Minelab GPX 6000 Full Reveal In February 2021?

[Lunk]

The big RV show is over, so it's not too bad now.

[jasong]

2 hours ago, Gold Catcher said:

I wonder how the 17 mono will perform in mineralized grounds. Most gold bearing grounds are mineralized, so probably not much of a competitor with the GPZ14. Perhaps more intended for African deserts?

Opposite. Bigger coils are better in mineralized ground (both for PI and the GPZ). Worse in salt (conductive) grounds.

20 minutes ago, Lunk said:

“it rapidly suppresses unwanted signals via three overlapping feedback systems for superfast detection of even the tiniest gold pieces.”

I'm guessing something along the lines of auto adjustment of sensitivity, ground tracking, and EMI cancellation? I'm curious how static the timings are. In other words, does Normal go "a little more Normal here, a little less Normal there" as you move along too? Or is such a thing possible?

[Swegin]

4 minutes ago, Lunk said:

The big RV show is over, so it's not too bad now.

Thank you.  Maybe I'll make the drive on Saturday.   

[jasong]

Since prices have been released now can someone ask in Quartzsite if we know what the MSRP on the 17" coil will be and when we might expect US availability?

[Lunk]

4 minutes ago, jasong said:

Opposite. Bigger coils are better in mineralized ground (both for PI and the GPZ). Worse in salt (conductive) grounds.

I'm guessing something along the lines of auto adjustment of sensitivity, ground tracking, and EMI cancellation? I'm curious how static the timings are. In other words, does Normal go "a little more Normal here, a little less Normal there" as you move along too? Or is such a thing possible?

That seems to be the speculative consensus, as unwanted signals include EMI and ground noise, both localized and variable.

[Gold Catcher]

2 hours ago, jasong said:

Opposite. Bigger coils are better in mineralized ground (both for PI and the GPZ). Worse in salt (conductive) grounds

I was referring to the fact that it is a monoloop. Only in low mineralized ground a big mono will have an edge in depth. In mineralized soil, they don't perform that well as the DD or Super-D.

"The magnetic strength to cause noticeable saturation to a sensitive metal detector depends on the magnetic chemical. Most of the superparamagnetic particles found in the goldfields require intense fields to cause saturation whereas, ironically, some more benign mineralised soils saturate more easily, and thus may cause worse spurious signals than the highly mineralised goldfields. Double-D coils are excellent for suppressing the effects of near-surface saturation, whereas mono-loops are poor at this. Thus, this saturation can most easily be noticed when using a mono-loop coil as one “pumps” the coil up and down, causing varying field strength in the soil"

[Northeast]

I wonder if Minelab have learnt something through the aftermarket Coiltek 15” coil on the SDC. 
 

That is a big mono (bigger than intended for the SDC anyway) that stills somehow retains the secret sauce for working in mineralised ground and is still crazy sensitive to small gold. 
 

If the 6000 is running some of that secret sauce then who knows what is possible.  
 

Of course there are people that could tell us but they are gagged. C’mon Minelab, let the speakers speak  😩

 

At the moment the rest of us are just making stuff up  🤪🤦‍♂️

[Gold Catcher]

Do you have experience with the Coiltek 15 on the SDC? I like the 8 because it's just perfect for small gold with the MPF timings. Just wondering how this would translate to a larger mono loop. And then of course there is the  6000 11 in /17 in mono loop performance anticipation...

[jasong]

2 hours ago, Gold Catcher said:

I was referring to the fact that it is a monoloop. 

You asked specifically about the 17" mono size in relation to the Z14 though, not the stock 11" mono. My point is that when it comes to monos in bad ground you have to take size in account because it makes a huge difference. Ground which a 10" mono struggles in can be fairly easy to work with an 18" mono for instance. And in some mineralized ground, depending on nuggets and mineralization, a 18" mono will get better depth on similar nuggets as a 18" DD.

So since you asked about the 17" mono and not the 11" mono in reference to mineralized ground, I'm telling you that if anything, the 17" will do better in comparison to the Z14 in bad ground than the 11" will do. And thus there is no reason to assume it's mostly intended for the Africa

2 hours ago, Gold Catcher said:

Only in low mineralized ground a big mono will have an edge in depth. In mineralized soil, they don't perform that well as the DD or Super-D.

Not true, depends on size of coils compared again and level of mineralization. 

And since the 6000 has GeoSense, that puts another variable in the loop.

[Northeast]

4 minutes ago, Gold Catcher said:

Do you have experience with the Coiltek 15 on the SDC?

Yep.  Brother in law got an SDC for Western Australia (lives there) but brought it across to Vic for Christmas 2019.  He had only just got the larger Coiltek and was giving it its first run. 
 

We hit a little flogged patch that I’d already done with a stock SDC and the GPZ.  First 5 minutes I found a tiny piece - crazy small. And this is a spot that has bad red clay and hot rocks that I’d struggled with a little bit with the Z.  We were both pretty impressed with the larger coil and he has since gone on to find quite a few small pieces and speccies back in WA.  
 

And so much better ground cover  👍