Do you just go deep or do you change your finders?

[blubalou]

I queried the NRF Share List database and generated the linked file below. (Sorry, no location information.... you gotta contribute to get that. )

http://www.sdsb.org/Documents/AverageSizeByDepth.csv

What it shows is something we probably could have guessed without the data... on average, the deeper you go the bigger the finds. (Unfortunately without miss rates it doesn't tell us if you get fewer larger finds too.)

Anyway, the discussion topic I have is this:

Do you vary your finders depending on what you're after and where you are or do you just use the finders with the highest Average Depth based on your skills?

Sort of like hunting... I use a small gun for small MOBs and a bigger gun for bigger MOBs. Do you think it works the same for mining?

[Calin]

I vary my tool depending on where I am and what I'm after.

[Pianoman178]

I have always used the best ore/enmat finder I can, which is currently a maxed out Z20 and Ju55. I have also always used the best gun I can, which is the Breer M4a. I still use the opalo for small mobs/finisher, but why wouldn't you use the best? I do know there is quite a bit of speculation surrounding the depth/occurrence of certain ores, but I do not have high enough skills or experience to contribute to that argument

-Piano

[Luckycharm]

Originally Posted by Pianoman178

I have always used the best ore/enmat finder I can, which is currently a maxed out Z20 and Ju55. I have also always used the best gun I can, which is the Breer M4a. I still use the opalo for small mobs/finisher, but why wouldn't you use the best? I do know there is quite a bit of speculation surrounding the depth/occurrence of certain ores, but I do not have high enough skills or experience to contribute to that argument

-Piano

Finders that go deeper skip the upper part in the ground. i.e. Tik400 wont find what the tt finder will ...

[Atraie]

I dont believe depth has anything to do with size of deposit, just type. My average claim size is no different then i started, im at about 60,000 probes/bombs now, using finders from tt to ~800 ASG.

[Lobbe]

how very hard to say -.-

[blubalou]

Originally Posted by Atraie

I dont believe depth has anything to do with size of deposit, just type. My average claim size is no different then i started, im at about 60,000 probes/bombs now, using finders from tt to ~800 ASG.

Hey you guys, look at the .csv file I attached in the first post. There are 26k records in that database... I queried it group by Claim Type and Size to return AVG(Depth) and only include entries that have 10 or more for the Type and Size in question.

It does show, in most cases, that as depth increases so does size.

You are pointing out here that you start to find different types of claims but the average size remains the same... but that makes sense too... as you go deeper you may start to find rarer materials, but back to IIs and IIIs until you go deeper still.

If you know enough about an area to know that there is plenty of lets say Belk and Ali around 460m, would you want your OF-105 or better hoping for larger chunks of that stuff or try to hit the 460m and hope for more, but smaller finds.

[Trina Xenophage]

Umm.. about that as depth increases size increases comment...

I have found that once I left the realm of the 105 sizes have dropped..I use the tk series 120 ,220, and 320 now and all are maxed depth. 99% of the time all they find is level II and III size claims. I just get an avg number of finds per 100 bombs that is higher. Nothing pisses me off more then when I get a level II lyst with a tk 320 at 1000m depth.

The only difference I see is that I was getting 15-20 claims per 100 bombs with the 105 and now get 25-30 claims with tk series. Rare finds dont come close to what I expected with the expensive finders so when the ones I have die that will be the last ever purchased.

Same with the tik series I use the tik500 and basicly get same results many small finds, few rare finds, have not found dunkel (other then 1 random sheet a month or so ago) in over a year.

I am almost 31 in prospecting (have unlocked mineral sense) and am almost 24 in surveying so no reason at this point larger finds and rare claims should not be comming a little more frequently.

[Ionar]

Originally Posted by blubalou

It does show, in most cases, that as depth increases so does size.

One explenation could be that as miners get more experiance they use amps more. Only the experienced miners (not counting chippers) have the skills to use the deeper finders. Ergo deeper finds tend to be bigger due to amps while the "original" sizes could be the same regardles of depth.

[Atraie]

Ya gotta account for the amps, duno if the op did or not. But ya if you count raw numbers my finds are much bigger currently, but im using 103 amps on every drop, if you divide them by 3, they are the same as when i was mining with shallower finders without amps.