Find's Treasure Forums

Welcome to Find's Treasure Forums, Guests!

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.

Click here to register!



Need Support Help?

Cannot log in?, click here to have new password emailed to you

Which Beach Machine???

Jackalope

New member
As a fairly new beach hunter I was faced with spending a considerable amount of money on an underwater unit based on the info here and other forums. Didn't have anybody local to check with, so sorting through the written info took some time.

Immediate thoughts would be to get the deepest unit available but at one time or another almost all units available were described as "deeper". Occasionally, a load of finds was posted that supposedly removed all doubt about the unit mentioned. Talk about confusing.

Decided to ignore the hype and get a unit that would do what I needed it to do. But what did I need the unit to do? During one on my pre-sleep episodes, the thought came to me that what is important is how much sand you check when hunting. I'm talking volume in cubic inches. If you thoroughly cover an area of (500ft.or 6000 in) X (500 ft.or 6000 in) X (12 in deep) you get 432 million cubic inches checked If, on the other hand, you thoroughly cover an area of (100 ft or 1200 in) X (100 ft or 1200 in) X (16 in deep) you get around 23 million cubic inches checked. That's like an 18 or 19 to one chance you'll find something good by checking more cubic inches of sand.

Sooooo..... it became obvious that I wanted a unit that covered the beach quickly instead of one where I stood in one area hammering the hard pan. Although I've never had any experience with P.I.'s or other touted units, the common threads were that you needed to go slow with these units or dig most everything. If I were younger, it might be fun to give the DF PI a go. When I was in Galveston, the only iron I dug was I.D 'd by my unit as such but I just wanted to confirmed that my md was doing its job. Also, the 14K gold bracelet was recovered in the first scoop, so not all the good stuff is deeper. I'm a firm believer in what's written at the Golden Olde that, when prime areas open up for a short period, you need to move quickly before things close down.

That's my take on the subject. Most of the experienced hunters have spent much time with various units, and P.I's and such are within their ability to make good finds. Your average Joe (Jane) needs to have their efforts rewarded or they'll probably never join the ranks of the experienced.

Ron
 
The covered volume thought has been in my mind for a while. I have been considering the cleansweep coil for the Sand Shark. Supposedly not as deep, but when covering an18 inch path in each sweep, the total volume swept adds quickly.

I did not find going slow was needed with the Sand Shark. Listening closely to the threshold is.
tvr
 
That is one way to look at it. But where that volume lies is more important to me. I would rather cover 200 square yards to a depth of 8" than 400 at 4". Same total volume, but I would rather have my extra volume at depth. The depth becomes even more important in the water or soft sand where the heavier and more valuable targets sink deeper. I tend to find more of value by hunting as deep as I can as well as I can. That means I do not cover area as fast as some do, but it is what works for me. My two cents, hope it is useful.
 
I think your point of view is very useful but using depths of 4" and 8" sort of avoids the real debate. Most, if not all, VF/VLF beach machines will solidly hit targets at 12" or more, while the P.I.'s claim
16" or more. Also your assumption that the faster machines only cover twice as much area as the slower machines really misses the mark. The ratio is like 5 to 1 or more.

My thinking is that the difference between the two styles of hunting comes down to (1) whether you wish to hunt much more area down to 12" and recover more good targets and wait for beach conditions to uncover those targets just out of reach or (2) if it's more important to find targets that others can't reach by moving slowly, and that's more important than finding larger numbers of good targets located on the beach in question.

Although I feel the (volume of sand covered) method is far more productive than the (greater depth) method, maybe some folks just enjoy going slower. At least until some hunter goes zipping by with a VLF machine and recovers something special that you would have recovered had you been moving quicker.

Ron
 
Your using to much brain power. Find out what everyone in your aerais using . If they are using exals or Infiniums and you buy a CZ21 the chance are pritty good that you won't find any thing . You have to keep up with everyone else or your not going to find much. So HH Ron Lord Naples, FL
 
I'm thinking most all of the dedicated Beach Machines have reliable depth (12") but not all allow you to move quickly and cover large areas of beach. I believe the depth thing, although on the surface it sounds too good to pass up, is a distraction from the real goal. My focus is coverage as I believe more good targets will be recovered that way.

My beach hunting machine is the White's Beach Hunter I. D. 300 with the 12" coil and, although I have limited experience with it, has proved to me it has great beach coverage and excellent depth. Certainly, there are others that will provide the coverage to get the job done.

I'm not one to follow the pack.

Ron
 
Top