Thomas Dankowski's Metal Detecting Forum

Chris.....Another interesting video; yet, I'm not sure what was to be gained by this video. , . , . , . , other than: small target detection. The controls/settings (when changed) responded in a very correct/standard fashion.

Just exploring the possibilities. Desirable targets on ancient European habitation sites are not the same character as what we are used to. Ours may not have the age, but they are usually of better/standard alloy. Most Rutus Versa users are not in the USA. We can thank Lawyers for that.

I asked JCR to conduct this kind of testing on very small targets—say, the size of a lead shot pellet—at the limit of detection depth in his mineralized soil. I already knew how the detector performed on standard North American targets, ranging from small bronze buttons and coins to lead rifle bullets.

What I was missing was a comparison involving very small targets—the kind I routinely detect and dig up on European soil, especially when targeting small hammered silver coins or fragments thereof. When hunting for such extremely low-conductivity targets, I often detect and dig up 15–20 lead pellets per session. Of course, I only dig those very low VDI signals when I choose to, but I often do so during software testing to see what targets remain in the ground. Keep in mind that in this type of terrain, such small targets are quickly depleted, yet every additional target found reveals something about the detection capabilities of the tested detectors and various coils.
Remember, a target of this size could be a small fragment or clipping of a medieval hammered coin, or perhaps a piece of a Roman coin.

Detecting such small targets is also crucial because, here in Europe, the smallest ancient gold coins—such as the 1/24 stater—often measure only 5–6 mm, making them a truly challenging target, even for an experienced detectorist.

My colleague JCR conducted a really good comparison—and on two [units], at that. ...various software versions—specifically Versa 4.72 Nc and the latest 6.14 Nc...

It is great to see the results of correct and optimal detector settings when dealing with such small targets at the limits of detection depth...

This test also confirms another fact: that the "Beach" multi-frequency mode maintains consistent sensitivity and depth for targets of this size, even in highly mineralized ground...

Image 2: Using the Versa Software 3.2nc "Multi Low Conductor" setting, this shows the first sweep of an old stone road; the detection was selective, targeting items with a VDI of 30 or higher.Of course, I also dug up targets with very low VDI readings just to test them—I wanted to see how the detector's software handles those types of signals.

Image 1: The same stone road, but a second sweep focused on targets with a VDI of 13 or higher; the image shows only a portion of the "good" targets (VDI 13+) that were dug up.

Image 3: From a different location, but it illustrates the point that the old Romans already had the habit of chopping coins into pieces.

Here is an example of specifically targeting and digging up very low-conductivity items—those with VDI values ​​of 1–15 or higher. It involves the same old stone path shown in the previous images, but in this instance, I managed to detect several targets located beneath iron objects—such as a deep coin with a small iron nail above it, or plated iron 1- and 2-euro-cent coins...

The image clearly demonstrates that Versa excels at selective detection based on specific VDI ​​ranges; consequently, I often focus my searches on ranges above those of small lead targets, concentrating instead on the VDI ranges typical of small coins or coin fragments—specifically VDI +15 or VDI +30 and higher.

Chris...... yes........ their 2000 year old nails are indeed different from our 200 year old nails! Especially decomposition status.

EL NINO...... Living in such an old area..... I would find it VERY difficult to "pass up" those low conductors......... knowing that gold coins and small cut/hammered silver coins ...fall into that range! The detector performance comparison....is always fascinating. And the finds to prove human-advancement performance gains!

Mr. Dankowski, Florida is one of the states with the oldest history of colonization of America, so you know exactly what I'm talking about..
It is also true that the technical development of detector electronics must be supported by human efforts of designers and testers to improve the detection properties of detectors in various aspects of detection, which directly correspond to experience from such detection situations, also from various terrains..
Sometimes these are minor changes, sometimes they are drastic changes in the software and detection properties of the detector...

I definitely want to say that the members of this forum are very capable detectorists, literally specialists in their field and type of detection, capable of pushing the possibilities of detection technology further...