Minelab Depth Chart Vs ATX

[JAMES MC LERNON]

vanursepaul 

• 

Posted February 25, 2015

Steve,

I would like to see you superimpose the ATX on this bar graph to see where it fits.

 

Paul

 

The whole graph isnt there, but you know what i mean, eh?

 

Steve, remember this one? ...Did you ever do it?

Maybe you could have a go at superimposing 2 new columns for each of the 3 nugget pics. (space to the  left and right of the GPX and GPZ). Time permitting of course! I'm thinking 1 column representing the old style DEEP SEARCHER 15" x 20" coil, and another for the new flat style, 11" x 13" closed DD coil. If you had space,... stretch it, or create a new chart,... you could even throw in the TDI, and even a Golg Bug for reference/fun. Also assuming similar ground conditions, good or bad.

     For example:-

          How close is the 11" x 13" DD coil to the STD coil on the GPX 5000? And whats it like against the SDC2300 on small bits?

          And is the 15" x 20" coil deeper than the STD GPX 5000? And how far away from the GPZ is it, on big bits?

Doesn't have to be an exact scientific test orientated job, more of an approximate one based on your time and experience with this machine. I know its not you No1 gold machine (but is, & could be for others), and you love it for wet beaches, but you won't sell it which says a lot about it... I think.

With all the latest new vlf stuff (equinox/gm1000/impact/mx sport/at max) getting all the headlines & peoples attention, does no harm to reflect on something old, something different. After all, YOUR elusive/magic/dry land/sub $2000/lightweight/LTX PI machine hasn't arrived yet! (MINELAB/GARRETT/FISHER/NOKTA/MAKRO/XP??? Wonder who will be first then?)....THAT WILL DEFINATELY GET EVERYONE EXCITETED!

I don't think its (ATX) a dead duck. I'm still thinking there's more to it (prospecting) than being relegated to a SUPERB beach PI machine. Just don't bring the weight into it!!!

Have you tested the closed DD coil? Improved falsing and balance issues?

Thankyou in advance!

jim

[Steve Herschbach]

Hi Jim,

I don't think the ATX is dead, and I don't think it is just a beach detector, though that seems to be where it gets used the most by other people. It also sees some use with relic hunters.

Mine goes along often nugget detecting as a backup for my GPZ for places where I might encounter hot rocks or salt conditions the GPZ struggles with.

I already reported extensively on the Minelab GPX 5000 vs Garrett ATX and see no reason to revisit the issue. I also have already reported on the 11" x 13" DD coil here with some follow up commentary here. The 11" x 13" DD as far as performance acts like the 10" x 12" that has been placed inside an enclosed housing. I'm not seeing any serious difference between the two in depth and sensitivity. The improvement as far as I am concerned lies in the better balance due to the center mount and improved knock resistance. The enclosed design sheds dirt better. The 11" x 13" DD is now permanently affixed to my ATX for general nugget detecting. The old stock coil has now been relegated for water use only.

The 15" x 20" mono in my brief use I found to add no depth at all on the normal less than gram nuggets found most often and in fact was more likely to cause a loss of depth on sub-gram nuggets. My impression was that it would have to be a quite large nugget, like ounce and over, for any significant depth improvement to show up versus the standard coil sizes. I just don't think the ATX packs the battery horsepower required to really get the extra performance out of oversized coils as compared to the GPX series. The large mono in my opinion is more about getting better ground coverage. The areas I hunt usually have too much sagebrush and grass to swing a large coil so I sold mine.

The SDC 2300 easily does better than the GPX 5000 and Garrett ATX on tiny gold in severe ground. The ATX is quite good and gives the GPX a run for the money as regards small gold but neither are as good as the SDC 2300 in this area.

Let's get to the heart of the matter. Again, read my GPX vs ATX report linked above. Now, in my opinion the GPX 5000 versus GPZ 7000 is not a case of one being blatantly superior to the other. To this day my Steve's Picks lists the GPX 5000 as my suggested choice for people considering the two. Why? My Steve's Picks are based on overall value and the safety of the choice. The GPX 5000 has a huge coil selection and large number of settings which make it a safe choice for virtually any conditions you will encounter. I consider the GPZ 7000 to be superior for my use on my ground, which tends to be milder ground, tends to be smaller gold, and which has a decent chance of producing fine wire and specimen gold. The GPZ however can struggle with certain hot rocks the and salt ground and in some locations I would rather use a GPX 5000. For scouting/covering ground a GPX with large elliptical coil is near impossible to beat.

Now, having said all that, I saw no need in my particular circumstances to have all the money wrapped up in both a GPX 5000 and GPZ 7000. In my opinion, again based on my report above, the ATX is "close enough" to the GPX when using similar coil sizes as to be "good enough" for me. The kicker was the ATX could also serve me well in salt water. So my GPX 5000 took a hike and the ATX stayed. And will stay. It continues to be my favorite salt water detector and backup for my GPZ 7000.

On 9/17/2017 at 6:20 AM, JAMES MC LERNON said:

Steve, remember this one? ...Did you ever do it?

Maybe you could have a go at superimposing 2 new columns for each of the 3 nugget pics. (space to the  left and right of the GPX and GPZ). Time permitting of course! I'm thinking 1 column representing the old style DEEP SEARCHER 15" x 20" coil, and another for the new flat style, 11" x 13" closed DD coil. If you had space,... stretch it, or create a new chart,... you could even throw in the TDI, and even a Golg Bug for reference/fun.

Yeah, I remember it. I ignored it then and will ignore it now. What you consider a fun project for me I consider a project that to do properly would take a huge amount of my time. In general I consider charts like that to be vague at best and misleading at worst. Even that one is full of caveats in the fine print. I would want hard data to back me up and no matter what any chart I produced would be seized upon as an item of dispute and probably misused by others determined to twist things for their own purposes. It is why I generally have no use for the many depth comparison videos done on the internet. They are so easy to manipulate to get the results people want and half the time people don't even know how to operate the machines they are comparing. Many are outright laughable. In my opinion the only way to get accurate information about how two machines compare is to test them yourself. I constantly do my own depth tests and comparisons but as far as I am concerned they only have validity for me on my ground. I use the information to form my general thoughts and opinions, which I then share with people like you who ask. So here is how I see it - how I rate them in order of what I would grab first:

1. GPZ 7000 or GPX 5000 - just depends. Either is superior depending on the situation. The GPZ for my specific purposes serves me well. But if somebody was going to put me on a plane and fly me to random locations around the world with the expectation that I be prepared for anything, I would take a GPX 5000 and decent coil selection.

2. GPX 4500

3. Garrett ATX

4. White's TDI

The SDC 2300 is a special case due to the hardwired 8" coil. It is more like the worlds best alternative to the best VLF detectors. In a weird way it may be better at simply finding gold, any gold, than all the other detectors above. This is because it is pretty magical at finding the far more common tiny gold in hot ground that is still rather prevalent compared to larger gold. If I had a rank beginner and just wanted them to be able to find a piece of gold the SDC 2300 would be what I would want them to use. Anyone that can't find a gold nugget with the SDC 2300 really just needs to find better locations or switch hobbies. If Minelab would stick the SDC 2300 in the MInelab Eureka box and add a few coil options it might very well shoot to the top of everyone's list. Right now the high price and single coil make it more a specialty niche detector.

Hopefully that's good enough. The ATX makes me a bit sad really as I really do think it is an excellent and capable circuit. Garrett's refusal to put it in a proper gold nugget detector housing continues to baffle and disappoint me. It is like they purposefully want to hobble what could be an excellent nugget detector. This refusal has for all practical purposes relegated it to being a beach and relic detector. I sometimes seem to be the only prospector left that has any faith or regard for the machine, and in my opinion that is a result more of the inappropriate housing design than a reflection of its true capability. The housing drives the price too high, which in turn makes the ATX more expensive in Australia than the Minelab alternatives. That's just nuts.

So anyway, no chart. Hopefully the above suffices. If you have any followup questions, fire away.

[JAMES MC LERNON]

WOW, Thank you Steve.

Was'nt expecting that! Very good info.

Once again, go to the front of the class... 11 out of 10 for effort!

No chart... no problem!

 As usual its "horses for courses" with detectors.

Joking aside, thanks for all your knowlegable replies which must seem like a full time job. I 'm sure everyone will agree with this!

P.S. Please don't be put off with your independent testing the EQUINOX. Don't let the idiot's, fools and low life's get in the way of you love doing, what you need to do, what you want to do. After all, you do it for yourself and for us, the 99%... 

P.S. Still no whispers about your  elusive/magic "dry land/sub $2000/lightweight/LTX/ or similar, PI machine" then?

Fisher must be the next one up?

thanks again

jim

[Steve Herschbach]

2 hours ago, JAMES MC LERNON said:

P.S. Still no whispers about your  elusive/magic "dry land/sub $2000/lightweight/LTX/ or similar, PI machine" then?

Fisher is clearly working on a PI but that may be a year or two out. Nokta is working on one but no word there in a long time. Garrett, well, you know the score there. At this point I would have to kind of bet on Fisher as it is clearly something they are going to do, but who knows how long. On the other hand Nokta has run out of stuff to do except for a waterproof model, a PI, and multifrequency. So 2018 is wide open for them but we do not know where the priority is. I am however not holding my breath on any of them.

[Jim Hemmingway]

On 9/17/2017 at 7:57 AM, Steve Herschbach said:

I don't think the ATX is dead, and I don't think it is just a beach detector, though that seems to be where it gets used the most by other people. It also sees some use with relic hunters.

Etc...l.

Outstanding post Steve!!! I don't normally respond to most of your posts because there is nothing to add. All your posts are knowledgeable, well-considered and otherwise excellent in every way. But this one does all that and adds a lot of the thought process behind your views. That is what I really appreciated most. Thankyou for all of your diligent hard work both with the management of this forum and for your superlative presentations. 

Jim.

[flakmagnet]

Wow that was one of the most amazing replies to a forum question I've ever seen. 
 

[Steve Herschbach]

You guys are too kind - thank you. And thanks for your presence on the forum!

The thought process part I think is valuable because what I think is important in a detector may not matter to someday else. I think I am a bit more cognizant than most of the fact that detector performance can vary dramatically by location. Personal requirements and limitations like budget vary even more. When a person declares a detector to be the “best” the first question in my mind is “for who, where, and why”? Context matters, more than just “which goes deeper” in my opinion at least. There are people who want “the fastest” car but most of us have more practical reasons for our vehicle purchases. Detectors are no different. “Goes deeper” is mostly just a marketing hook these days. It’s all the other factors that generally decide what detector suits one person better than another.