I went and tried out the beach again today on the delaware bay at a town that dates back to the late 1600s.. I finally found a used sandscoop so I wanted to test it out.
Falsing everywhere once again on the at pro. Used the 5x8 this time instead of the standard coil. Coil cover was over. Seemed that if I didn't want to false I had to go to 2- 3 sensitivity out of 8. Also I couldn't ground balance properly. Every 10 feet it was different. As low as 13 and as high as 83.
So, as the subject says. Are just some beaches not huntable or just really hard to hunt due to black sand and what not?
So I would guess you are in salt water that's the first thing. The AT Pro is a good detector on fresh water beaches. And will work some on salt water beaches but not the greatest another thing is you have to remember how much mineralization is there. and how much small ground up trash would be there from 1600's.
It was a smart move going to the 5 x 8 as it really calms the machine down I don't know about having to run the sensitivity that low. wouldn't get very deep. I remember one time when I went to NJ and took out a GTI 2500 and I was in the dry sand couldn't hardly turn the machine on it went so nuts and didn't find anything.
I would think some spots are worse than others but I do not live out there, just travel through once in a while
(01-03-2016 04:30 PM)Steveo Wrote: [ -> ]So I would guess you are in salt water that's the first thing. The AT Pro is a good detector on fresh water beaches. And will work some on salt water beaches but not the greatest another thing is you have to remember how much mineralization is there. and how much small ground up trash would be there from 1600's.
It was a smart move going to the 5 x 8 as it really calms the machine down I don't know about having to run the sensitivity that low. wouldn't get very deep. I remember one time when I went to NJ and took out a GTI 2500 and I was in the dry sand couldn't hardly turn the machine on it went so nuts and didn't find anything.
I would think some spots are worse than others but I do not live out there, just travel through once in a while
Thanks for the response Steve. It's brackish, Half and half. I never knew the AT Pro works differently between fresh and salt water beaches, that's definitely good to know...
And that's how it's been for the most part with the AT Pro in both dry and wet sand for me, in my area (NJ). Even though it was going nut's for 2 hours, I still tried to push it and try different settings with no success.
So like you said, I guess it just comes down to the right machine and the area. I'll watch some video's and what not and I'll continue to try out different beaches and settings and update later on. Thanks again
1600's?! DROOL!!!!! As mentioned above, the AT Pro is usually more unstable at salt water beaches, as are a lot of detectors. That being said, not all beaches are alike. As also mentioned above , mineralization plays a huge part in any machine becoming unstable...that and EMI. The Garrett machine I have does the same thing yours is doing. I use my Etrac on salt water beaches now. The Minelabs seem to do fairly well on dry salt water sand, but once you hit the wet salt sand on certain beaches around here, it becomes rather unstable. PI is the way to go, but they can be pricey depending on what you want.
(01-03-2016 05:30 PM)RelicMedic Wrote: [ -> ]1600's?! DROOL!!!!! As mentioned above, the AT Pro is usually more unstable at salt water beaches, as are a lot of detectors. That being said, not all beaches are alike. As also mentioned above , mineralization plays a huge part in any machine becoming unstable...that and EMI. The Garrett machine I have does the same thing yours is doing. I use my Etrac on salt water beaches now. The Minelabs seem to do fairly well on dry salt water sand, but once you hit the wet salt sand on certain beaches around here, it becomes rather unstable. PI is the way to go, but they can be pricey depending on what you want.
Just finished reading some articles and threads through Google and found some tips and tricks. As said above, I also read it isn't the greatest machine to be using for beach hunting. You really need to turn down your sens and change settings if you want too detect the beaches apparently with the AT Pro.
I guess i'll stick to mostly land hunting for now and continue trying out the beach every once and awhile.
P.S a little about the area.
Fort Nya Elfsborg was a fortification and settlement established as a part of New Sweden. Built in 1643 and named after the Älvsborg Fortress off Gothenburg, Fort Nya Elfsborg was located on the New Jersey side of the Delaware River, between present day Salem and Alloway Creek.
Fort Nya Elfsborg had iron and brass 12pd cannons mounted on earth and wooden palisades. It was a Swedish-style three-cornered earthen redoubt with eight guns. Log farmsteads similar to those found in Sweden went up around the fort further downriver, so that Dutch West India Company ships coming up from the bay would have to get by them first.
The actual site of the fort is now under water at Elsinboro Point. In August 2012, archaeological surveys were undertaken to locate the precise location and any remains of the fort, but without success.
So I guess I shouldn't say "at the town" but near the location of the settlement.
Thank you for letting us in on the history of the site. I love reading historical facts about other places. It really puts into perspective the sites the guys on the forum are hunting. The ealiest sites I can find around me, that aren't protected, are 1760-1775. Most are 1780-1820
Steve & Medic are correct. While the AT could probably be used with no issues on the dry sand of a beach, working the wet sand might be very problematic, unless you turn the sensitivity way down, and at that point, you'd lose all potential depth.
It CAN be done, but performance is going to be erratic, and, again, with the sensitivity pushed down, you'll have a difficult time finding the deeper stuff.
There's a lot of good stuff in the dry sand, too, but you'll have to dig much more trash than if you were working closer to the water.
Joe
(01-03-2016 06:44 PM)NjNyDigger Wrote: [ -> ]Steve & Medic are correct. While the AT could probably be used with no issues on the dry sand of a beach, working the wet sand might be very problematic, unless you turn the sensitivity way down, and at that point, you'd lose all potential depth.
It CAN be done, but performance is going to be erratic, and, again, with the sensitivity pushed down, you'll have a difficult time finding the deeper stuff.
There's a lot of good stuff in the dry sand, too, but you'll have to dig much more trash than if you were working closer to the water.
Joe
I was actually having problems in the dry sand as well, so I'm not sure...! No power lines or whatever electrical around.
And yeah, makes sense Joe. I think I might hold off on the trips for just metal detecting the beaches for now. Unless I bring a back up like before...fishing!
Thanks all for the replies
(01-03-2016 07:00 PM)Zachbl92 Wrote: [ -> ] (01-03-2016 06:44 PM)NjNyDigger Wrote: [ -> ]Steve & Medic are correct. While the AT could probably be used with no issues on the dry sand of a beach, working the wet sand might be very problematic, unless you turn the sensitivity way down, and at that point, you'd lose all potential depth.
It CAN be done, but performance is going to be erratic, and, again, with the sensitivity pushed down, you'll have a difficult time finding the deeper stuff.
There's a lot of good stuff in the dry sand, too, but you'll have to dig much more trash than if you were working closer to the water.
Joe
I was actually having problems in the dry sand as well, so I'm not sure...! No power lines or whatever electrical around.
And yeah, makes sense Joe. I think I might hold off on the trips for just metal detecting the beaches for now. Unless I bring a back up like before...fishing!
Thanks all for the replies
Think out of the box. There's many lakes in NJ, some of which are deserted in the Winter. The AT would work flawlessly at these spots, and there would be just as much, if not more, than a beach
Joe
(01-03-2016 07:03 PM)NjNyDigger Wrote: [ -> ] (01-03-2016 07:00 PM)Zachbl92 Wrote: [ -> ] (01-03-2016 06:44 PM)NjNyDigger Wrote: [ -> ]Steve & Medic are correct. While the AT could probably be used with no issues on the dry sand of a beach, working the wet sand might be very problematic, unless you turn the sensitivity way down, and at that point, you'd lose all potential depth.
It CAN be done, but performance is going to be erratic, and, again, with the sensitivity pushed down, you'll have a difficult time finding the deeper stuff.
There's a lot of good stuff in the dry sand, too, but you'll have to dig much more trash than if you were working closer to the water.
Joe
I was actually having problems in the dry sand as well, so I'm not sure...! No power lines or whatever electrical around.
And yeah, makes sense Joe. I think I might hold off on the trips for just metal detecting the beaches for now. Unless I bring a back up like before...fishing!
Thanks all for the replies
Think out of the box. There's many lakes in NJ, some of which are deserted in the Winter. The AT would work flawlessly at these spots, and there would be just as much, if not more, than a beach
Joe
I already have a few lakes researched
one had a amusement park from 1894-1950s. Some other late 1800s-mid 1900s lakes as well. Just need to get my ass over there...
