Well, on the 'other' forum (t.r.e.a.s.u.r.e followed by n.e.t.) there's a guy that claims that his ML Etrac and Excalibur can see THROUGH a sheet of rusted 18 guage iron and accurately ID the silver dollar. the Etrac would also do this with a 1/8" aluminum plate. What do you guys think? I'm trying to be polite here and haven't responded to his post yet. It's in the general forum under "Whats the difference bertween BBS, PI etc???". ..Willy.
Find's Treasure Forums
Welcome to Find's Treasure Forums, Guests!
You are viewing this forums as a guest which limits you to read only status.
Only registered members may post stories, questions, classifieds, reply to other posts, contact other members using built in messaging and use many other features found on these forums.
Why not register and join us today? It's free! (We don't share your email addresses with anyone.) We keep email addresses of our users to protect them and others from bad people posting things they shouldn't.
Click here to register!
Need Support Help?
Cannot log in?, click here to have new password emailed to you
A detector that can see THROUGH iron/aluminum.
- Thread starter willy
- Start date
Ed in SoDak
Member
Well, an aluminum can by itself reads as a dollar coin on my machine, so I imagine if you put an "Ike" behind the can, you could point at it and say, "Look, it's reading the dollar behind the can!"
Someone totally new to TID detecting just might be taken in by it or convince themselves when by chance there actually -was- a dollar coin under the hunk of plate or sheet metal.
-Ed
Someone totally new to TID detecting just might be taken in by it or convince themselves when by chance there actually -was- a dollar coin under the hunk of plate or sheet metal.
-Ed
But not the way buddy is describing it. My BS-o-meter has the needle pegged. Thing is, how many newbe's will read that post, go out and get a high dollar Etrac or Excalibur, then start yowling about how the detector is a POS. Don't get me wrong, they're good detectors.. but not that good. It also serves to give ML machines a bit of a black eye when people start posting and/or believing that kind of malarkey. ..Willy.
I have the E Trac as well as a DFX. The E Trac is a great machine. But the bottom line is that, (in the world of physics), it is impossible to see through any other metal, especially iron. He is reading the aluminum and is getting falsing from the iron on the second test. I never believe any outstanding claims like that, when they are not possible through science. He may have thought that it was working that way, but it was not. I once made a really great disc program for the E Trac, that saw a dime through 4 nails, all around and on top of the coin!!! I had the unit maxed on it's sensitivity, and was sure I could find coins at 8" under all those nails,----- that is, until I removed the dime and was still getting a good signal from the nails
If any machine could see through metal and find the good stuff, the market would be flooded with everyone's old machines!!!
If any machine could see through metal and find the good stuff, the market would be flooded with everyone's old machines!!!Ed in SoDak, you hit the nail right on the head. As an example: I once had a CZ6 user tell me he could tell a coin under a rusted bottle cap (as if .. his CZ could see through it). To illistrate this, he puts a rusted bottle cap over a penny, and swings. Sure enough, a signal. When I asked him "but can you tell that signal apart from bottle caps with no coins underneath it?" He says "of course, it'll sound different". Imagine his surprise when I tried this test on him: While his back was turned, I put out 3 rusted bottle caps, with a coin hidden under only one. Then I challenged him to swing over them, and tell me which bottle cap was hiding the coin. Believe me, he never made that claim again, and he began to have a hefty respect for the concept of "masking" after that 
There is also the issue of "averaging" (to change the subject a bit). Some detectors are better at this than others. That's where, for example, you have a dime which, on the Whites scale, reads 79, right? So you put a tab, which reads 30, over it, and you will end up (depending on the machine, the distance between the targets, etc...) presumably with a reading of around 54 (the average between the two). But I've noticed that phenomenom only on certain machines. Others simply only read the object that is on top, especially if there's any appreciable distance between the targets. And this is more pronounced with 2 conductors, not iron vs conductors.
There is also the issue of "averaging" (to change the subject a bit). Some detectors are better at this than others. That's where, for example, you have a dime which, on the Whites scale, reads 79, right? So you put a tab, which reads 30, over it, and you will end up (depending on the machine, the distance between the targets, etc...) presumably with a reading of around 54 (the average between the two). But I've noticed that phenomenom only on certain machines. Others simply only read the object that is on top, especially if there's any appreciable distance between the targets. And this is more pronounced with 2 conductors, not iron vs conductors.
Ed in SoDak
Member
Yupper, my Time Ranger does that. It cannot separate two nearby targets into two discrete signals, but it does average their IDs. In the case of iron, it may pick that out and also give a reduced ID on the coin. Tabs and two coins together, it gives a solid reading that is often neither. Still, it was often stable enough to make you want to dig it as a possible "good" target.
In all metal, you could slowly hover over the twin targets and sometimes the ID would shift to one or the other.
In practice with multiple targets using the Time Ranger, I think it would hard to tell without digging what might be under the coil.
-Ed
In all metal, you could slowly hover over the twin targets and sometimes the ID would shift to one or the other.
In practice with multiple targets using the Time Ranger, I think it would hard to tell without digging what might be under the coil.
-Ed
In September 08,I was searching a yard with a brand new Silver UMax.Got a signal, dug it and was disappointed that I dug a rusty piece of can.Put it in the baggie and got another signal from the same hole, 1906 Indian..The Silver did not register on the iron.,but only at the coin that it hid. $165 detector new on eBay, and that little stunt impressed the heck out of me..Go back into the September Tesoro forum and you'll find my comments..I'm using a Vaquero in twisted ground covered with last years grass mats..I know I may be missing stuff. But I am a little put out with the Vaquero's iron abilities..I went over the area with another brand and found every hot rock in town.Now that I discovered meteorites may be hidden as hot rocks, can't find any.(Running just below nickels).Afraid I'll have to get the other detector out.Cordially NAD
dougmoore34
New member
n/t
Nauti
Well-known member
It's surprising how many people claim their detector can see through another metal to hit a hidden target.As mentioned in an earlier article this is totally impossible.If however the target is next to a piece of iron....and you have a fast enough recovering machine....you may have a chance of getting enough of a response to convince you to dig the signal.Thats about as good as it gets with todays technology.
GRAY GHOST
New member
hello. like coinnut, i have recovered silver surrounded by broken iron nails and the like, and even a wheat cent once. but for this fellow to claim his machine can detect through one metal and more or less accurately i.d. the target below it is full of malarkey. willy, your bs-ometer is dead on. [so is mine] like some of the others said, i wouldn't even dignify that post with a reply. hh!
.. get ahold of your Homeland Security and ATF and tell them about this incredible breakthrough so they can catch them some gun runners 'n terrorists and such. They might even hire him as some sort of 'special' consultant (you know, like in 'special' classes at school). ..Willy.