Jump to content
Nugget Shooter Forums

GlassJAw667

Nugget Shooter Members
  • Content Count

    122
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by GlassJAw667

  1. Yes Fred it is magnetic, and I determined it to be metal and not magnetite but viewing it at 10X and 60X. Under 60X magnification, after leaving a small drop of water on some of the metal areas it developed a slight amount of rusting.

    Chances are it is not a meteorite. I just want everyone to be clear that I don't really think it is. It is too 'funny-looking', and the whitish material inside is shaped wrong. But it could be, so i was asking if you seasoned hunters/dealers/collectors think I should give it a shot at professional testing. I am not holding my breath or bragging to buddies that I found some rare achondrite or anything, I am just placing a bit of hope in it being a meteorite as it does have some interesting features. Even if it is not, i am going to cut in in half and prepare it to add to my shelf of neat wrongs.

  2. There is nothing on the surface of this piece that I would consider to be a fusion crust at all, although the blackish portions do look basaltic in nature, and there are only a few spots of visible metal when viewed at 10X, so the magnetism is very slight and I almost dismissed it as being completely non-magnetic. I'd like to cut it straight in half and polish it for my shelf of beautiful wrongs, especially if I get it tested and it i for sure terrestrial. I don't hold high hopes for any of the 3 specimens I have posted here with the exception of the iron piece. I just want everyone to know that I am almost positive they are NOT meteorites, I was just looking for input to see if anyone were in my shoes, would they spend the time to get these pieces checked. I have a pretty good amount of knowledge on meteorites, and after 28 boring months of deployment I spent a lot of my down time researching meteorites online, reading everything on meteorites I could, and studying specimens that were purchased from reputable dealers. So I wouldn't call myself new to this at all, I just don't have any strewnfield experience, but I have years of hunting experience. Due to the locations of these finds that appear Lunar, I don't want to immediately dismiss them as wrongs, as the arid desert I found them in would be perfect for preserving them. So please don't be too harsh on me, I realize I am just driving on hope here, and they only so far visually appear similar, but if there is a slight chance I want to take it.

  3. Thanks for the read an info Johnno! What I was referring to as a 'crust' is the bottom of this piece. It has a think layer of yellowish melted glass, but it is only on the side that was still imbedded in the sand. here is one spot of melt glass on the top left of the pitted side, and I admit they do not look like regmaglypts to me either. There is visible metal inside, and the interior is gret as is the outer portions with the exception of the layer of melt glass.

  4. The rock looks like some type of quartz or quartzite to me...pictures of lunars that I have seen have white clasts that are more like milk-glass...but, that is just one souls opinion...

    fred

    I agree with the statement about the white clasts being more milk-like. The stone itself is not quartz, but is some grey material that is almost like glass with metal dispersed throughout. But the white portions inside do seem like some type of quartz. I don't know what it is, and the 'crusted' side is the only reason I reconsidered this particular piece. That side obviously melted somehow, and there are no volcanoes over there.

  5. Jay, the last photo is a rounded, polished window. Take your time Boss, but I will be moving out of this house in about 2-3 weeks, so if you're going to send it soon, it needs to be this week. Thanks again brother!

    It sanded it from rough to 1200 grit sand paper, and I didn't want to cut it just in case it might be a Lunar. I will rely on whatever University I send it to to do the cutting to reduce loss. I may cut it in half beforehand, to save the best-looking half for myself, and the rest to go to institutions/classification. (That's IF it is a meteorite, which I know is 99% unlikely, but a guy can dream, right?)

  6. In the last photo, it almost appears to be volcanic. I have never seen a meteorite that looks like it has eye sockets! Haha. But it does have white clasts in it, one of which can be seen on the top, center, of the last photo as well. The glassy 'crust' on the underside of the stone is what gets me. That was the side that was facing the desert floor, and there is only one spot of 'crust' on the top left, which is visible, in the last picture as well.

  7. Thanks for the input fellas. On some edges it appears to have slight rollover lips when viewed at 10X, as well as flow lines. I have a $40 camera, so I can't take photos too much better than what I have provided. I have been holding on to this piece for several years mostly out of fear I will get my hopes crushed (Haha) and also because I have had 6 specimens kept by those who were helping me get them looked at.

    But with this one I will take a chance. There is a ground window on ones of the edges, and it is 100% metallic, and will rust without treatment after 15 days or so.

  8. Needs some science, not just "it looks like XXX".

    You want me to actually scroll through the chemical compositions of each Dhofar XXXX that it resembles and paste the data here? All I am asking is (and I have done years of research) do those of you with a decent Lunar collection or experience in handling them think it is a waste of time to get this checked? I realize it is impossible to tell, but clast size, external and internal compositions can tell you a lot. So visually, does it seem worth my time?

  9. This is a picture of Kalahari 008 & 009 next to my grey Kuwaiti stone that I found. They both have the 'glassy' crust, as well as the white clasts on the outside. I need to send this in for classification. (Picture of Kalahari 009 borrowed from http://meteorites.wustl.edu/lunar/stones/kalahari008.htm)

    I doubt it is a Lunar, but it's external and internal similarities are pretty close to identical. It's only slightly magnetic, and was very difficult to cut due to it's 'glassy' nature. So the questions I have are, what are your thoughts, and should I get it looked at by a professional?

    Kalahari009.jpg

    Kuwaitregmaglyphs1.jpg

    Kuwaitregmaglyphs2.jpg

  10. That is a great find Homefire!

    You are right about the coinage...There just wasn't any coinage in this place until the end of the first world war, and what there was was not often misplaced. Businesses accepted currency, gold and silver coin, and gold and silver bullion. Most would probably accept all sorts of barter and trade. Think of how healthy our economy would be if this were the case now! The dollar is now the bottleneck through which all business is conducted in today's world.

    My experience is that there is as much Mexican sillver, silver shot, and silver coins from other countries than there is U.S. coinage. Tokens too. There was not enough coin to go around and any ol' silver could be weighed. The vaqueros would hammer mexican coins into conchos after 1846 and spend them on either side of the border. And silver shot or "popcorns" are very common. (that is one good thing about using a gold detector and digging every small target!).

    So any piece of silver of known purity was as valuable (or even more so) than a U.S. coin and was probably used as often in transactions.

    This is a great piece of knowledge, and is news to me. Very interesting, I have never heard of silver shot before, unless you count stories of people using silver bullets for werewolves... :)

  11. No one on any of the forums I have posted on the photos can ID the button. It's still not ad cool as the 1861 Republic of Colombia button I found near Fort Bragg by eye when I was scouting locations to hunt. I wonder if this button was put on a Confederate uniform. I know they used what was available, and the time period fits. It has survived well for being a surface find. This picture has the button, a bus token (I don't know how old it is), and two hide scrapers including one made from pottery.

    NCfinds.jpg

  12. The are cute little guys aren't they! Folks such as myself who have neither the time, nor the cash to drive and hunt are envious of even the small nuggets. Keep up the hunt, and keep postin photos to keep my desire alive. In a few months I will get my shot at hunting AZ, so this keeps my eye on the prize, and if I could come home with even one of those little beauties I would be proud. I just hope my MXT can pick up small nuggets when I arrive.

  13. I went out to the private property on the battlefield, but only came away with a few small finds. The landowner said his farmland has been heavily hunted with detectors for about 20 years. It is one of the only places on the battlefield site that is not protected. Oh well, I had fun, and I took a few nice pictures. Enjoy!

    My finds from Averasboro Battlefield, on private property.

    From left to right, and unidentified copper plate, unidentified copper item, unidentified copper brad (?), a copper button, a Confederate Enfield 51 caliber bullet, 2 pieces of copper - unknown purpose, two pieces of 'camp lead'.

    Averasboro1.jpg

    And here's a couple more to show the unidentified pieces with more detail

    Averasboro3.jpg

    Averasboro2.jpg

    Anyone with ideas about what this copper plate, unidentified copper 'brad' and and small piece, and button are, please let me know!

  14. @fredmason, I know they aren't worth much, unless I pull a Lunar, Martian, Diogenite, etc. What I meant by selling a few to fund another trip is I will need to sell a few to have extra cash TOWARDS my next trip... :)

    I know all about values, locations, types, etc. I have researched them for years, and my collection is probably 50-60 pieces strong. I just haven't had to privilege of hunting a known strewnfield, or the American Southwest for that matter. I have done hundreds of hours of hunting, but this includes relics, meteorites, mushrooms, and anything else I find exciting. I would say out of the hundreds of wrongs I have picked up 'cold', I have 3 or 4 that could very well be meteorites, and only one I think is the absolute 100% real deal. I got my first meteorite about 12 years ago, but only really got heavy into researching, hunting, and collecting them about 3-4 years ago.

    I value everyone's help, insight, criticism (Both rude, and constructive) it is all well-received I promise you. As far as the show goes, I admit, I too am pretty bored throughout most of it. I would benefit more from, as well as enjoy the show a lot more if they had more hunting than talking. But I agree with fred, that they probably don't have much exciting footage. Most of the footage they get is two guys walking random terrain either looking at the ground, or swinging/dragging a coil. I do get tired of hearing the description of a strewnfield, and the announcer stating what an iron/stone meteorite is, but it is necessary for those just tuning in, children, and newbies alike. I do think the show also keeps it a bit boring to show realistically what it is like to hunt meteorites, even with trained eyes, knowledge, and a ton of equipment. The guys even get skunked or come out with very little. I do like that. It tells you for certain that pieces weren't 'planted' there for ratings and excitement. But all in all, I watch it every week, even the boring parts. It increases my knowledge of HOW to hunt certain places, even though I won't ever get to go to a lot of the places they go, but it helps me to know places I will. For example, Franconia. That show kept showing a map of the 5 different meteorite find locations. (I know the original pieces are scattered over the whole area) It showed a large concentration on the far side of the strewnfield, and also Nate pointed out that he hadn't hunted over there much, and lo and behold Geoff found two over there. This makes me want to head towards the hilly terrain on that side and focus most of my time there as opposed to the easier flat spots. As far as Holbrook, it all looks to be the same. So I plan on just having a go at it and covering as much ground as possible on all sides of the strewnfield.

×
×
  • Create New...