MXT pros with different coils hunt today

[leebowhunts68]

MXT pros with different coils hunt today. My buddy and I found a small cival war picket out post which was only about thirty feet wide and 80 feet long today. He was using his MXT Pri with a 9.5 coil and I had My MXT pro with a 10 x12 sef. We slow hunted the hole area 2 or 3 times. I found 15 bullets and a small buckle along with other targets. The dirt is real rocky and red clay. He found 1 enfield and a couple of iron targets that read good. I would find a target and he would come and check it out. He could not hear part of the targets and others would break up on the second pass. We swapped coils right at the end of the day and he dug some camp lead a ten inches using his detector. I can run my gain wide open with the sef and found a pistol bullet today at 11 inches. Most of the targets where at eight to nine inches. He is going to be buying him a sef now. Just thought I would share. Love my MXT.

 

[norbyx]

Congratulations on your finds. I was thinking of getting a Sef myself but I am quetioning if it will outperform the White 300 coil or not.

 

[Aarong81]

Apples and oranges!
Its hard to say one is better than the other because they are very different designs and each has an advantage over the other. A 12" Concentric vs a 10x12 SEF (DD family), essentially a 10" coil. The 300 would get greater depth but requires a much cleaner ground, therefor causing frustration in many areas and missing targets. The SEF has abilities the 300 lacks but in its-self lacks depth the 300 can "sometimes" attain. If you cover a given area with the 10x12 SEF and clean it out, the 300 can find a few missed targets the SEF left behind. The same goes for the other way around, the 300 will not find all the targets so the SEF will find some of the ones the 300 missed. Even then, a 3rd coil can find targets both the SEF and the 300 missed. Ain't metal detecting fun?

 

[norbyx]

Well I know that the detecting patterns are different. And I know a DD coil will separate targhets better. I am just thiking that from the 9.5 to the 10x12 there is a big gap... but from the 12" concentric to the 10x12 the main difference is the shape of the detecting pattern. Depth should be more or less alike, even though the concentrig might be a litte deeper, I don't thin that is much. The main thing would be the ability to detect small obects, the concentric should have a mayor advantage in detecting small deep oblects, vs. the DD having the advantage of covering more ground...

Am I wrong??/

 

[Aarong81]

Sounds about right, but I have had the opinion that the 300 had a disadvantage to seeing "small" targets. The idea is that the bigger the coil the bigger the target needs to be. Think of prospectors looking for tiny gold flakes, they NEED a tiny coil to even see the flakes. Why? because if the coil is really small, even tiny targets are 'big enough' to bounce enough signal back to the coil. If you use a slightly larger coil, those gold flakes are not seen at all. Now move to slightly bigger targets, fired .22 bullets. The 5.3 will find lots of them! But the 300? Not so many. What is the difference? Target size compared to coil size. The .22 bullet might bounce 1% of the signal back to the 300 coil, but more like 6% of the signal of a 5.3 coil making a much louder signal. Same target, just more signal bounced back. Add to that, the 300 will be 'seeing' other targets and extra ground mineralization at the same time, masking what slight signal the "small deep" target is giving.


"small deep" targets almost dont belong in the same sentence. The deeper the target, the larger it needs to be in order to be seen. I don't know of a coil specifically for small targets and goes deeper than other coils. If it goes deeper, it is a larger coil. Coils for small targets are small. A larger coil lacks small target ability. Deep belt buckles, quarters and larger are ideal target sizes for the 300 and it will find those deeper than you want to dig. It can see dimes but thats at the bottom of its target size range, at least at any respectable depth.