Nail board tests?

ghound said:

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!

Click to expand...

Thanks' for starting the thread. It is one of the many things that can challenge folks when they venture away from a rather 'tame' urban hunting area to one that is more challenging with a dense array of iron nails, and other ferrous type debris.

Because I hunt at least 85% of the time in really littered environments I keep most of my detectors outfitted with a smaller size coil that I have found to provide me the best efficiency in a tough condition. Four of my Tesoro units have a 6" Concentric mounted and one the new 7" Concentric. For four of them I have one round 8" Concentric mounted on a spare lower rod, and for the other the 8X11 DD is mounted and ready to swap, if needed.

On my Target ID and Tone ID models, that I currently have, they each have a coil mounted for the toughest 'challenging test' I have put them to, with a small 'OOR' DD on one Nokta FORS CoRe and the standard 7X11 DD on my 2nd CoRe.

I have one FORS Relic with the round 5½" DD mounted, another Relic I bought with the 5½X10 Concentric affixed, and my Relic R-P sports the standard 7X11 DD.

Then there my 'Test' Impact. I have the 4X7¾DD ready to mount which I like for urban coin hunting and some Relic Hunting sites that have a limited amount of junk. I'll get another lower and middle rod to keep it at-the-ready.

My Impact is working well for me in some very, very iron litter sites with square nails and rusty tin the biggest annoyance and I am using a round 5½" DD coil. For me, for now, this will be my primary-use coil on this Impact.

Now that production Impacts are hitting the market I am going to get a new production Impact to keep a different coil mounted. Not sure until after the open-frame 5X9 DD gets out whether the 2nd Impact will have that coil mounted or the stock 7X11 DD.

By the way, I am working on my Impressions of the Nokta Impact which I'll post on the General Detecting Forum at ahrps.org when I am finished which, I hope, will be by Friday night. In there I will be discussing this 5½" DD coil (Nokta calls it a 5" but I measure coils) and I know I will be asked about it. I already was last weekend on a ghost town hunt with friends from out-of-town.

I had a discussion with Dilek a while back after a very tough NBPT 'challenge' I had for my hunting buddy Gregg to check out. I still want any detector/coil combination I use to provide me at least 7-out-of-8 or even better all 8-out-of-8 hits when I use an Indian Head cent. All of mine do.

The Impact with the new elliptical 4X7¾ DD coil gives me very good 'dig-it' responses. It and my other Nokta models get 8-of-8 with those smaller coils, and still do well with the stock coils or the Relic w/5½X10 Concentric.

The really surprising challenge I had for him was using a very small-diameter and very thin 1836 Capped Bust Half-Dime, another Utah ghost town find back in '91. It weighs half of what a silver dime weighs which explains its diminutive size.

The US 1¢ (cent or penny) coin is the most often carried and lost coin and accounts for the most found coin by detector users. So appropriately it is the standard coin to use in the NB test, aside from the fact that it was the coin I initially discovered amongst those four nails.

The half-dime makes this one of the most challenging I have done using the NBPT to evaluate detector and coil performance. Is it a 'practical' test? Probably not because half-dimes are not a frequently found coin. I think I am still one short of hitting a dozen of them in 52+ years of detecting.

But, is it a USEFUL test? I believe it is because it lets you determine which detector/coil combo can give the best performance in a really tough to hunt site, and thus the odds would be more in your favor of finding a desired keeper. I like the odds to be in my favor.

Anyway, when I posted the result on my Forums is was spotted, pretty quickly, by Dilek and we then had a phone conversation. As I explained, the new elliptical coil is a really nice coil and works well for many applications, but in a dense iron nail environment with a really small non-ferrous target, there can be problems.

Those are based upon the coil shape, position of the inner Tx and Rx windings in relationship to the nails, and how a detector processes the signals and dealing with Discrimination and recovery to respond to the favorable target.

That's all I will say about our conversation as we did discuss other things, and all I can tell you is that it is sure wonderful to have a detector manufacturer who monitors the consumers comments, keeps abreast of their product's performance, and quickly addresses any important concerns. No manufacturer does what Dilek and Nokta/Makro do.

Here is a cut-and-paste of an e-mail I got from Dilek and reporting back about the VERY favorable results I have been having with this coil.

"You can post your results though – please make sure that you mention that we developed this coil upon your request and for your nail board test …and now that the results are positive we are thinking of adding it to the lineup but you do not know about the date.

Dilek"

So there you have it. I will share this. Right now Nokta doesn't need to be pestered about this coil I have as they are working feverishly to get Impacts and other products produced and out the door as they have to be back-ordered on the Impact.

The Impact gave me 8-of-8 with this coil on the Impact on that dinky old half-dime. One of those was a digable 'iffy' and many detectors couldn't do that. The 4X7¾ DD on the Impact can't, and the 'OOR' and 5½" DD on the Racer and Racer 2 couldn't, the White's V3i, with the best operating coil in the hands of a very skilled 'V3i master' gets 5, maybe 6-of-8.

I am sure that when the time comes, and knowing Nokta that won't be too far down the road, Dilek will make an 'official' announcement. For now they just need to get the Impact and current coils and accessories into the hands of all the average consumers.

Monte
Q's? Fire me an e-mail: [email protected]

Monte, first of all thank you for all this useful information. Second, I've seen the "blueprint" for your nail board test, but don't remember where I saw it. Can you post a link to it or give the dimensions for this?
Thanks.

Monte said:

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.'

Click to expand...

Realistic:

Metal detecting is a three dimensional game. Not a single planar Star Trek battle scene.

Is is possible that a coin and an nail are going to be sitting on the same horizontal plane in the ground? Sure, it is possible, but it is unlikely even though that is the best case scenario.

Will that rusted iron halo have a big impact on what the detector sees? Yup, it sure will. Non-sulfurous water will not corrode silver like it will iron. It takes a real special kind of ground condition to cause silver to corrode any more than just the surface. That iron halo will almost always be bigger. (It really depends upon the level of corrosion of the nail and how long it has been in the ground).

Does testing something on the ground expose the targets to the ground matrix? No. There is no ground matrix above a target sitting on the ground. Testing something on the ground in which you ground balances is the same thing as air testing when you have ground balanced to the air. The signal will hit the target undiminished by the ground matrix and the induced signal will not be degraded by the ground matrix.

Iron response is direction dependent. Non-ferrous response is consistent from all direction assuming the target is uniformly thick and uniform in diameter. In most nail board tests, people place the point of the nail near that coin. That is going with the grain. It would be an entirely different test if they placed the head of the nail (assuming it isn't a brad) towards the coin. That nail head sure reacts different from the detector-friendly end of the nail, yes?

Like I said before. It is my opinion that such tests are useless. You don't have to try to convince me I am wrong, or justify why you think it is useful. It is YOUR time you are spending doing it. If you think you are getting something out of it and you are enjoying yourself. All the power to you.

NCtoad said:

Monte, first of all thank you for all this useful information. Second, I've seen the "blueprint" for your nail board test, but don't remember where I saw it. Can you post a link to it or give the dimensions for this?
Thanks.

Click to expand...

trying to help anyone is my pleasure. Since I am a 2-finger typist (using 1 per hand) it takes me w while to get them finished onc I start. Sorry if some get a bit long, but it is to try and convey thoughts, opinions, and learned skills. I just hope they help and if you ever have a question, drop me an e-mail.

Under Tips & techniques on the AHRPS.org website, you can read about the NBPT. There is also a rough image of the test board, however:


I have been trying to get a few things worked out on this website as well as my other that is basically inactive. In moving some things around the web designer somehow lost some of the photos and other info I had there. When we get it resolved he will take down the warning notice and it will be down-loadable to scale.

In the meantime, I do have some NBPT 'kits' left that we sell for AHRPS Donations, but only mail them out in the lower 48 states. Many use PayPal Donation at AHRPS and e-mail me their mailing address for the 'kit.' PayPal eats a chunk of the donation so we charge $25 with a Donation, and that covers mailing it out.

If you use Cash or US Postal Money Order you can send it to me. E-mail your request with your name and Mailing Address and I will e-mail back with my address.

I had these made to exacting scale by a professional sign maker using sign board so they will last for almost ever.

Keith S. has one that he uses now instead of the printed out paper version that was slightly out of scale.

Q's, just shoot me an e-mail.
[email protected]

Monte

Monte,

Help me understand, as I'm not trying to be argumentative, but could be considered a Nail Board skeptic (or denier so to speak). What specific results are you looking for? Is it just to pick up the coin through the trash? Is this used to tune the detector? Is there a baseline to measure other detectors?

I prefer an even smaller coil. I use my 4x6 dd shooter coil almost exclusively in trashy areas.

We should be thankful to have folks with so much experience even posting here on this forum.

What about the nail board tests??

I see there are skeptics here,,,but what I don't hear them stating is a better way to judge a detector's possible capabilities as it relates to nails and iron.

I also see where 3 d testing was mentioned.

I think it is a fair statement when talking about 2D separation/unmasking vs 3D separation/unmasking,,,is there a complete departure from 2D in its entirely when one moves to 3D here??

You see with all the possible combinations out there in existence will the detector that passes the nail board test better overall,,,will this carry over in the field even to the slightest degree??? I think so.

Folks should remember it could be microns of distances here,,,where one detector with a certain coil can capitalize and provide a user with some thing more worthy-- to allow them to stop and dig.

It is not a clean break when going from 2D to 3D.

I guess I could say,,,the manufacturers need a place to start,,,or need a place to go when it comes to engineering and designing detectors.

I think it is a true statement here,,not all detector models are created equal when it comes to hunting in and around iron and nails.

Now depth of nonferrous find here,,,can play a part.

I mean I don't think anyone here believes with a 16 penny nail laying on top of the ground,,directly over a silver dime at 9",,that it will be detected.

Folks here are familiar with power ball and the possible combinations of numbers.

Well,,in the field,,I feel the possible combos with nails, iron vs the nonferrous just like the combos with powerball numbers.

So,,what we need is more keys (a detector and coil(s)) to unlock more locks.

Will a person every time they go out,,,will they need all the keys to unlock the locks detecting the nonferrous in a site?? Probably not.

But there will be days(sites) where a person will need.

Now,,next,,,remember we don't know what we don't know when it comes to nonferrous items buried under the surface.

The problem here is,,,we likely could prove which detector(s) are the best overall in the separation and unmasking depts,,,it would take a lot of time,,and using a lot of detectors,,and taking careful notes on the head to heads.

There are like I said loads of detecting scenarios out there,,,probably everyone has a (scenario) they have never been exposed to while sweeping a coil over the ground.

Thee are good finds deep,,,at mid depths,,and yes some are still at shallow depths.

I am a firm believer especially in the good shallow finds still existing.

I definitely see a trend with myself using certain detectors/coils,,in sites I have spent a great deal of time in.
I also see a trend when examining the spot where nonferrous finds (coins and relics) are being found.
They usually are not solo sitting nonferrous targets.
They in fact have something wrong with them,,and yes this is probably why they were still there.

Let's talk target ID.
This here plays a part too when targets are being crippled to varying degrees.

If folks will look here at the Impact thread you will see where there was a nonferrous target in my yard,,,I had swept this target with every detector /coil combo I had ever owned. ID of target was junk nonferrous target using all these detectors,,but the Impact told me something else. And yes it was a copper coin.

The reason I bring this up,,,nonferrous targets in the field,,I am positive some of these targets have actually been detected,,,but the ID didn't interest the person and they walked.

So,,I feel there are finds that haven't been detected previously using a model detector with coils swept over.
And there are finds that were detected but gave poor ID,,and were left in the ground.

Let's talk sweep speed and coil position.

Does this matter.
Wonder if one detector can pick out a coin on nail board test with faster sweep,,and or more latitude for coil position.

Will these provide advantages in the field.
I think so.

This is one reason why,,I don't like head to heads on you tube.
You'll hear folks say narrating,,oh it's getting it.

Hovering a coil over a place where you already know where the target is don't paint true pic.

You can try to simulate sweeping up to the target,,but this is still not a true blue comparison/test.

There are pass ratings assigned sometimes,,but really which detector shined over the other(s) truthfully.

What triggers a detectorist to stop and investigate,,,super duper important.
Are all detectors here equal??
I think this is at least half of the puzzle solved,,,just a detector making me stop.

tnsharpshooter said:

We should be thankful to have folks with so much experience even posting here on this forum.

What about the nail board tests??

I see there are skeptics here,,,but what I don't hear them stating is a better way to judge a detector's possible capabilities as it relates to nails and iron.

I also see where 3 d testing was mentioned.

I think it is a fair statement when talking about 2D separation/unmasking vs 3D separation/unmasking,,,is there a complete departure from 2D in its entirely when one moves to 3D here??

You see with all the possible combinations out there in existence will the detector that passes the nail board test better overall,,,will this carry over in the field even to the slightest degree??? I think so.

Folks should remember it could be microns of distances here,,,where one detector with a certain coil can capitalize and provide a user with some thing more worthy-- to allow them to stop and dig.

It is not a clean break when going from 2D to 3D.

I guess I could say,,,the manufacturers need a place to start,,,or need a place to go when it comes to engineering and designing detectors.

I think it is a true statement here,,not all detector models are created equal when it comes to hunting in and around iron and nails.

Now depth of nonferrous find here,,,can play a part.

I mean I don't think anyone here believes with a 16 penny nail laying on top of the ground,,directly over a silver dime at 9",,that it will be detected.

Folks here are familiar with power ball and the possible combinations of numbers.

Well,,in the field,,I feel the possible combos with nails, iron vs the nonferrous just like the combos with powerball numbers.

So,,what we need is more keys (a detector and coil(s)) to unlock more locks.

Will a person every time they go out,,,will they need all the keys to unlock the locks detecting the nonferrous in a site?? Probably not.

But there will be days(sites) where a person will need.

Now,,next,,,remember we don't know what we don't know when it comes to nonferrous items buried under the surface.

The problem here is,,,we likely could prove which detector(s) are the best overall in the separation and unmasking depts,,,it would take a lot of time,,and using a lot of detectors,,and taking careful notes on the head to heads.

There are like I said loads of detecting scenarios out there,,,probably everyone has a (scenario) they have never been exposed to while sweeping a coil over the ground.

Thee are good finds deep,,,at mid depths,,and yes some are still at shallow depths.

I am a firm believer especially in the good shallow finds still existing.

I definitely see a trend with myself using certain detectors/coils,,in sites I have spent a great deal of time in.
I also see a trend when examining the spot where nonferrous finds (coins and relics) are being found.
They usually are not solo sitting nonferrous targets.
They in fact have something wrong with them,,and yes this is probably why they were still there.

Let's talk target ID.
This here plays a part too when targets are being crippled to varying degrees.

If folks will look here at the Impact thread you will see where there was a nonferrous target in my yard,,,I had swept this target with every detector /coil combo I had ever owned. ID of target was junk nonferrous target using all these detectors,,but the Impact told me something else. And yes it was a copper coin.

The reason I bring this up,,,nonferrous targets in the field,,I am positive some of these targets have actually been detected,,,but the ID didn't interest the person and they walked.

So,,I feel there are finds that haven't been detected previously using a model detector with coils swept over.
And there are finds that were detected but gave poor ID,,and were left in the ground.

Let's talk sweep speed and coil position.

Does this matter.
Wonder if one detector can pick out a coin on nail board test with faster sweep,,and or more latitude for coil position.

Will these provide advantages in the field.
I think so.

This is one reason why,,I don't like head to heads on you tube.
You'll hear folks say narrating,,oh it's getting it.

Hovering a coil over a place where you already know where the target is don't paint true pic.

You can try to simulate sweeping up to the target,,but this is still not a true blue comparison/test.

There are pass ratings assigned sometimes,,but really which detector shined over the other(s) truthfully.

What triggers a detectorist to stop and investigate,,,super duper important.
Are all detectors here equal??
I think this is at least half of the puzzle solved,,,just a detector making me stop.

Click to expand...

Ok, not 100% sure what your trying to say, but it sounds like you're saying is;

'there are too many different Variables, to put too much credence into a set up test. Especially when we cannot see what's under the ground ahead of time, nor can we effectively repeat the sample once it has been dug.'

Is that correct?

Big Treble said:

Ok, not 100% sure what your trying to say, but it sounds like you're saying is;

'there are too many different Variables, to put too much credence into a set up test. Especially when we cannot see what's under the ground ahead of time, nor can we effectively repeat the sample once it has been dug.'

Is that correct?

Click to expand...

More or less.
How about this.
What if we buried nail board test intact 2" down??
Had you rather use a detector that will pass this nail board test and still get respectable depth??

I do think the nail board test,,as far as passing should be tied also to settings,,,how deep is the detector still.

One problem with this,,,different levels of soil minerals will affect here.

What would be nice to see.

Wonder what we would see for the detectors Monte affirms passes the nail board test.

If we could suspend a nail above a coin 6",,, and see how close the nail can be moved towards the line of sight of coin,,,for the detector to give at least a nonferrous signal.

Would we possibly see a connection here,,,comparing the passers vs the failers of nail board test?

I am actually quite surprised Monte hasn't built a nice test jig to do tests like this.
A jig that would allow real precise shifting of the masker(s) and the coin,,,deployed in both 2d and 3D fashions.

We could by seeing his results here,,,it would answer at least a few questions,,and just maybe decrease the skepticism a bit.

I have given thought about building such a device using nylon bolts/screws.

tnsharpshooter said:

More or less.
How about this.
What if we buried nail board test intact 2" down??
Had you rather use a detector that will pass this nail board test and still get respectable depth??

I do think the nail board test,,as far as passing should be tied also to settings,,,how deep is the detector still.

One problem with this,,,different levels of soil minerals will affect here.

What would be nice to see.

Wonder what we would see for the detectors Monte affirms passes the nail board test.

If we could suspend a nail above a coin 6",,, and see how close the nail can be moved towards the line of sight of coin,,,for the detector to give at least a nonferrous signal.

Would we possibly see a connection here,,,comparing the passers vs the failers of nail board test?

I am actually quite surprised Monte hasn't built a nice test jig to do tests like this.
A jig that would allow real precise shifting of the masker(s) and the coin,,,deployed in both 2d and 3D fashions.

We could by seeing his results here,,,it would answer at least a few questions,,and just maybe decrease the skepticism a bit.

I have given thought about building such a device using nylon bolts/screws.

Click to expand...

The reason I asked originally is, of course I don't know everything nor will I, but their might be great value that either I don't see or understand.

The bigger flaw I see in comparing this test to a live target is the FIS, Falsing Iron Syndrome. I would tend to believe that nails that might false this close to the coin at 6" would appear as one bigger high tone target.

This concern doesn't address the fore mentioned 3D/2D issue. The reduction of sensitivity to complete some of the test, also doesn't generally match a true hunting situation.

Big Treble said:

The reason I asked originally is, of course I don't know everything nor will I, but their might be great value that either I don't see or understand.

The bigger flaw I see in comparing this test to a live target is the FIS, Falsing Iron Syndrome. I would tend to believe that nails that might false this close to the coin at 6" would appear as one bigger high tone target.

This concern doesn't address the fore mentioned 3D/2D issue. The reduction of sensitivity to complete some of the test, also doesn't generally match a true hunting situation.

Click to expand...

I used 6" in my example,,how about 4"??

How far out of line of site does the nail need to be moved for detector with specific coil detect the coin(at least as nonferrous item).

And when this spot for the nail is determined,,and one detector detects the coin,,,then leave setup and try other detectros with like/similar sized coils.

Like I said could their be a link here,,,with what is seen with nail board results.

As distance of nail and coin widens(distance nail above coin) on the 3D plane,,,I think the detector's used in tests will be closer overall.

How does elliptical shaped coil play here vs round??
This test might show.

This is where Deus makes one think...it is 9" across the round 9" coil,,,but a mere 7" across like the F75,,, but which one is better in nails and iron??
Is it about processing speed here,,for the Deus
being better.
If you believe Mr Dankowski the answer is not entirely.
He gave what he thought were equivalent Deus reactivity level setting comparing F75 in a post on his forum.

It's also a good test to find the strength of your detectors separation on different conductors.
My Rutus running 18.4khz can pick out very small conductors like, hammered coins,.22 cases etc right on the point of a large nail, not so good on a higher conductor.
From this a read that the as the machine upgrades the co located low conductor, say it reads 50 ID on it's own, but beside iron it may read 90, this keeps it in the dig me scale where as a higher conductive silver coin that might read 90 ID could be upgraded to 118 and be close to the end of the scale and the signal gets less sure as it's caught up in the iron wrap round area.
So it can give you valuable info on your machine, and I've learned that i need to adjust my scale to allow a happy medium that lets both conductors be heard more clearly.

The problem with this test is it does not take into account or produce the iron leaching that happens in real life. A nail in the ground for some 50+ years will have leached and produce a much bigger mask than a freshly set nail test.

I still am not saying it has no value, I'm just saying it really does not indicate what a real life test would be. Of course a detector that does good on the freshly set nails would be, more than likely, a better choice than one that failed, but not an absolute piece of proof. As I said more a guide like an air test. And whether a detector passes or fails the test is a matter of proper adjustment more than ability.

An example would be I can adjust the Deus so that the AT Pro would smoke the it on a nail test if I wanted. Even though the Deus is far better in heavy iron.

In the end the real test is in your pouch. Watch what people are bringing home from old hunted out sites and that is a true judge of the claims of a detector capable of doing such a claim. The proof is in the pouch.

ghound said:

It's also a good test to find the strength of your detectors separation on different conductors.
My Rutus running 18.4khz can pick out very small conductors like, hammered coins,.22 cases etc right on the point of a large nail, not so good on a higher conductor.
From this a read that the as the machine upgrades the co located low conductor, say it reads 50 ID on it's own, but beside iron it may read 90, this keeps it in the dig me scale where as a higher conductive silver coin that might read 90 ID could be upgraded to 118 and be close to the end of the scale and the signal gets less sure as it's caught up in the iron wrap round area.
So it can give you valuable info on your machine, and I've learned that i need to adjust my scale to allow a happy medium that lets both conductors be heard more clearly.

Click to expand...

I think those of us that question this test, do so because we don't be, (refer to your first line) believe that the separation you believe it has on the nail board test, is the same separation you will have when everything has been buried for 50 years.

The falsing iron, doesn't false when it's out of the ground.

Big Treble said:

I think those of us that question this test, do so because we don't be, (refer to your first line) believe that the separation you believe it has on the nail board test, is the same separation you will have when everything has been buried for 50 years.

The falsing iron, doesn't false when it's out of the ground.

Click to expand...

I don't think anyone has said a detector will operate in carbon copy fashion as the nail board test would indicate when testing.

Could this though be relative,,,as it it applied in real world detecting situation??
I think so.

Take a look around,,what do you see the veteran detectorists using in nail pits to try and get any and all detectable nonferrous??

Again I asked,,for the skeptics here,please list the detector's that rank above average for hunting in nail pits,,,and tell us why you have labeled as such.

Btw ever do any tests using Deus with 3D test using nails elevated above coin??
How did it do compared to some other detectors compared??
Deus does pretty good eh?
How does it do in the field,pretty good?? Right.

How does Deus compare with CTX,,both wearing 11" coils??

Now take both detectors wearing 11" coils to a nail pit,,,alternate using each detector making finds,,then use the other to see if it can detect.
(Use only hunt able settings)
Wonder what will happen??

Now take the Deus and repeat all the above using F75 any series detector and do all the above.
Deus wearing 9" coil,,F75 wearing 7x11" coil.

In the field,,will the results mirror what is seen on the 3D test as far as which detector is better in the nail pits???

Try it and see.


I already have.

Good info thsharpshooter and I think we all pretty much agree. Some of us just question putting much faith in a nail test much like and air test. As I said, and have the video to back it up, my 13+ year old DFX can do quite well and would impress those new to detecting leaving them with the impression the DFX is a real iron monster LOL. In fact I could easily maladjusted the Deus to where the DFX makes it look bad.

It's just that those of us who have been detecting a long time know the results of a rusted nail in the ground for 50+ years compared to a freshly exposed one. Really no comparison. All it takes to look good at the nail board test is to set your detector just above the level to discriminate the nails and it will sound off on any conductive metal added to the mix no matter how you arrange them or how many.

I think my concern is that those who are new to detecting could be mislead in to basing a decision on what they buy on such a test which can be easily flawed. Not that I believe that is your intentions, I just think pointing out some facts and a bit of skepticism is good.

Still good info though tnsharpshooter. Thanks

I like the nb test and believe it's a good learning tool, epecially for people new to the hobby to see what combination of settings and coil size works best. However, trying to normalize so many variables is an impossibility. As previously stated, ground mineralization, depth and orientation of coin vs nails, time spent in ground, and one not mentioned, moisture in ground. Iron gives a more stable ID when ground is dry, but after a heavy rain, it falses, more so if it's been in the ground a long time. And don't get me started on chunks of coal. Those of us that's been at it for years know theirs no be-all end-all detector or detector test for every situation. But I do like the test.

Thank you Terry.

Next,,let's talk nail falsing,,since it has been mentioned.

Is the falsing caused entirely by the nail???

Nope.

How do I know this?

Part of it is caused by the detector used and perhaps coil.

Case in point,,anyone who has used Nokta Relic detector in a nail pit.
Take a Nokta Impact into the same site and listen. (19khz vs 20khz,,a mere 1khz difference)

Notice any difference?

Next take a Racer 2 with small coil into same site (runs on 14khz btw).
Now take the Impact in and dial to 14khz,,and listen.
Notice any difference,,,,same freq running right?

The same iron and nails under the coil right?
Maybe this is the why behind Impact's gain on factory default programs is level 85 vs Relic detector default gain is 50 and Racers,,where their gain is default set to level 70.

This transition of a coil passing over the nails,the nail points,,not all detectors/coils here created equal.

Deus btw,,,it does a good job here in this dept too.

Just thought I Would point this out.
And not meant to be a plug for Impact either,,but this difference noted here means some thing.

And believe it or not,,this tendency to give high tone glints on the nail points/ends can be seen when comparing using nails in a test on top of the ground.

So again another on top of the ground test that does shed light on detector performance,,when used in the real world of detecting.

You think manufacturers check this here??
Like Xp, Nokta,Makro, Fisher, etc.
You bet!!

All I can say is almost 7 years in the hobby and I have YET to find coins on a nail board in any plug, I'm.just.saying.

Detector said:

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.

Click to expand...

+1