Minelab Detector Performance Chart - Quick Question

[Erik Oostra]

Why don't most of these detectors perform too great on 10 and 100 gram nuggets? This doesn't make much sense to me, I thought that on nuggets this size they'd be real screamers.. 

[Mike C...]

I wouldnt put to much attenion on the chart info-I had a sdc 2300 and put it over some of my old beat up patches that I hunted  to death with my 5000 and a few other beepers over the years hoping to find a bunch of nuggets missed guess what none at some and only a bit here and there-I have a 3-4 grain nugget on a poker chip I use for testing-the sdc hit at about 2-3 inches while my 5000 hit it at about 5-6 inches-I no longer have the sdc-IMO alot of sales hype-I hope the 6000 lives up to its chart hype-Time will tell 

[Jeff McClendon]

1 hour ago, Erik Oostra said:

Why don't most of these detectors perform too great on 10 and 100 gram nuggets? This doesn't make much sense to me, I thought that on nuggets this size they'd be real screamers.. 

Not always but generally, larger/heavier gold will often be deeper. If it isn’t, then all of the detectors on that sales chart will do just fine. The Goldmonster 1000 is limited by its available coil sizes and 45kHz VLF detection type and will only go as deep as its small coils and soil mineralization will allow. Even though the SDC 2300 is a pulse induction detector, its stock configuration (8” mono coil) limits it depth wise as does its inability to deal with extreme mineralization. The GPX 5000 got the short straw on that chart in my opinion since it is so versatile coil wise and settings wise. It does much better on deeper and smaller gold than that chart shows.

[geof_junk]

The chart is to sell GPX6000 and not harm the GPZ7000. So if I was selling the 6000 I would show it best features (getting 1.0 to 0.05 gram bits at depth.) and show the 7000  best features (getting 1.0 to 100 gram lumps at depth.) This would be done by putting the bits as deep as the 6000 can get them, of cause at that depth the others detectors are out of range.

[Erik Oostra]

1 hour ago, Jeff McClendon said:

The GPX 5000 got the short straw on that chart in my opinion since it is so versatile coil wise and settings wise.

I'm glad you said that Jeff, I bought a GPX 5000 just before the GPX 6000 was released and had come to believe that Minelab was breaking my heart on purpose! 

[Valens Legacy]

So why isn't the 800 on that list? I thought it was a good gold detector also.

Just asking for the difference on them.

[Erik Oostra]

18 minutes ago, Valens Legacy said:

So why isn't the 800 on that list?

Good point! It would be interesting to see how it matches up with the other detectors on the chart seeing it's also a VLF detector like the Gold Monster.. Maybe Minelab doesn't consider it a true 'gold' detector but rather an all rounder.. 

[Jeff McClendon]

33 minutes ago, Valens Legacy said:

So why isn't the 800 on that list? I thought it was a good gold detector also.

Just asking for the difference on them.

Minelab marketing...............They can't market the Multi IQ Equinox as a gold detector. It would directly compete with (and outperform) the Goldmonster 1000 and even to some extent it will out perform the SDC 2300 especially with that new Coiltek 10X5" coil. 

You can check out the detector categories on Minelab's website, at Nuggetshooter or on Rob's Detectors for instance and the Equinox will be included in every category of detectors =all terrain, coin and jewelry, relic, underwater.........but not in gold prospecting. Bill and Rob know how good the Equinox is on small gold in high mineralization. Their hands are tied marketing wise.

[Northeast]

3 hours ago, Jeff McClendon said:

Even though the SDC 2300 is a pulse induction detector, its stock configuration (8” mono coil) limits it depth wise as does its inability to deal with extreme mineralization.

I’d have to disagree with the second part of your comment. I’ve found the SDC an absolute beast with regard to handling mineralisation.  Better than the GPZ 7000 and QED.  I’ve never directly compared it to a 5000.  I thought everyone found it ridiculously good in mineralised ground/hot rocks?  
 

Small stock coil is certainly a limitation on depth although I thought the timings that it ran also contributed to this? 
 

Eric - I hope that within 3 weeks I can provide some feedback to undug gold signals compared with the 7000, 6000, 5000, SDC and Equinox.   I’ll have to think about my chart symbols  💥 💣 ⛱️ 😃

[Gold Catcher]

8 hours ago, Jeff McClendon said:

Even though the SDC 2300 is a pulse induction detector, its stock configuration (8” mono coil) limits it depth wise as does its inability to deal with extreme mineralization.

I have to agree with Northeast's comments. The SDC is designed for shallow gold in highly mineralized ground and it deals with mineralization exceptionally well, better probably than any other machine. And it is actually respectable with somewhat deeper targets too despite the small coil size and ultrafast timings. You just have to listed to the faint warbles which can be tricky to hear since the threshold can be rather unstable at higher sensitivities. Therefore, for deeper targets I usually never go above 2 and do noise cancelling often. The more stable the threshold will be the better you will hear deeper stuff, gain 2 suffices for that, combined with a booster. It will be very interesting to compare the SDC with the 6000/11 with respect to handling mineralization.