Detectors can perform much differently in different areas. Being in the USA, I'll bet my money that Monte has waaaaaaaaaaay more experience using those two detectors in the USA than you, Sir. Just a few months ago you were asking for help on how to use your Xterra.emubob said:
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.
racer vs 705
- Thread starter digginLa
- Start date
That's what I'm wanting to find out, is the Omega going as deep or deeper that the other 2 detectors running at a sensitivity between 50 and 60 (which is where I normally have to put it) and the other two a their higher settings. Just have to find the right spot grid it off and see how it goes.
88junior
Well-known member
The constant 82 vdi's would give me trouble using the Racer. If your hunting relics or coins in a area that's got very little aluminum trash the Racer would be great but if your hunting modern day parks and schools you will be digging tons of can slaw that register 82 vdi's. I'm waiting to see what the Impact detector has to offer over the Racer.
A lot of hardcore hunters would BRISTLE over what you just posted. Perhaps for turf as you say, then yes: you might pass surface trash and angle just for old coins. But for anything @ relic type sites, they would laugh at any supposed benefit to TID. Because, afterall, "you're going to dig everything, right ?". At first glance, this sounds logical. But consider this true story :
A friend and I were working a virgin contact era indian village site here in CA, associated with the mission system. It was in a zone that is now row crops. So unfortunately, much aluminum cans had tangled with plows over the years. Fieldworkers who discard their cans, which then become "slaw". So there was just no way to avoid digging the stuff, in our quest for thin reales, small buttons, etc.....
I was using an Explorer, and my friend was using a non-TID machine (a moot point for the moment which make/model). But since we were each in "relic mindset", we figured it didn't make any difference, RIGHT? Yet night after night, I'd spank him 3 to 1 on coin/button counts. Eg.: If I had 3 good buttons, he'd only have one. If I had 3 reales, he'd only have 1. HOWEVER, when we went to count our over-all target counts (all period targets plus the modern aluminum junk), THEN our counts would be about the same. Eg.: 100 targets dug for each of us.
HOW THEN was I ending up with 3x the better finds? Why were my ratios better, when it came to actual keepers ? My friend accused me of cherry-picking , since he knew I had a tone ID machine. I denied it. Because I was fully convinced that I was in "relic mindset" and "digging all conductors". Eventually though, we began to figure out what was happening:
SUBCONSCIOUSLY, my mind was *favoring* the better sounding targets. Ie.: "round" sounding, or whatever. And subconsciously I was 'diss'ing turd-sounding (elongated out-of-round, or flitty low foil-ish cr@p sounds, etc....). Not purposefully, mind you ! Because they're conductors too afterall. It was subconsciously done , when there is scores of signals to choose from.
Needless to say, my friend ditched his non TID machine, and ran out and bought an Explorer on-the-spot. Doh!
So the benefit of TID and good sounds that give tell-tale-differences , is NOT only restricted to just turf. It can come in handy elsewhere, even if only subconsciously. This could be a factor in Racer vs other machines, depending on type sites.
A friend and I were working a virgin contact era indian village site here in CA, associated with the mission system. It was in a zone that is now row crops. So unfortunately, much aluminum cans had tangled with plows over the years. Fieldworkers who discard their cans, which then become "slaw". So there was just no way to avoid digging the stuff, in our quest for thin reales, small buttons, etc.....
I was using an Explorer, and my friend was using a non-TID machine (a moot point for the moment which make/model). But since we were each in "relic mindset", we figured it didn't make any difference, RIGHT? Yet night after night, I'd spank him 3 to 1 on coin/button counts. Eg.: If I had 3 good buttons, he'd only have one. If I had 3 reales, he'd only have 1. HOWEVER, when we went to count our over-all target counts (all period targets plus the modern aluminum junk), THEN our counts would be about the same. Eg.: 100 targets dug for each of us.
HOW THEN was I ending up with 3x the better finds? Why were my ratios better, when it came to actual keepers ? My friend accused me of cherry-picking , since he knew I had a tone ID machine. I denied it. Because I was fully convinced that I was in "relic mindset" and "digging all conductors". Eventually though, we began to figure out what was happening:
SUBCONSCIOUSLY, my mind was *favoring* the better sounding targets. Ie.: "round" sounding, or whatever. And subconsciously I was 'diss'ing turd-sounding (elongated out-of-round, or flitty low foil-ish cr@p sounds, etc....). Not purposefully, mind you ! Because they're conductors too afterall. It was subconsciously done , when there is scores of signals to choose from.
Needless to say, my friend ditched his non TID machine, and ran out and bought an Explorer on-the-spot. Doh!
So the benefit of TID and good sounds that give tell-tale-differences , is NOT only restricted to just turf. It can come in handy elsewhere, even if only subconsciously. This could be a factor in Racer vs other machines, depending on type sites.
88junior
Well-known member
Tom I wasn't knocking the Racer! I know it's a very good machine at picking non-ferrous targets out of ferrous infested areas. But in modern day trashy areas the Racer would keep you busy digging up trash due to the 82 VDI which a lot of good targets fall into the 82 VDI also. Like I said I'm waiting to see what the Impact has to offer.
88junior said:
Interesting that you would say that. Be prepared to be tarred and feathered by the proponents, who will insist it spanks every machine, even for turf, etc....
As soon as my buddy and I pit his racer against various others, this coming winter, we'll post the results. It won't be for turf though (where some semblence of TID is in order). It'll be in a relicky ghost-townsy iron -zone site. Where we've each pulled seateds & reales in from the morass of iron, in the past.
But I'll try to talk him into stopping off , on our travels, to do some turf on the way. Will post the results of that , if we make time for that too. And I will be very cautious to not only point out a target and say "do you hear it?", but also make mental note of "Is there any difference in what he's hearing, versus the scores of other junky-turf-park signals that abound?". Because if a deeep wheatie/silver sounds no different than 4" deep corroded zinc, or pencil eraser tops, or whatever, then .... what good is that ? Maybe ok for relicky "dig all", but .... not for turf.
Jackpine Savage
Active member
Tom_in_CA said:
Tom
Were you able to get back to the site and test out the 705 with 6" HF coil? If so, did you compare it with the Racer? The X-70 had some attributes I really like but did not hang on to it long enough to try out some of the later release coils.
Thanks
Tom Z
Hey there. Yes I put the 705 w/HF coil through the paces. At several ghost-townsy sites. And I wasn't satisfied. I didn't get the same results for iron-see-through as my friend with 305 had been doing.
Thus I suppose the Racer too would spank this 705 set-up as well. But not sure if the 305 would spank the Racer or not.
I have not met up with that friend , who owns the racer, to do any more comparing. But suffice it to say, I usually spank him on target counts anyhow (with whatever machines each of us are bringing to sites). So not sure how fair the test would be.
An alternative might be to flag actual targets and compare (rather than counting end results). But even THAT becomes psychologically skewed. Because it becomes subconsciously easy for someone to say "yes I hear it", when you point it out to them. But the question really is: Is it distinguishable enough from other random falses and chatter, that they can pick-those-out on their own?
For example: One time , I was trying an old machine of mine, against a dealer's new "latest greatest" machine. And each time I'd show him a flagged signal, he would gleefully announce that he hears it, with "room to spare". And surprisingly, his "calls" were about the same as mine. So at first glance, it appeared his was at LEAST as good as what I was using. However, after an hour or two, I noticed that I was the only one finding deep turf wheaties/silver, and he had YET to show me any good flagged signals (barring some shallow clad, pulltabs he thought "might be gold", blah blah). It then became apparent to me that he was merely be subconsciously prompted to hear exactly what I was telling him was there. So the REAL question is: Could you have found that target on your own ?
And to know that, you're back to target counts at end of hunt. But that's problematic, because, some people are just faster/better hunters, and it might actually have no reflection on the machines in question. Doh!
Thus I suppose the Racer too would spank this 705 set-up as well. But not sure if the 305 would spank the Racer or not.
I have not met up with that friend , who owns the racer, to do any more comparing. But suffice it to say, I usually spank him on target counts anyhow (with whatever machines each of us are bringing to sites). So not sure how fair the test would be.
An alternative might be to flag actual targets and compare (rather than counting end results). But even THAT becomes psychologically skewed. Because it becomes subconsciously easy for someone to say "yes I hear it", when you point it out to them. But the question really is: Is it distinguishable enough from other random falses and chatter, that they can pick-those-out on their own?
For example: One time , I was trying an old machine of mine, against a dealer's new "latest greatest" machine. And each time I'd show him a flagged signal, he would gleefully announce that he hears it, with "room to spare". And surprisingly, his "calls" were about the same as mine. So at first glance, it appeared his was at LEAST as good as what I was using. However, after an hour or two, I noticed that I was the only one finding deep turf wheaties/silver, and he had YET to show me any good flagged signals (barring some shallow clad, pulltabs he thought "might be gold", blah blah). It then became apparent to me that he was merely be subconsciously prompted to hear exactly what I was telling him was there. So the REAL question is: Could you have found that target on your own ?
And to know that, you're back to target counts at end of hunt. But that's problematic, because, some people are just faster/better hunters, and it might actually have no reflection on the machines in question. Doh!
Jackpine Savage
Active member
Thanks for the quick reply. The results your friend got could very well have been specific to his particular machine or I suppose his hearing.
In the past when a comparing targets with a friend we would point out the location. I think the better way would be to say "there is a target in this area" giving them a rough location within reason and see if they can locate and identify it.
The new Racer 2 can't get her soon enough!
Tom
In the past when a comparing targets with a friend we would point out the location. I think the better way would be to say "there is a target in this area" giving them a rough location within reason and see if they can locate and identify it.
The new Racer 2 can't get her soon enough!
Tom
Nauti
Well-known member
emubob said:
Monte seems to have years of experience and knowledge about detecting and is very respected by a lot of detectorists.However,i too would question any advice from somebody who has relied on nail board tests for the last 21years.Nailboard tests prove nothing.Detectors that do badly in these kind of tests can do better than detectors that do on actual buried targets that are close to iron.........why test a detectors ability on targets that are on the surface of the ground in the same plane.
yeah flagging is funny really I can hear can you might be good to learn about the detector I am holding but as a comparison test , really I don't think there is a 100% way to test 2 machines against each other.
yes minelabs don't do so well on nail board tests but they seem to find the goodies in the ground, really no one has come close to the FBS machines in depth and ID as a pair in a VLF machine that I know of, other machines I use find stuff but if looking in a old park for old coins I reach for the ctx it has the runs on the board, sure the others find silver found some shallow silver the other night with the F19.
so yes different tools for different jobs.
and well there is nothing better than time on a detector it sure helps raise the finds , I might have room for an Impact when it comes out just to see how it does, other than that I don't see the need to try every machine that comes out unless it fills a hole in my detecting needs like the hold racer has.
guess there are several styles of detectors each good at one thing with some cross over in some of them.
I see how fast the GR is in iron and that's good for me and if the impact can do fast and deep with ID then it might earn a spot
time will tell.
guess really its not about what machine is best its what's best for me.
AJ
yes minelabs don't do so well on nail board tests but they seem to find the goodies in the ground, really no one has come close to the FBS machines in depth and ID as a pair in a VLF machine that I know of, other machines I use find stuff but if looking in a old park for old coins I reach for the ctx it has the runs on the board, sure the others find silver found some shallow silver the other night with the F19.
so yes different tools for different jobs.
and well there is nothing better than time on a detector it sure helps raise the finds , I might have room for an Impact when it comes out just to see how it does, other than that I don't see the need to try every machine that comes out unless it fills a hole in my detecting needs like the hold racer has.
guess there are several styles of detectors each good at one thing with some cross over in some of them.
I see how fast the GR is in iron and that's good for me and if the impact can do fast and deep with ID then it might earn a spot
time will tell.guess really its not about what machine is best its what's best for me.
AJ