A
Anonymous
Guest
Here is a email I received from a happy Beachscan PI user.
Side note: A clad quarter is probably the least responsive metal for the Beachscan. The Beachscan was designed to be most responsive to gold jewelry, that in turn is very low conductive. The nickel is close to a large gold band.
Mr.Bill <IMG SRC="/forums/images/smile.gif" BORDER=0 ALT="
">
Bill,
I found the Beachscan very well made and again the S handle is fantastic, like carrying around a feather. Hunted four hours on Saturday at the beach, in the wet sand, right arm was ready for more, rest of the body was worn out from digging very deep targets.
I found with the Delay slightly retarded (about one line) that the Beachscan was very hot on nickels and would find a nickel in the wet sand with the 11" coil at well over a foot and probably closer to 1.5 feet. Quarters and dimes were recovered at about the same depth but the audio was very sharp on nickels.
I dug everything I could hear regardless of whether or not I had an idea it was iron just to learn the machine. There were three targets that I could not recover and after 10 scoops of wet sand I decided that it was either large iron deep, or an aluminum can also deep, and I mean over 2 foot.
All in all I recovered 2 rings both junk and an earring also junk and about $4.50 in change. My buddy with the Excalibur and the 15" WOT got no rings and about $6.00 in change.
We did a depth comparison. On very few targets (2-3) could I only hear them only when he would point them out, I probably would not have noticed enough change in the threshold and would have kept walking otherwise. The rest were easy to hear and also deep. But, there again do you want to dig quarters at 2 ft.? Not me!
He only pointed out one target I could not hear, which turned out to be a quarter which was very deep, and deeper than I'm willing to dig for a quarter.
First time I ever hunted on the beach and felt like I was not leaving reasonable depth targets behind.
You can post this to the PI forum if you would like.
Thanks,
Rich Dalton <WD3C@aol.com>
Side note: A clad quarter is probably the least responsive metal for the Beachscan. The Beachscan was designed to be most responsive to gold jewelry, that in turn is very low conductive. The nickel is close to a large gold band.
Mr.Bill <IMG SRC="/forums/images/smile.gif" BORDER=0 ALT="
">Bill,
I found the Beachscan very well made and again the S handle is fantastic, like carrying around a feather. Hunted four hours on Saturday at the beach, in the wet sand, right arm was ready for more, rest of the body was worn out from digging very deep targets.
I found with the Delay slightly retarded (about one line) that the Beachscan was very hot on nickels and would find a nickel in the wet sand with the 11" coil at well over a foot and probably closer to 1.5 feet. Quarters and dimes were recovered at about the same depth but the audio was very sharp on nickels.
I dug everything I could hear regardless of whether or not I had an idea it was iron just to learn the machine. There were three targets that I could not recover and after 10 scoops of wet sand I decided that it was either large iron deep, or an aluminum can also deep, and I mean over 2 foot.
All in all I recovered 2 rings both junk and an earring also junk and about $4.50 in change. My buddy with the Excalibur and the 15" WOT got no rings and about $6.00 in change.
We did a depth comparison. On very few targets (2-3) could I only hear them only when he would point them out, I probably would not have noticed enough change in the threshold and would have kept walking otherwise. The rest were easy to hear and also deep. But, there again do you want to dig quarters at 2 ft.? Not me!
He only pointed out one target I could not hear, which turned out to be a quarter which was very deep, and deeper than I'm willing to dig for a quarter.
First time I ever hunted on the beach and felt like I was not leaving reasonable depth targets behind.
You can post this to the PI forum if you would like.
Thanks,
Rich Dalton <WD3C@aol.com>