Jump to content

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, mn90403 said:

Of course there is new tech.  Bring it on.  Every nugget JP finds in his flogged patches or Gerry finds in his flogged patches proves the new tech works better.  There should be new tech.  It becomes tedious to go over and over patches again just to find 'missed' nuggets.  Will the 6000 get every nugget?  I wouldn't bet on that.  There will be another generation of detector that will get the few still unseen nuggets because that will be the only game in town then also.  Jason is very much aware of the law of diminishing return.

What is the old adage used by sales people and people in general ... 20% of the people get 80% of the sales ... so 10% of the expert detectorists get 40-50-60% of the nuggets?  Luck has some connection to the nugget formula as Fred Mason told me often.

I'd rather be lucky than good.  It was easier to be lucky in the past. 

It really is what they claim.It's a magic wand

  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 316
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

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

Minelab is basically just trying to create their own social media. That's what "detexperts" are, and that's why they are choosing their own no-name relic hunting channels to give exclusive looks into

I think these pictures sum up the GPX 6000 very concisely and also how I feel about those people who continue to suggest my input is biased or just marketing hype!! Tiny piece at stupid depth for

Posted Images

Different tools for different jobs.  We all know that wrenches come in different sizes and we all know the adjustable wrench sucks the most. So who wants an adjustable wrench metal detector? That’s why we have lots of different options.  It’s the nature of metal detecting technology.  The 6000 is just another wrench for a different job.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, afreakofnature said:

So who wants an adjustable wrench metal detector?

Me. With electronics, I reject the premise, which is that multiple functions cannot be implemented as well in a single device, as in many. I’ve gone from needing at least six detectors to now needing three. The Equinox had a lot to do with that. The 6000 for me takes it down one more machine, as with the 6000 I no longer feel I need a hot VLF like the Gold Monster, 24K, or Gold Bug 2. So I sold the 24K. If I need disc while nugget hunting, the Equinox covers it. The 6000 will also probably serve as my Tahoe beach detector, which previously I’d been trying the Impulse AQ. After looking at the situation, I started selling off excess machines again a few months ago. Not counting machines I’m playing with, I’ll be relying on three detectors going forward. GPX 6000 (nuggets and beach), Equinox 800 (everything), and DFX (to run Bigfoot coil).

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, afreakofnature said:

We all know that wrenches come in different sizes and we all know the adjustable wrench sucks the most.

Try telling that to the people who used it as a hammer (and a pry bar, and...).  :biggrin:

5 minutes ago, afreakofnature said:

So who wants an adjustable wrench metal detector?

Isn't that what the Equinox is in the IB/VLF space?

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well let me add this. Most people who use an adjustable wrench are just doing around the house projects. But if you’re fixing an engine you’re not using an adjustable wrench. At least a professional I don’t think would use one.  I don’t think that the 6000 is an adjustable wrench. It just fits into the niche of tools that we all use.  But with that being said I don’t know many people who have a full set of wrenches that have a cost them over $20,000 to get them all 😂.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, mn90403 said:

This was proven to me quite conclusively at one of Gerry's metal detecting classes.  He took several different detectors, gold nuggets and specimens and passed them over the different coils in AIR TESTS and not all the nuggets could be seen.  You can only imagine what is not seen by even the best detectorists with some salt and mineralization.

Mitchel, 

Great post about gold detectors. I also attended Gerry's classes, many times in the past, and his AIR TESTS proved to the entire class at Rye Patch that you need more than one detector to find all of the different types/sizes of nuggets(tiny, specimen, crystalline, wiry, paper thin, 1+ ounce, etc.) He had the GPZ, GPX 5000, SDC and a GBII with a small coil that detected a nugget at almost 2'. Maybe that's why I bought several detectors from him over the years.😀

Best training ever!

Bill 

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

The 6000 for me takes it down one more machine, as with the 6000 I no longer feel I need a hot VLF like the Gold Monster, 24K, or Gold Bug 2. 

Were you able to get a 6000 and get it into the field Steve?

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/6/2021 at 4:49 AM, geof_junk said:

Just remember that testers will tell the truth but being tied to ML it will be stupid of them to indicate the faults in a disapproving way.

 

4 hours ago, jasong said:

Were you able to get a 6000 and get it into the field Steve?

As far as I know I can neither confirm nor deny that question. I will reveal now I was involved with Vanquish, but after Equinox I kind of decided it’s pointless for testers to get involved in direct release commentary. I put in huge effort, and took not a small amount of risk to get people early info on Equinox, but looking back I unfortunately remember the rocks that were tossed my way when I said Equinox was the real deal. Just another shill, after over twenty years of accurate reports. Funny those same people now agree it was a game changer, but I’m still the suspect one? How does one fight being accused of lying by omission? I'm guilty for what I've never said, but that someone imagines I should have said? Basically, it's either be a calabash style "basher" (it's in the name even :smile:), or be accused of being a shill. It puts a guy off the entire exercise, as despite rumor to the contrary, Minelab does not require testers to ever say a thing. Just the opposite really. It seems best when I just stay in the background, and stick to posting photos, specs, manuals, and other general info.

How about this? The GPX 6000 has no threshold adjustment (just on or off) for $6000.00. No coil smaller than 11" round, only three coils (one that can’t be had yet), no disc. That's makes it shite, no reason for anyone to buy one. Minelab says the GPZ is still top dog anyway, so the right combo of prior models is all you need. There you go. I can take a piss if that’s what people prefer. Maybe I have street cred now. :laugh:

You’ve said it’s a simple equation for you Jason, ergonomics do not matter to you, only pure power, plain and simple. I see no reason why a guy with a GPZ with full coil complement would be considering a machine that Minelab says is a step down from a GPZ. Other than that you are conjecturing that the machine is better than Minelab has let on, because we know they have a long history of understating things? Or something to that effect, that maybe there is some niche where the machine will best a GPZ? That’s honestly something I can say about the Gold Monster versus GPZ, so why would the 6000 be any different? Salt mode exists on the GPX 5000, and why would that not work on the salt areas where that is an issue? There are even salt coils made for the 5000. SDC has a salt mode - who uses it? Have these possibilities been exhausted? It’s not like the capability does not already exist.

The GPX 6000 is packaging its own performance mix, but none of it cannot be achieved by at least one other machine set up right. It does get dicey trying to compare small gold performance. Nobody is saying the SDC 2300 is bad at small gold, but the chart below gives only one star. Well, think about it, SDC 8" mono versus 6000 new type 11" coil. Might the 6000 be getting similar size gold, but just a little deeper across the board due to the coil? These are the things that go into the charts, not a basic this inches versus that inches. It's a sales guide intended to help sales people ask some simple questions that direct people to a better choice. The trickery and games people assume are counterproductive to getting people into the proper machine for what they are actually doing. That creates happy customers, not tricking them into buying things they do not need.

Minelab has made zero claims of new absolute performance benchmarks, though again, it gets fuzzy in small gold land, where we are dealing in millimeters, not inches of depth. Minelab are just saying there is more gold finding capability packed into a couple groups of settings with the 6000 than exists on a 5000 in any one setting, that might better suit a lot of people than some of the other options. Number one clue about the chart below... only Minelab coils figure into the equation, and aftermarket coils can change the equation.

minelab-gpx-6000-relative-performance-chart.jpg

I could make a sales pitch to you on the GPX 6000, but every discussion with you comes back to efficiency. Do you need a 6000 for salt areas, really, even if it kills salt signal completely? What effect does killing salt signal completely have on depth - are you really ahead, or better off at a crawl with no salt setting? Are you going to find enough extra to make that worth the extra machine and it’s cost - and the time spent finding out maybe those salt areas are not hiding as much as thought? That’s really not a machine question, but a strategy calculus. In general, saying all you’ve said, with a GPZ and full coil complement....... even Minelab is not saying you need the 6000. You seem well covered for your situation.

Me, I am at the point where efficiency matters less than just having a damn good time. I like puttering with new things, even if I’m not finding much. That means I use what I like, and I’m not worrying one way or another over an inch. I do well enough to make me happy, and that’s all that matters. So a different perspective and reasons for needing a detector from yours. The GPX 6000 could have been custom made for me, and actually was in a tiny way. That being the case, it should surprise nobody, that just like Equinox, I’m GPX 6000 fan number 1. But maybe that enthusiasm makes me a poor candidate for the type of reporting most people seem to crave. Me, I’m more the giddy kid with a new toy, and don’t need anyone bringing me down. Life is good. :smile:

The general consensus, which I can’t disagree with, is people wait about six months after release, to collect reviews from regular purchasing consumers.

  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, well thanks for taking the time to type that all out.

It was reasonable for me to wonder that if with new and unknown GeoSense, a brand new DD "unlike any other DD", and fairly top of the line modern signal processing circuitry that there might be some gains over 6-15 year old technology. That was the basis for my question, and it was a reasonable question to ask.

I'm sorry you took flak for the Equinox, but I definitely wasn't one of those people. Just to be clear there. I'll move on, no intentions on bringing anyone down. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

You are not bringing me down at all Jason, and I never claimed you gave me any flak. Your questions are entirely reasonable, as are people’s desires to get what they perceive as totally unbiased reporting. What that means is you are the better candidate than I to be doing a bunch of critical comparative performance testing. I’ve already told you what I think, and don’t have anything to add at this time. The problem with honesty is it does not deliver the black and white answers people crave. Reality is a bit more of a bummer, in that nuance and gray areas rule. Everyone has their own set of needs, and different machines match those needs differently for different people. I’m willing to ditch the GPZ 7000 for the GPX 6000, and JP is not. Why? JP pays bills with gold, and in his opinion the GPZ 7000 is what he has to use as a primary machine. Other machines like the 6000 are secondary for him. That seems equivalent to your situation. Me, I made the move from paying bills with gold, to being a casual detectorist. So I’m more in the boat with a different crowd than you. That’s the basis for my opinion, but it’s nothing more than that... my opinion. Some people I’ve just told them they should get a GPX 6000, no worries. You are a more serious operator, as are many here, and I’m not going to assume I know your business better than you do yourself.

In my opinion, if everyone would just read all the Minelab info, including the star chart, and accept that it is all ballpark accurate, a lot of this fuss could be avoided. Some of the star chart positioning does involve intangibles, like will easier learning make for better operators. It simply is what they say it is, no big mystery, but like everything when you try to be simplistic, a little wiggle room is left on the table. From what I’ve seen, Minelab has nailed the positioning here very well, below GPZ 7000 but above the rest. But do not beat me up if somebody finds gold with a Gold Monster that a 6000 will not see, $900 versus $6000. That could happen, so does that make the Monster the better machine? Maybe, for some people, especially those with small gold and a ton of trash. In a trash pit, the Monster operator could wipe the street with the 6000 owner. The world is not black and white, and almost every machine has a tiny area that it really excels at, where others are weak.

As far as Geosense, we know the GPX 6000 has far fewer settings than the GPX 5000, yet it claims better performance across the board. People say that can't be done with fewer controls. What if the machine was reading the ground and adjusting the timings for you, instead of requiring you to somehow know what the ground and gold is like before you've even started? I'll never claim I really know how Geosense works, but it should be obvious that it is this feature that allows for so many settings to be removed. Part of our thinking on how to choose a proper 5000 timing has been built into the 6000, so we do not have to make that choice. With the 5000 odds are casual operators are not tuned for optimum performance. This is hard to do with the 6000... you'd actually have to purposefully misadjust it.

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 2
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 Steve Herschbach
      ....... is that they lack any Geosense!  Sorry, could not resist, just having too much fun with this.

    • By 1515Art
      If this has been posted here already I missed it, sorry.
      But, wow... 
       
    • By mn90403
      Get a GPX 6000 to use on your old patches before someone else does!  You will be glad you did.
    • By Steve Herschbach
      I was on the team, as were Nenad and JP. Any others here? In any case, if you have specific questions about the GPX 6000, ask away, and get straight answers. If it violates our NDA expect to be told so. In general, Minelab simply does not want how they make the sausage advertised to one and all. So don’t ask about how the sausage got made, or why it tastes like it does. That part is done, and we can’t talk about it anyway. Is the machine perfect? No. But I’ll tell you what, it’s a sweetie for sure. I smell a detector classic, simple, to the point, powerful, gets the job done. That being the case, everyone who took part in it is pretty proud of the final effort. My part was modest, I’m sure, but I for one will be bragging about it for as long as I’m around. Congratulations to Minelab and the entire team. My special thanks to Eng and Simon. 👍🏼
      So any questions about the best little detector ever (just go with it)?  Yes, I do think that if a person can afford it, then this machine is the machine to have right now for the U.S. If you are like me, you can ditch everything else, use the GPX 6000 exclusively, and be a nugget slayer. Add a Gold Monster or Equinox 800 with discrimination for nugget detecting perfection.
       


      Minelab GPX 6000 Data & Reviews
      Minelab GPX 6000 Accessories and Spare Parts
      Minelab GPX 6000 Owner’s Manual
    • By Steve Herschbach
      More on coils. The tops are just to shed debris and attach to detector.
      GPX11 mono, exactly 11" diameter, 562 grams coil and cable only (no scuff cover or coil bolt)

      Minelab GPX11 mono coil underside
      GPX14 DD, exactly 14" diameter, 892 grams coil and cable only

      Minelab GPX14 coil underside
      GPX17 mono, exactly 17" x 13", 802 grams coil and cable only

      Minelab GPX17 coil underside
      GPX 6000 lower rod
      21.5" long, 17.7 mm (0.70 in) diameter tube, 1 mm wall thickness, end 0.90 in width, round washer part# 4005-0117

      I've suggested to steveg that a 24" rod would be a nice option. Have to take care of the tall people! 
      Minelab GPX 6000 Data & Reviews
      Minelab GPX 6000 Accessories and Spare Parts
      Minelab GPX 6000 Owner’s Manual
×
×
  • Create New...