Nail board test

[Picketwire]

What is your opinion? Is it the ultimate test for the best detector in nails? Do you think it has flaws? Defend you opinion.

 

[Monte]

What is your opinion? Is it the ultimate test for the best detector in nails? Do you think it has flaws? Defend you opinion.

Since the Nail Bard Performance Test is my offering based on an actual in-the-field encounter over 27 years ago, and I have used this test ever since in evaluating prototypes detectors and coils as well as a wide-range of detectors I have owned and also used in some very nasty Iron Nail contaminated ghost towns, homesteads, and military forts and camp sites, I think I can offer up some worthy 'opinions' about the NBPT and the results I have seen, made by me and by many others who have used this 'test' in their own detector & coil evaluations.

► As with ANY 'test' we might use, we have to remember that it is only a 'test' based on the actual sample targets used, both desired and undesired. Any change in the samples or in their orientation can, and will, alter the results we might get. However, I believe the best 'test' would be something that is an actual representation of an in-the-field encounter and not simply some thought-up or imagined sample of good and bad targets in a random orientation. In this case, the four Iron Nails and Indian Head Cent I use are in the exact position and of the same size and shape, as what I encountered in the ghost town of Frisco Utah, Memorial Day Weekend of '94. Over 27 years ago.

Many people have used, and continue to use, my NBPT as at least ONE of their testing scenarios to evaluate the performance of the detectors and coils they use, and most of those are people who have acquired a NBPT 'kit' so they have an exact position and orientation of the actual conditions. I also got a NB to Garrett, Nokta / Makro and White's (a few years before they folded up).

► Is it "The Ultimate Test" in Iron Nails? No, certainly not. You can take some of the good TR's nd TR-Disc. models from the '70s and early '80s and place several Iron Nails on top of an Indian Head Cent and get a good audio response on the Coin, but most of the more 'modern' detectors we use today and have for the past two or three decades are useless in trying to produce a hit on that Indian Head Cent under a small cluster of Iron Nails on top of it. However, the NB is a very valid 'test' for both a detector's circuitry design as well as the performance of a search coil to take on the challenge of a heavily-littered Iron Nail environment.

► Does my NBPT have 'flaws'? No, not really. It is what it is, an actual in-the-field encounter which was a site on top of the old school hill in Frisco that had an unbelievable amount of Iron Nails scattered about and visible as you looked around. Also on top of the ground were other pieces of ferrous and non-ferrous objects, and one of those just happened to be an Indian Head Cent from the 1880's laying on top of the ground between the 4 Iron nails. Was it detectable as located? Yes .... by detectors that worked well in such a ferrous target challenge and with a decent coil, but not by detectors with over-size search coils and/or those that didn't work well in a dense ferrous contaminated environment due to their circuitry design.

► Naturally, some will say it is a 2-D 'test' and it is ... BECAIUSE THAT IS THE ACTUAL WAY THE NAILS AND COIN WERE POSITIONed WHEN i FOUND THEM!!

Now, there could have been some Iron Nails or other ferrous object out-of-sight and positioned somewhere below the Coin, anf that might have masked it. But there wasn't. OR .. the Coin could have been in the same orientation but positioned just below the 4 Iron Nails, and that might have masked it completely or partially, making the coin detectable from perhaps only one or two or three directions.

So, is a 3-D 'test' a better idea? Maybe and maybe not. It would simply be a different idea for a 'test' and I do that as well. FIRST and foremost, I want to start with a detector and coil that can 'pass' my NBPT with a good 7 or 8 out-of-8 score. If they are that good, which is my cut-off for a worthy Relic Hunting combination for serious work in dense Iron Nails, then I conduct my two other 3-D tests. One with the Coin positioned above the 4 Iron Nails, and then with the 4 Iron Nails positioned above the Coin.

It is interesting that you asked this particular question about my NBPT because I am trying to learn my new phone to get good photos of my NBPT in the original setting snd in both of my 3-D set-up with a measured 1" between the Nail Board with Nails and the Coin. I am working on that to post on my AHRPS Forums for General Detecting Information because others have asked about doing such 'tests'.

When I get that posted I'll let you know.

** Oh, I can't forget to remind readers that any test anyone does is also going to be dependent on their control function settings, such as Discrimination or Recovery Speed, Iron Bias or other setting options. Therefore that takes it one step beyond a default detector circuitry design or search coil design and incorporates operation control of the detector function. That, alone, can make a pass or fail result with some detector models.

Monte

 

[Picketwire]

The last reminder is exactly what I am trying to get others to try. Sometimes the changes work like a person thinks, sometimes not so much but they all do make a difference. The only way to know is to try it yourself. What I like might not be what you like.

And thank you for defending your position. Any one else?

 

[Draco]

The truth is that I don't use discrimination. In Europe, we have so many different currencies and so many centuries of coins, that there can always be flaws. So I would rather dig garbage than lose a good coin.
For me an ideal detector would be:
No movement
Manual ground balance, threshold control, sensitivity control, power control.
I don't need discrimination

 

[Picketwire]

Any change in the samples or in their orientation can, and will, alter the results we might get. However, I believe the best 'test' would be something that is an actual representation of an in-the-field encounter and not simply some thought-up or imagined sample of good and bad targets in a random orientation

There are two positions for the coin. One of the positions is obviously "thought up". Is the test only valid for four sweeps because the second position is not an actual "in the field encounter"?

Also on top of the ground were other pieces of ferrous and non-ferrous objects, and one of those just happened to be an Indian Head Cent

Your eyes are the best discriminator. Why didn't you just pick up the coin?

most of those are people who have acquired a NBPT 'kit' so they have an exact position and orientation of the actual conditions.

I see Mr. Southern used a copper penny, not an Indian head one, to test the Vista detectors. Does this cast doubts on the validity of his test? What about the test with the half dime?

It is interesting that you asked this particular question about my NBPT because I am trying to learn my new phone to get good photos of my NBPT in the original setting snd in both of my 3-D set-up with a measured 1" between the Nail Board with Nails and the Coin.

In my opinion this is a better test but why the "made up" 1" distance that makes this no longer a test "based on an actual in field encounter"?

I also got a NB to Garrett, Nokta / Makro and White's (a few years before they folded up).

They are in the business to sell metal detectors and can see that your influence can help sell and also cause consumers to not buy certain detectors including White's and Tesoro.

Don't get me wrong, I think this test is a useful one and another fun one to try. I would suggest putting a cover over it and circling 360 degrees around it. or using a bent nail or two which is much more likely in the places I hunt with nails.

That is my opinion but again, I am fairly new to metal detecting and do not claim to be an expert.

 

[Monte]

There are two positions for the coin. One of the positions is obviously "thought up". Is the test only valid for four sweeps because the second position is not an actual "in the field encounter"?

• I wouldn't say it was "thought up" for the #2 position. The Indian Head Cent was located (observed) in the #1 position. That made the four Iron Nails and the Indian Head Cent an actual in-the-field encounter.

• I joined my club friends for a weekend ghost town hunt, but also evaluating a newer model for a manufacturer in a tough ferrous-debris environment. Also, once located, I called three fellows over who were hunting with their fast-sweep White's detectors using bigger-size 8" and 950 search coils. I wanted to let them see what the results were with their equipment compared to what most of us were using that was better suited or such a chall3enge.

• Then, when asked if that was a typical situation to come across, I explained, "No. It does happen, but ...." quite often you'll find a single coin positioned close to single Nail and that creates a challenge. I said, "For example ...." and moved the Indian Head Cent close to the center of the Nail on the left in the #2 position for folks to check out.

• ALL 'tests' can be check to see if they are "valid" for any directional sweep. I marked the ground beside the Nails and Coin for the 4 lines, but it is actually 8 directions because if it is swept from left-to-right and then from right-to-left.. They represent a N-S and E-W line across the center of the Coin, and then the diagonal directions as if NE-SW and NW-SE. The appearance of the 4-Lines for 8-Sweep-Routes was based on how it appeared from where I stood when first encountered.

• Can my NBPT or any other 'test' be evaluated with different sweep-routes or search coil presentations? Yes and I encourage anyone to use their detectors and different coils to do just that in order to better learn what level of performance they might offer, and also note any weaknesses there are for lack of performance. In any 'test', since we are usually searching for Coins, Tokens, Bullets, Buttons and all sorts of Non-Ferrous targets of interest, we should also sweep the coil directly across the desired targets, in this case the Indian Head Cent. Coil sweeps, regardless of search coil 'type', should be done with the center-axis of the search coil following the intended sweep-route across the desired target. Not with an off-set coil sweep such as the front or back of the coil. We want to get the best and most accurate results possible in order to compare our detector & coil against other detectors & coils we have, as well as against other folk's results. Thus, using a dedicated and exacting-position 'test' makes it reasonably fair for you and I and anyone else to see how our equipment might compare, as long as the 'test sample' is uniform for each of us. That includes the sweep-direction and the coil orientation.


Picketwire:
Your eyes are the best discriminator. Why didn't you just pick up the coin?

• I didn't disturb the coin I encountered because I was evaluating a detector or two, and with the Iron Nails as found I figured it would make an exacting 'test' to learn by. Then, when I finished with a few people who checked it out, I got the exacting positions on my notepad and THEN I picked up the India Head Cent and four Iron nails.

• My statement about "Your Eyes, the ONLY 100% accurate form of Discrimination" is simply to point out that regardless of the make or model detector and visual display it might use ... they are ALL going to be inaccurate at times, and some not very reliable at all. Instead, use the 'Beep-DIG!' approach and when you find a target, recover it and take a look. THEN you will know, by 'Visual Discrimination', if it is a trash target or a keeper.

- - - - - to be continued - - - - -

 

[Monte]

- - - - - the continuation - - - - -

I see Mr. Southern used a copper penny, not an Indian head one, to test the Vista detectors. Does this cast doubts on the validity of his test? What about the test with the half dime?

• A person COULD use an Indian Head Cent to be close to the actual encounter I had. But ....

a.. ANY of our US One Cent coins since 1865 are going to present the same size, shape and diameter for the test.

b.. As for a "copper" coin, when we got the smaller or thinner-size Indian Head Cents and right on with our Lincoln Cents up until we went to the 'modern' junk Zinc Cent, they were ALL listed as containing 95% copper (except for a few WW-II years). That would suggest they might have have the same or similar conductivity .... but they didn't. Even back in February of '81, two+ years before we got visual Target ID. Roy Lagal & I were discussing Discrimination and other topics and how we noted that most Indian Head Cents, and a lot of the early Wheat-Back Cents from 1909 to about 1920,had a slightly lower conductivity and could be rejected with some detectors with a broad-enough range than the so-called 'Copper' Cents made since then.

c.. Not everyone has an Indian Head Cent around for the 'test' and could use any Cent of the same size. Most of the time, if I don't have an Indian Head Cent handy, I will use a modern Zinc Cent because it's the same size, and is a bit lower-conductive and close to that of an Indian Head or very early Wheat-Back Cent.

• Does that cast doubts on the validity of the 'test'? No, not in my mind.

• The use of a Half-Dime in place of the Indian Head or other One Cent coin was done by me and with a couple of friends to revaluate a number of detectors and coils back in early 2017 when I got a Nokta Impact prototype/pre-production unit with their small elliptical coil. A couple of friends and I knew how our detectors handled tough Iron Nail environments in the ghost towns and similar places we hunt, and we just wanted to check out our detector outfits, a new detector and coil, and also present a tougher challenge than the NBPT using an Indian Head Cent. So, I got the 1836 Capped Bust Half-Dime I had found in my favorite townsite to use, knowing that while the Half-Dime was 89.xx% silver and a bit higher-conductive than an Indian Head Cent, it was also much smaller in diameter and thinner and only about half of the weight of a Silver Dime. It makes a 'valid test' because we, or anyone with a production, exacting Nail Board, can do the same 'test' and compare the performance in such a tougher challenge ... and it is.

In my opinion this is a better test but why the "made up" 1" distance that makes this no longer a test "based on an actual in field encounter"?

• The NBPT is a legitimate 'test' because it is an actual duplication of what was encountered. However, some folks think it isn't 'fair' because it is two-dimensional and not three. So, to make all future 'tests' consistent that I do, I used 1" corks on all four corners to separate two Nail Boards. That way all of the Coins in a #1 position are consistent and it is used to learn, and demonstrate, how that 1" separation with Coin higher and Nails lower, or with Nails higher and Coin lower, can have a dramatic effect on performance. Naturally, some detectors and coils are going to out-perform others in this evaluation, and for me and those who like to take on the challenges of similar old, ferrous-littered sites, it is a good way to know what detectors and coils and settings might work in our favor to help unmask good targets in tougher environments.

They are in the business to sell metal detectors and can see that your influence can help sell and also cause consumers to not buy certain detectors including White's and Tesoro.

• Whatever 'influence' I might have on the various detecting Forums might or might not help them sell detectors. I felt it would be good for them to have a uniform, and let me say 'official', Nail Board for their own use. The benefit in my view isn't directly for them to sell more detectors. But indirectly, if those manufacturers could make a detector and coil that performs very well on my NBPT, then it would be a detector and coil that would be of great interest to me, as well as many other avid detectorists who also like to take on the challenge of a very Iron Nail contaminated sites.

• As for White's, they had SOME models that worked pretty well in the 'test' but they had some that were anemic. If any detector and coil can produce 7 or 8 hits, then it works well enough for me to consider owning and using one for those difficult places. Garrett bought White's and hopefully we will see them continue to release one or two more models that I consider to be good units. And when we talk about most anything from Tesoro, I evaluate any detector I can get my hands on, and when it comes to the NBPT, I want to find any detector that can match the performance of most Tesoro's that easily get 8-out-of-8 to set the performance standard.

Don't get me wrong, I think this test is a useful one and another fun one to try. I would suggest putting a cover over it and circling 360 degrees around it. or using a bent nail or two which is much more likely in the places I hunt with nails.

• Anyone with a NB can put anything over it they would like, except a metal garbage can lid, and walk around it and approach it from any direction. Use multiple detectors and coils and note the exact directions where some units produce a good audio hit and check it with a different model and coil. See how many can match or better the results they might get with a Tesoro using a 6" Concentric or 7" Concentric coil. They won't find many, but it will be 'educational'.

That is my opinion but again, I am fairly new to metal detecting and do not claim to be an expert.

• Hey, nobody is an 'expert' and ever since I started in thi great sport I have committed myself to always be learning. I want to learn more, always refresh my memory of things I have learned in the past, and do what I can to share my detecting education and experiences with others to try and help them in whatever way I can. It's a really great sport and there are endless challenges out there for us to deal with, and each detector circuitry design can behave different from other makes and models, even if they seem to be similar. Coil changes also make a big difference, both by their size & shape and the type of internal design.

Monte

 

[Picketwire]

Thanks again Monte!

 

[Picketwire]

However, I believe the best 'test' would be something that is an actual representation of an in-the-field encounter and not simply some thought-up or imagined sample of good and bad targets in a random orientation.

How would the "best test" be a situation that will never be exactly encountered by another person when every target is found in a random orientations? Even you think the test is valid when held one inch above the coin which is not an "actual representation of an in-the-field encounter". Weren't the nails and Indian head penny in a random orientation when you found them. Weren't you standing in a random location when you found them and decided to position the lines on the test? Why is this test better than one "thought up" or "imagined"? Aren't scientific tests "thought up"? I am pretty sure that anyone can find an actual "in the field encounter" in the nail beds they detect and I am also pretty sure they will see the Tesoros shine in this situation if they have one. I guess I see the "best tests" are ones that pertain to the person detecting and how to do better with what they have than telling them this is the best because my test says so. I don't see how using a bent nail or moving a nail to a different position makes your test less valid. I think raising the test above the coin is a great idea, especially if you raise it incrementally, not just arbitrarily setting it at one inch.


Thank you for disagreeing agreeably and taking the time to respond. I pray that your health improves so you can enjoy this great hobby like you used to. God bless

 

[Monte]

How would the "best test" be a situation that will never be exactly encountered by another person when every target is found in a random orientations?

I'll clarify what I am referring to since we are discussing 'testing' as it applies to a lot of people and detectors who are spread out all around the globe. ANY 'test' is simply a way for the user to better understand a detector's adjustment functions, audio tones and visual display with a metal target encounter. We can learn more about a detector's circuitry design to know the weaknesses or strengths it might have for different applications, and we can also learn more about a detector's better-performing sweep speed, and what is functional if it is a little faster or slower than optimum.

'Testing' is something we should each do, whenever possible, with each detector and all the coils we have. Learn the detector and make sure you continue to learn it and practice with it to better know it and be in control of how to use it and where and when to use it. One issue we might encounter is to compare our results afield using the detector and coil and settings in our environment with someone else, in their environment with their detector and their coil and their settings and each of them working the search coils at different sweep-rates and coil presentations.

If I want to compere the performance I get with my Bandido II µMAX w/6" Concentric, as well as my Nokta FORS CoRe w/'OOR' DD, plus the results I get with my Garrett Apex w/'Ripper' DD coil, it is going to be difficult to do a reasonably legitimate or accurate 'test' if you are using different detectors and coils and settings, and if we are not able to compeer our detectors, coils and settings at the same time on the same located targets or using the same controlled 'test'.

I could suggest you grab a coin, any coin, and four or five nails of various sizes and shapes, and just scatter them around kind of close on the ground and see if YOUR detectors work as well as MY detectors and coils. Not a valid 'test' at all because your 'test' scenario is not going to be the same as mine.

The 'best test' will be to use the same test scenario with all of the targets, good and bad, orientated in the exact same position. Then, at least that part of the testing and learning equation is going to be fair and consistent. At that point any individual can test any detectors, coils and settings to see what works best for them and can provide the best, most consistent good performance. Using the exact same 'testing' set-up, such as my NBPT, anyone, anywhere, can then make a fair and reasonable comparison with the results anyone else gets.

That then becomes a 'best test' to have a standard, uniform test scenario to always evaluate any detector at any time. That gives us is a better knowledge or understanding of a detector or coil's strengths or weaknesses so we can make the best selection to hunt a more challenging site. Knowing what we might expect afield is part of the learning and practice and performance that results. The better we get, the better we can perform if we want to apply our skills.

Don't confuse a 'best test' with 'best performance afield' because doing the 'testing' along the way helps us to improve our knowledge and skills and select the better detector and coil for the task we plan to encounter.. Doing so will then enhance our opportunities to enjoy more successful results.

Yes, the Iron Nail challenges we are generally discussing are always going to be 'random encounters' so we never know for sue how many Nails might be close to a Coin, or their size or shape or if the Coin or Nails are slightly higher or lower than the others, or iof the Ion nails are straight or bent, or if the Coin is flat-to-the-ground or canted, or ??? If we set out to hunt an old ghost town, for example, and we know that the particular location is likely to have a lot of Iron Nails from torn-down or burned-down structures, we do have the choice to select a detector and coil that we feel might best deal with the challenges at-hand.

The site environment is going to have 'random' targets I have no control over. But, knowing that I might encounter some good-target masking Iron Nails, I DO have the choice to grab a coil and detector that I feel has proven some comparable ability to deal with such a harsh challenge. I can rely on one very proven, consistent, reliable 'best test' scenario of my NBPT and select a detector and coil that will give me at least 7-out-of-8 and possibly 8-out-of-8 good audible hits. That testing conclusion would tend to shift the odds a little more in my favor when hunting a 'random-target' site.

Even you think the test is valid when held one inch above the coin which is not an "actual representation of an in-the-field encounter". Weren't the nails and Indian head penny in a random orientation when you found them. Weren't you standing in a random location when you found them and decided to position the lines on the test? Why is this test better than one "thought up" or "imagined"?

Yes, all of the Nails and Indian Head Cent were, and on my NBPT are, in the exact orientation and Yes, they were all flat of the ground surface.

As I just explained, any 'test' we do is not to say one detector is or isn't better than what someone else uses. That's for them to decide. Instead, a 'test' is just that and we can do anything to alter any test to have a 'random' display. Since it is possible to have an encounter where the Iron Nails or the Coin might be slightly higher than or lower than the other, I simply made the test easier for anyone to learn from and understand, and the best way to do that would be to have the difference in target level be a measured amount. In this case, only about a 1" difference. That's enough to demonstrate the difference between the ferrous junk and non-ferrous keeper and how target masking is so easy to happen and cause challenges.

My NBPT is "better than imagined or thought up" simply because it is what it is an in-the-field encounter, and all of the NB's provide a consistent testing medium for anyone anywhere. That doesn't make other random tests anyone does useless or invalid because they are still ways to learn more about a detector and how they might work.

Aren't scientific tests "thought up"? I am pretty sure that anyone can find an actual "in the field encounter" in the nail beds they detect and I am also pretty sure they will see the Tesoros shine in this situation if they have one.

If I know I am going to work a dense bed of closely-positioned Iron Nails, I will want to have one of the my favorite detectors in-hand. Often, through the many years since July of '83, I tackled such conditions with one of my favorite Tesoro's. Because they had proven to me their abilities in tough ferrous conditions, aka 'best performance afield' , and i was confident how they would perform based on that from the summer of '83 until summer of '94, and confirmed their abilities with my NBPT from then to the present which is a 'best test' .

I guess I see the "best tests" are ones that pertain to the person detecting and how to do better with what they have than telling them this is the best because my test says so.

That's what ALL 'testing' does, to help any individual learn what they have and how to get the most out of it ... while also learning any short-comings.

I don't see how using a bent nail or moving a nail to a different position makes your test less valid. I think raising the test above the coin is a great idea, especially if you raise it incrementally, not just arbitrarily setting it at one inch.

In any 'test' we might do, if we alter the orientation or size or shap4 or position of the good or bad targets we are also going to alter to potential results. Especially if you change the size or shape or position of a ferrous target because that metal hs a greater effect on the EMF than does a similar-size non-ferrous object.

Thank you for disagreeing agreeably and taking the time to respond. I pray that your health improves so you can enjoy this great hobby like you used to. God bless

Okay, enough or this topic!! Time to move on to something different. I wish you were close to me here in Mid-West Texas and could attend one of my day-long classroom Metal Detecting Seminars. Attendees and I always learn something new or understand some things better.

Monte

 

[Picketwire]

Okay, enough or this topic!! Time to move on to something different.

Thank you for moving on. I am here to learn and I don't believe that you have said anything on this thread that I haven't read from you before. What I want is for another expert or if you are not one, an expert to explain why they use different ones than you do in iron, kind of a trust but verify thing. If this is the ultimate test why don't all experts use the same thing in nails? That is what I am looking for. You made your case long ago. I want more information, thank you.

 

[Monte]

What I want is for another expert or if you are not one, an expert to explain why they use different ones than you do in iron, kind of a trust but verify thing.

I am sure you can get another experience, avid detectorist to join in with their suggestions or recommendations for testing in iron nails. That is what you hope for, someone with experience.

I do not and have never claimed to be an expert. I don't believe there is an "expert" by definition .... There are only those who have a lot of experience hunting in dense iron nail sites, and those with little or no field experience. Then there are a lot of hobbyists in the middle who think they know what some challenging environments are, and later find out they didn't.

If this is the ultimate test why don't all experts use the same thing in nails? That is what I am looking for.

There is no "ultimate" test, but to have any 'test' be useful and comparable, it must be consistent. My NBPT is. There are other 'tests' that use nails and I have tried many of them.

You you can go online and look at all sorts of videos people do comparing their detector and their coil and their settings using iron nails. You can see how their results are and you can try those similar tests with your own detectors and coils and settings and know if your detector and setup will match the performance they get. No doubt when you see different tests you might wonder if they are a valid or legitimate test, and all they are is a test just a test. It may not be a duplicate of an in the field encounter but it is a test to learn how your particular detector and chosen search coil and adjustment settings might handle a comparable situation.

You made your case long ago. I want more information, thank you.

Well I'm glad I could help in any way I could and I also look for other people too offer up their suggestions of how to do tests that would help an individual select the better detector and coil and settings to handle similar challenging sites. As I've mentioned, I have five different detector models with the coils I find work best on them, and they serve me well in the challenging sites I hunt. I hope you can also select detectors that handle your needs to bring you satisfying results.

Monte

 

[Picketwire]

Monte, at your advice long ago i purchased a Tesoro. Today I have 6 of them. If I was hunting for my life in heavy iron nail situations, it would probably be what I would use. I have seen other people with lots of experience that use different detectors, which I do not have, say that their detector, which you have passed by is better than the one you recommend. It is like doctors, I want a second opinion and then decide which is more valid for me.

I truly am thankful for your replies and am sorry for taking so much of your time which would be better used helping others than defending your test. If someone else responds why their's is better, I will quote you to let you know there was a response. Once again, sir, thank you for your time.

 

[Monte]

Monte, at your advice long ago i purchased a Tesoro. Today I have 6 of them.

My personal opinion is that just about everyone in this great sport ought to own at least one good, reliable Tesoro model. Biased, yes, but that because they work so well for so many applications for 38+ years now. Oh, I have other detectors that I really enjoy using, and they have some3 of that nifty 'mod3ern' stuff like visual TID eith VDI read-outs and Audio Tone ID ... but for all these many years I have made sure I had at lest a couple of favorite Tesoro's at-hand. Six? That's a nice number. I'm down to only three of my favorites. A pristine Bandido II µMAX and Silver Sabre µMAX that are at the ready for any adventure, and a very clean Silver Sabre µMAX that is a constant-carry companion in my vehicle for any opportunity that shows its face. All three wear a 6" Concentric coil.

If I was hunting for my life in heavy iron nail situations, it would probably be what I would use. I have seen other people with lots of experience that use different detectors, which I do not have, say that their detector, which you have passed by is better than the one you recommend. It is like doctors, I want a second opinion and then decide which is more valid for me.

Those who have attended one of the Welcome-to-Hunt Outings I've hosted in Northern Nevada and Eastern Oregon ghost towns know what we are discussing when I related the very dense ferrous debris in many parts or them, and quite a few learned that what they used, detector & coil, fell a bit short on performance so they grabbed something different from their vehicle, or made sure they attended the next WTHO with better-performing equipment for tough Iron Nail and other touch conditions.

I really like my Garrett Apex models, with each of the three sporting a different coil, and they come close to matching the performance my Tesoro's give me in nasty conditions. That's why I like them and keep in in my working outfit. For the most challenging old sites with ferrous discards, my all-purpose go-to detectors are my Nokta FORS CoRe (Coin & Relic) w/4.7X5.2 DD aka 'OOR' coil, and my FORS Relic w/5" DD coil because they can match or better the performance I get from my Tesoro's nd give me the added functions of Tone ID & Target ID, and also allow a lower Disc. setting if desired.

I truly am thankful for your replies and am sorry for taking so much of your time which would be better used helping others than defending your test. If someone else responds why their's is better, I will quote you to let you know there was a response. Once again, sir, thank you for your time.

Just remember that when I make most forum posts they are to answer an individual's particular question or comment, but they are really directed to any and all readers who have the same ponderings but often remain silent. And yes, some of my comments were to 'defend' my NBPT, but were really to point out that any or all 'tests' we want to use for comparison purpose need to be duplicates rather than random suggestions. Remember, we should select detectors to handle the task-at-hand because not all detectors to all things well. Of the 5 models I use, they are all very good for the Iron nails and similar challenges I typically encounter. However, if I set out to hunt an old house or structure site where I might encounter a small, hidden stash of coins (which I have dons several times this past half-century) I would not use some of the models that fail to hit on a shot-stack of silver coins I use as a 'test' sample. That is 5 Walking Liberty Halves stacked on top of a Silver Dollar, with bare metal contact. Many are surprised how some of our 'modern' detectors can't do that in their Discriminate mode .... or know why they can't.

Best to you and get out and hunt up something good.

Monte