tesoro sand shark.

i just bought one and after using it a few times on my florida beaches it does not seem to be getting much depth and the coil design (8 inch ) is annoying in that it is pushed around by the current and flipped up. i need to bury a fairly small and medium size gold(ring and ear ring) test target and compare its performance to my tdi,excal, and cz6a. im sure it will not match or exceed the performance of these machines but im hoping it will come close.
the reason i bought it is im looking to go all waterproof as far as my machines go and i thought it might be equal to or better than other waterproof vlf or pi machines once you start getting into deeper water due to its fixed pulse delay setting of 19.5.......still don't fully understand the best way to use its adjustable pulse width.

input from anyone having a decent amount of experiance with the sandshark would be appreciated!!!!!

love my original through hole tdi but i really do need the option of going in the water if i see a nice hole to hunt!

chuck.

Lets put it this way in fresh water Tesoro's excel.....And in saltwater its a tossup between which is the best the Minelab or the Fisher for excellence...haven't used the TDI so no comment...

Im not too keen on the pi sand, i have had my tiger for a long time, and it goes deep, and fantastic on the small gold others leave behind...
I would check with the hunting club nearest you, maybe hit a meeting and ask some questions...it's always better to ask questions to people who hunt the same ground, this also goes for when asking advice on a particular machine...regarding location, there are too many variables which could have the replies sent back to you seemingly contridicting each other...the internet is more of a hinderance then a help for advice in this manner.

Hey Chuck,
The Sand shark will most likely not do any better than any good VLF machine on most Florida beaches because much of Florida's sand is without any mineralization. White sands only. A PI machine excells in heavy mineralization. Although there are some very good detectorists who use them very successfully, my thoughts are it is more because they are very good detectorists and know how to read their beaches more than it is a great machine. The high pulse rate of the Sand Shark puts it at a disadvantage to machines at much lower pulse rates from all that I understand of PI units and how they operate. I prefer the Whites Dual Field because of its lower pulse rate but that is just my personal choice.Probably the best two machines for Florida beaches from what I have read is the Aquasound (for white sand beaches only, does not like mineralization)which is basically a nautilus with half the guts taken out, and Tom D's AU21 ( I think that is what he calls it) which we all wish he would put into production.
Like you I have the TDI which I am in the process of putting into a waterproof box and should prove to be a great water machine. And like you I also have an Excall which is a solid machine that works in most places with its BBS processing and to this point in time is my go to water machine. I also have a Whites Dual Field for in the water over knee deep because the Excall begins to fail as the coil reads the conductivity of the salt water above the coil. As the depth increases so does the amount of conductivity that the coil must read through. To counter act this you have to reduce the sensitivity which really cuts down on the depth that the machine can operate at. My back up machine is a Sand Shark. I have used it only a few times and had to send in for repairs for a pin hole in the coil which they replaced and got it back to me quickly. I also do not like the coil flipping up constantly in the surf so I had to make a coil support to solve that problem. Of course a lot of this information is only my opinions from what little I understand about water detectors.

"To counter act this you have to reduce the sensitivity which really cuts down on the depth that the machine can operate at"

right, and the shark being preset to 19.5 ? would be better suited for anything over waist deep than a tdi set at 10 or 12 if i understand things correctly?

thanks for the replys so far, can someone explain the sandsharks pulse width as an adjustment vs pulse delay adjustment used on most other pis.?

chuck.

Chuck, Pretty simple really. On the Sand Shark pulse width increases the amount of power that you send in each pulse. Increasing pulse width increases the depth of the signal. This means you receive deeper targets but at the cost of shorter battery life. Batteries can last maybe half as long with pulse width turned up.
Pulse delay is the amount of time between signal is sent and received by the detector. The shorter the pulse delay the better the machine should be able to see a gold target. Also. The Sand shark sends 600 pulses per second where as most pulse machines send something like 1800 pulses as I understand. I can not remember the exact number of pulses of each pulse machine, but it is a lot more than the Sand Shark.
Anything you wish to know about the Sand Shark I would suggest that you PM Les in Florida on treasurenet. He is a true expert on this machine and a very nice guy. Always willing to share information and finds lots of gold. If you are lucky he may let you do a hunt with him. He is on west Coast of Florida but about straight west of you...Stuart

Per Robert Mattison once of Tesoro before departing mentioned to me that Tesoro was behind the times with PI's and desperately needed a new PI design to be competitive.

DeepTech Vista X with 3 search coils.
Works for me

Chuck,

My measurements on Sand Sharks (years ago) were 22us on the delay. This hurts sensitivity but makes it more stable in moving salt water. You can reduce the delay by swapping the crystal, I think I got mine down to 16-17us but it squeals like a pig. Picked up 1-2" on depth, tho.

The pulse width doesn't affect depth much on low conductors because the high coil resistance limits the peak current. It helps just a tad on high conductors.

- Carl

my tiger in salt water, with a one minute tops ground balance, searches silent in the florida salt water...at the breakers u r going to have problems if yur cables arent secured correctly, but other then that, quiet, and still hot on tiny gold.

Thanks Carl.
And........... Resurrect PI platform(s) (and technologies) for FTP!

Geotech Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Chuck,
>
> My measurements on Sand Sharks (years ago) were
> 22us on the delay. This hurts sensitivity but
> makes it more stable in moving salt water. You can
> reduce the delay by swapping the crystal, I think
> I got mine down to 16-17us but it squeals like a
> pig. Picked up 1-2" on depth, tho.
>
> The pulse width doesn't affect depth much on low
> conductors because the high coil resistance limits
> the peak current. It helps just a tad on high
> conductors.
>
> - Carl

thanks carl,

1. so it will start to be equal to or outperform other machines....stability and sensitivity wise to small,medium, and large gold rings due to its higher delay setting in the deeper(knee to waist) or more turbulent water( due to its higher pulse delay, correct?
2. if im going after low conductors(and i am) what would be the best setting for the pulse width?

p.s. best of luck to you at fisher, looking forward to some new waterproof multi freq and pulse machines!!!!! (i hope)

chuck.

Chuck,

Generally a PI delay needs to be 15us or so to ignore salt water. Many PI detectors are still a little chatty in salt, especially if you are sweeping in & out of the surf zone. Higher delay improves stability at the cost of low conductors. The Sandshark is a little less sensitive to small gold than some other PIs, regardless of water depth. However, its smoother operation may make it easier to hear targets. As I recall, pulse width had little/no effect on low conductors. I reserve the right to be mistaken about this, it's just what I recall.

- Carl

yes, it absolutely seems like a very calm machine, its depth capabilities worry me!!! will be doing some burried object tests as soon as possible!!!!

thanks again,
chuck.