When you folks test detectors....

Do you only test on sole permissions? I do. This is important in my opinion. It can tell you if you really have something special. In my recent tests the signals I dug were the ones I ignored many times prior. When dug , most turned out to be small non-ferrous trash. So I feel comfortable, in my own conclusion, in my own environment that I did not miss any desirable targets using my preferred detectors. Good luck !

Good point, thank you

George you probably forgot more than I know...I do have a few sites like that and they are very excellent test areas. 3 of them has almost no modern trash and has produced some great relics and a lot of them. The modern trash thing is key in what I'm about to say. So when we first hits those sites the great targets flew out. I dug 26 military buttons off one of them in just a few days. Loaded. Okay we finally cleaned all the good signals out . Started digging the faints ones and on and on ... to the point we started digging the most junky signals you ever heard. This where I started to realize I might think I know whats there but I didn't really know till I dug it. I saw junk signals turn into military buttons, coins, and even a General Lafayette button. That Adams button I dug this year was a small signal too. I thought I was chasing a lead ball.... I hunt down in Georgetown where slave tags show up from time to time. My buddys found a couple and they where both rolled up and had to be straightened and I wonder what those sounded like. I'm not confident enough with any machine to cherry pick a old site really. I have found 2 piece eagles on hammered sites in close to a few shotgun shotgun shells and often thought those guys that hunted it before were calling shot gun shells and walked off from this one...because about the only thing left on the site was shotgun shells. lol Maybe one day when I have done this long as you I will feel comfortable doing that or be able to do that but at this time my skill level is just not that high as to be able just to cherry pick relics... HH BTW I'm waiting on the heat your bringing....



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/23/2018 12:37PM by calabash digger.

Yea George,
I do hunt pounded areas. I call my detecfor proving grounds. These sites every single time have revealed how good a detector performs in iron.
Meaning my results marry up well with what others eventually see with units.

Usually in about 40 hours the sunlight starts to shine on the real performance.

I usually take a new unit here just to run initially and listen to, just sweep around. Goal, to draw some preliminary conclusions on how the detector when exposed to iron sounds.
Monkey with a few settings.

Then read manual a little more, and even do a few more on top of the ground test.

Then go back.
And go back.
And go back.
And go back.

Lightbulb starts to flicker, then becomes brighter with each passing hour of use at sites.
Need to see trends too, not isolated occurrence.

And if things really start popping out of the ground, gotta get at least one more good detector to see if I can see the 'WHY' behind what I am witnessing.
Like elimate what folks will be quick to say, "Oh you just missed those finds"

My proving ground sites all have landmarks, so I know with high certainty just where I have been previously using/testing other detector models.
One field area I use hasn't been plowed/tiled since 1992.
If this section was plowed and my other detecfor proving grounds sites.
There is no telling how many nonferrous finds I could find.
Likely would go into the hundreds.
And could use lots of different detectors and be successful.
Would be like shooting fish out of a barrel.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 03/23/2018 01:04PM by tnsharpshooter.

The criticality of having the 'variables' removed..... is paramount. Systematic scientific methodology implementation is mandatory. I covered a few of the details in the article "Head-to-Head Comparison Testing". Bench testing, test-garden testing and real-world testing are all required.

Absolutely correct Tom and the recent rash of testing does nothing but introduce MORE variables into the testing.

When, in addition to the hundreds of variables presented by the ground and the metallic targets, you introduce a multiplicity of controls to be manipulated - in various quite different programmed modes - comparisons become mostly pointless except as a snapshot of one event.

I long for the day when a top level machine is introduced with no more complication that say - an Eurotek Pro. Auto noise cancel - auto ground balance - maybe a couple of choices of mode.

With modern multifrequency technology, such a machine could remove the awful self-torture of “I wonder if I have set this thing up right for this site and these targets?”

Rick Kempf
Gold Canyon AZ- where there is no gold