Garrett Sea Hunter Mark II ..... discrmination???

[Ivan]

I see that this detector claims it has some limited form of discrmination.They call it "discreet eliminatiom" How well does it work? Anyone out there that has used the Garrett Mark II, please chime in. I'm looking for a pulse detector that has a smaller coil , so it's between the Tesoro Sand Shark or the Garrett Sea Hunter II . I'm leaning towards the Garrett...am I leaning in the right direction? I would not really rely on the discrimination too heavily but am curious how well it works? Also, is this a good pulse machine any tips or advice...........thanks for your replies.

 

[Hank68]

I have the sh2, switching to a pulse is a different world than a vlf, what I can say about the detector that it does discrimate out pull tabs if you want to but iron is tough , you can learn the sounds of rusted iron targets , I set mine to a slight hum, and disc @3 which eliminates the waivering threshold in the surf, and the 8" coil is great in the surf, not to mention the ability to swap coils and headphones is a plus, and i tape the cable straight up the shaft first foot and then wrap the cable which helps on the waivering threshold, it's a tough machine simple to use and deep as heck, just dig all the targets and learn the tones , I only use standard mode while beach hunting , and get a heavy duty sand scoop because you'll need it, GL

 

[Rainyday101]

It is my understanding that changing the Disc. setting changes the pulse delay on this machine. Different pulse delays work better for different conductive targets. I am told it is not a true discrimination because that is not possible with a PI detector. The Sand Shark is a fixed pulse delay at which Tesoro considers an all around optimum delay for most hunting conditions. In my opinion, and that's all it is, the Sand Shark would be simpler because it is one less control to adjust. I guess if you didn't understand the affect of pulse control on targets, you could possible set it up wrong on the SH II. and maybe miss some targets. Don't know for sure. I would never want to disc. out anything but small iron and bobby pins so that I would never miss gold.

I two have been looking at both of these detectors and making comparisons. If you do some searching on the forums, I have found that these two detectors are probably fairly even. Lots of good finds have been made from both from what I have seen. For a water detector a lifetime warranty is a nice thing to have and the Tesoro has that. I want to purchase one of these two but haven't made my mind up yet.

It would be nice of you to purchase both of them, try them, and let me know what you think!!!!

 

[Booty Hunter]

If you don't want to miss any gold, run it with no disc, I've done air and sand testing and disc will reduce the sensitivity and ability to pick up gold. And gold is what we are all after, isn't it?

 

[Tom_in_CA]

I believe what the others are telling you, is that the "discrimination" works in reverse. Instead of iron (nails, bobby-pins, etc...) being the FIRST (and easiest) thing to knock out, those are the LAST (if even possible) things to get knocked out. However, you can maybe knock out pulltabs, if you wanted. But then, of course: a) you'd miss gold, and b) you still wouldn't be knocking out nails/iron.

So what's the point? If you want disc. (ability to pass iron), get a regular machine. Today's machines have closed the gap depth-wise. And ..... except for some gun-powder black nasty conditions, it's only rare sand conditions where *only* a pulse can penetrate. And sure: there's some tinsel fine chains or earing studs that *only* a pulse can get. But ....... it's a factor pay-your-choice of evil's downsides.

 

[Rainyday101]

Tom, when you say todays machines have kind of closed the depth gap, I have wondered about that also. It sure gives me second thoughts on a PI. I am inland Midwest, mild soil. My Tiger Shark in all metal mode with slight background threshold will hit all the coins at 10" in my less than 2 year old test garden and all the 12" coins faintly. So I wonder how much if any a Sea Hunter or Sand Shark will gain me in depth. I wonder if it is enough to even bother. In wet sand at an inland lake I imagine it would be even deeper yet. Essentially in all metal my Tiger is a dig it all detector anyway.

 

[Hank68]

I can tell ya that a vlf machine is not even close on depth as a PI, I have the tiger shark with the 10" coil which is a great machine in wet and dry sand and have dug 9+ " targets, but the sh2 with a 8" coil I dug a very faint target in the towel line and pull a beer can @ 3' lol , but only imagine what the 10x14 coil would do,

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Hank and Rainy-day: When I say that today's standard vlf (mf, etc...) discriminators have closed the gap on depth, I realize this is a loaded statement. Because there's infinate types of "discriminators" and there's infinate types of pulse machines. So I was speaking rather broadly with the following evolutionary basis:

Back when pulse machines first came out for beach users (mid 1980s?), it was a given, back then, that ..... yes: You could go deeper with the beach pulses than the then-current breed of discriminators people were swinging on the beaches in those days. Eg.: 6000's, etc.... And ...... consider for the moment, that TODAY however, if you put a WOT coil on the sovereign, that you can get up to 14 to 16" on coins. Maybe even 18" on a quarter or half. Then you can see that that closely mimicks the depth of most of the beach pulse machines.

However, I realize that not many people can get accustomed to the warbly fishy performance of a Sov/Wot combo. And I realize there's some pulse machines (especially some of the high-powered nugget machines), that can, in fact, exceed 18" on coins. I've heard that Minelab's pulse nugget machine, for example, can get a nickel at nearly 2 ft. ! But seriously now, can you imagine the insanity you'd go through, to try to use that type setup on the beach. Or dry sand where teensy staples and pinheads and such exist?

Thus yes, it's an over-generalized statement. But when you start to consider that depths up to nearly a foot (or 14" with the CTX and big-coil-combo) are attainable, you see that the depth differences gap has been much closed, in the last 25 yrs. or so.

 

[Rainyday101]

Thanks Tom, at times I debate getting a PI for my freshwater hunting. I currently own a Tiger Shark and it does well. I just wonder if I really need to though. In most of the places I hunt, at the most I hit clay or hard packed dirt before 8" deep. Some places this may only be 4" or less. In reality, I rarely find targets in the hard pack, all targets are usually on top of the hard pack. The only exception I have found to this is on reservoirs where that hard pack is the original ground before it was flooded. It seems coins and rings can only sink to the hard pack. Most of these places have sand on top of the hard layer.

If I wanted all metal my Tiger Shark is deep in this mode with a light background threshold. Hear a change in threshold, scoop. In all metal the Tiger with a 10" coil is deep. Hunting in all metal takes some getting use to after hunting in silent search with low disc. I'm thinking I will use the Tiger another year before making the PI decision.

 

[Hank68]

Thanks for your knowledge Tom, I just stuck on my SH2 on the beach, HH