EricT

1 Nickel
6 Pennies (not even wheat pennies)

Theo

My haul for the day:-

2 x Elizabeth 1st Hammered Silver Sixpences dated 1574 & 1602

1 x Henry VIII Half Groat, 1509-1526

1 x Cut Half Shortcross Penny of John circa a.d. 1199-1216

6 x Roman bronzes:- four Constantine, one Domitian, one Nero.

1 x George III "Spade" Guinea 1761

150 Musket Balls, 80 Shot Gun Cartridge Ends, 5kg of assorted lead, 1950's
toy car, and a pocket full of miscellaneous scrap!!

Just an average day really.

Me

WOW!

Can't even imagine that kind of haul here in Kentucky. You need to
come over and register at our forum and post pics of some of your
finds...it would make us drool for sure...

http://www.mdparadise.net

Ben

On Thu, 09 Nov 2006 10:24:08 GMT, "Theo"
<theodore.twyler@ntlworld.com> wrote:

>My haul for the day:-
>
>2 x Elizabeth 1st Hammered Silver Sixpences dated 1574 & 1602
>
>1 x Henry VIII Half Groat, 1509-1526
>
>1 x Cut Half Shortcross Penny of John circa a.d. 1199-1216
>
>6 x Roman bronzes:- four Constantine, one Domitian, one Nero.
>
>1 x George III "Spade" Guinea 1761
>
>150 Musket Balls, 80 Shot Gun Cartridge Ends, 5kg of assorted lead, 1950's
>toy car, and a pocket full of miscellaneous scrap!!
>
>Just an average day really.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

s_gest@yahoo.co.uk

Would mind a day like that . What sort of detector are you using ?

Theo

Minelab Explorer XS - simply the best.

me

I have an Exporer also. Very nice machine.



On Sun, 12 Nov 2006 16:31:46 GMT, "Theo"
<theodore.twyler@ntlworld.com> wrote:

>Minelab Explorer XS - simply the best.
>
>

Theo

"me" <mail@insihga.com> wrote in message
news:5tnjl2pa2fb4peq43hn14k6kasr791ubrn@4ax.com...
>I have an Exporer also. Very nice machine.

Yes, but don't forget two things:-

1. Any machine is only as good as the person using it - that
includes the Explorer.

2. The best detector in the world is only as good as the site you
are searching.

Rob

Theo wrote:
> Minelab Explorer XS - simply the best.
>
>
>
Theo,

How would you compare that to the Quatro?

Rob

Rob

Theo wrote:
> Minelab Explorer XS - simply the best.
>
>
>


How would you compare that next to the Minelab Quatro?

Thanks,

Rob

Theo

"Rob" <ace62usa@fastermacHOHOHO.net> wrote in message
news:ema6290cr7@enews1.newsguy.com...

How would you compare that next to the Minelab Quatro?

Thanks,

Rob

There's no comparison - Explorer wins hands down!

me@privacy.net

On Wed, 15 Nov 2006 19:04:01 GMT, "Theo"
<theodore.twyler@ntlworld.com> wrote:

>
>"me" <mail@insihga.com> wrote in message
>news:5tnjl2pa2fb4peq43hn14k6kasr791ubrn@4ax.com.. .
>>I have an Exporer also. Very nice machine.
>
>Yes, but don't forget two things:-
>
>1. Any machine is only as good as the person using it - that
> includes the Explorer.
>
>2. The best detector in the world is only as good as the site you
> are searching.
>

And research is 99% of detecting

Theo

<me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:4pjvu2lj4sflol2re7tg9k49p1g9di6nl1@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 15 Nov 2006 19:04:01 GMT, "Theo"

And research is 99% of detecting

Up to a point, but some of the my most amazing finds have been made on
"unresearched" land.
There is a theory that in this hobby luck also has a lot to do with it.
Also in my 30+ years detecting experience, most farmers whose land you have
researched and has potential for good finds, you cannot get permission
(possibly the farmer knows the history of his land, too).
On farms where permission is easily granted without much trouble, quite
often the land turns out to be totally barren, open cast mined or is full of
scrap!

Dan Holdsworth

On Thu, 08 Mar 2007 08:54:13 +0000, me@privacy.net
<me@privacy.net>
was popularly supposed to have said:

> On Wed, 15 Nov 2006 19:04:01 GMT, "Theo"
><theodore.twyler@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"me" <mail@insihga.com> wrote in message
>>news:5tnjl2pa2fb4peq43hn14k6kasr791ubrn@4ax.com. ..
>>>I have an Exporer also. Very nice machine.
>>
>>Yes, but don't forget two things:-
>>
>>1. Any machine is only as good as the person using it - that
>> includes the Explorer.
>>
>>2. The best detector in the world is only as good as the site you
>> are searching.
>
> And research is 99% of detecting

The other thing is, if you're out on a new site, set the machine onto
all metal for the first few minutes, and dig everything. While you're at
it, become a connoiseur of corroded iron scrap; it isn't all rubbish.

Horseshoes, for instance; learn to tell the difference between a modern
riding horse's shoe, a crossbreed heavy/riding horse, a cart horse and a
pony, and how old the shoe is. If you're digging up the odd shoe from a
heavy horse and its only a foot or so down, you're in luck on account of
everything old should be fairly close to the surface.

On the other hand, if you're digging modern riding horse or hunt horse
shoes from way deep, the field has likely been deep-ploughed to turn it
over that much.

Same thing with nail, hammers and so on; if you're out in an
agricultural field and you're finding long nails, odds are there was a
field boundary there once; worth searching along because people usually
walk along, and rest next to hedges and so on. If you're finding
handmade nails in a field, someone was living there and the nails are
likely to be pre-industrial revolution (since industrial wire-making to
make cheap nails was a fairly early industrial revolution product).

Finally, all-metal digging lets you know how much aluminium rubbish
there is on the site, and how much hot-rock and other contamination.
Once again, this is something worth knowing; lots of aluminium and
ringpulls tells you people were on the site recently (ringpulls changed
design about 20 years ago, from pull & discard to pull and leave on the
can designs) so there may be coinage there.

Hotrocks usually means fire ash, maybe Victorian steam ploughs on the
site, but it may be metalworking slag (exciting if it is; small-scale
metalworking's usually pretty old).

Finally, if you start turning up bits of non-ferrous industrial waste
like brass and aluminium offcuts and the like, all scattered in the
ploughsoil and you're in the middle of nowhere and not near a former
industrial area or tip, then it means somebody's been seeding the site
to give any nighthawks an earbashing when they search. If it was worth
seeding the site, then there must be something there so after you've had
a quick shufti to see if it is scheduled (leave alone if so), persevere
with it.

--
Dan Holdsworth PhD dan1701usenet@ntlworld.com
By caffeine alone I set my mind in motion, By the beans of Java
do thoughts acquire speed, hands acquire shaking, the shaking
becomes a warning, By caffeine alone do I set my mind in motion

me@privacy.net

On Thu, 08 Mar 2007 10:12:53 GMT, "Theo"
<theodore.twyler@ntlworld.com> wrote:

>
><me@privacy.net> wrote in message
>news:4pjvu2lj4sflol2re7tg9k49p1g9di6nl1@4ax.com.. .
>> On Wed, 15 Nov 2006 19:04:01 GMT, "Theo"
>
>And research is 99% of detecting
>
>Up to a point, but some of the my most amazing finds have been made on
>"unresearched" land.
>There is a theory that in this hobby luck also has a lot to do with it.
>Also in my 30+ years detecting experience, most farmers whose land you have
>researched and has potential for good finds, you cannot get permission
>(possibly the farmer knows the history of his land, too).
>On farms where permission is easily granted without much trouble, quite
>often the land turns out to be totally barren, open cast mined or is full of
>scrap!
>
There are a lot of theories in Detecting but luck has little to do
with it.
In my 37 years of detecting I have tried unresearched sites and
researched sites and all the researched sites have been far more
fruitfull.
Whilst I have had finds from fields on spec, I like to know that the
site I am on has a decent history and not just a history of being
worked. Its all right if you like buttons but Ive had my fill of
those.

I also detected a roman site that was incredibly well known, so well
known that when I told the club I was going there they all laughed and
said it had been done to death. Even the farmer said he thought every
detectorist in the UK had done it at one time or another.
2 hours on the site with my XLT brought
15 identifiable Roman bronzes 30+ unidentifiable one.
6 Roman silver coins
1 bronze axe head ( Now in the Museum) a Roman childs gold ring minus
intaglio, and curiously a miniature anvil (modern style) about 2
inches long and 3 inches deep.
The following weekend a friend went over the same field with the
supposed 'superdetector' the Red Heat, and found..........nothing.

Feel free to do unresearched sites, Ill only do a site after its been
researched, which for me is as interesting as actually detecting

Theo

" Feel free to do unresearched sites, Ill only do a site after its been
researched, which for me is as interesting as actually detecting".

That's if you can gain permission, of course!

My results of detecting on unresearched sites has given me a plethora of
nice finds over the years, including many Bronze Age, Iron Age, Roman,
Celtic and medieval coins and artefacts - probably because people like you
prefer to ignore them in favour of sites they have researched!

So while you are spending time researching, I'm out there finding the goods!

Also, bear in mind that many others before you have probably researched the
same sites and detected them.
Additionally, if the site is a real "hot potato", the likelyhood of it
being/been nighthawked these days is a high probabliity.

By contrast, there is less detecting on unresearched land because some
people disregrard it as uninteresting and unworthy of detecting, which in my
experience is a misconception.
I have the finds to prove it!