A
Anonymous
Guest
its sold by accurate locators. supposedly it can blow the doors off any other pulse detector. im looking for a pulse for gold prospecting.
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
A
Anonymous
Guest
Hey David,
Looking at the specs it looks like it's more designed for cache hunting. Also, with only a couple 9V batteries it's probably not a very high-power machine.
Looking at the specs it looks like it's more designed for cache hunting. Also, with only a couple 9V batteries it's probably not a very high-power machine.
A
Anonymous
Guest
Hi David,
I agree with Jeff on the pulse penetrator. Based upon the specs I would guess there are much better machines for gold prospecting.
If you have the patience you might wait a while. There are strong rumors that Eric Foster is developing a new gold machine more advance than his previous Goldscan 4. I have one of the older Goldscan 4 models and with the addition of autotuning, it is a great machine. I would expect the next generation to be even greater. The beauty of the Goldscan 4 is it doesn't see most of the more common type of hotrocks or black sand.
In the meantime, you might want to consider one of Eric Foster's other machines. I cannot tell you first hand on all his machines and how well they will pick up hotrocks or black sand, but the responses on this forum clearly indicate they do a exceptional job on gold.
I have been playing with another detector based on the Beachscan design that seems to work quite well with a delay of 15 usec. This machine seems to be quite sensitive, basically ignores most hotrocks and black sand, and hits hard on gold. My guess, the Beachscan with a larger coil would do the same. The 8" coil would probably hit on smaller gold a little better, but I don't know for sure how hotrocks respond. Mr. Bill should be able to answer that better than me.
The down side of a Beachscan design is like all other PI's without ground balancing, they are sensitive to certain ground conditions. The more sensitive they are the more responsive they are to different ground minerals. I have found that in some areas I can hunt with ease. In other areas, I have to be more careful to keep the coil at a constant height above the ground or run at zero threshold and lose a little depth to avoid false ground signals.
Maybe we can talk Jeff K into giving us an idea how responsive the Deepstar is to various ground conditions on land and if someting like turning the sensitivity down and running low power have any significant effects of ground signals as well as depth decreases.
Reg
I agree with Jeff on the pulse penetrator. Based upon the specs I would guess there are much better machines for gold prospecting.
If you have the patience you might wait a while. There are strong rumors that Eric Foster is developing a new gold machine more advance than his previous Goldscan 4. I have one of the older Goldscan 4 models and with the addition of autotuning, it is a great machine. I would expect the next generation to be even greater. The beauty of the Goldscan 4 is it doesn't see most of the more common type of hotrocks or black sand.
In the meantime, you might want to consider one of Eric Foster's other machines. I cannot tell you first hand on all his machines and how well they will pick up hotrocks or black sand, but the responses on this forum clearly indicate they do a exceptional job on gold.
I have been playing with another detector based on the Beachscan design that seems to work quite well with a delay of 15 usec. This machine seems to be quite sensitive, basically ignores most hotrocks and black sand, and hits hard on gold. My guess, the Beachscan with a larger coil would do the same. The 8" coil would probably hit on smaller gold a little better, but I don't know for sure how hotrocks respond. Mr. Bill should be able to answer that better than me.
The down side of a Beachscan design is like all other PI's without ground balancing, they are sensitive to certain ground conditions. The more sensitive they are the more responsive they are to different ground minerals. I have found that in some areas I can hunt with ease. In other areas, I have to be more careful to keep the coil at a constant height above the ground or run at zero threshold and lose a little depth to avoid false ground signals.
Maybe we can talk Jeff K into giving us an idea how responsive the Deepstar is to various ground conditions on land and if someting like turning the sensitivity down and running low power have any significant effects of ground signals as well as depth decreases.
Reg
A
Anonymous
Guest
thanks reg iknew you guys would know something about this detector.the goldscan 4 sounds great but bob fitzgerald told me the 18000 would be a better choice,and i value his opinion,but on the other hand,pulse IS the deepest. i dont give a damn about the small nuggets,but when that thing beeps i want to know its a big one!!! if you use a large coil it should not respond to small trash,but would only sound off on large targets. i have often wondered about eric's detectors and how they would work for prospecting,but there dosent seem to be any research done in that area. i wish we could get some info from eric on this. by the way what is the largest coil you can get on the goldscan4?
A
Anonymous
Guest
Hi David,
Eric doesn't make the Goldscan 4 any more and hasn't for several years. I picked mine up used.
As for the XT 18000, it is a good gold machine. I know I have one. The XT is a smooth machine, ground balances well, and does a great job of picking up gold. The problem I have found with VLF's including the XT 18000 is it is easy for a gold nugget to "hide" under a hotrock or in black sand areas. VlF's including the XT 18000 have problems with this. The worse the ground, the more problems including depth loss occurs.
That is where a PI should excel. If they ignore hotrocks and black sand and still pick up gold under them, they will beat a VLF hands down in such areas.
You can take the XT 18000 make several passes over the hotrock/gold nugget combination and after 3 passes or so, you will probably hear the nugget, but this means each and every rock suspected to be a hotrock would have to be given the same treatment to be sure a nugget isn't hidden under it.
My experience is this, I can take a nice quarter ounce nugget place it under a fist size hotrock and pass a VLF that is properly ground balanced to surrounding ground conditions over the hotrck/nugget combination and miss the nugget. Actually, I have experimented and found a half ounce nugget can also be ignored under the same conditions.
I can repeat the same tests using my Goldscan and my other PI and pick up the nugget every time. More importantly, I reduce the nugget to a 10 grainer and repeat the test and still pick up the nugget. Finally, I can remove all nuggets, pass over the rocks, and notthing, zilch, zero signal, indicating the signals were coming from the gold.
As for me, I will have both types of machines and use them both. However, in the black sand environments or where the area is ladened with magnetite hotrocks, I will most likely use a PI.
One last note, when I refer to most hotrocks I am referring to the magnetite family of hotrocks, the ones that are readily attracted to a magnet. Volcanic rocks such as basalt, and a few of the other hotrocks that normally respond with a positive indication will give a positive response on both the VLF's and the PI's. There is no easy way to get rid of them.
Reg
Eric doesn't make the Goldscan 4 any more and hasn't for several years. I picked mine up used.
As for the XT 18000, it is a good gold machine. I know I have one. The XT is a smooth machine, ground balances well, and does a great job of picking up gold. The problem I have found with VLF's including the XT 18000 is it is easy for a gold nugget to "hide" under a hotrock or in black sand areas. VlF's including the XT 18000 have problems with this. The worse the ground, the more problems including depth loss occurs.
That is where a PI should excel. If they ignore hotrocks and black sand and still pick up gold under them, they will beat a VLF hands down in such areas.
You can take the XT 18000 make several passes over the hotrock/gold nugget combination and after 3 passes or so, you will probably hear the nugget, but this means each and every rock suspected to be a hotrock would have to be given the same treatment to be sure a nugget isn't hidden under it.
My experience is this, I can take a nice quarter ounce nugget place it under a fist size hotrock and pass a VLF that is properly ground balanced to surrounding ground conditions over the hotrck/nugget combination and miss the nugget. Actually, I have experimented and found a half ounce nugget can also be ignored under the same conditions.
I can repeat the same tests using my Goldscan and my other PI and pick up the nugget every time. More importantly, I reduce the nugget to a 10 grainer and repeat the test and still pick up the nugget. Finally, I can remove all nuggets, pass over the rocks, and notthing, zilch, zero signal, indicating the signals were coming from the gold.
As for me, I will have both types of machines and use them both. However, in the black sand environments or where the area is ladened with magnetite hotrocks, I will most likely use a PI.
One last note, when I refer to most hotrocks I am referring to the magnetite family of hotrocks, the ones that are readily attracted to a magnet. Volcanic rocks such as basalt, and a few of the other hotrocks that normally respond with a positive indication will give a positive response on both the VLF's and the PI's. There is no easy way to get rid of them.
Reg
A
Anonymous
Guest
wow!! it makes you wonder how much gold we've missed over the years with vlf's! i dont think i want to know! so do you think that the goldscan4 is the best for nugget hunting,or would the aquapulse or beachscan be better?
A
Anonymous
Guest
Hi again,
David, I forgot to mention that I believe the 11" coil was the largest standard coil for the Goldscan. I am sure that Eric could build one larger if a person really wanted one.
As for going larger on a coil size to eliminated trash problems, I am not sure how large a coil would have to be to ignore the type of trash I have found in gold producing areas.
Unfortunately, trash objects are much easier to sense or be detected with either a VLF or a PI due to their inherent nature, while the nature of gold is such that it is one of the hardest metals to detect. If you were to use a coil that would ignore the typical trash I have found in gold producing areas, I am not sure how big a nugget would have to be to even be detected. I would bet it would have to be huge, probably pie plate size or larger, maybe even as large as a drum lid. In many cases, these have already been found in the normal range of a detector and what few remain are probably scarcer than hen's teeth.
Unfortunately, trash is one of the major obstacles one runs into when nugget hunting. What is really sad is there are a very small number of nugget hunters that throw their trash out behind them when they hunt even today. Batteries, candy wrappers, gum wrappers, and cigarette packs are the biggies I run into. They are closely followed by pop and beer cans.
Reg
David, I forgot to mention that I believe the 11" coil was the largest standard coil for the Goldscan. I am sure that Eric could build one larger if a person really wanted one.
As for going larger on a coil size to eliminated trash problems, I am not sure how large a coil would have to be to ignore the type of trash I have found in gold producing areas.
Unfortunately, trash objects are much easier to sense or be detected with either a VLF or a PI due to their inherent nature, while the nature of gold is such that it is one of the hardest metals to detect. If you were to use a coil that would ignore the typical trash I have found in gold producing areas, I am not sure how big a nugget would have to be to even be detected. I would bet it would have to be huge, probably pie plate size or larger, maybe even as large as a drum lid. In many cases, these have already been found in the normal range of a detector and what few remain are probably scarcer than hen's teeth.
Unfortunately, trash is one of the major obstacles one runs into when nugget hunting. What is really sad is there are a very small number of nugget hunters that throw their trash out behind them when they hunt even today. Batteries, candy wrappers, gum wrappers, and cigarette packs are the biggies I run into. They are closely followed by pop and beer cans.
Reg
A
Anonymous
Guest
Hi David,
I wish I would answer your question for you but I cannot. I haven't tried all the machines and it is just too expensive to try to buy all the ones out there to experiement like I do. If my rich uncle ever gets out of the poor house, I might be able to test more of them and give an honest opinion.
What I have found in my years of nugget hunting is the major problems lie in handling black sand, hotrocks and to a lesser extent, red clay ground conditions. Digging every magnetite type hotrock would be a real pain to deal with, and black sand has always given VLF's fits. Red Clay ares are variable and I hunted areas with red clay and areas without it. But in almost all cases I have had to deal with hotrocks and black sand. Normally, the black sand problems are in the bottom of both the smaller and larger dry washes, which of course is the more likely place for the gold nuggets also.
What really excited me about the Goldscan was the fact that it did ignore the typical magnetite hotrock and also ignores concentrations of black sand. I didn't realize a PI could do that when I bought it.
Since then, I have experiemented with PI kits and the other PI very similar to the Beachscan and found them to ignore hotrocks and black sand also. However, on the kit I built, I had to do some serious modifications and when done, still doesn't equal the second PI I have.
I sent some hotrocks to Mr. Bill for his evaluation and determination of how well Eric's other machines ignore such rocks.
The bottom line is I cannot tell you how the Aquastar and Deepstar will do on hotrocks or how responsive they will be to ground conditions. As for the Beachscan, if it just like the other PI I have, it should work like I mentioned in an earlier posting. I suspect that coil size might influence how much of a signal hotrocks give, but I don't know that for sure. I do know from my kit building that is the case, but I am not sure what is really happening, technically.
As for my second PI, it has a 10" coil and with that coil basically it also ignores magnetite type hotrocks, black sand, and still picks up nuggets quite well. As I said before, actual field testing in Colorado gold country displayed this detector had very little ground response in areas where there was a lot of black sand and not red clay. In other areas, I found the detector to have greater response to the ground conditions and had to be more careful to keep the coil level to avoid "ground" signals". I found I could run it silent in these ares with some loss of sensitivity. Even silent it seemed to have great depth capabilities.
Other testing was done using simulated conditions so I have a better idea as to what I can expect when I get down to my favorite hunting sites in AZ.
Reg
I wish I would answer your question for you but I cannot. I haven't tried all the machines and it is just too expensive to try to buy all the ones out there to experiement like I do. If my rich uncle ever gets out of the poor house, I might be able to test more of them and give an honest opinion.
What I have found in my years of nugget hunting is the major problems lie in handling black sand, hotrocks and to a lesser extent, red clay ground conditions. Digging every magnetite type hotrock would be a real pain to deal with, and black sand has always given VLF's fits. Red Clay ares are variable and I hunted areas with red clay and areas without it. But in almost all cases I have had to deal with hotrocks and black sand. Normally, the black sand problems are in the bottom of both the smaller and larger dry washes, which of course is the more likely place for the gold nuggets also.
What really excited me about the Goldscan was the fact that it did ignore the typical magnetite hotrock and also ignores concentrations of black sand. I didn't realize a PI could do that when I bought it.
Since then, I have experiemented with PI kits and the other PI very similar to the Beachscan and found them to ignore hotrocks and black sand also. However, on the kit I built, I had to do some serious modifications and when done, still doesn't equal the second PI I have.
I sent some hotrocks to Mr. Bill for his evaluation and determination of how well Eric's other machines ignore such rocks.
The bottom line is I cannot tell you how the Aquastar and Deepstar will do on hotrocks or how responsive they will be to ground conditions. As for the Beachscan, if it just like the other PI I have, it should work like I mentioned in an earlier posting. I suspect that coil size might influence how much of a signal hotrocks give, but I don't know that for sure. I do know from my kit building that is the case, but I am not sure what is really happening, technically.
As for my second PI, it has a 10" coil and with that coil basically it also ignores magnetite type hotrocks, black sand, and still picks up nuggets quite well. As I said before, actual field testing in Colorado gold country displayed this detector had very little ground response in areas where there was a lot of black sand and not red clay. In other areas, I found the detector to have greater response to the ground conditions and had to be more careful to keep the coil level to avoid "ground" signals". I found I could run it silent in these ares with some loss of sensitivity. Even silent it seemed to have great depth capabilities.
Other testing was done using simulated conditions so I have a better idea as to what I can expect when I get down to my favorite hunting sites in AZ.
Reg
A
Anonymous
Guest
I have only been out in the goldfields once, on a trip to AZ. We went wayyy back off the beaten trail hoping to find a glint of gold, just so we could say we did it.
You would think man had never been back as far as we were, it was almost scarey.
What we found was shell casings, buck shot, shotgun bottoms, spent primers, cans. bottle caps, condom wrappers etc. We were soo suprised that an area soo far from anywhwere was trashed.
I simply can not imagine using a PI unit in a place like this.
I have a BeachScan and do plan on taking it to an old local park that hasnt given up much of anything lately.
I wil give it some 25 targets ! If I get 100% trash/iron I am outta there.
You can bet with the PI there will be zero target masking.
Later,
Tony
You would think man had never been back as far as we were, it was almost scarey.
What we found was shell casings, buck shot, shotgun bottoms, spent primers, cans. bottle caps, condom wrappers etc. We were soo suprised that an area soo far from anywhwere was trashed.
I simply can not imagine using a PI unit in a place like this.
I have a BeachScan and do plan on taking it to an old local park that hasnt given up much of anything lately.
I wil give it some 25 targets ! If I get 100% trash/iron I am outta there.
You can bet with the PI there will be zero target masking.
Later,
Tony
A
Anonymous
Guest
> Maybe we can talk Jeff K into giving us an idea > how responsive the Deepstar is to various ground > conditions on land and if someting
> like turning the sensitivity down and running > low power have any significant effects of ground > signals as well as depth decreases.
Reg, you're great! <IMG SRC="/forums/images/smile.gif" BORDER=0 ALT="
"> Well, I'll do my best here but I'm afraid I don't have a lot of experience with using the Deepstar on anything but sand. Here where I live (Santa Cruz, CA), some of the beaches are quite heavily mineralized. Lots of black sand. In those places I find I need to turn the threshold back some and be careful to keep the coil level and constant height. It takes some getting used to but I don't believe I lose much, if any depth in those areas.
On the other hand, here at my house, in my test garden, the Deepstar doesn't even seem to know there's ground there, I can swing just about any way I please. The ground composition is really crummy dirt/clay mixture, and I don't have an XLT to tell you about the ground characteristics, but it doesn't seem to bother detectors much.
Now, I will tell you that I've "evolved" a lot lately with respect to PI detectors, at least Eric's detectors. I used a Surfmaster PI (stock) for a number of years and dug lots of coins, nails and a little gold. Now that I'm swinging the Deepstar I'm finding less coins and nails, but more gold and jewelry. Contrast that to my Sovereign, which is a great detector for beach-coin-hunting, but is also no match for gold. It's almost like the Deepstar is super-sensitive to gold and nothing else, and while I know that's not totally true, it is very obvious that it's a lot more sensitive to gold than most other detectors. For this reason I don't mind not finding as many coins, and I don't mind digging a few nails, because I know my chances of coming up with some gold are much better.
So, when I'm searching a beach for coins, the Sovereign works great, but in the summer time when I'm looking for recent jewelry losses, the Deepstar is now my detector of choice. I stay right at the low water and wet sand area, there's a lot less trash there, far fewer detectorists, and it's cooler <IMG SRC="/forums/images/smile.gif" BORDER=0 ALT=""> It also seems to be where the good stuff is!
Ok, enough writing, as you can tell I'm certainly hooked, but it comes after much work, any detector is a tool, and you need to learn the tool first to be productive with it. I feel like I have the Sovereign mastered, and now I'm working on mastering the Deepstar. It's got a few tricks and I'm doing my best to let it lead me to the good stuff.
Congrats and thanks go to Eric for kicking tail with a killer machine, and also to Terry in Hawaii and also Mr. Bill who also help me a lot in learning how to use this machine <IMG SRC="/forums/images/smile.gif" BORDER=0 ALT="">
I liken it to the car I have in the garage, it's a 1967 prostreet Chevelle. I can't do much more than drive it to the gas station and back. It's a blown 454 and is somewhere in the neighborhood of 800 horsepower, and gets maybe 1 mile-per-gallon, but it's a *rush* to drive, but it too took some learning to make it fun. You can't just sit down and drive it away, you have to learn it, and let it show you what it can do...
I think it's getting late, I'm philosophizing entirely too much. Have a great night everyone!
-Jeff
> like turning the sensitivity down and running > low power have any significant effects of ground > signals as well as depth decreases.
Reg, you're great! <IMG SRC="/forums/images/smile.gif" BORDER=0 ALT="
"> Well, I'll do my best here but I'm afraid I don't have a lot of experience with using the Deepstar on anything but sand. Here where I live (Santa Cruz, CA), some of the beaches are quite heavily mineralized. Lots of black sand. In those places I find I need to turn the threshold back some and be careful to keep the coil level and constant height. It takes some getting used to but I don't believe I lose much, if any depth in those areas.On the other hand, here at my house, in my test garden, the Deepstar doesn't even seem to know there's ground there, I can swing just about any way I please. The ground composition is really crummy dirt/clay mixture, and I don't have an XLT to tell you about the ground characteristics, but it doesn't seem to bother detectors much.
Now, I will tell you that I've "evolved" a lot lately with respect to PI detectors, at least Eric's detectors. I used a Surfmaster PI (stock) for a number of years and dug lots of coins, nails and a little gold. Now that I'm swinging the Deepstar I'm finding less coins and nails, but more gold and jewelry. Contrast that to my Sovereign, which is a great detector for beach-coin-hunting, but is also no match for gold. It's almost like the Deepstar is super-sensitive to gold and nothing else, and while I know that's not totally true, it is very obvious that it's a lot more sensitive to gold than most other detectors. For this reason I don't mind not finding as many coins, and I don't mind digging a few nails, because I know my chances of coming up with some gold are much better.
So, when I'm searching a beach for coins, the Sovereign works great, but in the summer time when I'm looking for recent jewelry losses, the Deepstar is now my detector of choice. I stay right at the low water and wet sand area, there's a lot less trash there, far fewer detectorists, and it's cooler <IMG SRC="/forums/images/smile.gif" BORDER=0 ALT="
"> It also seems to be where the good stuff is!Ok, enough writing, as you can tell I'm certainly hooked, but it comes after much work, any detector is a tool, and you need to learn the tool first to be productive with it. I feel like I have the Sovereign mastered, and now I'm working on mastering the Deepstar. It's got a few tricks and I'm doing my best to let it lead me to the good stuff.
Congrats and thanks go to Eric for kicking tail with a killer machine, and also to Terry in Hawaii and also Mr. Bill who also help me a lot in learning how to use this machine <IMG SRC="/forums/images/smile.gif" BORDER=0 ALT="
">I liken it to the car I have in the garage, it's a 1967 prostreet Chevelle. I can't do much more than drive it to the gas station and back. It's a blown 454 and is somewhere in the neighborhood of 800 horsepower, and gets maybe 1 mile-per-gallon, but it's a *rush* to drive, but it too took some learning to make it fun. You can't just sit down and drive it away, you have to learn it, and let it show you what it can do...
I think it's getting late, I'm philosophizing entirely too much. Have a great night everyone!
-Jeff
A
Anonymous
Guest
Hi Dave,
Welcome to the club. Were all looking for a universal detector that will out do all others. Unfortunately no such unit exists. <IMG SRC="/forums/images/smile.gif" BORDER=0 ALT=""> <IMG SRC="/forums/images/smile.gif" BORDER=0 ALT="">
I don
Welcome to the club. Were all looking for a universal detector that will out do all others. Unfortunately no such unit exists. <IMG SRC="/forums/images/smile.gif" BORDER=0 ALT="
"> <IMG SRC="/forums/images/smile.gif" BORDER=0 ALT="">I don
A
Anonymous
Guest
Bill has mentioned there is a difference between gold jewelery and gold nuggets and a PI may respond differently to them. I cannot speak for gold jewelery but I have been doing some serious testing on gold nuggets.
Most of my nuggets come from three areas of Arizona and do have somewhat different characteristics and composition. I have tested two machines designed by Eric and both of these machines do a great job of giving a strong signal from all the nuggets I have tested which are several.
My test nuggets range from about 4 or 5 grains to half ounce. In all cases both of the machines do a great job of detecting each of them.
My dad and I recently tested the Beachscan relative on a small nugget he found with his SD. My dad indicated it was a couple inches deep when he found it and he did get a weak but obvious signal from it.
Well, we tried to simulate the conditions but buried the nugget about an inch deeper. The ground was a very similar environment. The Beachscan relative hit it with an impressively loud signal. We figured we could have buried it a couple inches deeper and still detected it.
This was the worst ground I have found so far to test the limitations of this detector. Yes, it would require being more careful and holding the coil at a more constant height above the ground, but it worked fine.
Other areas where I have tested I can be very sloppy with the coil height and not get much of a ground response. The conclusion is there will be differences on how my PIs will react and this is because of the different ground conditions. Basically, this is what Jeff also stated he found with his Deepstar.
Right now, I am confident that my two Eric Foster designed detectors will excel in areas where VLF's are their weakest. That is what is important to me.
Am I completely satisfied? Nope, but I feel these machines will work for a while until I have gained more knowledge from working in the field with them, and hopefully, by then Eric will have designed a new Goldscan 5.
Most of my nuggets come from three areas of Arizona and do have somewhat different characteristics and composition. I have tested two machines designed by Eric and both of these machines do a great job of giving a strong signal from all the nuggets I have tested which are several.
My test nuggets range from about 4 or 5 grains to half ounce. In all cases both of the machines do a great job of detecting each of them.
My dad and I recently tested the Beachscan relative on a small nugget he found with his SD. My dad indicated it was a couple inches deep when he found it and he did get a weak but obvious signal from it.
Well, we tried to simulate the conditions but buried the nugget about an inch deeper. The ground was a very similar environment. The Beachscan relative hit it with an impressively loud signal. We figured we could have buried it a couple inches deeper and still detected it.
This was the worst ground I have found so far to test the limitations of this detector. Yes, it would require being more careful and holding the coil at a more constant height above the ground, but it worked fine.
Other areas where I have tested I can be very sloppy with the coil height and not get much of a ground response. The conclusion is there will be differences on how my PIs will react and this is because of the different ground conditions. Basically, this is what Jeff also stated he found with his Deepstar.
Right now, I am confident that my two Eric Foster designed detectors will excel in areas where VLF's are their weakest. That is what is important to me.
Am I completely satisfied? Nope, but I feel these machines will work for a while until I have gained more knowledge from working in the field with them, and hopefully, by then Eric will have designed a new Goldscan 5.
A
Anonymous
Guest
I agree, no one in their right mind would run a serious PI detector off of 9v batteries. Deepseekers need AA packs, preferably using Li or NiMH cells. Also seems a bit pricey.
- Carl
- Carl
A
Anonymous
Guest
Hello All, I bought a PI (the CS7) last winter for beach work in the South Pacific. While watching the snow fall here in Colorado, I did a series of tests with AZ hot rocks and black sand cons from sluicing. The CS7 could handle both with no problems. I'm really getting excited about swinging it in AZ this winter. The only thing that worries me is missing meteorites as it doesn't seem to like the meteorites that I found last Nov. in Gold Basin AZ. It might just be these meteorites (L4 chondrites) that it doesn't see, but I'll take that trade off for a chance to find a small nugget in ground that my GM3 can't handle!!! HH
A
Anonymous
Guest
Hi Brian,
I am in Colorado also and have been performing the same types of experiments you have with a detector very similar to yours. However, mine seems to pick up the meteorites found in Gold Basin quite well. No, it doesn't give the loudest signal to the smaller ones I have picked up from there but it does give a nice response to some of the larger ones.
I agree with you that the PI will tackle certain conditions that give a typical VLF fits, namely, hotrocks, and black sand.
On a different note, I hope the snow isn't falling now where you live. Where I live in southern Colorado it would be steam before it hit the ground. Just kidding,
Reg
I am in Colorado also and have been performing the same types of experiments you have with a detector very similar to yours. However, mine seems to pick up the meteorites found in Gold Basin quite well. No, it doesn't give the loudest signal to the smaller ones I have picked up from there but it does give a nice response to some of the larger ones.
I agree with you that the PI will tackle certain conditions that give a typical VLF fits, namely, hotrocks, and black sand.
On a different note, I hope the snow isn't falling now where you live. Where I live in southern Colorado it would be steam before it hit the ground. Just kidding,
Reg
A
Anonymous
Guest
Thanx Reg, I can't wait to give it a try. Maybe my meteorite sample is to small (dime sized) I am quite impressed with the power of this machine. I don't concern myself with trash signals as I dig everything when nugget shooting anyways. I have found meteorites in S. Colo. but with the GM3. I just read Norton's "Rocks From Space" and realized that I collected a few shattercones from Huerfano Cnty. about six years ago and now must go back to that spot with the detectors to seek the space rocks. The more I get involved with this hobby, the more I learn about it. Seemingly endless angles to it and new ideas for places to hunt. I'm in the Springs area. Not much here but all around us are good sites. Must get more time out!!! HH
A
Anonymous
Guest
[No message]