Jump to content

Official Minelab GPX 6000 Page


Recommended Posts

21 hours ago, Jonathan Porter said:

The 6000 does what the 5000 can do depth wise on larger gold even slightly better, but what’s the point of providing it that way to the market when there is already something much better out there for that purpose in the form of the 7000? Hence the 17” elliptical coil rather than say an 18” round monoloop.

A 17” elliptical will be a very good coverage coil for prospecting purposes with pretty good depth on larger pieces, but it is not about outright depth, you have ZVT for that. The GPX 6000 with the largest coil you care too put on can never attain the depth of the 7000 with its standard coil!! Having a lightweight coil with 17 inches of coverage with the sensitivity to snag a 0.01 gm piece is nigh on diabolical, this concept will take shape once operators get their hands on them.

Ergonomically the 6000 is brilliant with the supplied standard 11” mono coil, that coil size is perfect for one handed operation with nil support devices unless you are unused to detecting. The standard 11” coil has the ability, if you care to invest the energy, to find tiny pieces right down to the ‘wet your finger to pick it up’ GM 1000 level!! 

So this then begs the question, what is the GPX 6000 good for? I very quickly learned to target a specific type of environment to maximise the 6000 benefits. The first and key approach was to target old areas were I’d previously found multiple targets within 100mm of the surface, in almost all cases I tend to stick to ground where bedrock is visible and work out from there but mainly sticking to ground up to or around the 12” mark as the targets the 6000 is VERY good at reside at less than those depths (inverse square law).

Hot ground is not a problem (usually the shallow gravels are more mineralised as the top layer has been washed or blown away), If the ground becomes problematic due to conductive signals or salt signals or EMI then I revert to the DD coil and use that option (truly amazing sensitivity to tiny surface targets using the DD), I will however tend to stick to ground less than 10 inches as the depth is less with the DD relative to target size. The bulk of the gold I find with the 6000 is in the sub gram range but I have hit on some pretty decent stuff whilst out and about thanks to the good outright depth of the tech, this is reassuring as often decent targets are found due to time spent and the ground covered during that time, so its nice to know if you get your coil over a decent nugget or speci at depth then your in with a chance. 

The 6000 is not a tiny gold only detector, but operators can only swing one detector at a time, there will be a cross over on some target sizes between the various techs (SDC and GPZ), however what it does do it does exceptionally well as such there will be a pretty decent range of targets that it outperforms everything on. It is nice to know while your taking advantage of the tech behind the GPX it can still compete with its predecessors and also the modern big guns. 

JP

Thanks for the valuable insight.  Since the 6000 does so well on small gold, does it improve the performance on porous or prickly gold that often gave the 5000 difficulties?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


On 4/6/2021 at 10:40 AM, jasong said:

 I never met anyone in the field who was swinging the 5000 without a bungee, other than patch cleaning where one stayed in the same place and set the machine down often, or using stuff like Sadie's.

 

I never use a bungee with my 5000-Im already tethered up enough with the power cord-I dont use a sadie-but I dont use anything bigger than a 17 coil either :ph34r:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Mike C... said:

I never use a bungee with my 5000-Im already tethered up enough with the power cord-I dont use a sadie-but I dont use anything bigger than a 17 coil either :ph34r:

Same, never use a bungee.  Only time I can remember clipping it on in the last few years was with the NF 25” DD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It occurs to me that the lighter shaft on the 6000 is going to shave weight in a critical area towards the coil end too, and that might just make all the difference (especially when I'm comparing weights to the GPZ in my head and how different coil weights on it feel), so I shouldn't just be considering the coil weight alone since the 6000 is bringing better carbon fiber shaft design to the table.

But you two supermen are outliers. Most average detectorists used/still use a bungee on the 4500 and 5000 on anything around the 11" (800ish grams) or larger for all day detects outside of patches. Including myself.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know about the 5000,  but all 7000/14 users I know use a bungee. I even use one for the SDC when I detect for longer, also to keep the coil control as good as I can. I can do without, but the coil control will decline over time. But the ergonomics matter much more than the weight, so the 6000 might be fine without bungee, or at least fine for longer. But weight aside, I love my hipstick so much that I would never go without it. It makes everything so easy without the need for a heavy harness, especially in the heat. Even the GM with hipstick is nice after many hours swinging.🤣

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

GPZ with 14, I do use a bungy. I can detect without one, but I can feel things after a while

GPZ with 12" NF coil, I haven't used a bungy yet, but haven't done longer than a 3hr stint

GPX4500/5000 with 12" Evo or smaller - no bungy. I will use one with 15" coils or bigger 

6000 with 11" Coil - no bungy. Balance is indeed excellent. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, PhaseTech said:

6000 with 11" Coil - no bungy. Balance is indeed excellent. 

Which means you’ve used one.  Tell us more  😜

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Northeast said:

Which means you’ve used one.  Tell us more  😜

Come on Nenad.   Spill a few beans 🤐🤐🤐🤐🤐

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A potential look forward past the 6000 here. I just took a look at whatever Minelab had published recently in the patent arena and I thought I'd distill it down to a few simple paragraphs since these patents are quite complicated to read.

(pdf direct download warning) Here's a real new one, just published basically last week. This one mentions gold nuggets specifically as targets, seems made just for gold machines, and concentrates on further decreasing the decay time in order to increase sensitivity to smaller stuff. It may be related to the 6000 (they say it can be used for DD coils), but the way it's written seems like it's intended for a new ZVT machine as the primary use as ZVT tech seems to be the focus.

There is mention of nulling out (my term) salt/conductive soils.

(pdf direct download warning) Here's another one, slightly less recent. This one has to do with depth determination and automatically altering controls/timings/ground balance based on depth determination target feedback as you detect, and sounds a bit like GeoSense except directly applied to maximize target detection depth constantly and showing the user exactly how each setting combination performs depth-wise on different targets. So, there is two components - determining depth via SNR, and automatically adjusting the timings/etc to maximize sensitivity and depth based on that info.

A user is allowed to select different target types. Which makes me wonder if you can maximize gold, can you minimize sensitivity to iron? Or does the target type only apply to VLFs?

This second patent appears to be general in the sense they say it can apply to ZVT, PI, and VLF. Though, the test targets used are coins in the graphs. But gold nuggets are also mentioned as a potential target. Also, they talk about giving the user the information directly to the screen to use manually (if I understand correctly), which means it's probably intended for a flagship level machine where users want a bit more control - since any lower level machines are eliminating controls and information right now.

Careful coil design sounds fairly critical for some of this.

----

Distilled even further for simplicity: I think it could be likely based on these and prior patents, a new ZVT machine is on the way, and it (and maybe some coin/relic machines too) will be built to maximize depth via a GeoSense-type method, plus will provide real time depth information to the user on the screen to adjust settings manually or to simply monitor for information. Also, a newer ZVT machine may have some increased ability to deal with salt, as well as have increased sensitivity to smaller/speci gold.

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A good review of Minelabs current patent applications & you are correct - they are a hard read. Minelab have applied for 4 patents so far his year (6 last year) so they are definitely serious about keeping ahead of the pack and not becoming a sitting duck in business by resting on their laurels.

sitduck.jpg

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
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
×
×
  • Create New...