for your style of hunting, you want to have the most accurate reading in that one spot, by all means get it by pumping because that works for you. I just would refrain from telling people if they do it differently that its "no good" because it is less accurate. A pretty definitive statement. Perhaps, no good for you but not necessarily for them.

I, on the other hand, only need the average bargraph reading you can easily obtain by simply sweeping as you search because I only need to know the approximate, average mineralization state of the site I am searching and the variation in mineralization index range as the bargraph dips and peaks to decide whether to make minor tweaks in a couple of my settings that I rarely fiddle with (TX POWER, GROUND NOTCH) or to decide to search the site using the Gold Field pitch all metal program. I don't really mess with all the other settings you mentioned solely based on whether a mineralization bargraph is 1/2 way up, 3/4 way up. I feel it is simply a feel thing rather than an accuracy thing and may require some experimentation. I do not need nor do I actually want the most accurate bargraph reading for one small 9" - 11" diameter patch of ground. Also, typically, a mineralized site naturally has a lot of variation in the mineralization index as you traverse it, so getting a more precise reading at only one spot on the site is not necessarily representative of the site as a whole nor desirable. I suppose you could argue that you should get several accurate mineralization readings by stopping and pumping at various discrete points on the site but for what I actually do with the mineralization reading as far as tweaking the machine is concerned, that is way overkill. It might be something I consider if I didn't have the bargraph continuously showing on the display as I searched because it was buried in an expert setting somewhere or because it only displayed while pumping. I believe there is a reason XP chose to have it continuously displaying to the user on the main search screen, so I use it in that manner.

My advice to Deus users, to deterimine mineralization - pump the coil if you want to in a single spot or sweep the coil while you walk if you want to to get a mineralization bargraph reading. Get a feel for the general approximate mineralization of the site as a whole by walking it and observing what the mineralization meter does in whichever manner you desire to get the meter to display a reading and tweak your machine accordingly. There is no real "no good" way to do this other than completely ingoring the bargraph meter altogether. Anything wrong with that advice?

Hopefully, this is the last I say about it (other than what Andy comes up with) but will gladly let you get the last word in on this one because I am sort of done with the topic. (Sigh of relief from the the others reading this thread who think we are both nuts - lol). Thanks.