Target responses?

[Easylife]

Maybe just a fast shortcut really for some to expediate the learning curve, but I guess it's always quite intriguing to fathom out the factors that create quite iffy targets to better understand the cause.
If we are quite honest we likely all have past regrets from not digging targets which at the time we didn't quite understand either from not fully understanding your detector, target responses near limits of detection, or the effect of masking etc. But with great experience gained since and full understanding nothing much should escape us now. It can often be a very fine line between the response of a non-ferrous target at limits of detection and iron, but once you have cracked that then it is game on for some very deep non-ferrous finds. It can often be just some slight nuance that tips the balance one way or the other. Quiet ground is a great place to experiment and learn from iffy target responses which type it is, and there will be some unexpected surprises for sure. It's fine to just go for the more obvious good clean signals but pursuing the really quite iffy targets can also pay off dividends.
If your detector is set up something like then it should only respond to metal, whether ferrous, non-ferrous, or both together at the same time. Metal composition is another factor. On top of that target shape will also determine the response, eg - round giving a solid TID and irregular being quite jumpy. Target orientation is a further factor - think a coin on edge! Considering all these factors on an iffy target should help to determine it's type even within a just few seconds with experience though some will still be a 50/50 guess.
Of course you could just dig all target responses regardless but would end up wasting time digging iron but still a good way to learn. Alternatively just dig the more obvious solid targets if time is maybe limited and ignore the iffy ones, then later wonder what you have left behind? Remember that the older targets may have sunk deeper so may not give such a good response.
Just what a game dirt fishing is if you want it all!

[Steve_JT]

Interesting thing that troubles every detectorist, dig or not to dig on a target, a lot of variables come into play, the one thing is confidence in the detector and its settings, that could work for and against, over familiarity and full confidence may dismiss an iffy signal that was a good target, but could work to your advantage also but dependant on other variables below.

High probability of digging iffy signals
Early in the day, easy digging, keenness to get anything in the finds bag, quiet field with few targets, plenty of time, unfamiliar / new machine, good weather, high fitness level, remove the crap, a good day overall

Low probability digging iffy signals
Tiredness / late in the day, ground like concrete, noisy field lots of targets, over familiarity with your detector, poor weather, poor fitness level, bad day in general

I think you have to dig some crap on any day to find the good stuff, if you only come back after a session with good stuff you’re missing something IMHO

As the adage goes “IF in Doubt, Dig it Out” at the end of the day its best not to over analyse it will spoil your day, think of it as the “fish that got away” it will be there next time.

Regards Steve

[Pete E]

I guess that if we are quite honest we all have past regrets from not digging targets which at the time we didn't quite understand either from not fully understanding your detector, target responses near limits of detection, or the effect of masking etc. But with great experience gained since and full understanding nothing much should escape us now. It can often be a very fine line between the response of a non-ferrous target at limits of detection and iron, but once you have cracked that then it is game on for some very deep non-ferrous finds. It can often be just some slight nuance that tips the balance one way or the other. Quiet ground is a great place to experiment and learn from iffy target responses which type it is, and there will be some unexpected surprises for sure. It's fine to just go for the more obvious good clean signals but pursuing the really quite iffy targets can also pay off dividends.
If your detector is set up something like then it should only respond to metal, whether ferrous, non-ferrous, or both together at the same time. Metal composition is another factor. On top of that target shape will also determine the response, eg - round giving a solid TID and irregular being quite jumpy. Target orientation is a further factor - think a coin on edge! Considering all these factors on an iffy target should help to determine it's type even within a just few seconds with experience though some will still be a 50/50 guess.
Of course you could just dig all target responses regardless but would end up wasting time digging iron but still a good way to learn. Alternatively just dig the more obvious solid targets if time is maybe limited and ignore the iffy ones, then later wonder what you have left behind? Remember that the older targets may have sunk deeper so may not give such a good response.
Just what a game dirt fishing is if you want it all!

What is this clean ground you speak of? I swear all the land I detect on has had some serious industry at some point usually in the form of old coal, lead, or other mineral extraction, plus the associated railways that supported them...

[Easylife]

Think of it as the “fish that got away” it will be there next time.

Yes you should find it several times with repeated random searches over the same ground if that is your method. But if efficient gridding then there would likely not be a next time if on pasture in ideal conditions. Of course on ploughed land the target could maybe be brought closer to the surface at some later stage to give a better response or sink even deeper.

[Easylife]

What is this clean ground you speak of? I swear all the land I detect on has had some serious industry at some point usually in the form of old coal, lead, or other mineral extraction, plus the associated railways that supported them...

Hi Pete, I normally use all-metal so any breaks in iron contamination are quite noticeable. Those big chunky nuts and bolts sure sing out, an area of one of my fields is a major chorus of large iron sparking off, makes you wonder what went off there. Clean ground to me is any with very little modern metallic trash on it.

[Easylife]

I find that in text book ideal conditions of moist ground target responses are the easiest to interrpret, they're pretty good in dry ground too though perhaps with some limitations. But in water logged ground there is extra noise and sometimes even completely ghost targets can seem quite good for a while but then just completely dissappear before even digging them!

[Easylife]

On some quiet ground I had a few odd target responses which I can't quite explain as yet. A small lead ball of about 8mm, but not a shot, would give a solid response one way but absolutely silent the other. I guessed iron masking but there was none present when I checked the hole? Another solid target appeared to be just two quite small bits of iron about 5" apart with no non-ferrous to be found, so that was quite odd? Although detecting is currently generally not allowed it is maybe an ideal time to experiment with certain targets in your own garden? A good simple one is to bury a hammy penny at about 7" or deeper and note how your detector responds to it.

[HolzHammer]

[ think of it as the “fish that got away” it will be there next time.

My feelings EXACTLY!