All Activity

Any time you place ferrite near a pancake coil it causes the flux lines to bend more. This is why mineralized ground reduces depth, it increases the flux curvature and reduces flux density at depth. Placing a ferrite shell on top of the coil certainly does what you envision (reduces the top-side field); at the same time it increases the bottom-side flux density very close to the coil but this advantage is quickly lost and at depth the flux density is reduced. Here is an FEM plot: Here is the same coil with the ferrite set to air: It's possible the ferrite-shelled coil would be good for shallow tiny nugget detection. Another (lighter) possibility is to design an anti-Helmholtz coil, where an anti-phased bucking coil placed just above the TX coil to "focus" the field downward: Unfortunately it tends to also reduce flux density at depth compared to just a single TX coil. .

We had a couple corrupt index tables that have now been cleared. Should be fixed now though some items like Activity Streams or notification lists may need to rebuild. I'll be honest with you guys sometimes I feel like I'm just keeping it running with duct tape and bailing wire and hope the whole thing does not blow up at some point.

I have also found the same 'Funky thing as well,it seems to have settled down but on all topics it was showing a message and no topics,but all is sorted by the looks of things. Just one of those 'Funky Days' i guess.

Thanks gentlemen.-----I am now considering the Manticore (with extra M8 coil)---especially with Minelabs discounted price on the detector.-----However--I don't understand their "reasoning" for increasing price on it in Jan. & then doing a steep discount on it in April.----Buyers shouldn't complain about that though. 🙂

Well isn't that weird as heck...all of my thumbs up and etc. has vanished as well.

I got notification of your post GhostMiner, but the forum just seem to be acting kind of funky today.

I found this button seems like a napoleonic one but dont know

I had some years ago. I found that it wasn't all that good for our very flat, thin flour gold that can float on water without using soap to break up the water surface tension. Our flour gold can take off like a piece of tissue paper in the wind with water turbulence in the sluice, so I ended up with unacceptable gold loss. Now, for gold with a little more density, it might work well. I also did some math. Calculating the volume of those little holes on the dream mat vs. the volume of my drop riffles. I went with riffles because of the substantial increase of capture surface area. It allows for more gold to be captured and buried like in the real world, and many more traps to allow the gold to just "drop" as opposed to creating a reverse water flow, trying to get the gold uphill into that condensed round pocket. And, as previously mentioned, our light flour gold can take off like a piece of tissue paper in the wind.

I'm preparing to leave Queenstown this morning. I wish that I could report finding my own nugget but I do have some NZ gold courtesy of JW. Simon and I went out on just a perfect day to a spot just like many others I saw here in the south that once held lots of gold. Once again we gave it out best effort but came away without a nugget. We had a great time which could have only been made better by finding a piece. My big relic of the trip was an unfired 22 long. We both found dozens of tiny bird shot. Simon was using his 6000 and I was using my Algo. While I just started using it this trip I'm finding it to be a very capable detector with the Sadie on it. More on that later when I get back and meet up with some of you. This was near where we detected. It was one example of many that I saw of gold mining activity that took place over the area. The specific area we detected reminded me of the climate and growth at Rye Patch. There is just much, much more exposed bedrock and no crystals. On my return trip to the north along the West Coast of the South Island I'm told this is where the largest nuggets were found. I did stop by a shop and meet someone who had a 500 gram nugget! Lots and lots of gold was found and taken but I'm only taking back a little gift. Thank you Simon and thank you JW. I'll try to keep some of your secrets safe. haha

Great thoughts Doc, a nice little write-up of what's really needed. All the best, Lanny

Deus2 controller, WSA2 headphones, 13x11 coil. Detector is in great condition. Controller and WSA2 puck are 9 months old. Coil is 1 month old neither ever submerged and coil cover always used. The shaft and backphones have never been used. RCdigs holder is righthanded - lower shaft is carbon fiber. Selling as I have two units and only need one. $975 which includes shipping in original boxes. Accept PPFF or Paypay plus 3% fee. Thanks

I'm envisioning the opposite of a ferrite core, more like an exterior casing to concentrate flux such that the amount of magnetic field energy is maximized towards the ground and minimized towards open air. Since half of the field of a coil radiates upwards and thus is not particularly useful for detecting, it seems to make sense to put it where it's more useful - if possible? Here is a cutaway diagram. Would this not have any benefit, at least for near surface flux density concentration? At the field strengths of PI machines I'd guess something like fairly thin 24 gauge steel would be more than enough, saturation is probably ok since the goal would just be some improvement, not capturing all the upwards flux. Is there a way to use that other half of the "wasted" (using that term loosely) magnetic field energy more usefully downwards if this doesn't work? Sort of like the idea behind a Halbach Array, except whatever the EM version would be? Weight alone doesn't have to be a deal breaker. For instance if a hypothetical 12" coil with flux shaping components weighed the same as a 20" standard coil, can it be made to obtain similar depths? If so, then it'd be worth it due to maneuverability with all other things being equal.

Once again I would strongly suggest that only the laws be a guide to your actions. There are only four laws in California that use the term mechanized. Three of those laws relate only to the mechanized display of signs advertising alcohol. Here is the fourth law that mentions mechanized. 13172.5. (a) For purposes of this section, the use of any vacuum or suction dredge equipment, also known as suction dredging, is the use of a mechanized or motorized system for removing or assisting in the removal of, or the processing of, material from the bed, bank, or channel of a river, stream, or lake in order to recover minerals. This section does not apply to, prohibit, or otherwise restrict nonmotorized recreational mining activities, including panning for gold. http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate?WAISdocID=31808029769+0+0+0&WAISaction=retrieve If you aren't using a suction dredge to remove or process material from the bed, bank, or channel of a river, stream, or lake for the purpose of recovering minerals this permit law has no applicability. The original poster seems to have ruled out that use or the use of stream or surface water and this law doesn't apply to water use anyway. It is specific to dredge permitting. It should also be noted that owners of properties in California with riparian rights are not subject to water permitting schemes for their personal beneficial use of their riparian water rights. Mining is one of the listed beneficial uses of water in California. There is no 300 foot law regarding water pumps. That's probably coming from a misunderstanding of this portion of the dredge permit regulations: 2. (e) It is unlawful to possess a vacuum or suction dredge in areas, or in or within 100 yards of waters, that are closed to the use of vacuum or suction dredges. Same source as above. Clearly this only applies to dredges in areas closed to dredging. Not a thing in there about water pumps.

You have good prices on your used Detectors Gerry. Wish you'd quit tempting me when I'm broke! Lol

My lead discrimination filter has settings for those also, it’s shaped like a trowel and works really well!

Well, if you can show me how to find gold amongst the can slaw and nails, let me know when you're in the area. Lol

It looks like all of my notifications have vanished except for a new one today. Any idea why? Thanks.

im gonna keep it

Something odd here - all my old notifications have vanished on the journal except for the new ones from Mike Furness just now. It says I have no notifications.

@Jeff McClendon or @abenson can probably do a deeper dive, but from a purely technical standpoint I think it breaks down like this...it depends. Not trying to be snarky, it's just that the question as you presented it is a little open ended since you didn't specify whether you were primarily interested in just general nuggets or also being able to Sniff out micro, subgram gold. Furthermore, ground conditions matter for this comparison. I'll give you my thoughts from a purely technical basis from a detector standpoint (I own both and have done some air tests), but avid gold hunters like Steve H., Jeff, Andrew, phrunt and others who have used both can weigh in with their practical field experience. I think overall, it's a close call based on test and real world results I've seen posted here and elsewhere. Probably a slight performance edge goes to the Nox because of the overall versatility that Simultaneous Multifrequency brings to the table in terms of hot ground handling. Maybe Orx handles itself slightly better in ferrous trash situations. I know Deus 2 does much better than the Nox 900 in that regard and also in regards to Target ID accuracy/stability. The D2 is held back slightly, however, because the smallest available coil is the 9" round. If you ignore ground handling, the Orx may have a slight edge in subgram gold sensitivity solely based on the higher frequency (80+ khz) it can achieve with the 10x5 HF coil. I don't think the Nox 900 is far behind though, if at all, especially with the 6" coil (vs. the 10x5). On larger nuggets I would probably give the edge to the Nox as that Coiltek coil has great depth for its footprint on larger gold targets vs. the Orx. It's still close. For hot ground handling, the Nox in Simultaneous Frequency Mode is better than the SF Orx and also has ground tracking unlike the Orx. But the Orx still performs ok in hot ground and is easy to rebalance with single button ground grab. Finally, the Nox 900 is an overall more versatile detector vs the Orx for detecting in general. So overall edge to the Nox. Orx will cost you a lot less however ($550) vs. $1000 for the Nox (includes the 11" and 6" coil) + $235 for that Coiltek 10×5. TBH however, based on the recent $500 price drop on Manticore down to $1200, I would also strongly consider getting Manticore over the 900 and pick up the $250 M8 5x8 coil which should give you everything you need (it effectively combines the best of the 6 inch round coil and the 10x5 coil with perhaps a incremental hit on depth and coverage). The cost Delta is only about $200 even if you factor in the cost of the 10x5 Nox coil vs. M8 Manticore coil But you do end up with one less coil overall because the Nox package includes the 11" and 6" coils. Also, the Manticore is just a better all around detector than the 900. There is nothing the 900 can do that the Manticore can't. FWIW. My recommendation: For pure nugget hunting value, consider the Orx. For overall performance Manticore + the M8 coil. Splitting the cost difference (slightly, by $200) Nox 900 + Coiltek 10x5.

I would say on average around 1/3 of the days I spend out detecting are skunk days

great idea Doc

Doc, I’ve used your older smaller model for years and have handed out dozens to other gold seekers through out the Southwest Placers. There’s been a couple times I wished for a larger Nugget Stash and somehow, you answered! Here’s to fresh patches to fill your dream's LuckyLundy

Either will get the job done, personal preference thing more than either being an absolute provable "best." I lean Equinox myself due to larger available coil selection and versatility, but would not argue with anyone who'd rather use the ORX for nugget detecting.

Which of these makes the best gold (nugget) hunter----the Equinox 900 with Coiltek 5X10" & Minelab 6" coils---or the XP ORX with the 5X10 h.f. coil?