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
Changed email? Forgot to update your account with new email address? Need assistance with something else?, click here to go to Find's Support Form and fill out the form.
Best $350 detector for finding rings/jewelry???
- Thread starter youngbuck
- Start date
Paul from Kiev
New member
For finding rings you should better buy something with NOTCH. Otherwise you will dig a lot. In the range of 300-350 USD Fisher 1236 is very good. I think it has the edge over the F2. It goes deeper than the F2 and in the same way simple to use.
I'm assuming you mean Fisher? If so, then I agree with the 1236-X2. Besides, it can also be used for other things, as it is quite a powerful detector.
First, remember that any detector will find rings - they are easy, in fact, being single loop inductors.
Other jewelry may or may not be so easy. Fine worked gold and filligree, small chidlrens rings and so on are harder to detect. What is needed is a detector that has an affiinity for these. That normally means a higher operating frequency than common coin detectors. It also helps to accept that such gold falls low on the conductivity scale so low discrimination should be used. And these sorts of jewelry items tend to give poor responses, meaning you have to be willing to dig even iffy items that are at foil discriminate and above.
I tend to go with the detector that gives the sharpest response to iffy targets in this case, and that is also the 1236-X2 in your price range. If a Fisher isnt a requisite, then I would suggest one of the Tesoro's. Also the Garrett Ace 250 fills the bill well.
Finally, here are two truisms you may not hear when we start arguing detectors:
1. It's not so much the detector, as where you take it.
That means you gotta take it where the odds are high that rings can be found. Even the highest priced model will fail if you don't do that.
2. Gold jewelry looks like junk to a detector
That is a fact of life. If you are really serious about finding jewelry, get a detector with notch and eliminate everything above and below the midrange. If you avoid diggin' foil, pulltabs, or screwcaps by whatever means, then you can pretty much give up on finding much gold jewelry. The rule of thumb in jewelry hunting is - if it signals at foil or above, recover it.
First, remember that any detector will find rings - they are easy, in fact, being single loop inductors.
Other jewelry may or may not be so easy. Fine worked gold and filligree, small chidlrens rings and so on are harder to detect. What is needed is a detector that has an affiinity for these. That normally means a higher operating frequency than common coin detectors. It also helps to accept that such gold falls low on the conductivity scale so low discrimination should be used. And these sorts of jewelry items tend to give poor responses, meaning you have to be willing to dig even iffy items that are at foil discriminate and above.
I tend to go with the detector that gives the sharpest response to iffy targets in this case, and that is also the 1236-X2 in your price range. If a Fisher isnt a requisite, then I would suggest one of the Tesoro's. Also the Garrett Ace 250 fills the bill well.
Finally, here are two truisms you may not hear when we start arguing detectors:
1. It's not so much the detector, as where you take it.
That means you gotta take it where the odds are high that rings can be found. Even the highest priced model will fail if you don't do that.
2. Gold jewelry looks like junk to a detector
That is a fact of life. If you are really serious about finding jewelry, get a detector with notch and eliminate everything above and below the midrange. If you avoid diggin' foil, pulltabs, or screwcaps by whatever means, then you can pretty much give up on finding much gold jewelry. The rule of thumb in jewelry hunting is - if it signals at foil or above, recover it.
Meter and notch sure come into play to cut down the odds. 1236X has neither and don't need superior depth as most jewelry is not found deep and F2 does a nice job for the bucks..As far as digging everything above foil local parks would have me on my knees for most of the day..Of course area comes into play but cutting down the odds does also..1236X might be superior on a beach but on land F2 gets the nod..
Jackpine Savage
Active member
They can be easily found in that price range. It has a jewelry mode which eliminates zinc and above and you can also dial in some discrimination into the low foil range if you chose to do so. Like the 1236X2 its very sensitivity to small low conductors.
Tom
Tom
jackintexas
New member
Jimmyk said digging everything above foil. Foil has at least 40% of lost rings. Who wears the most rings. Women. Ladies thin gold rings hopefully with stones. I have found over one hundred and twenty five gold rings. Most in the last five years. It is more where you hunt than just dig everything where ever you are. The one in the picture appraised for $2000.00.....Jack
jackintexas
New member
Most of mine was found with a $250.00 detector....Jack
