Friendly Metal Detecting Forums   Myers Depot Metal Detectors
List all sponsors

Go Back   Friendly Metal Detecting Forums > Detectors and Gear > All About Detectors

Reply
  
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02-12-2020, 09:00 PM
markinswpa's Avatar
markinswpa markinswpa is offline
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Pittsburgh Pa.
Posts: 2,566
Default Tale of two war nickels--Equinox

OK, The one thing I've learned for certain in my 5 yrs. of Mding is that nothing is certain. Had a little head scratcher today. After a factory reset I put my settings back in Park 1 and Field 2. Doing some air tests to check my tones I noticed one of the only two war nickels I've dug this year sounded completely different. The 45P sounded with a higher more melodius 12-13 and the 43 P came in with a lower flat tone with numbers showing 15-16. Not just a slight difference, If you heard these tones in the field you would think two different targets for sure and the numbers would tell you the same. Now both nickels have been cleaned and have about the same amount of detail. Comparing with two recently dug Buffs they rang 12-13 and sounded the same as the 45P. Park 1 the same. Park 2 50 tones still a big difference. Went into the warchest and pulled out 10 43 P's. 3 of them had the low flat tone with 15-16 numbers but the other seven all rang louder, higher with 12-13s. Ok I understand variables in the field but there are no variables in an airtest with the coil hanging of my dining room table. By the way sensitivity was down to 12 in the house. And all the other coins I tested came in right around where they should be. Gentlemen your thoughts, please. Mark

__________________
_ON HOLD______________
Equinox 800
2020 -Silver 26 -IHPs 9 -Wheaties 79 -Tokens 9
-Buffs 14 - Vs 7 - Sterling 2 Clad-23.81

Reply With Quote


  #2  
Old 02-12-2020, 09:37 PM
ToySoldier's Avatar
ToySoldier ToySoldier is offline
Supporter
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 1,728
Default

Originally Posted by markinswpa View post
OK, The one thing I've learned for certain in my 5 yrs. of Mding is that nothing is certain. Had a little head scratcher today. After a factory reset I put my settings back in Park 1 and Field 2. Doing some air tests to check my tones I noticed one of the only two war nickels I've dug this year sounded completely different. The 45P sounded with a higher more melodius 12-13 and the 43 P came in with a lower flat tone with numbers showing 15-16. Not just a slight difference, ...
Yes, they can vary. In fact, I have one or two war nickels that read closer to silver even after they're out of the ground. I think there must have been some variations in their alloy blend.

__________________
------
2020: 6 silver; 64 wheats; 1 1836 large cent; 1 Indian Head Cent; 5 buffalo nickels; 4 tokens; 3 foreign coins; 2 sterling; $25.97
2019: 45 Silver Coins; 271 Wheats; 15 Indian Head Cents; 18 Buffalo Nickels; 6 Liberty V Nickels; 4 Silver Rings; 1 Gold Ring; 2 silver other; 6 Tokens; $104.60
Minelab Equinox 800; Minelab Explorer II; Garrett AT Pro & AT Pinpointer

Reply With Quote


  #3  
Old 02-13-2020, 07:02 AM
Monte Monte is offline
Full Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Vale, in Far Eastern Oregon
Posts: 231
Default

Mark, there's nothing too spectacular with your results because .... "things vary."

That's one of the problems of relying on any brand's visual Target ID for a lot of people. Some of the crappy junk that usually reads 'off' a bit can sometimes register as a good targets and get recovered. then at other times things that should fall in at a particular spot based on their claimed alloy content ... don't. So those sometimes get ignored and not recovered.

It was noticeable before visual Target ID came along, too. With USA coinage, look at the alloy make-up of the non-fatty Indian Head 1˘ coins and then the Wheat-back Lincoln 1˘ early-on. Same alloy content, but as a very avid detectorist back in the mid-to-late '70s there were a few models that had a broader range of Discrimination that could get up to Screw Cap rejection. It was more apparent with many models from '78 to '82.

Most of the Indian Head 1˘ coins as well as a bulk of the earlier Lincoln's from 1909 to ±1920 would be rejected (or 'read' lower with visual TID when it came out) than the bulk of the latter Lincolns, even though their alloy content was the same.

Why? Well, in that case it was the source of, and production of, the copper used in the mintage. But it's not limited to smaller coins, either. I had an enjoyable day with friends in my favorite ghost town a number of years ago when I got a 'double.' I dug a silver 1871 Seated Liberty Half-Dollar and, naturally double-checking the spot I had another good response and just a bit below where the first was located was a 2nd Seated Liberty Half-Dollar, an 1868.

Two nice-sized silver coins with close production dates, but the 1868 reads noticeably lower on any make or model's numeric VDI read-out. Digable, but different. I've been hunting with a Minelab Vanquish since it arrived Monday and been working an old CCC camp that's now a large county park. I recovered a few targets that flickered between '13'-'14' and '14-'15' in the hope I might snag a "War Nickel" because they generally read a little higher than common nickels due to the silver content. No success, but anticipated.

Also, the '12'-'13' VDI's were not all 5˘ coins, either. Matter-of-fact, only 1-out-of 5 turned out to be a coin. You summed things up quite well when you started you post when you stated:

"OK, The one thing I've learned for certain in my 5 yrs. of Mding is that nothing is certain."

I'm just finishing 55 years of detecting and just about every detecting jaunt I make offers proof of that statement.

Don't let it bother you, just get out hunting and enjoy!

Monte

__________________

"Your EYES ... the only 100% accurate form of Discrimination!"

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
... or ...
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Detector Outfit: An assortment of favorite detector makes and models, with the best coils mounted for the tasks I'll take on.
Reply With Quote


  #4  
Old 02-13-2020, 11:08 AM
IDXMonster IDXMonster is offline
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: New Glarus
Posts: 4,198
Default

A higher number with a lower tone because that’s how you have the pitches arranged?

__________________
CTX,800,Explorer2,IDXPro-M
Old Coins or Bust...

Reply With Quote


  #5  
Old 02-13-2020, 08:42 PM
coin whisperer's Avatar
coin whisperer coin whisperer is offline
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Danville,Va
Posts: 16,154
Default Tale of two war nickels--Equinox

War nickels are notorious for coming in weird. I’ve had some ring as high as a penny. The reason being the loss of magnesium in them. The more magnesium they lose the higher the vdi. That black gunk you’ll sometimes see on a dug war nickel is the magnesium leaking out


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

__________________
YTD 2020 (5)Wheaties (2)Classic Head LC’s (1)Coronet LC (1) Virginia Half Penny (1)IHP (0)Buffs (0)V Nickle (0)War Nickle (1)Silver coins (3)Silver jewelry (0) Gold jewelry Oldest Coin: 1773 Virginia Half Penny

Reply With Quote


1 members found this post helpful.
  #6  
Old 02-13-2020, 09:41 PM
ToySoldier's Avatar
ToySoldier ToySoldier is offline
Supporter
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 1,728
Default

Originally Posted by coin whisperer View post
War nickels are notorious for coming in weird. I’ve had some ring as high as a penny. The reason being the loss of magnesium in them. The more magnesium they lose the higher the vdi. That black gunk you’ll sometimes see on a dug war nickel is the magnesium leaking out
Huh. That's interesting!

__________________
------
2020: 6 silver; 64 wheats; 1 1836 large cent; 1 Indian Head Cent; 5 buffalo nickels; 4 tokens; 3 foreign coins; 2 sterling; $25.97
2019: 45 Silver Coins; 271 Wheats; 15 Indian Head Cents; 18 Buffalo Nickels; 6 Liberty V Nickels; 4 Silver Rings; 1 Gold Ring; 2 silver other; 6 Tokens; $104.60
Minelab Equinox 800; Minelab Explorer II; Garrett AT Pro & AT Pinpointer

Reply With Quote


  #7  
Old 02-14-2020, 12:17 PM
markinswpa's Avatar
markinswpa markinswpa is offline
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Pittsburgh Pa.
Posts: 2,566
Default

Originally Posted by ToySoldier View post
Yes, they can vary. In fact, I have one or two war nickels that read closer to silver even after they're out of the ground. I think there must have been some variations in their alloy blend.
TS I woulda' thunk like Coca Cola and KFC the recipe would've been non-negotiable, especially with US coins. Huh ?

Originally Posted by Monte View post
Mark, there's nothing too spectacular with your results because .... "things vary."

That's one of the problems of relying on any brand's visual Target ID for a lot of people. Some of the crappy junk that usually reads 'off' a bit can sometimes register as a good targets and get recovered. then at other times things that should fall in at a particular spot based on their claimed alloy content ... don't. So those sometimes get ignored and not recovered.

It was noticeable before visual Target ID came along, too. With USA coinage, look at the alloy make-up of the non-fatty Indian Head 1˘ coins and then the Wheat-back Lincoln 1˘ early-on. Same alloy content, but as a very avid detectorist back in the mid-to-late '70s there were a few models that had a broader range of Discrimination that could get up to Screw Cap rejection. It was more apparent with many models from '78 to '82.

Most of the Indian Head 1˘ coins as well as a bulk of the earlier Lincoln's from 1909 to ±1920 would be rejected (or 'read' lower with visual TID when it came out) than the bulk of the latter Lincolns, even though their alloy content was the same.

Why? Well, in that case it was the source of, and production of, the copper used in the mintage. But it's not limited to smaller coins, either. I had an enjoyable day with friends in my favorite ghost town a number of years ago when I got a 'double.' I dug a silver 1871 Seated Liberty Half-Dollar and, naturally double-checking the spot I had another good response and just a bit below where the first was located was a 2nd Seated Liberty Half-Dollar, an 1868.

Two nice-sized silver coins with close production dates, but the 1868 reads noticeably lower on any make or model's numeric VDI read-out. Digable, but different. I've been hunting with a Minelab Vanquish since it arrived Monday and been working an old CCC camp that's now a large county park. I recovered a few targets that flickered between '13'-'14' and '14-'15' in the hope I might snag a "War Nickel" because they generally read a little higher than common nickels due to the silver content. No success, but anticipated.

Also, the '12'-'13' VDI's were not all 5˘ coins, either. Matter-of-fact, only 1-out-of 5 turned out to be a coin. You summed things up quite well when you started you post when you stated:

"OK, The one thing I've learned for certain in my 5 yrs. of Mding is that nothing is certain."

I'm just finishing 55 years of detecting and just about every detecting jaunt I make offers proof of that statement.

Don't let it bother you, just get out hunting and enjoy!

Monte
Monte wow, 55 years. My hats off to you sir. And you are right with your example on the pennies, the same but different. I like things cut and dried but this hobby changes all the rules. Thanks HH Mark

Originally Posted by IDXMonster View post
A higher number with a lower tone because that’s how you have the pitches arranged?
Kevin great thought, and you are right. Adjusted settings in Park 1 and Field 2, but in factory Park 2 and Field 1 the Vdi's are still 12 and 16 and a noticeable difference in tone only the 16 tone is higher in factory settings. Thanks Mark

Originally Posted by coin whisperer View post
War nickels are notorious for coming in weird. I’ve had some ring as high as a penny. The reason being the loss of magnesium in them. The more magnesium they lose the higher the vdi. That black gunk you’ll sometimes see on a dug war nickel is the magnesium leaking out


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Vic, thanks much. Did not know that. It helps explain the discrepancy. I had heard he phrase "plug nickel", thought maybe I had one. lol Take care, Mark
Originally Posted by ToySoldier View post
Huh. That's interesting!
Thanks guys. This is one of the reasons I love this forum. Its like a google for Mding. HH Mark

__________________
_ON HOLD______________
Equinox 800
2020 -Silver 26 -IHPs 9 -Wheaties 79 -Tokens 9
-Buffs 14 - Vs 7 - Sterling 2 Clad-23.81

Reply With Quote


  #8  
Old 02-14-2020, 01:03 PM
ToySoldier's Avatar
ToySoldier ToySoldier is offline
Supporter
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 1,728
Default

Originally Posted by markinswpa View post
TS I woulda' thunk like Coca Cola and KFC the recipe would've been non-negotiable, especially with US coins. Huh ?
I only entertained the idea of fluxuating war nickel alloy composition because it was war time (of course) and that's the reason they changed in the first place. CoinWhisperer's info makes more sense, though.

__________________
------
2020: 6 silver; 64 wheats; 1 1836 large cent; 1 Indian Head Cent; 5 buffalo nickels; 4 tokens; 3 foreign coins; 2 sterling; $25.97
2019: 45 Silver Coins; 271 Wheats; 15 Indian Head Cents; 18 Buffalo Nickels; 6 Liberty V Nickels; 4 Silver Rings; 1 Gold Ring; 2 silver other; 6 Tokens; $104.60
Minelab Equinox 800; Minelab Explorer II; Garrett AT Pro & AT Pinpointer

Reply With Quote


  #9  
Old 02-14-2020, 01:37 PM
YooperBSN's Avatar
YooperBSN YooperBSN is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: Mid-east Michigan
Posts: 254
Default

Could there be any merit in thinking that same production year, mint-to-mint differences in alloy composition could be possible as well? As in a 1909S WP could ring up differently than a 1909 (date and denomination just as an example)?

__________________
Andrew D. BSN, RN
Gear: BH Land Ranger Pro, Garrett Pro-Pointer AT. 2020 (Total): Ag 8 (9) | 925 3 (3) | WP 52 (53) | IHP 3 (3) | Buff 1 (1) | Clad $44.04 ($47.17). Notable: 1871 Can Qtr ('20), 1909 WP ('20), 1941E Nazi 10 RPf ('20), 1864 IHP ('20).

Reply With Quote


  #10  
Old 02-14-2020, 04:30 PM
sube sube is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 48
Default

coin wisperer has it right its the magnesium it is the lowest conductor in the nickle the more that leaches out the higher the coin will read .Then again who's to say they put less magnesium in the nickel and used it for the war effort. A good read would be Wikipedia indain cent if you read this you will see why a copper nickel indain is so hard to find .

By the way 1864 and on were to be 95 percent copper and 5 percent tin and zinc but as you know a indain does not read like a latter wheat cent or early wheat that 5 percent tin and zinc portion was different to 1918 or there abouts another war started and the tin to zinc was changed.

Copper nickel 88 copper 12 nickel Fattys
1864 to 1962 95 copper 5 percent zinc and tin
1962 to 1982 95 copper 5 percent zinc no tin that's why they read higher than pre 62 pennys

Now I know indain and early wheats read lower than later wheats and that's because they changed the tin portion more tin than zinc 1864 to 1962 it does not give a percent of either metal just says 5 percent zinc and tin ..sube

Last edited by sube; 02-14-2020 at 05:44 PM.
Reply With Quote


  #11  
Old 02-14-2020, 07:18 PM
longbow62's Avatar
longbow62 longbow62 is offline
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Jonesboro, AR
Posts: 566
Default

I don't dig as many IHP's you guys but, the only one I dug this year an 1882 was about 6" deep and read 20-21 in Park2. I think most early Wheats I have dug ring in that range. I thought the IHP was going to be a Wheat. I just did an air test on it and it came up 21 just like when I found it. I do primarily look for IHP's to ring up 18-19 as most have, but dug a few that were ringing 17-18. I also tested all my War nickels and they were all 12-13 mostly 13.

__________________
Years detecting: (3) Equinox 800, Etrac, Nokta Impact, Tesoro Mojave, Garrett Carrot, Grey Ghost headphones. Oldest coin: 1851 Seated Dime, Total silver coins found: 72, Total rings:(Silver) 1 (Gold) 0 (Junk) 9, 2020 silver coins: 11

Reply With Quote


  #12  
Old 02-15-2020, 12:10 PM
markinswpa's Avatar
markinswpa markinswpa is offline
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Pittsburgh Pa.
Posts: 2,566
Default

Originally Posted by YooperBSN View post
Could there be any merit in thinking that same production year, mint-to-mint differences in alloy composition could be possible as well? As in a 1909S WP could ring up differently than a 1909 (date and denomination just as an example)?
Andrew, does make you wonder doesn't it ? HH Mark

Originally Posted by sube View post
coin wisperer has it right its the magnesium it is the lowest conductor in the nickle the more that leaches out the higher the coin will read .Then again who's to say they put less magnesium in the nickel and used it for the war effort. A good read would be Wikipedia indain cent if you read this you will see why a copper nickel indain is so hard to find .

By the way 1864 and on were to be 95 percent copper and 5 percent tin and zinc but as you know a indain does not read like a latter wheat cent or early wheat that 5 percent tin and zinc portion was different to 1918 or there abouts another war started and the tin to zinc was changed.

Copper nickel 88 copper 12 nickel Fattys
1864 to 1962 95 copper 5 percent zinc and tin
1962 to 1982 95 copper 5 percent zinc no tin that's why they read higher than pre 62 pennys

Now I know indain and early wheats read lower than later wheats and that's because they changed the tin portion more tin than zinc 1864 to 1962 it does not give a percent of either metal just says 5 percent zinc and tin ..sube
Sube I agree. Depending on the area, calling a wheat or Ihp is a crapshoot. Most of the penny signals I get will high tone first with numbers around 30 or higher then as I work the signal it will drop to its perspective number. 24-26 Mem. 22-23 Wheat, 18-21 Ihp. I've learned to accept the fact that just about any signal you get in the field can surprise you but the airtest of the nickels, with such a blatant difference was an eye opener. Vics explanation makes perfect sense. HH Mark

Originally Posted by longbow62 View post
I don't dig as many IHP's you guys but, the only one I dug this year an 1882 was about 6" deep and read 20-21 in Park2. I think most early Wheats I have dug ring in that range. I thought the IHP was going to be a Wheat. I just did an air test on it and it came up 21 just like when I found it. I do primarily look for IHP's to ring up 18-19 as most have, but dug a few that were ringing 17-18. I also tested all my War nickels and they were all 12-13 mostly 13.
Longbow The only thing I can say for sure is when an Ihp shows up its a welcome surprise. I dug a deep black copper with 21-22 last week, it was a 1920 wheat. Now as far as the 15-16 on war nickels, I'll probably start digging more of those now. HH Mark

__________________
_ON HOLD______________
Equinox 800
2020 -Silver 26 -IHPs 9 -Wheaties 79 -Tokens 9
-Buffs 14 - Vs 7 - Sterling 2 Clad-23.81

Reply With Quote


  #13  
Old 02-16-2020, 02:19 AM
Monte Monte is offline
Full Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Vale, in Far Eastern Oregon
Posts: 231
Default

Originally Posted by sube View post
coin wisperer has it right its the magnesium it is the lowest conductor in the nickle the more that leaches out the higher the coin will read .Then again who's to say they put less magnesium in the nickel and used it for the war effort.
Too many years of finding these and comparing. It would be slight differences in the production quality of the alloys used and not a degrading of the lowest quantity metal.

Also, we're not talking about magnesium but manganese. Different metals.


Originally Posted by sube View post
By the way 1864 and on were to be 95 percent copper and 5 percent tin and zinc but as you know a indain does not read like a latter wheat cent or early wheat that 5 percent tin and zinc portion was different to 1918 or there abouts another war started and the tin to zinc was changed.

Now I know indain and early wheats read lower than later wheats and that's because they changed the tin portion more tin than zinc 1864 to 1962 it does not give a percent of either metal just says 5 percent zinc and tin ..sube
Mid-February of '81 I was working a Garrett booth at a Portland Sportsman's Show with Roy Lagal and we had several interesting discussions, different topics, and shared some similar deductions. One was regarding operating frequencies, 'Electronic Prospecting' (which was big back then), old coins and trade tokens, and the conductivity of coins. This was two years before visual Target ID and almost a year before the US went to the Zinc Cent.

We discussed Indian Head and early-era Wheat-back Cents and how they had less conductivity than more modern Cents. We could determine that using the highest Discrimination settings or some models.

In 1864 we went from the 'fatty' Indian Heads to those with the 95% Copper and 5% Tin and Zinc composition. We kept using the composition until the change in the 1940's during WWII, but we noticed the differences in most. Almost all of the Indian Head Cents and Wheat-backs from 1909 to ± 1920 would have a slightly lower conductivity than those that followed.

From what he and I had read or could consider, the difference had to be related to the location source of the copper, and the refining that was done to produce the copper used.

Target ID was developed first by George Payne at the original Teknetics with their new CoinComputer models in '83, and we still mostly had the good old 'copper' cents in circulation because the Zinc Cent had only been out since the year before. It was determined that the copper cents and clad dimes had a very similar conductivity, so early TID models showed the 1˘/10˘ ID on their display for several years before they realized the modern Zinc Cent read lower due to less conductivity. Then we saw Zn and Cu on the displays to separate the pennies. and for a while they still combined the 10˘ clad coins with the Cu (copper) Cents.

Today, 38 years after the introduction of the Zinc Cent, most TID displays only show 1˘ at a lower reading because they are the 1˘Zn (Zinc) coin and a higher read-out as 10˘ because of the differences in conductivity. They no longer references the once-common Copper 1˘.

Anyway, we felt it was the source and purity of the copper being used that caused the lower rejection point or conductivity of those Indian Heads and decade or so of Wheat-back Cents.

Monte

__________________

"Your EYES ... the only 100% accurate form of Discrimination!"

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
... or ...
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Detector Outfit: An assortment of favorite detector makes and models, with the best coils mounted for the tasks I'll take on.
Reply With Quote


Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:03 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.