Jump to content
VicR

Minelab GPX 6000

Recommended Posts

For me, it has to have performance greater than the 5000. I couldn't care less about batteries, leads, speakers or screens. Performance is the only reason ill upgrade a detector. If its better ill buy one. Ill be keeping the zed though.

From PA forum. https://rogermontgomery.com/codan-goes-from-strength-to-strength/

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All valid points.  You would not buy a GPX6000 if you had a GPX5000 and GPZ7000 unless the 6000 was significantly different in some way - a few extra bells and whistles over the 5000 will not cut it.

Over a year ago the Minelab project manager for the Equinox approached me in one of Adelaide's park lands while i was detecting with the Equinox and asked for my opinion on how the new machine was performing. One of my comments was that it was "enjoyable" to use. He recommended that i give the 6" coil a go - which i thought - yeah sure. But when i eventually purchased the smaller coil he was right - for where i was detecting it was the right coil that would sniff out targets in high junk areas. We also discussed the weight issue of the GPZ which he nodded knowingly to - he didn't try to defend the GPZ. So i am sure Minelab will have this as one of their high priorities to make the new machine as fun/easy to use as possible. The GPX 5000 is 10 years old and technology has progressed so much in this time surely there will be a significant change? - otherwise people will not bother to update.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just stuff a GPX in a fully waterproof Equinox housing for under a grand and I’ll be fine. :smile:

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Steve Herschbach said:

Just stuff a GPX in a fully waterproof Equinox housing for under a grand and I’ll be fine. :smile:

I’d take something like that in a minute.
I wonder if some of the talk from FT about a new prospecting machine, lightweight etc got Minelab’s attention and they are trying to get something comparable or exciting out rather quickly. Guess we wait and see. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want one, no really..... I don't.  My GPZ suits me fine, It's great and I've got a good range of coils for it so I'm closing my eyes and blocking my ears when this GPX comes out.

A little snippet out of that report indicates it won't be better than the GPZ but looks like it is going to be better than the GPX 5000 which you'd expect just by it's name alone.  It sounds like it'd be the end of the 4500 though.

"They will in September launch a new gold detector called GPX 6000 which will slot in just below the current top model GPZ 7000 and sell for around $8,000. The capabilities of this detector are slightly different from the top model and hence there should not be too much cannibalisation between the models."

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just when I step out of the hobby, they do something like that to perk my interest.  But still, the same thing would be true for me.  Can have the best machine in the world but it's not any good without places to go with it.   

 

With gold prices soaring at all time highs, it makes sense to release a new gold prospecting machine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/1/2020 at 9:12 AM, Steve Herschbach said:

Just stuff a GPX in a fully waterproof Equinox housing for under a grand and I’ll be fine. :smile:

Then you'll have 8 million prospectors swarming the gold fields and every last speck will be sucked up in 4 months. 😁

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I sold the Harley yesterday in anticipation of it happening 💰💰😎

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

  • Similar Content

    • By GhostLands
      Hey wassup guys!😀
      Theses are my last 3 hunts with my brand new GPX 5000! I have 4 coils : Commander 15x12 DD, Commander 11" Mono and Double-D, Coiltek 14" Mono Elite. 👍
      I only used the 11" Double-D and the Coiltek!
      I have been learning a few things with Gordon Heritage from UK! 
      These are all finds from areas where i hunted before with other machines! My main machine is the Equinox 800!
      I'm very pleased with the GPX!
       
      Cheers







    • By Steve Herschbach
      Abenson - “As you'll soon see in the video, The Tarsacci, Equinox and GPX can hold there own against each other. The only loser in the video is the Deus but it's out of it's element. Deus thrives in surface trash in my dirt not, deeper targets in trash. There's really no magic bullet when it comes to deeper iron masked targets.“ 
      Tarsacci vs Vista X vs Equinox for Park Hunting
      Tarsacci vs GPX vs TDI
       
    • By mn90403
      I've told myself for months it was time to go out with the 5000 and the Coiltek Platypus mono coil and try for some deep targets.  Last night was the night.  I think I learned more about my beach then I did about the detecting setup.
      This is the coil:
      https://www.seriousdetecting.com/product/coiltek-12-x-8-platypus-mono-300x220mm-for-minelab-sd-gp-gpx-series-detectors/
      I don't have any pictures of finds because it was all junk except for 2 pennies.  I went out to a low tide wet area where I never find much with the Equinox 800 and I didn't find much with this either.  I was going after deep targets and I got a few aluminum can bottoms at 15 inches plus.  I had my giant scoop for the task so I didn't have to give up on the targets like I would with an arm scoop.
      What I learned is that with these conditions there just wasn't a patch of targets in the 'staging area' waiting to be washed up on the shore.  Maybe they are farther out.
      I mostly used the 5000 in Salt/Gold and I was really able to go as high as I wanted with the gain.  (For about 20 minutes I used fine gold but it had a hum when I swung.)  I stayed around 16 for the 2 hours I hunted.  I used my harness that I got with the detector in 2010 and a hipstick but it is a heavy load for me right now.  It started to hurt my back between the heavy scoop and the detector.  I cancelled my long walk style that I do with the 800.  I was trying to go places where I would go with an AQ.  I may have learned enough to not want one of those now.
      I was impressed that the battery worked fine and has not been charged much since I got a Z for the desert.
      I'll use this setup again on a better conditioned beach that has more targets but it is just not that much better at depth for it to be my regular detector.
      Mitchel
    • By abenson
      Got out Saturday morning early to try and beat the heat but by 11 am it was pushing 90. Used my GPX with the 14" Coiltek DD coil and ran in Salt mode most of the time, used normal a while too but Salt was much quieter. Had to walk half a mile down the beach to get to where I wanted to hunt and found either my headphones or battery had an issue. The volume was real weak even at full volume, I dealt with it but had the wind been blowing I would have had to walk back. Later found out it was a battery issue, amp must be bad. I think it's time to get Docs gold screamer setup. I'm tired of spending $450 for batteries Minelab claims can't be repaired. This is the second battery in a year that has gone bad.
      I hunted the wet sand down to the waters edge. Based on all the swim cap buckles, I was in the right place but just couldn't pull up any gold. The Chinese cache coin was kind of cool and all the coins were older. 2 corroded wheat pennies, silver Roosevelt dime, Jefferson nickel, buffalo and what looks like a V-nickel or possible token. Everything I found is pictured with the exception of a long piece of copper wire and two iron blobs that I left in the garbage can. All of the targets were shovel head deep or deeper  
       

    • By South Padre Treasure
      Good Morning Treasure Detectives,
      My wife was kind enough to purchase for me a New Open Box GPX 4500, for putting up with her for 29 years.  Not exactly her version of this story. June 29 will be 29 years, where did the time go.
      Back to subject, it came with the mono and double d coils, but need advise on what coil that is waterproof would be good for saltwater beach. Thinking 15" or about similar size. I have used my Simi Eliptical Mono Commander on my TDI and got great results in wet sand area. but did not put under water, because its only water resistant not proof. I would like to be able to use in wading depth. Yes I know expensive machine for being around water. I have waterproofed my TDI SL and will waterproof the GPX as well. need the extra depth. Didn't know they would be releasing the AQ so soon. would have told wife to wait. I thought the AQ was a year down the road. Maybe on our 30th anniversary. Right now have to use what I have. Moderate mineralization beach looking for jewelry size targets.
      Any help would be greatly appreciated, Happy Hunting and Stay Safe and Healthy to all!
      Lonnie
    • By Steve Herschbach
      I have used the Minelab GPX 5000 since it was introduced, and in fact probably owned the first one in Alaska. I have used the Garrett ATX also since it came out with one of the first units off the production line. I have been putting this review off while I got to know the ATX. I now have over 100 hours on the detector in a variety of environments so the time has come.
      This metal detector comparison review was very challenging for me to write. It pits two very different yet very similar detectors against each other. In a way it is almost like discussing three detectors instead of two, and there is the issue of a huge price difference. I apologize for the length but this is a case where I wanted to be as thorough as possible on the subject. This is the review you will never see published in a magazine!
      In a way it is all about that price differential. If the two detectors were priced similarly there would be much less debate than is going to occur amongst people and a far easier buying decision for some to make. For me personally it really is a story of the Garrett ATX being two very different detectors at once and so I will start the review there.
      I have been metal detecting over forty years now, and metal detecting is very important in my life. Not a day goes by that I do not think about, write about, or actually go out metal detecting. Luckily for me a large chunk of my income is derived from metal detecting and so I can justify a collection of metal detectors for what I do. I engage in quite a few detecting activities and I strive to have the very best detector possible at my disposal for whatever it is I am doing. Because of this I am constantly on the look for new detectors that might help me in some way.
      However, now that the technology is maturing I have the bases pretty well covered. The only thing I was still looking for was a detector that satisfied me while water detecting in Hawaii. Every other detecting scenario I have covered to my satisfaction, but every time I hit the water in Hawaii I was left wanting something better than was available. The combination of salt water, volcanic rock, and military grade electrical interference is very challenging for any detector.
      What I generally want is a combination of stability and power with good ergonomics. The perfect detector should only signal on desired targets and nothing else, at good depth, while feeling good on my arm. I obviously reject detectors that get poor depth - these are usually the lower price detectors. Most top tier models are very competitive in the depth department. Other detectors I have put aside solely due to an inability to handle electrical interference. Fine machines otherwise, but unstable in an urban environment. Other detectors are too noisy in mineralized ground or too chatty in dense trash. And finally, some detectors are holdovers from the old days of heavy and clunky. I do not like detectors that make my arm hurt!
      I was therefore very excited when I heard the Garrett ATX was on the way. I was very familiar with its predecessor, the Garrett Infinium, which was tantalizingly close to my perfect Hawaii detector. Unfortunately the Infinium suffered in the stability department. I was also aware of the Garrett Recon Pro AML-1000 military demining detector. I was intrigued by its having a non-motion monotone search mode and wondered if that could be incorporated into a new improved "Infinium Pro" model. I not only had Hawaii in mind but started envisioning scenarios involving underwater sniping for gold employing a metal detector.
      Add to this that neither Minelab nor White's seemed interested in putting a waterproof ground balancing pulse induction metal detector in my hands. I never expected it would be Garrett that would come out with a second generation model based on the Infinium before anyone else got to first base.
      I have told you all this to explain what I was expecting and hoping for in the Garrett ATX. The fact is Garrett delivered with flying colors on my desires and the ATX is now one if the most important detectors in my collection. I have already paid for the detector with jewelry found and it is the Hawaii detector I always hoped for. Garrett ATX in Hawaii If we are talking about the Garrett ATX as a new waterproof detector for use on black sand or volcanic island beaches the review can end right here. The Garrett ATX is a superb detector for those conditions and well worth the money.
      There is only one fly in the ointment. If you look at the full page ads for the Garrett ATX it is clearly being marketed as a prospecting detector, and one pretty clearly aimed at Minelab's top end models. Specifically "The ATX performs head-to-head with the most expensive prospecting detectors in the world."
      ads by Amazon...
      Interestingly enough this idea was not even on my radar. I had always thought it was a huge mistake for the Infinium to be set up as direct competition for the high end Minelabs. Anyone involved in that remembers the hype and resulting disappointment and backlash. The Infinium eventually found its place but more as a water and relic hunting machine than a prospecting detector, although it is a capable enough unit. My hope was to avoid a similar scenario with the ATX. I do not like hype and prefer things to be under sold so people are pleasantly surprised when their expectations are exceeded. Hype leads to disappointment when inflated claims cannot be met.
      The reality here however is that Garrett has chosen to make prospecting the battlefield of choice. There is a lot of money at stake here for a lot of people, and so I am going to do my best here to compare the two units as dry land prospecting detectors. I think we can all agree that if you are looking at both the Garrett ATX and Minelab GPX 5000 and need the detector to be waterproof the Garrett ATX wins hands down.
      The funny thing here is that if Garrett was gunning for Minelab then in my opinion they went about it the wrong way. I get the distinct impression the design process was backwards. It was not a matter of "what do prospectors want in a metal detector?" I think it was "we have this housing on the shelf we developed at great expense to go after a military contract. We need to leverage our development cost by putting something in that housing we can sell to the public." In other words, I do not see any sign of design following function. All I see is a prospecting detector crammed in a box inappropriate for the desired end use. If Steve Jobs was into metal detectors he would be rolling in his grave. I will have to suffice instead by simply shaking my head at missed opportunity. I will explain more about that later.
      Let's set ergonomics aside though for now and just talk about straight up prospecting performance. How does the Garrett ATX fare against the Minelab GPX 5000 on gold in mineralized ground? I have done fairly extensive tests but I do have to throw in the caveat that the world is a big place and when you discuss prospecting detectors one truth is paramount. It is all about the ground mineralization and hot rocks. What works well in one place fails in another, and for this reason alone I cannot offer 100% assurances. I have spent a month traveling Western Australia detecting every day and so I am quite familiar with what prospectors face there. I am not about to begin to offer more than an opinion about how these two detectors fare in the worst Australian ground but I do think my conclusions will prove to be true. I can tell anyone right now knowing detectors the way I do that either machine will prove superior at certain locations given their differing capabilities.
      In a nutshell, the Garrett ATX has a ridiculously good circuit. The engineers at Garrett have done a superb job of producing a detector that out of box performs extremely well on a wide variety of gold in a wide variety of ground conditions. I tested both units in some very red mineralized soil, both outfitted with stock DD coils. The ATX comes with a 12" x 10" DD coil. The GPX 5000 comes with two coils, one of which is an 11" round DD coil and this is what I used. The nuggets ranged from 0.1 gram to 6.5 ounces.

      Test conditions
      The impression I was left with was definitely not how the GPX 5000 blows the ATX away but instead by how well the Garrett ATX does. It is impossible to not be impressed by how well the $2120 detector does when run head-to-head against a $5795 detector. Garrett has done a fantastic job and in my opinion their advertising claims are not off base. This is a serious prospecting circuit well worth consideration.
      The two detectors basically differ in the range of gold they find best. The Garrett ATX skews towards the smaller more commonly found gold nuggets. The Minelab GPX 5000 skews towards larger gold nuggets that tend to be the goal of professional prospectors. Out of box with similar coils the ATX will find small gold nuggets the GPX 5000 would normally miss without special coils and tuning tricks. It does this simply and with no fuss. However, in mineralized ground with similar coils the GPX easily bests the ATX on large nuggets. By large I mean one ounce and larger and by easily I mean by a margin of 10-15%. The GPX 5000 does this using a coil that in my case had never been on the detector before. Most Minelab users would never consider hobbling the detector by putting the 11" round DD coil on if hunting large nuggets at depth. It is informative therefore that even doing this in the interest of "fairness" and with nothing more than stock Normal timing with Gain bumped to 16 (out of 20) the Minelab GPX 5000 easily outperformed the Garrett ATX on a 6.5 ounce nugget. The ATX was at max Gain of 13 for the test.
      Now the depth differential here was only about two inches but I have to throw in the huge caution note again that it will vary depending on ground conditions. Absolute depth was about 17" ATX versus 19" GPX for good solid signals. The kind nobody can miss. Again, do not take these as some sort of magical numbers as ground conditions and even nugget shape and alloy could cause you to get some surprising differences. That is why I hate mentioning exact depths and differences in most cases and just stick to relative conclusions. But you are going to ask so there you go. For reference a Fisher Gold Bug Pro with 13" round DD coil and White's GMT with 14" elliptical DD both with settings jacked to the max were barely able to obtain this solid gold 6.5 ounce nugget at 12" in this ground and the GMT in particular would not really have been able to hunt maxed out the way it was.
      Depending on who is reading this the response may be "really, only two inches?" or "wow, two whole inches!" Similarly, it is interesting to see the GPX with DD coil scrub a little nugget with no signal that the ATX easily detects at a couple inches.
      This however does end up being my basic and not new finding by any means. Others have reported similar results. The ATX does better on small gold and the GPX on large straight out of box with stock DD coils.
      I do believe the GPX has more ability to handle more varied and more intense ground conditions and hot rocks due to its many adjustments. However, this is more a belief than a fact as so far the ATX has easily handled everything I have thrown at it, including salt water, basalt rocks, and electrical interference in Hawaii. Garrett does make use of a salient fact in its advertising. The ATX handles a wide range of conditions with deceptively few settings. This makes it very easy to set up and it avoids a common complaint with the GPX detectors. They are so complex people are often left wondering if they have the optimum settings for the conditions. I know for a fact from observation that many people tend to use timings that are too aggressive for the actual conditions when using a GPX. The tendency often is to find something that seems to work well and then to just default to that way if doing things, even if conditions change. To get the best performance out of a GPX does require that a person be somewhat of a tuning wizard.
      The bottom line for many more casual prospectors in the United States especially is that the Garrett ATX represents a fantastic value. It is truly impossible to say but in my case at least most of the gold I find in the US with my GPX an ATX would have found it also. In particular when hunting areas where bedrock is a foot or less the ground would have to be extremely hot indeed for the ATX to not only find what the GPX will but to have an edge on the more common small gold. Even in deeper ground as long as the gold is measured in grams and not ounces and the ground not extremely mineralized the ATX is going to be a close match with the GPX. Again, out of box with stock DD coils.
      Where the ATX is going to clearly come up short is on large nuggets, especially those sought after 1 ounce and larger nuggets at depth and on gold in the worst mineralized ground and hot rock locations. To be perfectly honest I feel my putting an 11" inch round DD coil on my GPX 5000 in the interest of being fair does not reflect for one second how I look for gold. I am not out there being fair, I am out there looking for gold. I will be running a larger mono coil with settings optimized for larger gold and then the difference in large gold performance between the ATX and GPX is even more pronounced. I would consider a 10-15% to be a bare minimum advantage gained while in effect running the GPX with its hands tied.
      I have not done comparisons on the iron discrimination systems but I find the method used by the ATX to be inherently more reassuring. The GPX reacts to shallow ferrous targets by blanking out, a sort of non response. The ATX has a momentary ferrous check that kicks in at the touch of a button, and that gives a low tone growl on iron, which provides a more nuanced and natural response expected by most detector users. I am not a big fan of using discrimination on either unit but I did find the ATX method more to my liking for confirming shallow ferrous stuff as trash that I already thought was trash due to the response. Note that on either detector the ferrous rejection only works on shallow items and only with a DD coil. The amount of rejection is adjustable on the GPX and preset on the ATX so more tests really need to be done in this regard to determine which is the more accurate and useful system.

      Minelab GPX 5000 and Garrett ATX (Minelab outfitted with optional Nugget Finder coil)
      I do own both detectors and there is a simple reality here. If I am going looking for gold in the water, be it jewelry or nuggets in a creek, I will grab the ATX. For any other prospecting, the vast majority of it, I will be using the GPX 5000. I am not sure where the line between casual and serious is, but I am way, way over on the serious side. I spend a great deal of time targeting and hunting deep ground looking in areas where very large nuggets have been found historically. Most of the ground I detect I am hunting because it has produced nuggets weighing a pound or more in the past. I hunt tailing piles a lot so bedrock is tens of feet down, and the gold can be at any depth from shallow to extremely deep.
      I think most professionals would tell you that small gold is what happens along the way while looking for the big stuff, and at the end of the day it is the big stuff or the lack of it that makes the difference. I found over thirteen ounces of nuggets metal detecting in 2013 which is no great sum of gold in my book, but well over half of it was in the form of two nuggets, one weighing 6.5 ounces and the other 2.37 ounces. Now in this case the ATX would have found both these nuggets. Yet I would not use anything but a Minelab GPX for what I am doing. I am spending a lot of valuable time going over ground that I may only get one shot at. I plan these things well in advance and not only time but good money is invested in taking my best shot at getting good results. I basically cannot afford to be running anything that I feel does not give me the best chance of delivering that make or break it big nugget. One nugget can make all the difference between a month of lackluster results and fantastic success.
      If both the Garrett ATX and Minelab GPX 5000 detectors had exactly identical electronic performance I would still be swinging the GPX. I am on one hand very impressed with the ATX as a nugget detector and on the other hand very disappointed by it. The up front decision to use the Recon AML-1000 housing is an automatic fail from a nugget detecting perspective in my opinion. It adds not only needless weight but weight that is very much an impediment in rough, uneven terrain. This is accentuated by a stock coil that is sensitive to knocks and bumps. It requires an extra level of coil control to manipulate the detector in such a way as to not produce excessive false signals. This differs from Minelab coils that basically do not false at all unless something is wrong with them. I would caution anyone using a detector the way I do that the ATX requires extra care as regards the possibility of repetitive motion injury. Trust me as somebody who detected too much one year and ignored the signs this is something to regard seriously. A harness is a must for weeks of long daily use of the ATX. I shudder to think about how the detector feels with the 20" long rear mounted mono coil hanging off the front. That is an ergonomic nightmare.
      The ATX features silicone lubricated battery door o-rings that collect dirt. The coil connectors also have o-ring seals and even worse delicate pin connectors subject to damage if not carefully lined up. The headphone connector is similar to the coil connectors. All these are required to make the detector waterproof and not only unneeded for normal dry land use but an impediment as regards serviceability in the field.
      The coils are sold as a unit with the telescoping rod assembly adding needless expense and weight and making carrying an extra coil around something to be avoided. The rear mount enables the ability of the detector to fold up but is another weak point from a serviceability aspect and ergonomically the worst way to mount a coil.
      I always considered ergonomics to be the easy low hanging fruit for anyone considering manufacture of a detector to compete with the Minelab PI series, and I am frankly amazed anyone could make something even heavier I am less excited about handling. It is an absolute fact I would put the GPX aside for an alternative, even if that alternative was next best in overall gold ability, if it offered a big advantage ergonomically. I in fact often do decline to "harness up" and set the GPX aside in favor of a lightweight VLF at times because I am just too tired or not in the mood. More importantly, in steep terrain bedrock is often shallow and so when hunting hillsides and slopes there really is no advantage to using a GPX in ground only inches deep.
      I would very gladly use a properly designed Garrett ATX instead of a Minelab GPX in many situations that I currently encounter. In particular areas where bedrock is less than a foot deep or in areas where large nuggets have historically never been seen. The only reason right now that is not going to happen is I do not want the ATX on my arm. Yes, the ATX has an inherent advantage on small gold but nothing I can't negate by putting on a small mono coil and running the GPX hot. No, in my opinion Garrett missed a major opportunity to wow somebody like me by putting a fantastic prospecting circuit in a package very inappropriate for the target audience.
      Metal detectors are tools. Now the fact is that for the average person Craftsman tools do just fine and represent good value. But the guy making his living with his toolbox is probably going to be investing in Snap-on tools. It is an apt analogy accentuated by the real performance difference that exists between the Garrett ATX and Minelab GPX detectors on the kind of gold most pros are looking for. The vast number of accessory coils and other aftermarket options on top of a well proven platform makes it an easy decision for the serious prospector. Minelab makes a tool designed specifically for a certain job. The Garrett ATX unfortunately I feel is a duck out of water when employed for normal prospecting uses.
      I do have to say my hat is off to Garrett for producing a detector that is the first to really give Minelab a run for the money. I hope they do follow up and produce a model expressly designed from the ground up as a dry land prospecting machine. It may well become my primary prospecting detector if they do so. If you have read this review carefully you should understand the issues involved. For many people wanting maximum bang for the buck a Garrett ATX straight up and used properly is a real bargain in a PI prospecting machine. It can and will find gold and find it very well. The guys like me (you know who you are) that probably already have a Minelab PI plus extra coils, batteries and so forth can continue waiting for the next big thing in nugget detecting. You may also consider the Garrett for exactly the reason I did. It is waterproof, and currently is the closest thing you can get to a Minelab PI in a waterproof package.
      In closing I am curious to see how both detectors do for me this year. The ATX has the lead with about 2.5 ounces of gold and platinum jewelry found so far. I plan on using it often to hunt jewelry every chance I get in 2014. The GPX I will once again be taking to Alaska for a couple months of nugget detecting which may or may not pay off with a large nugget found. I will be hunting the right places but large gold is rare almost anywhere you go. Given the lead the ATX already has the GPX has its work cut out for it so it should make for an interesting year. For those of you trying to decide between these two very fine metal detectors I can only sympathize and count my blessings for not having to make such decisions. However, I hope this helps you with your decision because I have done my best to try and do just that. Good luck and good hunting!
      2020 Note: Since this review was written in 2014 the price for the ATX was remained the same, while the price for the Minelab GPX 4500 and GPX 5000 have both come down considerably. This does change the value proposition offered by the Garrett ATX, especially as regards the Minelab GPX 4500, which can now be had for only a few hundred dollars more than an ATX.
      Detailed information on the Garrett ATX
      Detailed information on the Minelab GPX 5000
      Great video by another party (a Garrett dealer) confirming the above results at another location with a different large nugget....
       
×
×
  • Create New...