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.
How much truth is there to these statements?
- Thread starter ronhob
- Start date
mascard1
Well-known member
I think the Blisstool has something like this?..
(Detectors such as Garretts GTI 2500 will allow you to set the discrimination of signals to an actual depth. If you know that targets of a specific era are all at 5 inches, you are able to exclude all signals that are shallower thus eliminating the modern junk.) IS THIS REALLY POSSIBLE?
(Detectors such as Garretts GTI 2500 will allow you to set the discrimination of signals to an actual depth. If you know that targets of a specific era are all at 5 inches, you are able to exclude all signals that are shallower thus eliminating the modern junk.) IS THIS REALLY POSSIBLE?
As with many things on forums today they give you a fraction of truth but hide the price you pay.
Surface blanking thats been around for years isn't on the majority of detectors because though it works the price paid was to high ie you can mask the modern rubbish near surface but you also lose older/wanted items in the same exclusion zone. Worse you lose wanted items at greater depths because each item in the "exclusion zone" you have set creates a dead area beneath it. Not good.
As for the Minelab statement if it was true why have I detectors that will beat my Minelabs on deep/weak target responses in high EMI areas ?
Surface blanking thats been around for years isn't on the majority of detectors because though it works the price paid was to high ie you can mask the modern rubbish near surface but you also lose older/wanted items in the same exclusion zone. Worse you lose wanted items at greater depths because each item in the "exclusion zone" you have set creates a dead area beneath it. Not good.
As for the Minelab statement if it was true why have I detectors that will beat my Minelabs on deep/weak target responses in high EMI areas ?
Salesmanship. Everyone selling something highlights their strengths and fails to mention their weaknesses.
There is no 'best' detector because we all are different re where/how/what/etc that each individual hunts. The trick is to find what works best for You and Your type of hunting. And if you are happy with what you have, be it a $50 70's era Radio Shack pawn store find or $5k+ internet wonder machine, then You Dun Good. Its all about enjoying life.
There is no 'best' detector because we all are different re where/how/what/etc that each individual hunts. The trick is to find what works best for You and Your type of hunting. And if you are happy with what you have, be it a $50 70's era Radio Shack pawn store find or $5k+ internet wonder machine, then You Dun Good. Its all about enjoying life.
Larry (IL)
Well-known member
Surface elimination on the 2500 was good in theory........ most of the detectors on the market today use a better version called a depth indicator......... dig targets at whatever depth you choose plus you can still hear the silver dollars that are right under the surface. 
Any detector with frequency offset or shift will help with EMI rejection.
Any detector with frequency offset or shift will help with EMI rejection.
Thanks for all the replies. That pretty much sums what I already thought, but it's nice to be reassured.
.(Worse you lose wanted items at greater depths because each item in the "exclusion zone" you have set creates a dead area beneath it. Not good.)-I didn't really think about this. Good to know.
.(Worse you lose wanted items at greater depths because each item in the "exclusion zone" you have set creates a dead area beneath it. Not good.)-I didn't really think about this. Good to know.
Garrett had surface elimination on a whole range of models including the 2500 and you will see they claim on their ads that its a "unique" thing. Unfortunately Tesoro, Compass and other companies also had it for years and lots of modern Chinese offerings such as the American Hawks HP-1030.
As you've read from the others, this is not a good idea. All it ever was, was an intensity cutoff (based on strength, intensity, etc...). Much better to let your ears decide, rather than have a computer be deciding. It was confusing. For example: if you were momentarily "catching the end" or "catching the side" of a larger shallower target (yet weren't exactly centered), you'd get a signal (since it appears to be a smaller/deeper target). So your "blanker" would allow you to hear it. But then when you went to go center over it to hear it better, it would disappear, because now you're on the louder center, which triggers the "blanker". Just a BIG nuisance, if you ask me. Much better to let your ears do it.
Also: There was a humorous mis-conception that people had about this gimmick. The misconception was no doubt fostered by the way the advertisements were bady (or purposefully?) worded: Some people thought that when the machine "blanked" that top 5", that they were going to eliminate masking. Ie.: magically "see right through" that top layer. So for example, if a flatted can were 1" deep, and a silver dime were 6", they'd get the time, while seeing through the can. Nope. Didn't work like that. The machine still "sees" the can (albeit silences over it, since it's above the intensity cut-off point). So you still masked, same as ever.
Also: There was a humorous mis-conception that people had about this gimmick. The misconception was no doubt fostered by the way the advertisements were bady (or purposefully?) worded: Some people thought that when the machine "blanked" that top 5", that they were going to eliminate masking. Ie.: magically "see right through" that top layer. So for example, if a flatted can were 1" deep, and a silver dime were 6", they'd get the time, while seeing through the can. Nope. Didn't work like that. The machine still "sees" the can (albeit silences over it, since it's above the intensity cut-off point). So you still masked, same as ever.
BarberBill
New member
Tom's explanation should put that question to rest. However, his statement about the flat can over the dime is a good demonstration as to why those that "dig it all" find the most goodies. Hunting in all metal and digging it all would still find the dime (as long as the detectorist rechecks the hole) because the trash item would respond in all metal and digging would remove it. Very tedious in heavy trash areas I know, and I usually only work that way for a short while before I get lazy and use some discrimination. The site being hunted may govern one's approach. If there's a good likelyhood of desirable old silver or gold jewelry in the area, the extra pain of hunting this way could definitely pay off.
BB
BB