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.
VALID info on the Coinstrike?
- Thread starter Tagamet
- Start date
Mark in NC
Member
and I was certain (pinpointing), that I was over only one target, it would be odd shaped non-iron trash (bits of aluminum, strips of foil, etc). The reason I said "only one target" is because if 2 targets were in very close proximity (almost touching, or overlapped) I would get jumpy depending on which one the C$ was "viewing" as the coil center passes over. I have had tilted coins give different ID's depending on the sweep angle also, but they would stay fairly consistent. If cherry picking, dig only the good repeatables.... if you have time, dig all positives if you want to be sure to get it all 
HH'n
Mark in NC
HH'n
Mark in NC
Mike Hillis
Well-known member
And it aint no slouch either when you learn how to poke it into target clusters. That long eliptical receive coil gives it some DD characteristics.
Happy CoinStriking
Happy CoinStriking
Jackpine Savage
Active member
The numbers will not always be accurate. The most accurate reading is always when sweeping with the coil centered over the target. Anytime you get a momentary good hit do as Bill suggested and check it out thoroughly. Back off and come at it again with good overlaps and check it from different angles. Do what it takes to satisfy yourself if it is a diggable target or not. Some of the stuff the C$ (and Excel) see have to be worked at a bit to get them to repeat, these are the ones IMO that other detectors miss.
Tom
Tom
Jackpine Savage Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The numbers will not always be accurate. The most
> accurate reading is always when sweeping with the
> coil centered over the target. Anytime you get a
> momentary good hit do as Bill suggested and check
> it out thoroughly. Back off and come at it again
> with good overlaps and check it from different
> angles. Do what it takes to satisfy yourself if it
> is a diggable target or not. Some of the stuff
> the C$ (and Excel) see have to be worked at a bit
> to get them to repeat, these are the ones IMO
> that other detectors miss.
> Tom
So is the goal to get a *repeatable* positive number? That seemed to be the pattern with the Garrett and it's Belltones, or at least be analogous to it. I liked BarBill's description of hunting with his ears and discrimming with his eyes (paraphrasing, of course). Even if that's the way it works it'd sure be a positive in my (limited) view. With the Tejon, finding a **good target** seems to be a matter of training ones ears to determine if the target is worth digging. If the C$ just alerts me to a target aurally, and then visually gives me some good clues about the target, I'm way ahead of the game.
I'm certain that the Tejon finds incredibly deep, small targets. I've dug them up. I'm reasonably sure that "training" my ear to determine the nature of a target with the Tejon, may well be beyond my aural talent range. I'm starting to get a bit optimistic about the C$ helping me work within my sensory abilities.
Time (and practice) will tell.
Thanks all,
Tagamet
-------------------------------------------------------
> The numbers will not always be accurate. The most
> accurate reading is always when sweeping with the
> coil centered over the target. Anytime you get a
> momentary good hit do as Bill suggested and check
> it out thoroughly. Back off and come at it again
> with good overlaps and check it from different
> angles. Do what it takes to satisfy yourself if it
> is a diggable target or not. Some of the stuff
> the C$ (and Excel) see have to be worked at a bit
> to get them to repeat, these are the ones IMO
> that other detectors miss.
> Tom
So is the goal to get a *repeatable* positive number? That seemed to be the pattern with the Garrett and it's Belltones, or at least be analogous to it. I liked BarBill's description of hunting with his ears and discrimming with his eyes (paraphrasing, of course). Even if that's the way it works it'd sure be a positive in my (limited) view. With the Tejon, finding a **good target** seems to be a matter of training ones ears to determine if the target is worth digging. If the C$ just alerts me to a target aurally, and then visually gives me some good clues about the target, I'm way ahead of the game.
I'm certain that the Tejon finds incredibly deep, small targets. I've dug them up. I'm reasonably sure that "training" my ear to determine the nature of a target with the Tejon, may well be beyond my aural talent range. I'm starting to get a bit optimistic about the C$ helping me work within my sensory abilities.
Time (and practice) will tell.
Thanks all,
Tagamet
mineralization, etc. all can affect the numbers, more so on the trash tragets especially if they are not round. The C$ seems to love 'round' objects the most. That's why it really "locks" onto a flat coin & won't move numberwise. The name "Coinstrike" fits.
Like Jackpine said, it's entirely up to the user to make the decision to dig or not. You can't say a jumpy signal is probably trash, as it could be a deep indian head that's tilted or just barley being picked up (Pinpoint numbers can give a good indication if it's a deepie, like if ya see a 20 on PP). I think sometimes folks can put too much stock in the pie chart being perfect, but you have to keep in mind that pie chart was made with airtests in the lab. It can be different in the ground. For me all this is really no problem. I'm in such an old colonial area & I dig anything positive. Many times digging up an "iffy" signal has paid off for me....& if it turns out to be junk I don't fret. I look at it as "cleaning out" one of my best sites & perhaps even unmasking something........HH, Bill
Like Jackpine said, it's entirely up to the user to make the decision to dig or not. You can't say a jumpy signal is probably trash, as it could be a deep indian head that's tilted or just barley being picked up (Pinpoint numbers can give a good indication if it's a deepie, like if ya see a 20 on PP). I think sometimes folks can put too much stock in the pie chart being perfect, but you have to keep in mind that pie chart was made with airtests in the lab. It can be different in the ground. For me all this is really no problem. I'm in such an old colonial area & I dig anything positive. Many times digging up an "iffy" signal has paid off for me....& if it turns out to be junk I don't fret. I look at it as "cleaning out" one of my best sites & perhaps even unmasking something........HH, Bill