Show all posts by user
This Open Forum is now DISABLE to new posts due to the "Phorum" Forum Software used for this forum being generally obsolete and basically no longer supported. Recently, the server that hosts this website upgraded to MySQL version 8.0.36 and Phorum 5.2.23 is not compatible with MySQL version 8.0.36. This Phorum based Discussion Forum will still be available for viewing and reference but is no longer accepting new postings and will be READ ONLY. To visit the NEW forum, CLICK HERE! Please note that those wishing to use the NEW Discussion Forum will have to re-sign up. Due to encryption of passwords, I cannot transfer users from the Phorum platform to the new forum platform. I am sorry for all the inconveniences. This Phorum based discussion forum will still be here for reference and veiwing, but will be closed for further posts.
This forum is currently read only. You can not log in or make any changes. This is a temporary situation.
Very nice work. Thank you for posting.
I suspect in ground tests and plotting would give you a screen very much like the stock accept pattern on the E-Trac. They open what they open for a reason.
Steve Herschbach
Prospecting Since 1972 at DetectorProspector.com
Steve's Mining Journal - - Gold Prospecting & Metal Detecting "How To" Guides - - Equipment Information &a
by
Steve Herschbach
-
Thomas Dankowski Metal Detecting Forum
go-rebels already posted the answer. The ground balance setting tells you what type of mineralization you are dealing with, not the amount of that mineralization.
Various detectors can also tell you the amount, most people here being familiar with the T2 and F75 bar graph for mineral amount. I tend to use the old fashioned method - stab a super magnet in the ground and see how much soil it gr
by
Steve Herschbach
-
Thomas Dankowski Metal Detecting Forum
I can't see Fisher abandoning multi-frequency since it is the key to VLF saltwater performance. They obviously need to get off the analog hard to produce and calibrate and parts soon to be gone forever platform.
The game these days seems to be boiling down to First Texas, Garrett, Minelab, and White's. I am talking about manufacturers that produce full, comprehensive product lines. I
by
Steve Herschbach
-
Thomas Dankowski Metal Detecting Forum
Excuse me. I wrote "This information is based on extensive head to head testing I have performed on both units in the years since they have been on the market." However, I am not out to try and convince anyone of anything so take it or leave it for what it is worth. You can't go wrong with a Gold Bug 2.
Steve Herschbach
Prospecting Since 1972 at DetectorProspector.com
Stev
by
Steve Herschbach
-
Thomas Dankowski Metal Detecting Forum
I guess we will have to agree to disagree then. My assessment of the GMT is that it is extremely close to the Gold Bug 2 in performance on micro jewelry. It and the earlier Goldmasters are the only detectors I would use as an alternative to my Gold Bug 2.
Steve Herschbach
by
Steve Herschbach
-
Thomas Dankowski Metal Detecting Forum
Hi Tom,
I have to question your assertion that the GMT is not even close to the Gold Bug 2 on micro jewelry. What evidence are you basing this on? I have used both machines extensively and for gold weighing less than 1 grain the Gold Bug 2 gets the nods by a hair. In other words for extreme nugget detecting I prefer the Gold Bug 2, but only by the slimmest of margins.
Micro jewelry by your
by
Steve Herschbach
-
Thomas Dankowski Metal Detecting Forum
Forget PI if you do not like digging iron!
Steve Herschbach
Prospecting Since 1972 at DetectorProspector.com
Steve's Mining Journal - - Gold Prospecting & Metal Detecting "How To" Guides - - Equipment Information & Reviews - - Public Gold Prospecting & Metal Detecting Sites - - Gold Mining Claims For Sale or Lease - - Steve's Guide to Gold Nugget Detectors
by
Steve Herschbach
-
Thomas Dankowski Metal Detecting Forum
Hi Keith,
Thanks for the details on firmware versions. I was not sure what was different in latest versions. I was not aware of the all metal issue in 2.9. I use my unit 99% of the time in all metal mode and it is usually jacked to the max and runs just fine that way so the change must have come at 3.0.
I agree the whole release was a mess.
Steve Herschbach
by
Steve Herschbach
-
Thomas Dankowski Metal Detecting Forum
The late 1980s Fisher Gold Bug was a real design breakthrough at the time with S rod, elliptical coil, and compact detachable control box. It ran at 19 kHz which was high at the time. There was no discrimination at all. Just beep and dig. It is a very good detector but the lack of ferrous discrimination would be a major lack compared to the current crop of detectors.
The 1990s Gold Bug 2 looks
by
Steve Herschbach
-
Thomas Dankowski Metal Detecting Forum
Maybe a little note somewhere along the way in the purchase process to reassure us purchasers in these days of online fraud? Just a suggestion. My order is in and I can't wait to watch the new Beach DVD. one of those doing it anyway so ordered both things.
Steve Herschbach
Prospecting Since 1972 at DetectorProspector.com
Steve's Mining Journal - - Gold Prospecting & Metal Det
by
Steve Herschbach
-
Thomas Dankowski Metal Detecting Forum
.... when I got to checkout it said PayPal was being processed for Walter A. Shivel? So I stopped there to see what is what. But I still want to buy.
Steve Herschbach
Prospecting Since 1972 at DetectorProspector.com
by
Steve Herschbach
-
Thomas Dankowski Metal Detecting Forum