Cherry Picker
Forum Supporter
For the vast majority of us, depth is without a doubt the most important ability of a detector. Undisputed, the most asked question by someone new to detecting is depth. But do we really understand how depth relates to our needs? Do we really understand how depth is perceived? Do we really understand how misleading depth can be?
As someone who lives in southwest Kansas, should I be swayed by the claims a detector can find a dime at 18" on the beach? On a beach I could see where this could be a nice feature to have, but I can't see me every digging an 18" hole in the places I hunt to recover a dime. In a plowed field, perhaps, but just because a detector can find a dime at that depth on the beach, doesn't mean it will perform the same in a field. Most likely not.
In most locations, such as private yards, I limit my recovery depth to about 7-8" and a few others about 10". In remote areas of our local park I may go 12", but no deeper. Last night I had to pass on 4 different targets that my Sovereign GT found that sounded good. I dug to 12" and still had a good signal in the hole but left them there. I'm sure they were good targets, but I value being able to detect our city park unrestricted and refuse to give that up for a few old coins.
Depth is also a relative thing, and this is where people can make misleading claims that influence the choices made by people new to detecting. They buy a detector based on these misleading claims and then blame the poster(s) for "false claims" about the detector. Again I say just because a detector will find silver at extreme depths doesn't mean it will also find gold at extreme depths. For example. My Sovereign GT is capable of some amazing depth on certain types of targets, but does very poorly on small gold.
And then there is that "bells & whistles" also labeled as "complicated" thing that I've never quite understood. Now I loved my old Garrett Freedom that I just turned on and started swinging, but I also realize that simplicity came at a cost. I have yet to use a detector that you can't just turn-on-and-go and still do a respectable job. I see people talk about spending all their time "fiddling with adjustment" and I can only say HUH? If there is a detector out there that needs no adjusting to achieve maximum depth in all conditions, I've yet to see it. So just what is maximum depth, and how important is it?
I can't speak for any one else, but I can honestly say at least 90% of what I recover is 6" or less. Just about any detector on the market, at any price range, can achieve 6" in the right conditions. It's when conditions aren't right that these bells & whistles come in handy. Maximum depth often changes from one location to another, and can even change drastically in little more than a few feet. A good example is a local park where we can dig coins as deep as 10" in one area, and in another area we are lucky to get 4" because of conditions. I dug a silver ring at 3 1/2" that was solid on my detector, while a buddies top of the line made no sound at all, and I made no adjustments what so ever. In this area 4" is an impressive depth.
So, with 90%+ of my recoveries being 6" or less, whats more important to me is the ability to pick out the good stuff from the junk, and the ability to detect those blasted small gold chains. The ability to pick out the good stuff from junk not only covers masking, but good accurate ID'ing. That brings us to having a visual display or not. Now I really see this as a very simple choice, at least for me. If having a visual ID is a crutch, then I say give me as many as possible. I want to know every bit of information on a target I can get before I decide it's worth digging a hole.
Personally, I've never been convinced that sound is any more accurate than a good visual display. Why I think some people feel sound is better is because they know to listen for that quick high pitch(with tone ID) among the other cracks and pops that can indicate a good target deep or masked. What many of those people don't realize is the same is true for a visual display for those who understand and use it properly. A quick high number between all that jumping can also indicate a deep or masked good target. And honestly I believe both the sound and visual ID'ing comes from the same source. That is to say the same information producing the sound produces the visual responses as well. You can learn to visually identify a deep or masked target just as accurately as using the sound. The same information is there, you just need to understand what it means. I find visual information easier to understand than sound.
Sorry this ended up so long, but I thought it would be interesting to see what people think about depth.
As someone who lives in southwest Kansas, should I be swayed by the claims a detector can find a dime at 18" on the beach? On a beach I could see where this could be a nice feature to have, but I can't see me every digging an 18" hole in the places I hunt to recover a dime. In a plowed field, perhaps, but just because a detector can find a dime at that depth on the beach, doesn't mean it will perform the same in a field. Most likely not.
In most locations, such as private yards, I limit my recovery depth to about 7-8" and a few others about 10". In remote areas of our local park I may go 12", but no deeper. Last night I had to pass on 4 different targets that my Sovereign GT found that sounded good. I dug to 12" and still had a good signal in the hole but left them there. I'm sure they were good targets, but I value being able to detect our city park unrestricted and refuse to give that up for a few old coins.
Depth is also a relative thing, and this is where people can make misleading claims that influence the choices made by people new to detecting. They buy a detector based on these misleading claims and then blame the poster(s) for "false claims" about the detector. Again I say just because a detector will find silver at extreme depths doesn't mean it will also find gold at extreme depths. For example. My Sovereign GT is capable of some amazing depth on certain types of targets, but does very poorly on small gold.
And then there is that "bells & whistles" also labeled as "complicated" thing that I've never quite understood. Now I loved my old Garrett Freedom that I just turned on and started swinging, but I also realize that simplicity came at a cost. I have yet to use a detector that you can't just turn-on-and-go and still do a respectable job. I see people talk about spending all their time "fiddling with adjustment" and I can only say HUH? If there is a detector out there that needs no adjusting to achieve maximum depth in all conditions, I've yet to see it. So just what is maximum depth, and how important is it?
I can't speak for any one else, but I can honestly say at least 90% of what I recover is 6" or less. Just about any detector on the market, at any price range, can achieve 6" in the right conditions. It's when conditions aren't right that these bells & whistles come in handy. Maximum depth often changes from one location to another, and can even change drastically in little more than a few feet. A good example is a local park where we can dig coins as deep as 10" in one area, and in another area we are lucky to get 4" because of conditions. I dug a silver ring at 3 1/2" that was solid on my detector, while a buddies top of the line made no sound at all, and I made no adjustments what so ever. In this area 4" is an impressive depth.
So, with 90%+ of my recoveries being 6" or less, whats more important to me is the ability to pick out the good stuff from the junk, and the ability to detect those blasted small gold chains. The ability to pick out the good stuff from junk not only covers masking, but good accurate ID'ing. That brings us to having a visual display or not. Now I really see this as a very simple choice, at least for me. If having a visual ID is a crutch, then I say give me as many as possible. I want to know every bit of information on a target I can get before I decide it's worth digging a hole.
Personally, I've never been convinced that sound is any more accurate than a good visual display. Why I think some people feel sound is better is because they know to listen for that quick high pitch(with tone ID) among the other cracks and pops that can indicate a good target deep or masked. What many of those people don't realize is the same is true for a visual display for those who understand and use it properly. A quick high number between all that jumping can also indicate a deep or masked good target. And honestly I believe both the sound and visual ID'ing comes from the same source. That is to say the same information producing the sound produces the visual responses as well. You can learn to visually identify a deep or masked target just as accurately as using the sound. The same information is there, you just need to understand what it means. I find visual information easier to understand than sound.
Sorry this ended up so long, but I thought it would be interesting to see what people think about depth.
