What do Y'all think is more sensitive to silver dime's and smaller silver

Yesterday we tested on highly ferrous trash ground Minelab E trac and Goldenmask 1+HF. Small landscape and we marked all good signals. Minelab found 0 Golden Mask 18 khz found 11. Four of them hammered coins. We tried different settings on e trac norhing helped. The landscape was 15 century household place hard nail carpet on. This Minelab 29 freq myth is a good marketing trick nothing more.

Haha, don't fool yourself.
I can stack the deck and show that a Compadre is better than an Explorer.

marxionu Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yesterday we tested on highly ferrous trash ground
> Minelab E trac and Goldenmask 1+HF. Small
> landscape and we marked all good signals. Minelab
> found 0 Golden Mask 18 khz found 11. Four of them
> hammered coins. We tried different settings on e
> trac norhing helped. The landscape was 15 century
> household place hard nail carpet on. This Minelab
> 29 freq myth is a good marketing trick nothing
> more. --------------------HOGWASH!!!!!!

Hi, Next time you do a test make sure the Minelab has the batteries installed in it.....I find it hard to believe that only the Goldenmask could find any targets worthy of digging.....Heck I think that even a K-mart 5000 could find a few targets to inspect.....This is not an Apples to Apples test it's more like a Ripley's Believe It Or Not???? TEST.......Just my opinion....JJ

Marxinou.......Could you go back to that site..........and video the search........and also make sure the detector settings are on video. Then show each detectors performance on a target. When detector settings are video'd, please make sure that there are no gaps between seeing the settings on the detector and the scanning of the target. This ensures that settings were not adjusted off camera. Alot of us just would like to see proof of your statement. Thank you.

Even if his test is true, it doesn't prove very much.
Some detectors that adjust very low in the iron range can be made to signal if there is something else there besides a nail
or perhaps several nails very close together.
The problem is though typically if nails are there in abundance, likely there will be a lot of other iron types present.
So it could be signaling on odd pieces of iron of every imaginable size or actually a non-ferrous item in the mix.
Some older models with a fast response fitted with concentrics can pull this off probably as well as the detector he mentions.

If however one tries a detector with a DD and nails are orientated every possible direction and they are very
close together.....getting a signal from a good object in the mix can be a problem.(I am talking about like a bed of nails)

That's why I mentioned the Compadre, it has the capability of getting a signal if the conductive level is higher than one or 2 nails or perhaps a few more.
It has very quick response and quick recovery....a few units like this have been around for a long time.
They have their place, likely because it is low powered, it can pull it off.
But the Compadre will lock on to a lot of big iron........
Yet it will likely "smoke" a lot of detectors with this sort of nail test.
On a side note, I wish Tesoro would put a static all metal, some form of rudimentary ID meter on the Compadre...if they
would it would make a super nice nail ridden detector....well and add a little gain also....hmm maybe a DD wouldn't hurt either.

The type detectors that pass these tests generally lock on to bent or broken nails more than others...or have the problems with other iron types
....what you gain in one area, you generally lose in other areas in the detecting world.
For this reason, it is more important to look at overall performance......

I agree with him about the marketing hype however ML uses but they are not alone....I see hype with most of the brands.....
Yet no matter if one likes ML or hates them....their detectors especially the Explorer/Etrac series have a proven track record
that no one but a fool would deny.
So his point about the myth/trick nothing more....haha is not accurate.

[www.youtube.com]
[www.youtube.com]
[www.garysdetecting.co.uk]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/17/2011 06:34PM by marxionu.

Excellent points you made Steve (MS)!

First............ Difference in sweep-speed.

That's also what I noticed on the video, sweep speed. If I remember the video correctly, that one instant where the Etrac coil was slow over the coin, it picked it up.
I would say the etrac swing speed would be the same as if using a cz. Without timing it that speed is approx 2 maybe 3 second swing with the coil traveling 8-9 feet. That distance varies and depends on the weight of the machine. If I'm using a lighter and faster detector like the f-75 the rod will be extended more, the arch distance will be longer, and the swing speed will be faster.