The purpose of the post (and why I am not posting this in beach hunting forum) is not to start an angry debate over which PI unit goes deeper or which is more sensitive to small targets. I am only posting this to help those thinking about buying a Sand Shark and those who want some comparison information about how the Sand Shark works in a particular environment.
A little about me: I have been detecting for about four years now. I developed an early preference for Tesoro detectors as I enjoyed them, but I have used or tested a wide variety of units from other manufacturers. I also own and use non-Tesoro units. I live about forty miles from the beaches of the east coast of Central Florida and I get to hunt them about twice a month. Overall, I get in about 4-6 hours of detecting a week because I work full time. I started early on with a Sand Shark and tried using it everywhere on the beach. Not the best idea. The beach was loaded with trash, especially the dry sand, and I exhausted myself regularly with little to show for my efforts. In frustration, I finally sold my Sand Shark.
Fast forward to the present. A little more experienced and a little wiser, I was looking for two beach units: one for the dry sand and one for the wet. I decided on a PI unit for the wet, mostly because I just did not trust the accuracy of the tones on dual or multi-frequency VLF detectors. In the wet sand, I feel digging it all is best. I eventually decided on another Sand Sand because I knew how well they were built and that they also had a volume control (a great feature most PI detectors do not offer). I will confess that if Detectorpro was still making the Headhunter Pulse, I probably would have bought it, but since it isn't, the Sand Shark became my new first choice. I purchased the unit with the 8" coil.
The Atlantic Ocean beaches along Central Florida are mutli-colored sands, not the white sand beaches you find on the panhndle. It has a reputation for being a tougher environment to hunt in th wet stuff. On this Sunday morning, I arrived at the beach near low tide. The stretch of wet sand ran between 5-10 yards from the dry sand to the water line. I did not go into the water beyond my ankles. I walked a regular pattern from the dry sand to the water line and back up to the dry again, slowly moving across the shoreline. I hunted for about three hours and only saw one other detectorist, an Excal user who was mostly following the shore line. We waved but did not speak.
I ran the Sand Shark in VCO mode, the Pulse Rate just past the recommended preset mark, the Threshold barely audible, and the volume at a comfortable level.
These beaches are heavily hunted and frequently re-sanded, especially during hurricane season, so targets were few and far between. This photo shows all of the targets I dug, with the exception of one rusted and blackened bottlecap that I threw out.
The last target I dug was the earring in the picture, placed next to a dime to give you a size reference.
The signal came in faint, but repeatable. It was faint at every angle, but there was clearly a target under the coil. My sand scoop is smaller type that holds about 2 quarts of sand with a full scoop, and took a couple of scoops to make wider hole (pinpointing is still a bit of challenge). I tested the signal again. Still faint. Took another scoop. Still faint. Third scoop, the signal disappeared. Did I have it?
The good part about this hole was that just beneath wet sand was a deep layer of hard sand and crushed shells, so the hole did not collapse as I dug. It did fill with water, but the tide did not come up to the edge.
I emptied the scoop onto the sand and scanned it. The target now read out very loud and very clear. Why the difference in volume? I can only assume this target was lying at an angle and did not provide enough mass to give the detector a more solid target. But out of the hole it was laying on its side (I could see it when I smooth out the sand pile with my foot) and the signal strength increased greatly.
The depth of the earring was right at 6" in wet salt sand. I was impressed by both the size of the target and th depth at which it could be found. PI units may be dead to small targets beyond a certain range, but the facts surrounding this unit show that it can hit very small targets at 6 incles, and very likely deeper depending on what angle the target is lying in the sand.
I hope this post is useful to anyone using the Sand Shark or looking for data on the sensitivity of PI units in general.
A little about me: I have been detecting for about four years now. I developed an early preference for Tesoro detectors as I enjoyed them, but I have used or tested a wide variety of units from other manufacturers. I also own and use non-Tesoro units. I live about forty miles from the beaches of the east coast of Central Florida and I get to hunt them about twice a month. Overall, I get in about 4-6 hours of detecting a week because I work full time. I started early on with a Sand Shark and tried using it everywhere on the beach. Not the best idea. The beach was loaded with trash, especially the dry sand, and I exhausted myself regularly with little to show for my efforts. In frustration, I finally sold my Sand Shark.
Fast forward to the present. A little more experienced and a little wiser, I was looking for two beach units: one for the dry sand and one for the wet. I decided on a PI unit for the wet, mostly because I just did not trust the accuracy of the tones on dual or multi-frequency VLF detectors. In the wet sand, I feel digging it all is best. I eventually decided on another Sand Sand because I knew how well they were built and that they also had a volume control (a great feature most PI detectors do not offer). I will confess that if Detectorpro was still making the Headhunter Pulse, I probably would have bought it, but since it isn't, the Sand Shark became my new first choice. I purchased the unit with the 8" coil.
The Atlantic Ocean beaches along Central Florida are mutli-colored sands, not the white sand beaches you find on the panhndle. It has a reputation for being a tougher environment to hunt in th wet stuff. On this Sunday morning, I arrived at the beach near low tide. The stretch of wet sand ran between 5-10 yards from the dry sand to the water line. I did not go into the water beyond my ankles. I walked a regular pattern from the dry sand to the water line and back up to the dry again, slowly moving across the shoreline. I hunted for about three hours and only saw one other detectorist, an Excal user who was mostly following the shore line. We waved but did not speak.
I ran the Sand Shark in VCO mode, the Pulse Rate just past the recommended preset mark, the Threshold barely audible, and the volume at a comfortable level.
These beaches are heavily hunted and frequently re-sanded, especially during hurricane season, so targets were few and far between. This photo shows all of the targets I dug, with the exception of one rusted and blackened bottlecap that I threw out.
The last target I dug was the earring in the picture, placed next to a dime to give you a size reference.
The signal came in faint, but repeatable. It was faint at every angle, but there was clearly a target under the coil. My sand scoop is smaller type that holds about 2 quarts of sand with a full scoop, and took a couple of scoops to make wider hole (pinpointing is still a bit of challenge). I tested the signal again. Still faint. Took another scoop. Still faint. Third scoop, the signal disappeared. Did I have it?
The good part about this hole was that just beneath wet sand was a deep layer of hard sand and crushed shells, so the hole did not collapse as I dug. It did fill with water, but the tide did not come up to the edge.
I emptied the scoop onto the sand and scanned it. The target now read out very loud and very clear. Why the difference in volume? I can only assume this target was lying at an angle and did not provide enough mass to give the detector a more solid target. But out of the hole it was laying on its side (I could see it when I smooth out the sand pile with my foot) and the signal strength increased greatly.
The depth of the earring was right at 6" in wet salt sand. I was impressed by both the size of the target and th depth at which it could be found. PI units may be dead to small targets beyond a certain range, but the facts surrounding this unit show that it can hit very small targets at 6 incles, and very likely deeper depending on what angle the target is lying in the sand.
I hope this post is useful to anyone using the Sand Shark or looking for data on the sensitivity of PI units in general.
nice earring.that would be a tough target for any detector at six inches in wet sand .when I am having a hard time pinpointing width the sand shark I will switch from the vco to the normal its got a little more punch ,I also turn my pulse with up .