Pardon the delay but I've been away doing some field evaluation, and that included some comparisons on my Nail Board as well as trying to find one or two accessible old sites to check out. All I can say is winter cold and mud can end as soon as possible.
El said:
Which units do you use that perform best on the nail board test?
'Best' performance, out of the makes and models I own, would be my two Compass T/R's as they essentially ignore or very slightly null/reject the nails and respond well to an Indian Head 1¢ from any direction. I still grab one from time-to-time at a known location where the ground contour is quite level and nails are in abundance. Otherwise, using a conventional T/R is difficult when compared with our modern ground cancelling Discriminators.
Every detector I have in my detector battery, shown below plus a few more, can do 'OK' in most average iron littered sites, but that's encountering an occasional nail here or there. In a really dense iron nail environment, I want a detector in-hand that can work my
Nail Board Performance Test and provide the best performance, or at least what I consider to be 'passable' performance. With a possible 8 hits, I want to get at least a 6 hit minimum, but would prefer 7 or 8 hits out of 8 for peak performance.
Referring to my list below, those would include the following.:
Compass Coin Hustler [size=small](w/6" DD)[/size]
Compass 99B [size=small](w/8" DD)[/size]
Nokta Fors CoRe [size=small](w/4.7x5.2 DD)[/size]
Tesoro Bandido II µMAX [size=small](w/6" & 7” & 8" Concentrics)[/size]
Tesoro Outlaw [size=small](w/6" & 7” & 8" Concentrics)[/size]
White's MX5 [size=small](w/6½" & 9" Concentrics)[/size]
White's MXT All-Pro [size=small](w/6½" & 9" Concentrics)[/size]
White's VX3 [size=small](w/6½" Concentrics)[/size]
One I forgot to add to my list is a White's Classic ID [size=small](w/4½" & 6½" Concentrics)[/size], and I have a few older detector models that are on my 'Want List' simply because they handle iron nails well. Those are the Tesoro Silver Sabre II, and the original Bandido and Bandido II. Those early Tesoro offerings worked better in dense ferrous trash than most models that replaced them. The newer detectors introduced a "Low-Noise/High-Gain" circuitry to try and help enhance the weak signal depth and give them a little more bark.
That 'improvement' in circuitry did help, but with it came the trade off that they do not handle iron as well as the former models. The Bandido II µMAX, for example, generally worked a little better than the first three Bandido models at being louder or a little deeper, but the original Bandido and Bandido II have a cleaner audio handling in iron and better overall results. So, I put those three models on our 'want list' so we have some loaners on-hand for some historic site projects we work on and need good, but easy-to-use, gear for volunteers.
Note, too, that most of the best performance in a dense iron nail infested site will come with the use of a smaller-size search coil. Additionally, after working similar-sized Concentric to Double-D's, the advantage favored the Concentric coils.
El said:
Of these units, which would be best for dry sand beach hunting with some slight wet hunting mixed in?
Well, the models that work well in dense iron nails are not necessarily the models to select from for 'beach hunting' where iron nails are usually not in abundance. However, if I were narrowing my detector selection to models that could handle iron nails well AND hunt a saltwater [size=small](conductive)[/size] beach, even one with more iron mineral sand, then I would need a model that provided a salt-compensate GB adjustment range.
So, of the list I provided I'll trim it down to these.: Nokta Fors CoRe, White's MX5, White's MXT All-Pro and White's VX3. If I don't consider a model needing to pass the
NBPT as well, then I will include my Teknetics Omega and White's XLT because both have worked well for me on coastal beaches.
To take it one step farther, if I were to only list the models that I own that I would want to have in-hand for beach hunting, and list them in the order that I feel they would provide the performance I want on the beach [size=small](with the best coil mounted for hunting the particular beach location)[/size], it would be the.: Nokta FORS CoRe then the MXT All-Pro, followed by the Teknetics Omega, and coming in 4th would be my White's XLT.
Everyone's pick can vary, and I moved farther from the coast to Eastern Oregon in September of 2013 and have only visited the coast twice since that time .... very briefly. I am not big on water hunting, preferring to be hitting a mining or logging camp, railroad siding and depot, stage stop, homestead, or other old-dated location. In short, I prefer 'dry' to wet.
El said:
On your Omega, how does it do on mineralized ground.
I haven't had a real problem hunting any location with it yet as far as dealing with the ground mineral make-up. With both an automated GB through Ground Grab and the ability to manually GB to fine-tune a setting, the Omega works fine. Matter of fact, the Omega is still my personal favorite model in the current Teknetics line.
El said:
One site I hunt has some deep targets mixed in with heavy iron in spots with the mineralization changing within the site between 65 to 85. The site is farm land and plowed 2 to 3 times a year with some targets coming closer to the surface but many we believe dropping deeper into the fluffy soil.
An interesting set of challenges that are similar to many I have faced over many years. Sometimes I have a brief or limited opportunity to hunt an old site where once stood an old church or school, but now it is just a plowed and farmed pasture. It might have some iron in the mix from torn-down/burned-down structures, or from discards from that era, and quite often the western US sites I search tend to be pretty mineralized.
Plowing to plant and harvest, or periodic cattle grazing can easily churn targets around and some will be displaced, and when I have a limited opportunity to hunt such a site, then I use a detector or two that will allow me to best handle the ground mineral conditions [size=small](using Automated or Manual Ground Balance)[/size], and just enough Discrimination adjustment such that I can search without it [size=small](either in All metal mode or in a Zero or minimum Disc. motions Discriminate mode)[/size] to find ANY signs of past activity. If I happen into a dense amount of targets, I want a smaller-size search coil along so I can try to weed the good desired targets out of the unwanted trash.
On other occasions it will be a similar site, such as a ghost town where a good portion of it is in farm land and grazing land, but [size=small](at least for now)[/size] access is more or less open as long as cattle aren't in there or the planting is overgrown. When able to hunt these kinds of places, I like to take a slightly different tactic and grid off an area, search it well, and remove all the blasted iron and non-iron trash I can.
This will be to my benefit now and in the future because I will rid a spot of junk, and check the location around and under where the trash
was in case it was masking a desired target. Also, the more trash I remove now that has been turned a bit closer to the surface, the less there will be there on a re-visit after the next plowing so I will have fewer noisy targets to listen to, and it wiwll help eliminate the trash that can mask a repositioned find.
El said:
I can get 6 to 8 inches on a target with my Deus at this site.
The site is Mission era and my partner and I have pulled 10 Phoenix Buttons, Reales and Reales Buttons, a Great Coat Button and many others and Seated coins.
While most targets we are after will usually be located in the surface to 4" or 5" range, I have also recovered my share of deeper coins, tokens, buttons, bullets and all sorts of smaller-size artifacts at deeper depths, even with some older detector models that most of the newer folks haven't even heard of.
My 1836 Capped Bust Half-Dime was at about 6½" in road-graded dirt and gravel and I found it with a Pillar 1 Reale. An 1858 Flying Eagle 1¢ was an 'iffy' response at about 7" and I was using an original Tesoro Bandido. I plucked a Walking Liberty 50¢ piece in the 8"-8½" depth with a White's Ghost Towner BFO. An 1851 Large 1¢ was also at a good 8+" and I was using a Gold Mountain Technologies GMT-1650.
With more modern detectors, such as a 5900 Di Pro SL, 6000 Pro XL/XL Pro, Classic ID, IDX Pro, XLT, VX3, MXT Pro, MXT All-Pro, Inca, Silver Sabre II, Silver Sabre µMAX, Bandido, Bandido II, Bandido II µMAX, Pantera, Eldorado µMAX, Conquistador µMAX, Explorer II, Explorer SE Pro, and others ... to include the Teknetics T2's I had and the Gamma and Omega .... I have pulled coins in a variety of locations that were down in the over 5" range, even to a checked depth of 9½"-10", but most honest deeper coins have bee in the 6" to 8" range.
Coins that deep, for me, come only on periodic occasions because the bulk of the sites I like to hunt, most coins and trade tokens and other desirables aren't deep. At least 80% are surface to 4", and by 'surface' I mean either just a skiff of dust or dirt over them, or in plan view or partially in plain view. I really enjoy finding those older sites, but it is getting tougher.
El said:
We are at the point now that we need a machine that can give extra depth and handle the minerals and iron.
Yes indeed. The older technology BFO's and T/R's didn't provide the advancements we saw over about a 15 to 17 year range of progress, and today we are faced with a lot of technology to try and give us colorful displays, musical notes and all sorts of wild guesses at what a located target might be. I still think a lot of the former models, prior to all the newest 'digital' circuitry designs, had the potential to find what we want to today, but they were usually in heavier and more cumbersome packages.
As of today, I could settle on an MXT All-Pro, Nokta FORS CoRe and Omega and have a nice 3-detector set-up to handle most any site challenges I would encounter, and have a well balanced, comfortable, yet versatile detector in-hand. One reason I like the Omega, other than the display features and ample adjustments with very good in-the-field performance, is the physical package with the T2 grip handle.
El said:
Last question--Do you know something special about the new G2 that would make me want one?
Kind of, but we will all see what the end product is they deliver. I had the G2 and liked it, generally, except for it wasn't very hot on higher conductive coins, it didn't get very impressive depth, and it failed the
NBPT miserable with all coils available. It was okay in most places with just an occasional nail or piece of iron here or there, but in a really dense ferrous environment it struggled. What I did like, however, was it used the same rod and grip design as the Omega.
What would make me want to add a new G2 [size=small]plus newer features[/size] into my arsenal? Maybe if it had some up-to-date revisions or improvements? I've used a similar model that does in the F19 from Fisher.
Well, I checked out a couple of Fisher F19's and compared them with other detectors I had, plus with a borrowed Gold Bug Pro and G2. I think most folks would agree with me that the F19 is kind of based on the Gold Bug Pro/G2 basic idea, but with some definite improvements. I used one to evaluate, and got another to assemble and set out on display at a couple of seminars. That nice new F19 went to a dedicated button hunter and I am sure you can follow George's posts on the this forum and see how well that F19 is performing for him, especially with the 5X10 DD stock coil. I liked it for the same reasons .... it worked!
Things I liked included.:
1.. It came with the 5X10 DD coil which is my favorite coil for the F19/GBP/G2 for general use searches, and I like the 5" DD for tighter, trashier conditions.
2.. A camo finish and I liked the camo appearance and quality on the F19 as it didn't look ugly or cheaply done.
3.. The new Volume adjustment where I can set it at '13' and that gives iron targets a low audio volume and non-ferrous targets a full audio volume. I prefer the Omega's ability to reject iron nails with a Disc. setting of 16/17, but the G2 's I had and the F19's too a setting of 38/39 just to zap the nails. I would have preferred more resolution in the iron range of adjustment. So, I like to hunt at minimum Discrimination with the Omega, G2, F19 as well as my MXT All-Pro, MX5 and FORS CoRe quite often, but hear an audio 'classification' between ferrous and non-ferrous targets. the Volume adjustment on the F19 is useful.
4.. The F19 has a very functional 5-level backlighted display with a red light for easier viewing in the dark w/o eye strain adjusting from a bright white light back to dark.
5.. It had a notch system that some might like but I list it here only to state that I didn't care for it as I never use and don't care to use a notch discriminate system of most any design. That's just me.
6.. A marked improvement on how well it hunted in a dense iron nails infested site as it 'passed' the
NBPT that the G2 and Gold Bug Pro failed.
I also like the Teknetics name more than Fisher, so I would really like to see a new Teknetics model that would be an 'enhanced' G2 that had the following design.:
a.. The Teknetics name.
b.. Kept G2 in the name so as not to get too many new names as it adds to some confusion.
c.. A new G2 that retained the current Omega/G2 rod and hand-grip design.
d.. I'd like to see a black or dark colored rod package and not a gold or silver colored rod.
e.. A similar quality camo finish like the F19 would be fine with me.
f.. Give it the Ferrous/Non-Ferrous Volume adjustment.
g.. Add a backlighted display.
h.. Package it with the excellent 5X10 elliptical DD coil in camo finish like the F19 and not use the bigger, open, BiAxial [size=small](DD)[/size] coil.
I.. Make sure it has the performance of the F19 to do better in a dense iron challenged site like the F19.
Yep, those are things I would sure like to see in a new model that might bring us a revised G2.
Personally I would also wish they could get a little better depth out of it and also make it work well but at a somewhat reduced sweep speed. Many sites I hunt get a bit choked up with sage brush and building rubble, so when you add that with an increase in closely associated targets to sort through, being able to sweep a bit slower and still get very decent depth of detection and target response would be nice. When I got into the tougher conditions like that I couldn't get the performance out of the F19 like I could my MX5, MXT All Pro or Omega. Today the FORS CoRe also lets me work those conditions a little better with a slower sweep speed. Not a crawl like a Classic or Outlaw or Bandido II, but slower than the G2 and F19's.
THE GOOD NEWS !!! There's no such thing as a 'perfect; metal detector so we have the opportunity to pick and chose and end up with two or three [size=small](or ???)[/size] that fit the different hunting needs we have. Even better news, in my opinion, is that we have a few manufacturers who are actively working on R&D and doing things to bring us improved detectors or even new detectors that are up-to-date on features and performance. Some makers kind of fall behind and are slow to do much for the avid detectorists.
Monte
and bugga all this new stuff coming out all the time 
