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.
Ism said:Here's my simplified take from years of reading posts and personal experience. Wet soil allows for better depth in fairly clean areas. In areas with high trash and iron, it can have a negative impact. The halo effect around iron is more pronounced giving the iron object a larger footprint thereby masking good targets that would be seen in dry soil. The better depth you will achieve in wet soil also magnifies the signal from the trash (again giving trash a larger footprint) overwhelming many good targets that would be visible to the detector in dry. Also to be considered is the mineralization of the soil. A good example of this to the extreme is salt water beaches. In the dry-semi-dry beach sand, great depth is achieved by a VLF detector. But in wet sand the depth is greatly diminished because of the high concentration of conductive salt minerals. This is why I believe that some people claim better depth in dry soil and others in wet. It all depends on your style of hunting and location.