What does a cache of coins sound like?

[Don in South Jersey]

I hope to find one some day, but for those who have, I was wondering how did your detector respond. When I had my E-Trac, if I was over a large beer can or large piece of junk metal,sometimes I would get an overload message on my detector. If coins were spread out overlapping each other say bigger than 5" round, would it show up on your detector as a good signal or come across as overload and why?

Thanks

 

[kaptainkosmic]

n/t

 

[Tom Slick]

beep-beep-beep-beep-beep-beep-beep-beep-beep-beepbeep-beep-beep-beep-beep-beep-beep-beep-beep-beep-beep-beep-beep-beep-beep-beep-beep-beep-beep-beepbeep-beep-beep-beep-beep-beep-beep-beep-beep-beep-

 

[Hank68]

Ding ding ding ding chirp ding.

 

[jim tn]

I just recently dug 32 coins and a couple of rings with the ruminates of a plastic bag with my F 75 LTD. The coins were spread out over a 5-6" diameter and around 3-4" deep. In 3h tones it was a high coin tone, but of course, bigger. Because of its size, I almost didn't dig it. But, there was just something about it that triggered me to do so. Cache??? HH jim tn

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Hey Don, I had to chuckle at hank68 and Tom-slick's answer But when you think of it, there is really no way to ask a question of "what does something sound like", in printed text, afterall. Because sounds can only be heard. No amount of reading about how something "sounds", conveys "sound". It would be like asking "what does the note of C-minor sound like?" and thinking you can get an answer in printed text. But the only way to know, is to actually hear the note of c-minor, not read something in print.

But to add more comment to the rest of your question (as it concerns over-load signals): Yes it's true that a can-size item or larger gives the over-load signal, yet this is *only* true insofar as depth of the item is concerned. So for example: A flattened aluminum can will give an overload signal, if only 2 inches deep. However, that same flattened aluminum can at 1 ft. deep, might not give the over-load signal, since it's further from the coil. It might give a quarter TID at 1 ft. deep, for instance (albeit a different size beep, and not as clean as a surface quarter, or whatever).

Thus deeper caches might not be expected to give over-load signals, depending on their size. A refrigerator sized object will indeed give an overload signal even at 1 or 2 ft. deep, but a can may go out of the over-load range, at depths beyond 6" or so. So it all depends on the size of the object, and depth, as to whether you get the over-load signal.

 

[Critterhunter]

I've found on my machine when testing that a pile of silver coins will still sound like a quality "coin" signal, where as a beer can will have a harsher sound and also a bunch of "junk" sounds mixed in here and there, like bouncing a bit down into the aluminum trash lower audio tone, but yea mostly it's a loud coin signal...but not as "clean" as a real pile of tested silver coins. Kind'a like in a sense how a screw cap will sound like a coin but it will warble a bit (on my machine). While the main "coin" signal is still prmary in a can signal, it also has more of a harsh and "trash" signal in it for split seconds at a time. This all depends on how detailed and capable that audio is on your machine, as I've owned ones that didn't provide such information in their audio. In particular the "beep" processed stuff doesn't relate these traits very well.

Now, if a cache of coins is in a glass jar with a glass lid then you'll hear a big coin signal. But if it's in a mason jar with a zinc lid then guess what you hear? Yep, a crappy coin signal, as I get those from mason jar lids. Dug a ton of those and my heart always skips when I see it in the ground, pulling it out hoping their is a jar attached. Never is.

But what about a glass jar of coins with a glass lid that has a wire bracket holding the lid on? Unless the wire has long since rotted and washed away you'll never hear those coins unless they are filled to the lid and so real close to the wire, where perhaps you can move off the wire with your detection field and still nip the coins off to the side of it. The field stops with the first metal object it hits, and that's the wire if it's there, so the only hope is to move off the wire with the field and the coins are so filled to the top you can still see the coin without the wire being in the field too. if the wire is the first thing hit then it's game over and all you'll get is a small iron signal or null.

Now what about a cache of coins in a metal box? Iron signal. Big one. And that's it. Period. End of story too. So IMO if you are hunting where you expect a cache you've got to dig any and all iron signals, especially ones that sound bigger than a nail, but then again that "nail" signal might be the top bracket wire on a glass jar holding the lid on as talked about above.

 

[oldcoon]

Beep ..... Beep ..... Beep ........ who's your daddy? ........ Beep ........ Beep ...... Beep

 

[hershey1]

Do not use any discrimination if you think there is a chance of a buried jar or other iron containers that might hold treasure. Old jar lids are the norm around old home sites and you never know what may be screwed or clamped onto them. I found an old wooden box one time that had SILVER ware in it. I have hunted that old homeplace many times since hoping to find something else that might be buried there but have'nt found anything like that. It sounded like silver but of course larger than normal. HH

 

[Critterhunter]

One time I got a good lead on a possible cache. A man owned a home who was known to have money. There was an empty lot right next door that he owned at the time and he stayed in a shed on that empty lot at all hours of the day it seemed to my friend, as my older friend said when he was a kid that old man would freak if you went anywhere near his shed on that lot, and the shed had a dirt floor. Hmmmm....

Years later he died and the lot next door was turned over to the city due to a tax lean or something like that. His kids still owned the house and they tore it apart looking for his money because he had zero bank accounts.

So I hear this story from my older friend who had the run ins with the old man and the shed when he was a kid, and as he's lived across the street from that lot and house his whole life he said he's never see the ground disturbed or anybody detecting it. So I ask...where do you remember that shed standing and he takes me over to the spot. The lot was still city owned so no issues and there were no no tresspassing signs.

I hunted the general area of where that shed used to be thinking he buried the money in the dirt floor and suddenly I get a large signal. I dig and I see the top half of a canvas money bag type deal staring me right in the face! The top was tied carefully too! My heart was going a mile a minute. I grabbed the top of the bag and pulled it out of the ground and it was HEAVY!

Open the darn thing up and it was a bag full of old nails and nuts and bolts that he must have buried to get rid of! And no, it wasn't a prank pulled on me, as the ground and grass wasn't disturbed and the nuts/bolts/nails were so rusty you could tell it had been in the ground for a long time.

 

[Ed in SoDak]

Maybe I watched too many Mayberry episodes, but I'd suspect moonshinin' or some such, as much as some old guy constantly hovering over his stash o' coins or nails or what have you. He seemed awful protective of something and it's much harder to bury or hide a whiskey still than a crock of old coins, so it becomes important to keep any prying eyes at a distance, especially those of curious children.

From an owner's perspective of a cache, most folks would likely hide a treasure somewhere they could see the location while keeping themselves hidden from view, such as peeking through a window towards it. The fewer times they visited their hiding spot, the better. That's not to say someone wouldn't hide it right underfoot or almost in plain view, but acting like you're standing guard over something only serves to draw attention to it, as your old acquaintance noticed.

There's a local story or two here of buried coin caches. I'm not certain if there was ever a recovery, but there's enough evidence to say they existed. One involved an eccentric gentleman who often did some rather strange things. The telling of just those quirky instances would make a good story in itself. But he supposedly did, by gosh, bury coins in jars. I did search for them one time, but the property has changed hands since and I haven't been back. I guessed the jars would have a "junk" signature, owing to the lids, but it's also possible a jar was on its side or at an angle and maybe some coin signals could be detected.

I later had a thought that might have helped me. That's to try scanning any "junk" target with the coil off to the side, facing towards the signal at an angle, but aimed somewhere below it. The coil's area of detection pushes outwards in a bowl-shape, that is more or less straight-sided and flat-bottomed, depending somewhat on the coil's design. Tilting the coil to one side can angle the detection field to aim below the surface somewhat beneath a more shallow object to detect what lays below it.

Think of it kinda like how you'd bend down and crane your neck to look under the car for your kid's baseball that rolled under it. Aim your coil to "look" sideways and beneath a junky surface target to maybe pick up an elongated coin signal that might be directly beneath the iron lid.

Just a concept I'm tossing out there, with no recoveries to back it up.

-Ed

 

[Critterhunter]

I didn't assume the guy was hovering around in his shed because he had his money buried in the floor. I'm sure he had other reasons to be in there all the time, but that's also why it would be the perfect place to bury your money since you're also keeping an eye on it in the process of doing whatever else you got going on in there (moonshining or whatever).

As for "aiming" the coil at an angle...I think it would be all but impossible because the field stops and interacts with the first metal thing it hits. The field tends to be broader the closer it is to the coil, so picture trying to use a balloon to touch the side of the jar without hitting the lid at all, and also that the balloon can't be dropped past a certain point due to it being tied to a string (you're coil not obviously being able to be lowered further then the physical surface of the ground). Ain't saying it's not possible to perhaps angle the signal a bit but I think it'd be darn near impossible to hit the coils under the lid at just the right angle without hitting the lid first. Too "blunt" of a signal and with no real way to drop the signal somewhat lower so it could get the right angle on missing the lid and still hitting the coins. That's my theory anyway, but I'm too tired to really think it out all the way right now.

 

[michaelosully]

Ka-ching!

 

[Fabio]

If it's a hundred pennies, then you'll hear the sound of a Loony, in Canada... or a paper dollar bill, in the U.S.

 

[Ed in SoDak]

The pattern on the coils I've tested is bell-shaped in all metal but it becomes remarkably cylindrical and flat-bottomed in disc mode. Since we're trying to distinguish between a zinc or iron lid versus some sort of conglomerate coin signal beneath, then disc is the way to go and it should be possible to "aim" this cylinder of detection area somewhere beneath a more shallow and presumed junk top. All I can say is hey, it's worth a try!
-Ed

 

[Ed in SoDak]

Well, my idea didn't work out when I drew it on the computer. The 8" coil's detection pattern wasn't deep enough to peer at a target from the side. The jar's lid was included in the detection field and the coil edge was on the soil.
-Ed