Tested medium gold ring at 5 inches --

[TabWhisperer]

- with my V3i - MXT - QXT and Tejon in my yard.

I love my Whites machines. But it seems like the only gold rings I would find would be no more than 3 inches. I just picked up a used Tejon. I buried a womans wedding band set (engagement + plain band soldered together) 5 inches in my yard. I tried the V3i and MXT with the 300, 10DD, 950 and 6x10 coils and none of them would hit on the ring and any descrimination mode. I had to go to relic or prospecting mode. Then they indicated Low Iron which I probably would have passed on. Same for the QXT Pro with a 950 coil. However the Tejon hit the ring hard with good discrimination. I am resistant to the Tejon due to the lack of tone ID or some visual ID system. I do like it's simplicity and performance. I do not like the single tone. I would expect to dig more rings (and tabs) with the Tejon based on what I saw in my yard tests. The Whites are great on coins hitting 8 inches and pretty good on silver rings, but let's face it, the gold rings are where it's at in the urban hunts.

Does anyone have the ability to test a Whites detector against a F75, Minelabs FBS series or Omega 8000/T2 with a similar test? Granted your ground conditions are different than mine, but it still might be interesting to see if the results are consistent. If I find any locals near me I will also repeat the test and post the results. I'm not here to bash or promote brands, but I would like to find out which detectors can reliably hit a gold ring at 5 inches while using typical coin and jewelry disc modes since that is where I spend most of my time.

 

[jim tn]

I can't compare detectors for you, but I can state that my F 75 LTD can hit a gold ring with a broken band at 7." The LTD gave me a slightly broken signal with a vdi in the cent, dime range, a tone and reading I would always dig on an old site. My regular F 75 found me 3 or 4 gold rings in the 3-5" depth range and gave enough good information to dig...and I am not a digger of everything. HH jim tn

 

[matthias]

Hello from Pennsylvania. I have the ability to test your question. My limitations are that I am in my first year of detecting (newbie) and I only have a men's 10K (medium width) ring to test with. After I read your post I buried this ring at 6". My newbie results were not impressive even though I was using some sweet machines that I need to learn much more about. When using the Minelab Sovereign GT with Sun-Ray S-5 I got a broken signal which I probably would not have dug. Sens on auto, disc zero, notch zero, band 2, threshold on and even. Same results with Sov and 10x12 SEF coil and 10" stock Tornado. White's DFX in coin/jewelry mode with 8x6 SEF- nadda. With White's 10" D2 I got an inconsistant tone. With Fisher F75 Ltd SE the numbers were all over the place in Disc, even with sens at 80, which is pretty conservative for my soil conditions. In All Metal/ Motion I seemed to nail it between 9 and 11, reading nickel with a good reading on the confidence meter. Bounty Hunter Pioneer 505 Notch and Auto Notch- nadda. In Disc mode with sens max and disc min I got a consistant iron/foil tone. Probably would not have dug. These are just my real quick newbie findings. I hope they help somebody somewhere somehow. I had fun doing these tests and would gladly repeat them. I realize that a freshly buried article is not the same as something which has been buried for years, etc. I realize that Minelab are especially bad at fresh articles and air testing. If I've blundered here please correct me- I will appreciate it. HH. Matt

 

[TabWhisperer]

Thanks Matt. That's the kind of stuff I'm looking for. It is consistent in the White's produced nothing. Some might argue that not very many rings would be that deep, but then how would you know how many have been passed over? Also if there are some at only 4 inches how confident are in what the detector is telling us it's seeing? I know some hunt in AM mode all the time, but it's not for me in the city parks. Anyone else have a Minelab or Teknetics or Garrett to compare?

My bottom line is this, if I can find a detector that stands out at being able to consistently detect gold rings around 5 inches and not just the first 2 inches, that's what I will be using.

 

[matthias]

Hey Jim. I tried some other programs with the DFX with better results. The Relic program nailed it, but with no indication of what the article might be, and the depth meter read 3.5" (not 6"). I use a little hotter program than the stock coin/jewelry and that program sort of nailed it with a weak but consistant tone. Prospecting program gave a weak, inconsistant signal. This round of tests was done with a 10" D2 coil. I wish I had better than 10K to test with because I know it would make a difference. Looking forward to other people's posts. HH. Matt

 

[Ken in NC]

Your problem may be with the particular ring set that you are testing. Is this set very thin? Does it indeed have a kt marking for the gold content? Could it be platinum?

If the rings are thin, and of higher kt content, the rings may be coming in at the lower foil range. If you are setting the MXT to a preset coin and jewelry program, the foil may be not included in the disc accept.

The QXT should have picked it up, as the foil sector is included in the coin & jewelry program. But it is not included in the jewelry and beach program

The MXT, with it's 14.7khz frequency, should hit on rings well for you.

But back to your original question of the 5 inch depth on rings. I would say that very thin rings may not be possible at that depth. A standard man's 14kt wedding band should be possible. I have found my share of gold men's wedding bands at the beach with the Minelab Sovereign, as well as smaller/thinner ladies rings. But I use zero disc with the Sovereign, just listen to the tones

The Discovery Baron will air test 8" on a gold wedding band with the 8" coil. It operates at 12.5 khz

The Troy Shadow X3 will air test 7" on a gold wedding band, with the 7" coil. It operates at 19 khz

Even so, you will have to dig a lot of trash at the parks to find jewelry, as it comes in from foil to zinc

This last ring I found ID'ed as a screwcap with a QXT. It was 3 inches deep

 

[Critterhunter]

Read my signature file and then get a Sovereign. The only advantage the DFX and V3 line have is better very tiny target gold sensitivity (like very fine gold chains), but the use of a 12x10 coil will improve that. I never was one for that tiny of target sensitivity. It makes hunting trashy areas much more noisy and rough, often causing me to dig tiny bits of foil that banged hard and didn't clue me into them being small junk like that...when I owed machines that had that kind of sensitivity, namely Tesoros. That being said, I've dug tiny little earing backings real deep on my GT too. When it comes to depth on gold rings (along with old coins) the DFX/V3 machines aren't going to hold a candle to the Sovereign in terms of depth, not to mention great VDI resolution in the gold range and very distinctive/telling audio on gold versus things like tabs. They don't call it king of the gold rings for nothing. Interestingly enough, the M6/MXT line has a good reputation on gold rings, yet they lack the finer resolution and more diverse audio/tones of the Sovereign, and as said aren't going to get nearly as deep.

 

[TabWhisperer]

Excellent post Critter. Thanks for the comments. It sounds like the Sovereign gets down to business on the gold rings. Anyone else?

 

[TabWhisperer]

Critter, do you use the optional display on the Sovereign? If so do you find it accurate to 5 inches on rings?

 

[gambler13]

Can tell you this. My M6 found a woman's gold band at 3" but it showed as foil.

 

[TabWhisperer]

Here is a shot of the test ring along with my wedding band for reference. I repeated the test tonight with the V3i and Tejon at a local school. Again the Tejon hit hard and consistent. The V3i gave smeared and mostly red bars which to me look like trash or missed altogether. Tested in damp soil versus the initial test in a dry area of my yard. Both properly ground balanced. The Tejon sens was at 9. The inital V3i RX was at 13, then 15, then TX boost.

 

[matthias]

This is the 10K ring I am using for my tests. Size reference to Merc dime and .50 Euro. Can somebody explain how higher K gold would react overall, regardless of a specific detector? Thanks. HH. Matt

 

[TabWhisperer]

I forgot to mention my test ring is stamped 14k.

 

[Dan-Pa.]

Tesoro has always been tops in the gold ring department....as far as higher Kt. gold rings usually take two same size rings and the higher Kt. will read lower...I say usually as gold rings are mixed with many different metals depending on their manufacturer and that could certainly influence a meter reading...

 

[Critterhunter]

The QXT should have no problem hitting the ring. As with any other machine, those preset "Programs" for various styles of hunting are meaningless. You should never rely on that stuff. I always hunted in discrimination on the QXT but with ALL 8 zones accepted. Then just assign high tones to the zones you are after. In this case it's rings so set it high for foil, nickles, and tabs. Most gold rings I've tested on the QXT would bounce evenly between foil and the next zone up. Set your sensitivity at 16 or as high as it will go while staying stable. Turn off tracking (ALWAYS!, use manual ground balance for best depth). Turn noise reduction OFF also for max depth. Set VCO On and pinpoint sensitivity to around 16. Before doing all the above load the coin program this will set most things like SAT where they should be.

Now sweep over that ring and you should have no problem hitting it. The QXT is a low frequency detector which gives it better depth in bad ground and makes it hit hardest on nickle and copper targets. Deepest machine in my soil for that. As deep as my Explorers *in my soil*. Only machine I've found deeper is my current GT. Despite the QXT being geared toward silver/copper due to it's lower frequency, it'll hit just fine on gold rings. Not as deep as my GT thanks to the higher frequencies it has (as well as the low ones for higher conductivity targets), but it does well. The main problem I had with the QXT was the lack of VDI #s to split hairs on rings versus tabs easier. My GT gives me that kind of scale, and is much better at it than my Explorers were. Those machines had too much resolution which made seeing patterns in tabs versus rings almost impossible. Other machines I've owned had too low of resolution. The GT seems perfect to me. Not too high to make the VDI unstable (A common Explorer/Etrac problem) or patterns hard to see, yet not too low where I couldn't split hairs on nickles, rings, and tabs.

 

[TabWhisperer]

I originally picked up a QXT for my brother to learn detecting. I don't know what it is about the QXT but I picked one up too. I liked the tones more than anything. The display is real different but I kind of liked it once I understood it. I made your adjustments on the QXT and was hitting the ring. Still a little inconsistent but it was in the range I would dig it. It was also strong enough I would pick it up and not just pass it off as a hot rock or trash. I will not have time to get out until this weekend but I'll run it through it's paces with that setup. Thanks for the idea.

I still need to test out a Sovereign. That just might be the ticket.

 

[Critterhunter]

I said...

"The QXT is a low frequency detector which gives it better depth in bad ground and makes it hit hardest on nickle and copper targets."

Meant of course makes it hit hardest on silver and copper targets.

Yes, I do use the DigiSearch meter and 5" on a gold ring even in the worst of ground conditions is easy as pie. It should give good audio and a stable VDI so long as the ring is laying flat and not broken. Broken rings or ones on edge might only give a good response from one direction on any machine, though I'd have to say I've dug more coins (and just recently an old silver ring) on edge with the Sovereign than I have on other machines. Just seems to hit them well, and these SEF coils even enhance that.

I'm not one for huge sensitivity to tiny targets. That just bumps a machine around and makes it more uncomfortable to hunt. That being said, I've dug tiny little earing backings and such with the GT. The stock 10" coil was good at this. The 12x10 is even better. I don't really care about looking for thin gold chains or tiny earings myself, but it's there if I want it. Most gold is going to be in the form of rings, and as said you ain't going to find a deeper machine for those or old coins than a Sovereign. The audio is smooth/telling on gold versus say most junk. The VDI has very fine resolution in the low to mid range, allowing you to pick out common tab numbers and avoid them while looking for gold in heavily trashed parks. The multifrequencies of this machine both insure good sensitivity on any target in conductivity, from gold to silver, and these multifrequencies also insure at least a few will penetrate the ground with various mineral contents. The other thing about BBS technology is that for the most part target ID and audio response doesn't suffer with depth or in high minerals. You're apt to see that happen much more with typical VLF machines (everybody else out there). BBS also eliminates the need for a ground balance. This is not standard VLF automatic ground tracking (which will cost you depth), but rather a unique method to BBS machines that insure maximum depth and true target response in the worst of ground conditions.

 

[slingshot]

I sure wish someone would try the Compadre in their test. Mine (10k) air tests at 8". A familiar poster who once posted here had a post with pics of a small 10k ring that gave the same results. I set the razor sharp disc. knob to where I just ignore paper clips and small nails. It will find them deeper than some coins-unbelievable.

 

[crazyman]

There is a few different variables that come into play when it comes to how well a detector will hit jewelry size gold besides the frequency alone. In this case I think it has more to do with the discrimination width differences with the other detectors having more bias in the lower range. I'm not sure why that ring would read that low into the iron range. A single ring of that size should read much higher, Reading in the iron range though does explain why the Tejon would hit it and the Whites wouldn't until you expanded the discrimination to include more sensitivity to iron. If the ring reads in the iron range with your other detectors it's reading in the iron range on the Tejon as well and if the Tejon had TID you would see some iron in it's ID.

 

[Monte]

Jimbog, while I don't have a gripe about three of the model you mentioned, I felt that a good deal of information was omitted. If you don't mind, let me comment to your post as follows:

- with my V3i - MXT - QXT and Tejon in my yard.

To be fair, I have owned 3 Tej