You are viewing this forums as a guest which limits you to read only status.
Only registered members may post stories, questions, classifieds, reply to other posts, contact other members using built in messaging and use many other features found on these forums.
Why not register and join us today? It's free! (We don't share your email addresses with anyone.) We keep email addresses of our users to protect them and others from bad people posting things they shouldn't.
Mike Hillis said:Hi Campnagle, you are right, gold is an excellant conductor. The problem is that it is extremely rare to find a piece pure enough and large enough to read like a high conductor on our detectors.
Interesting thing about gold jewelry is that there really isn't that much gold in most of it. 10k is only 41.7% gold. 14k is only 58.5% gold. Its not until you get into the 18k and higher values that gold starts to really become the majority of the metal makeup of the item. So the item has to be even bigger to read higher up the conductive scale.
Then factor in the metals that are alloyed with it to make the different colors: White, Rose, Yellow, Bronze, Red and Lime. Then add the coatings that are added to some of those to improve the colors. All that affects the conductive reading, too.
The reason most of the gold we hunt is down below the nickel range is because most of the lost gold jewelry is worn by women, and women wear small gold![]()
One more thing to keep in mind is orientation in the ground. If the ring has a crown like the one in your pictures (which I like very much, by the way) It very likely will be face down in the dirt because thats the heaviest end and that will also affect the conductivity reading.
Also, think about silver. Silver is a high conductor but the smaller the silver is, the lower down on the conductive scale it reads.
Hi Walt.
Like your gold picture! Did you rescue that from the river?
HH
Mike