Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Juliuss

Help Gpx Or Atx

Recommended Posts

Greetings friends, I want to ask a question and I hope you can help, he is long after an garrett atx, but I have the opportunity to buy a gpx 4800 with several coils and batteries, where I am not sure if there are nuggets, what that if I know that there are many coins and jewels, even vessels with coins inside the planting grounds, my question is the minelab gpx 4800, could it be useful for this type of search (buried treasures) or is it only for nuggets and small things? What is more convenient if I look in sowing lands and walls of old houses? Gpx or atx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It will detect coins and relics no problems, it detects all metals.... the problem is the discrimination, it has some basic iron discrimination but it's nothing like swinging a VLF detector with target ID's.

It will no doubt detect coins and treasures deeper than a VLF in a lot of cases but you'll be digging a LOT of junk. 

If you're primarily after coins and jewels like rings and so on, a VLF like the Minelab Equonox is your best bet in my opinion, cheaper too.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it was me I would go for the ML4800 a great detector, and get a cheap VLF. machine for playing with coin and chase the gold with the ML4800. If you are after deep coins then use the ML4800 and dig every thing, even leaving known junk will mask good deep signals. You don't have to use ID to get good finds but it does prevent you from walking away from junk infested areas.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Garrett ATX and ML 4800 (GPX) use similar pulse induction (PI) technology and both can be used for natural gold detecting or for relics and coins.  It is somewhat difficult to advise you as I am not sure of your experience level in detecting and what kind of soils you will be primarily detecting in.  Sounds like ploughed fields.  Unless the "treasures" are super deep or the soil conditions are challenging with lots of iron oxide mineralization, a PI detector may not be necessary, and a less expensive VLF induction balance machine might be more suitable to your circumstance (more about that later).

The ATX has the advantage of being fully waterproof which means you can use it in the water or in foul weather without having to provide additional protection to the control box.  The ML 4800 has better iron discrimination circuits than the ATX, is lighter, and the timings are more sophisticated for varying soil conditions which is really just an advantage for gold hunting.  There are more accessory coil options for the ML 4800 than for the ATX.

Since both use pulse induction technology, they will go deeper than your typical VLF induction balance detector which are more commonly used by those seeking coins and relics and are typically much less expensive than the ATX and ML GPX you are considering, unless the price is highly discounted because the unit is used.  If you are seeking deep buried caches of treasure, I would lean towards the ML 4800 because its audio tends to give you a better "picture" of larger, deeper targets.  

If this is a hobby you are just embarking on, I highly recommend taking the advice of others here, and start out with a capable VLF machine like the Equinox 800.  It is highly versatile and light weight and is simpler to operate and tune than a PI detector and if you find that the hobby is not something you want to pursue your investment is relatively small.  It will perform well in all kinds of tough soil environments such as salt beaches and highly mineralized soils (where PI detectors also excel) If you really want to just dip your toe in the water with a capable detector with minimal investment, I recommend that you investigate using the Nokta Simplex detector.   Which has just been released (so it may be difficult to find initially).  It is low cost but appears to be very capable and straight forward to operate.

Good luck.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Garrett ATX and Minelab GPX 4800 have similar capabilities, and unless I needed the detector to be waterproof (ATX) my choice would be the GPX 4800. It has more power, more tuning options, and vastly more coil options at better prices.

 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know a person who bought both of those detectors.  He favors the GPX for gold hunting and found the ATX to be a little too bump sensitive.  But that is all second hand info.  I wish I could give you better.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Similar Content

    • By Shelton
      Check my thread:
      Link deleted since Findmall update broke all old links
      This is weird.
    • By Steve Herschbach
      I did a bit of Google searching for posts in the last year to see if I could get a feel for how much use the Garrett ATX gets and what people are finding with it. Not much to see though. The Garrett Australia Facebook page has some gold nugget finds https://www.facebook.com/GarrettAustralia/
      The Findmall ATX Forum would have you thinking the ATX is strictly a beach detector Link deleted since Findmall Forum update broke all old links and other than that a few relic hunters out there using it.
      The ATX is one of my favorite detectors and quite a capable nugget detector, but after some early nugget detecting it now only gets used seriously as a beach and water detector. The problem is with ATX at $2120 and 6.9 lbs, limited coil selection, it is a tough machine to recommend for prospecting with a Minelab GPX 4500 running only $2699 at this time. I still consider the ATX to have been a missed opportunity. At $1699 in a lighter weight dry land package and sporting less expensive dry land coils the machine could have made a real impact on the prospecting world. Instead it is a rare sight on the goldfields.
       
    • By Steve Herschbach
      I consider myself fortunate to have met Garrett's Senior Design Engineer, Brent Weaver, many years ago during prototype testing of the Garrett Infinium. I think Brent deserves a great deal of credit in making Garrett the leader it is today with a series of incredible innovative bang-for-the-buck metal detectors, first and foremost being the AT series. Brent is just a real nice guy - comes across as a regular Joe not a head in the clouds engineer. I think this video shows that. It also has an extremely interesting discussion of pulse inductions detectors, ground balancing methods, and the dreaded "hole" that occurs when ground balancing. There is explanation of why the holes occur and how some designs try to alleviate but not eliminate the problem. Good stuff, starts around the 3:40 minute mark.
      The audio quality in this video truly sucks. However, this is important information, and so repeated listens, typing, and listening again on my part produced the following transcript. Again, this is from Brent Weaver, Senior Design Engineer, Garrett Metal Detectors
      Transcript starting at 3:40 mark:
      "If you look at the various pulse detectors that exist on the market, you have your simplest pulse machines, which are single pulse machines that are non-ground balancing. Those are detectors that are typically exclusively used for the beach, for example, the Sea Hunter or something like this.
      The next step in advancement there is to have a ground balancing pulse machine, those can still be a single pulse detector. This pulse channel is able to ground balance, which means it can neutralize the ground. The problem with that sort of technology is when you ground balance out the ground, you can also balance out any target that has a decay characteristic that is similar to the ground. We call this the "detection hole". Essentially, it is a hole in the conductivity... when you look at the conductivity of gold or any material, you look at a conductivity spectrum. The decay rate of that... pulse decay is a function of the conductivity of the material and also the thickness and shape of the material. It all factors into effective conductivity.
      For a ground balancing pulse detector, again, if the conductivity of the ground is similar to the conductivity of the target, when you ground balance out the ground you also ground balance out the target. To eliminate that problem, you create a second pulse which is substantially different than the first pulse, such that when you ground balance out the ground on the second pulse, its conductivity decay as far as the target is concerned, the conductivity decay on the first pulse and that on the on the second pulse do not match each other. As a result, as you ground balance out the ground on the first pulse, you create a hole, and you ground balance out the ground on the second pulse, it also creates a hole, but it is in a different location.
      And so, those two pulses working together in unison, working simultaneously, one will always fill in the hole of the other, they overlap such that you never have a detection hole. If you only have a single pulse detector, and it ground balances, it will have a detection hole. There are various products on the market, some are less expensive than the ATX, some are more expensive than the ATX, but if they are a single pulse detector, they are going to have a hole in their detection, period. You are going to miss gold. You are absolutely going to miss gold.
      Now where that hole falls depends on the mineralization conditions, and where the ground balance is set for the detector. As the ground balance shifts, the hole shifts with it. If you have a detector that has continuous ground tracking, such that you cannot switch it off, as that ground track moves around for the various ground conditions, the hole moves around with it and the targets are disappearing into that hole. You never know where the hole is at any time.
      Again, to eliminate that problem, the more advanced, the most advanced detectors, like the ATX, use multiple pulse technology. They don't just have one single pulse that repeats, they have different kinds of pulses, and those pairs repeat. That is one of the differences in a true high end performance product like the ATX, versus some of the other products on the market. They are good products, and they are ground balancing pulse detectors, but if they are a single pulse technology, they have a hole in their detection that will miss targets."
      Now, for me listening to that it is obvious that Garrett was clearly gunning for the White's TDI. How do I know that? Because it was Minelab that originally put multi period pulse detection into the consumers hands, via their MPS (multi period sensing) technology beginning with the ground breaking SD 2000. The White's TDI on the other hand is an older design, and in fact is basically just an Eric Foster Goldscan stuck in a White's labeled box. The Goldscan and the TDI are a single channel ground balancing pulse detector with the problem that Brent outlines in the video. Bruce Candy of Minelab saw the same issue and the SD 2000 was specifically developed as a multi channel or multi period device for this very reason.
      MPS was patented, and so I am not sure if it was the patent expiring or Garrett simply using a method that got around the patent, but the ATX is using a similar multi period design as the SD Minelabs. Having used the Minelabs and the TDI plus the ATX I can vouch for the electronics in the ATX as being very capable and I do believe superior to that in the TDI. My ATX in fact tested favorably compared to my GPX 5000 with the 5000 having the edge, but not as much as I expected. I think in large part that is simply due to the Minelab using a much more powerful battery pumping far more power into the ground than the ATX with its eight AA batteries.
      Unfortunately in my opinion Garrett made a huge mistake in taking these excellent electronics and hobbling them with a housing that did not take advantage of one of Minelabs biggest weaknesses - ergonomics. The TDI had and still has a distinct edge in that regard, and at a lower price than the ATX. Ironically, it is also that detection hole and the ability to manipulate it via a manual ground balance that has become, not the big problem as laid out in this video, but a feature of sorts in favor of the TDI. People have learned how to manipulate the hole to help identify targets by using the ground balance control as a sort of reverse discrimination control. Combined with the unique conductivity switch on the TDI knowledgeable users can become very proficient at identifying various target classes, and this has made it very popular with relic hunters in particular.
      What history in hindsight reveals, in my opinion, is that Garrett missed the boat with the ATX as regards Minelab. The ATX hit the market before the SDC 2300 and had a window of opportunity to really make inroads if it had been in a lighter weight dry land package with a light dry land coil set designed specifically for desert prospecting. The electronics are there; it is the heavy housing, and heavy knock sensitive coils overpriced by an attached telescoping rod assembly that really hurt the machine. On the flip side, I don't think they did too much damage to the TDI also with the TDI being a less expensive more ergonomically friendly unit. Like the Garrett Infinium before it, the ATX has settled into being more a beach detector than a prospecting detector.
      I have of course been making hay over this since day one and continue to make an issue of it at every opportunity in hopes that we may see a Garrett LTX some day. Dry land design only for the absolute lightest weight possible machine with light weight knock resistant coils to match, it would be a winner. There is a market still I believe for a $1500 -$2000 ground balancing PI detector that clearly has more power than a TDI in an all in one package lighter than anything Minelab currently markets. The only question in my mind is whether Garrett will finally get it right or will it finally be a moot point when new Fisher, White's, and Nokta/Makro machines waiting in the wings finally arrive.

    • By Luis401
      Hi all,
      I'm from France, working with a GPX4500 of 2003.
      Yesterday when I started this old guy, I was affraid by this problem :
      - Sound when the treshold start is strange.
      - The autotune (research for free frequency) is a stable sound, with no variation.
      - And no power ! about 5 inch max for my metal digging pickaxe.
      I tried some factory resets, but the problem is always the same...
      I tried this one with another disc, trakking button, cable, headphone, battery, the problem come from the main box...
      Anyone knows this problem ?
      Thank you and have a nice day.
      Luis
    • By PPP
      Hi Guys!
      When i bought my ATX i bought a Grey Ghost amphibian as well.Fist day in the saltwater after an hour i notice an strange rosty colour spreading all over the back of the detector where the speaker is located.I just got panicked and cancled the hunt immidiately.When i got home i noticed the round edge of the speaker which is metal is rosted as hell!!! I looked around and could'nt find the problem.When i unplugged the headphones i realised that in the Grey ghost package there is some o-rings that i supposed to put it myself on the connector.THAT was the problem!!! i put the o-ring on and problem solved.But my speaker was så rusty i put some silicone glue all over it to isolate it from saltwater.I should send it to Garret which i did'nt. It works ok since then but i think there has been a slightly current without the o-ring that makes the speaker rust.What do you tink guys? 
    • By nugget hunter nz
      Hi guys I'm back after laying low after my nugget find starting to get back into some detecting again.. Still been using my 24k vlf and no way I'd get rid of it its so good.. But I am in need to replace my gpx I sold.. And I can't decide whether to get a gpz and run the small  xcoil soon as it's available to buy.. Or run with a gpx 5000 and get my trustie Sadie coil again.. Aparently my gpx I sold ended up with moisture damage on points but was fixed easy but with living on the wet west coast I'm thinking the gpz with its wetherproof housing might be better but the big coil isn't practical for alot what I do creeks bedrock etc but is for old tailings piles.. 
      I was wondering maybe Steve or kiwijw might he able to awnser this how small will the gpz detect will it go as small as say sdc in low to mild ground 
      And 2 is the depth over gpx noticeable on smaller gold 
      Thanks Craig 
×
×
  • Create New...