ghound
Elite Member
Out of interest, what coin do folks usually use in terms of conductivity for the test, i'm guessing nickel or lower?
Nail board tests?
- Thread starter ghound
- Start date
TabZilla
Forum Supporter
Usually see it with a zinc or an Indian head cent.
Saw a post about using a half dime though.
That's a tiny little coin.
Saw a post about using a half dime though.
That's a tiny little coin.
ghound
Elite Member
Cheers, a 1975 one cent, is that the coin?
pinenut
Full Member
That's an easier target than a zinc cent; '75 is copper. Tougher test than the cent would be a nickel, as they disc out closer to the iron nail range.
ghound
Elite Member
Thanks guys, I've not tried the nail board test before, i've a nickle and then a little silver hammered that's a fair bit lower conducting than a nickle to try, i'll post the results!
Cherry Picker
Forum Supporter
Not to be a Debbie Downer, but I wouldn't put a lot of faith any any nail board test. When properly adjusted pretty much any detector can pass the nail board test.
This is with a 13 year old DFX
This is with a 13 year old DFX
ghound
Elite Member
Monte
"In Memory of"
ghound, Good Morning. Let me help answer any questions you might have about the 'official' Nail Board Performance Test. This is a product that is widely used in this industry, and came about from an encounter I had in May of '94 at the southern Utah (USA) ghost town of Frisco. At the time I was joining a 3-club holiday detecting outing and also evaluating a detector.
As I reached the crest of the old 'school hill' where the school used to be, I could see it was just a dense scattering of nails of different sizes and shapes. Looking at the ground in front of me to find a clear spot to GB the unit, I spotted a round disk shape and brushing it off I could see it was an Indian Head cent from the latter 1800's, and it was surrounded by four rusty nails of different sizes in a naturally scattered orientation.
I doubted the model I was evaluating would respond to that coin in the close iron nail mix with the standard 8" coil or smaller 5½" coil I had for it, and I was correct. The built-in Iron reject was too high a rejection level.
Three fellows were using their different White's 6000 series models with 8" or 950 Concentric search coils, which is what they used for Coin Hunting urban parks. None of them could get even one response on the coin when sweeping across the nails and coin from the four directions I marked for them in the dirt that surrounded this natural, in-the-field encounter.
The evening before around the camp fire we had told them they needed a smaller size coil and a different detector to best handle the ferrous challenges they would face on that, their first, Relic Hunting adventure in a very littered ghost town.
While we stood there I called down to my friend Debbie who came up the hill with her 'original' Tesoro Silver Sabre w/7" Concentric coil, and she proceeded to walk a circle around the four nails and Indian Head cent and got a very digable response in every sweep direction.
I had experienced that type of iron nail and good non-ferrous target situation quite often in the 25 years I had been Relic Hunting at that point in time, so I used a sheet of paper from my notebook I was using during the evaluation, and placed it on top of the four iron nails and Indian Head cent and made an exact positioning of those five objects.
I picked up the coin and four nails, then later affixed them to a test board in their exact position as encountered in the field ... except for the coin. I drew a circle around the Indian Head cent. That way, I can lay the Nail Board on the ground so all the nails can just barely be cleanly rejected ... quiet ... and then I place a coin in the centered #1 spot and test the detector and coil for performance.
That is what I now call the 'official' Nail Board Performance Test, and I have been using it to evaluate detectors and search coils for the past 23 years as of this coming Memorial Day Weekend holiday.
Trust me, it is much different that the video we saw posted by 'Detector' of a single nail and single dime being a 'test' for the DFX w/950 Concentric coil. I have tested, and seen others take on the challenge using a wide range of detector makes and models, foreign and domestic, that fail this test miserably.
Even many so-called quick-response detectors which just can not handle recovering from the rejected nails to be able to respond to the sample coin. The moderate to fast-motion Discriminators, like the DFX, XLT, XL Pro, etc., are not the best detectors for working really ugly, dense iron contaminated sites.
They can be OK for an incidental iron nail encounter, but not on tougher tests. That means they won't handle the challenging sites I usually put myself in to find old coins, trade tokens, and other smaller artifacts in a dense nail littered site.
Just as I had marked in the dirt way back then, I marked the NBPT with four lines showing sweep directions to use. if you start off to the side of the board after first rejecting the four nails, and sweep completely across the board along the 4 routes, and if you sweep from left-to-right and then right-to-left along each of those 4 routes, that gives you a possibility of 2 hits per sweep route.
Therefore, sweep all 4 routes from 2 directions for a possibility of 8 hits on the coin. As a very Avid Detectorist and a devoted Relic Hunter who deals with very dense iron debris most of the time, I will not even consider a detector & coil combination that can not reject all found nails then provide me a minimum of 6-out-of-8 hits. Less than 6-out-of-8 is a fail-to-pass result for me.
I personally prefer to only use a detector & coil set-up that provide me a very digable 7-out-of-8, or best of all 8-out-of-8, hits on the NBPT.
This in-the-field scenario was with an Indian Head cent, and they have a conductivity similar to the modern US Zinc cent or many of the early 1909 to 1920 era Wheat-Back cents. Therefore, the 'official' coin to use on the NB is either an Indian Head or modern Zinc cent. These all share the same size and shape and very close conductivity.
Now, be aware that the coins 'conductivity' level is part of the important things to consider, but we also have to factor in the round coin's size, to include diameter and thickness.
These two factors also play a role in the size of the sample target that can have an eddy current generated on it, so usually the bigger the target (thickness and diameter) the more or stronger target response is possible.
My NBPT 'kits' might not help many urban Coin Hunters, but serious Relic Hunters find them to be a helpful 'tool' to have in their arsenal. I know that every detector in my Regular-Use Detector Team described in my signature below easily pass the standard NB test with my preferred coils mounted.
If I left you with any questions, drop me an e-mail: [email protected]
Monte
Cherry Picker
Forum Supporter
I have found the only thing a nail board test proves is if you have your detector adjusted properly for that test or not. I can make my 30+ year old ADS 4 pass the nail test.
But hey, it's your money.
But hey, it's your money.
So nail board tests mean nothing??
Just what tests should manufacturers be doing when engineering and designing detectors???
Surely there must be some,,otherwise how would they know what they really have.
Making a detector pass,,,sure some can be made,,,but has other capabilities been compromised like depth,,,and how much depth(percentage wise)??
And what about how a detector in a pass situation (settings wise) how does the detector respond tonally if the coil is advanced over bigger iron than the nails used in nail board test??
There are loads of test one can do with a detector and nails.
They do show some thing.
3D scenarios will too.
I guess if these older detectors are so good in nail pits,,,why are there still finds lurking in them. They should have been pulled out years ago.
Sure some of the finds are still there in sites that have been hunted,,the detectorist just didn't approach from the right angle for detection.
This angle here,,very important.
One degree of advantage don't sound like much,,,but over the course of many hours spent in a nail pit,,,it would expose some additional finds.
So basically it seems one person thinks no advancements as far as hunting in nail pits has been accomplished.
I personally think this is a load of bull.
Some of this going on with detector performance in and around iron and nails,,has some to do with audio reporting too,,not specifically detector transmitting or receiving.
Could some of the older detectors,,,could their audio reporting be rengineered and the overall detector be made better?? I think so.
It has been said,,for example the F75 series have a timed in tonal response.
It must tone in at least so long,,,before it can change tones (when reporting) as the coil is swept.
So the detector truly may be better than we as humans realize here,,,but you can't dig what you can't hear.
Cherry Picker
Forum Supporter
No thsharpshooter I didn't say a nail board test "means nothing". Read my post again with an open mind this time.
I see the nail board test much like an air test. I find value in an air test, but only a fool, or inexperienced, would expect that to mean you'll get the same results in the live ground. By live I mean not planted but natural settings. Take those same nails and leave them in the ground for 50+ years with a coin next to them and then test the results. They will be nothing like a nail board test.
As I said I can adjust my 30+ old detector to impress those less knowledgeable on the role the ground and a 50+ year old rust nail actually would respond. It simply a matter of proper adjusting any detector, with the proper adjustments, to pass the nail board test. It little more than a slight of hand trick nothing else. And I actually tend to place it in the area of misinformation, but I'll leave that up to the user to define themselves.
Now I'm not taking anything away from any detector. A good fast responding detector, which generally means a simple electronic path, does great in high iron sites. I think the Deus is one of the few exceptions that is both a well featured detector capable of extremely fast recovery making it great in trashy sites.
Oh, and the reason some older detectors respond so well is the simple design. No depth but fast to respond. But it is still just a matter of most any detector properly adjusted for the condition will do just fine with the nail board test. Its little more than a guide and nothing else. Just like the air test.
Not sure how you get that to mean I'm saying it means nothing, but I believe you just like being argumentative.
I see the nail board test much like an air test. I find value in an air test, but only a fool, or inexperienced, would expect that to mean you'll get the same results in the live ground. By live I mean not planted but natural settings. Take those same nails and leave them in the ground for 50+ years with a coin next to them and then test the results. They will be nothing like a nail board test.
As I said I can adjust my 30+ old detector to impress those less knowledgeable on the role the ground and a 50+ year old rust nail actually would respond. It simply a matter of proper adjusting any detector, with the proper adjustments, to pass the nail board test. It little more than a slight of hand trick nothing else. And I actually tend to place it in the area of misinformation, but I'll leave that up to the user to define themselves.
Now I'm not taking anything away from any detector. A good fast responding detector, which generally means a simple electronic path, does great in high iron sites. I think the Deus is one of the few exceptions that is both a well featured detector capable of extremely fast recovery making it great in trashy sites.
Oh, and the reason some older detectors respond so well is the simple design. No depth but fast to respond. But it is still just a matter of most any detector properly adjusted for the condition will do just fine with the nail board test. Its little more than a guide and nothing else. Just like the air test.
Last edited:
As stated, a single test with a set configuration doesn't have a lot of value.
That set configuration will affect aspects of detecting that are outside the of the test.
It makes more sense that one would prepare a handful of various tests then:
-Set up a machine with a defined configuration.
-Run nail board test.
-Run test B.
-Run test C.
-Run test D.
Compare all results for the defined configuration.
It sucks if a machine passes a nail board test with flying colors but can't detect a coin sized object past 5 inches, for example.
That set configuration will affect aspects of detecting that are outside the of the test.
It makes more sense that one would prepare a handful of various tests then:
-Set up a machine with a defined configuration.
-Run nail board test.
-Run test B.
-Run test C.
-Run test D.
Compare all results for the defined configuration.
It sucks if a machine passes a nail board test with flying colors but can't detect a coin sized object past 5 inches, for example.
ghound
Elite Member
It's only another guide as to how your machine performs, i doubt anyone would buy a detector off the results alone.
But as with air tests, test gardens etc they give folks a baseline and it lets you try out different settings with a new machine at home before hitting the field.
But as with air tests, test gardens etc they give folks a baseline and it lets you try out different settings with a new machine at home before hitting the field.
BottleCapKing
Elite Member
You are 100% correct. Too many people put too much stock in an absolutely pointless test.
Cherry Picker
Forum Supporter
Not that it has no value, but not the value that is being sold is all I'm saying. As I said it almost meets the misinformation definition in my opinion.
Anyone who has been detecting for any length of time knows this test is nothing but a guide and does not reflect a real world scenario. It only serves to try and impress those who don't know any better. That is why I say it boarders on being misinformation.
But most experience people already know this.
Anyone who has been detecting for any length of time knows this test is nothing but a guide and does not reflect a real world scenario. It only serves to try and impress those who don't know any better. That is why I say it boarders on being misinformation.
But most experience people already know this.
BottleCapKing
Elite Member
I do not believe any test done in ideal (read: unrealistic) conditions that will never be seen out in the field to have any sort of value. Just my opinion. Feel free to disagree.
Cherry Picker
Forum Supporter
I'm with you BottleCapKing. Especially on the nail board thing. Air test have some value if nothing more than to test tone ID or that your detector is working at all LOL. Personally, I have yet to use a single detector that got better depth, consistently, in the ground than in the air. So with this in mind one could say an air test, on a properly set detector, will give you a best depth idea.
Monte
"In Memory of"
'Detector,' I'm in my 53rd year of enjoying this great sport, and I am not a casual or part-time hobbyist. I am, and always have been, a very determined and devoted detectorist since I built my first metal/mineral locator back in March of '65. I am 'determined' and 'devoted' in several ways.
One aspect of being 'determined' is that I am always determined to learn all I can, to do the best I can to master a detector and get to know its strengths and weaknesses. Likewise with determining how well search coil sizes, shapes and internal 'types' of designs can handle a variety of search environments.
I am determined to learn all that I can because there is no such thing as a 'perfect' metal detector or search coil, so by trial-and-error my efforts will result in me making sure I own and use the best assortment of detectors that are likely to serve my needs the best for the types of challenging sites I like to hunt.
Not being selfish I also enjoy sharing all I can to help others gain a better understanding and knowledge of detectors in-general, and especially those they choose to own, so that they might learn their strengths and weaknesses in order to get the most benefit out of them.
I have been 'devoted' to helping others as best I can, such as hosting full one-day and two-day seminars since 1981. Giving presentations and one-on-one assistance in organized clubs or to specialty groups. Answering questions and helping when I can on a number of metal detecting Forums for over two decades. Working with detector engineers and doing prototype evaluations since 1974 for no fewer than seven detector manufacturers.
In short, I like to help folks and not mislead them. I prefer to help them learn about strengths and weaknesses in performance of detectors in general so that they might better understand how some makes and models or coil choices might, or might not, be a practical selection for them.
I don't like to be argumentative, but I also recognize a need to address incorrect statements which, in time, could mislead readers and that could send them out making the wrong choices. So, my replies below are strictly to make some clarifications were I feel you might have been a bit in error, at least as I read your statements.
But any of these 'Tests' can provide a savvy detector user a lot of information about detector settings, search coil choices, audio responses, visual responses, and bring to light many strengths and weaknesses for us to be aware of when we take a chosen detector and search coil out into the real world for a day of detecting.
It is not all that uncommon for me to eyeball coins and other desirables in plain sight on top of the ground or partially exposed as I have been doing that in old western US town sites, homesteads, and pioneer and military encampments since 1969. Indian Head and Wheat-Back cents, Shield and 'V' Nickels, Seated Liberty and Barber dimes and quarters, Mercury dimes, and more.
The same holds true for many early era military buttons and insignia, cartridge cases and complete cartridges, table ware, jewelry, and all sorts of worthy 'keepers.' Not everything gets buried, and sometimes erosion and other weather related evens can bring some lost or discarded objects into plain view.
And back to nails being in the ground 50+ years, there is no absolute answer as to how it will be, what effect it will have on a detector's generated EMF, or the detectability. The ground mineral make-up where the nails are lost/discarded can have differing effects on them. The amount of moisture, if any, or if well saturated, will also have a very direct effect on potential results when encountered.
I have worked places where nails that had been lost/discarded no more than 35 to 40 years prior were almost undetectable! They were so deteriorated that what little effect they had on my search was more insignificant. Other times their condition will be little changed and the target masking effects might be no different than if set-up for testing at that very moment.
But let me assure you, it is NOT "... simply a matter of adjusting any detector" because there are many older detectors, many, many mid-aged detectors, and far more modern detectors than people might imagine, that fail to pass the NBPT regardless of the adjustments made.
Like I said, I have been doing this specific test with countless detectors I have borrowed, owned, or carried when I was a detector dealer, or have seen worked over the NB at seminars, clubs meetings and outings, as well as on our Welcome-to-Hunt Outings we've held the past two years.
By the way, we have two WTHO's scheduled for this year that you might consider participating in. These are no-charge outings open to anyone, with the 5th WTHO being May 18-21 in Wells, Nevada, and the 6th WTHO working three gold mining era ghost towns in Eastern Oregon.
We've had 17 to 25 people make each of the first four Outings, and for those coming up we have participants coming from Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Illinois, Nevada, Oregon Utah, Washington, and possibly some from Florida, New Mexico and Michigan.
I always have my NB with me, as well as a few 'kits', and we always welcome anyone to join the Outings, try to make some exciting finds, share the camaraderie, and, naturally, do a show-and-tell of how their chosen detector and coil can handle the NBPT.
So come on out, bring your new or 30 year old MH ADS4 detectors and coils along and give us all some education.
I would say 'misinformation' is when folks spout off about an actual, in-the-field encounter test scenario as a useless tool and that it is nothing more than "a slight of hand trick and nothing else."
To me it is a more a case of someone thinking they know what their results might be, but have never actually had a NB on-hand, to lay in their dirt and reject the four iron nails, then sweep over the nails and an Indian Head cent to know what REALLY happens.
There are a lot of "fast responding' detectors out there. The Teknetics Gamma, Omega 8000 in popular V. 4, V. 5 and V.6, the Omega 8500, the Teknetics T2 and Fisher Gold Bug Pro. How about the Teknetics Euro-Tek Pro or the Fisher F5.
All of these can hunt coins in trashy areas but not have a lot of rejected targets for their circuitry to be dealing with. They can give a quick response and fast-recovery to adjacent coins that sure looks impressive, but you can even mount their smallest 5" DD coil and check them out on the NB. I have, and I know what they CAN'T do.
There are other fast-responding detectors out there and some can do passably well, but I can assure you that not all of them can, regardless of what settings you use.
A choice example of some 'older' as well as currently manufactured detectors that are 'simple' analog designs, offer a quick-response and fast-recovery, and happen to be able to work excellent in dense iron nail environments are the Tesoro Discriminators.
I use my favorite Tesoro models to compare all other makes and models on the NBPT challenge. Not many detectors come close to performing like they do. There are a couple, not in my personal arsenal, that can handle the test well with their smaller coil, but my visual TID and audio Tone ID models of choice are my Nokta Impact, three FORS Relic units and a pair of FORS CoRe models. All of them have different search coils mounted for different site challenges or opportunities.
There is more to be learned, however, such as how Tone ID and visual Target ID can be effected by the close-proximity nails. How iron can effect the EMF differently than non-iron objects. How depth can be hampered by nearby masking targets. And how some smaller and more challenging targets can be very difficult to locate/respond when located in such a tough environment.
Monte
One aspect of being 'determined' is that I am always determined to learn all I can, to do the best I can to master a detector and get to know its strengths and weaknesses. Likewise with determining how well search coil sizes, shapes and internal 'types' of designs can handle a variety of search environments.
I am determined to learn all that I can because there is no such thing as a 'perfect' metal detector or search coil, so by trial-and-error my efforts will result in me making sure I own and use the best assortment of detectors that are likely to serve my needs the best for the types of challenging sites I like to hunt.
Not being selfish I also enjoy sharing all I can to help others gain a better understanding and knowledge of detectors in-general, and especially those they choose to own, so that they might learn their strengths and weaknesses in order to get the most benefit out of them.
I have been 'devoted' to helping others as best I can, such as hosting full one-day and two-day seminars since 1981. Giving presentations and one-on-one assistance in organized clubs or to specialty groups. Answering questions and helping when I can on a number of metal detecting Forums for over two decades. Working with detector engineers and doing prototype evaluations since 1974 for no fewer than seven detector manufacturers.
In short, I like to help folks and not mislead them. I prefer to help them learn about strengths and weaknesses in performance of detectors in general so that they might better understand how some makes and models or coil choices might, or might not, be a practical selection for them.
I don't like to be argumentative, but I also recognize a need to address incorrect statements which, in time, could mislead readers and that could send them out making the wrong choices. So, my replies below are strictly to make some clarifications were I feel you might have been a bit in error, at least as I read your statements.
The Nail Board Performance Test, or an Air Test or Bench Test, or evaluating a Planted Target Test Bed, all have a few things in common. First and foremost, they are only a Test.
But any of these 'Tests' can provide a savvy detector user a lot of information about detector settings, search coil choices, audio responses, visual responses, and bring to light many strengths and weaknesses for us to be aware of when we take a chosen detector and search coil out into the real world for a day of detecting.
The Nail Board was, as I described above, an actual, in-the-field encounter. The old school had been gone a long, long time, much more than 50 years, and the scattering of iron nails and the Indian Head cent, in particular, had been that way most likely closer to 75 to 95 years.
It is not all that uncommon for me to eyeball coins and other desirables in plain sight on top of the ground or partially exposed as I have been doing that in old western US town sites, homesteads, and pioneer and military encampments since 1969. Indian Head and Wheat-Back cents, Shield and 'V' Nickels, Seated Liberty and Barber dimes and quarters, Mercury dimes, and more.
The same holds true for many early era military buttons and insignia, cartridge cases and complete cartridges, table ware, jewelry, and all sorts of worthy 'keepers.' Not everything gets buried, and sometimes erosion and other weather related evens can bring some lost or discarded objects into plain view.
And back to nails being in the ground 50+ years, there is no absolute answer as to how it will be, what effect it will have on a detector's generated EMF, or the detectability. The ground mineral make-up where the nails are lost/discarded can have differing effects on them. The amount of moisture, if any, or if well saturated, will also have a very direct effect on potential results when encountered.
I have worked places where nails that had been lost/discarded no more than 35 to 40 years prior were almost undetectable! They were so deteriorated that what little effect they had on my search was more insignificant. Other times their condition will be little changed and the target masking effects might be no different than if set-up for testing at that very moment.
You can adjust any 30 year old detector you want and possibly do well on the NBPT. You can change coils and see what differences in performance their might be.
But let me assure you, it is NOT "... simply a matter of adjusting any detector" because there are many older detectors, many, many mid-aged detectors, and far more modern detectors than people might imagine, that fail to pass the NBPT regardless of the adjustments made.
Like I said, I have been doing this specific test with countless detectors I have borrowed, owned, or carried when I was a detector dealer, or have seen worked over the NB at seminars, clubs meetings and outings, as well as on our Welcome-to-Hunt Outings we've held the past two years.
By the way, we have two WTHO's scheduled for this year that you might consider participating in. These are no-charge outings open to anyone, with the 5th WTHO being May 18-21 in Wells, Nevada, and the 6th WTHO working three gold mining era ghost towns in Eastern Oregon.
We've had 17 to 25 people make each of the first four Outings, and for those coming up we have participants coming from Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Illinois, Nevada, Oregon Utah, Washington, and possibly some from Florida, New Mexico and Michigan.
I always have my NB with me, as well as a few 'kits', and we always welcome anyone to join the Outings, try to make some exciting finds, share the camaraderie, and, naturally, do a show-and-tell of how their chosen detector and coil can handle the NBPT.
So come on out, bring your new or 30 year old MH ADS4 detectors and coils along and give us all some education.
If you think it is just a 'slight-of-hand' trick, well come work you magic and show us how it's done.
I would say 'misinformation' is when folks spout off about an actual, in-the-field encounter test scenario as a useless tool and that it is nothing more than "a slight of hand trick and nothing else."
To me it is a more a case of someone thinking they know what their results might be, but have never actually had a NB on-hand, to lay in their dirt and reject the four iron nails, then sweep over the nails and an Indian Head cent to know what REALLY happens.
You ARE taking away a detector's performance ability because you haven't put them to a test in actual comparison, obviously.
There are a lot of "fast responding' detectors out there. The Teknetics Gamma, Omega 8000 in popular V. 4, V. 5 and V.6, the Omega 8500, the Teknetics T2 and Fisher Gold Bug Pro. How about the Teknetics Euro-Tek Pro or the Fisher F5.
All of these can hunt coins in trashy areas but not have a lot of rejected targets for their circuitry to be dealing with. They can give a quick response and fast-recovery to adjacent coins that sure looks impressive, but you can even mount their smallest 5" DD coil and check them out on the NB. I have, and I know what they CAN'T do.
There are other fast-responding detectors out there and some can do passably well, but I can assure you that not all of them can, regardless of what settings you use.
I won't argue a lot on this one because you are basically correct. The Deus, with the right coil and working up the best settings, can do well enough to pass the NB test. I don't personally care for the Deus, but for those who do and learn it well, it might be the right detector for them and their needs.
Most of the older detectors were in the 'simple design' category because they used analog based circuitry and were not a blended A/D or all digital circuitry design like most modern detectors are.
A choice example of some 'older' as well as currently manufactured detectors that are 'simple' analog designs, offer a quick-response and fast-recovery, and happen to be able to work excellent in dense iron nail environments are the Tesoro Discriminators.
I use my favorite Tesoro models to compare all other makes and models on the NBPT challenge. Not many detectors come close to performing like they do. There are a couple, not in my personal arsenal, that can handle the test well with their smaller coil, but my visual TID and audio Tone ID models of choice are my Nokta Impact, three FORS Relic units and a pair of FORS CoRe models. All of them have different search coils mounted for different site challenges or opportunities.
Yes, many of the older detector makes and models lacked the depth potential of most of today's top-end offerings. But NO, you are incorrect when you say: "... it is still just a matter of most any detector properly adjusted for the condition will do just fine with the nail board test."
Like an 'Air Test' it is a guide in some respects and does give an indication of possible performance in a comparable in-the-field setting, which is exactly what it is!
There is more to be learned, however, such as how Tone ID and visual Target ID can be effected by the close-proximity nails. How iron can effect the EMF differently than non-iron objects. How depth can be hampered by nearby masking targets. And how some smaller and more challenging targets can be very difficult to locate/respond when located in such a tough environment.
Monte
ghound
Elite Member
As the thread starter, can i just say that i didn't set my detector just for the test, i used the settings i had hunted with a few days previous and with the 11"DD it scored 7 out of 8 on a nickle.
I can alter the settings on the Ritus Alter 71 to make it pass, but there not settings i'd normally hunt with, but it's still dam impressive for an 11" dd coil though!
I can alter the settings on the Ritus Alter 71 to make it pass, but there not settings i'd normally hunt with, but it's still dam impressive for an 11" dd coil though!
Monte
"In Memory of"
BCK, I basically agree with you, but we have to determine first what is and what is not 'ideal' and that does NOT necessarily mean it is 'unrealistic.'
If you 'air test' an assortment of coins, in various orientations to the search coil, positioned anywhere from 1" to 6" away from the coil, and note the different audio responses you get, would that be considered 'ideal?'
NO, it wouldn't if all those same coins were located in mineralized soil at the same depths and different orientations to the search coil.
However, YES, it would be an 'ideal' test of conditions that could be 'realistic' if the coins were at the same depths and orientations in a loose wood-chip tot-lot where the design had a very thick chip area that was a good 8" to 12" or more off-of/away-from the ground mineral make-up.
I understand the effects of ground mineral and the need for detector circuitry to process that signal, and my NBPT IS an actual, in-the-field 'ideal' situation I encountered. It is similar to other multi-nail and good target finds I have made, often, over decades of serious Relic Hunting the old sites I like to lurk around.
Not only is it a test of an actual in-the-field scenario, but it is done with the NB placed on the ground so that there is an 'ideal' or actual ground mineral component for the detector's circuitry to also have to deal with. That is not in the 'unrealistic' category.
I am certain that any avid detectorist can think of several hunting events of their own that could make an interesting, and 'ideal' or 'realistic', test example. if you have some, share those ideas with us as I would be glad to check the performance potential of all the detectors in my Regular-Use Detector Battery that travel along on my detecting travels.
An 'unrealistic' or 'less-than-useful' test example is if a 2X4 or some size board or box or ??? is positioned on the ground and test targets are placed on top of the board, away from the ground and in plain sight. Then if only one nail is used with one coin to attempt to demonstrate how a particular detector and coil can produce a 'beep' on the coin that is well spaced from the one nail, it certainly isn't what I would call 'ideal.'
Nor would I call it common to see a coin and nail on top of a piece of wood out in the open, and not just pick the coin up, but first decide to sweep over it because there really isn't much of an in-the-field challenge. Most detectors can handle one nail spaced well away from one coin.
Multiply the number of nails, and put them in differing positions, THEN you have more of a 'test' or 'challenge' that is more 'typical' or 'realistic' i.e. 'ideal' to test for potential in-the-field performance.
Out of curiosity, what detector(s) and coil(s) do you usually hunt with, and that type of hunt sites do you prefer to frequent?
Monte
