GPX 6000 - Emi Troubles - Some Data For Minelab?

[geof_junk]

I consider restrictive devices are only price gouging. They are restricting known technology ie. coil designs so they can have an unfair fight with other manufactures. All they are doing is protecting non patented products to make profit from their loyal customers .

🤬      

[Skookum]

So, are all of you without EMI issues running with lower gains? Is anyone running Auto+ Normal? I can see that it may require lower sensitivity at times and places. With the similar design nod to the Gold Monster, I was anticipating that auto settings might work somewhat similarly. The Monster is pretty awesome at picking the right gain in either Auto 1 or 2.

I do think it would be nice to have the speaker not interfere. I hope the decision was made because there was really no other viable solution and not simply because the designers were only using headphones. 😅

All that said, it’s fun to be testing it out. There are many more hours to put in before making any personal decisions.

[Gold Catcher]

Running Auto 1/Normal, headphones

[Norvic]

Mostly run patch hunting Auto+/normal/"no threshold", Torus speakers.

[Norvic]

My understanding and experience of the 2 Auto sensitivity settings is the 6K automatically sets the sensitivity to suit the ground, so far I cannot fault that function and believe it is that function in conjunction with Geosense that makes the 6K the magic machine it is. But to add some context I am very fortunate to detect in a remote area that has only natural EMI and very little man made EMI.

[Skookum]

Had a second session, but using headphones, today. There is still a little chatter in Auto 2 Difficult, but much less than with the speaker and totally doable. 

[Jonathan Porter]

On 7/10/2021 at 11:00 AM, geof_junk said:

I consider restrictive devices are only price gouging. They are restricting known technology ie. coil designs so they can have an unfair fight with other manufactures. All they are doing is protecting non patented products to make profit from their loyal customers .

🤬      

That throw away comment is simply astounding. For your statement to be true you would also need to include ML in their own equation because THEY ALSO make coils for their own machines and they won’t work on the 6000 either and for very good reason.🤔 🤪 Secondly how is it an unfair fight when it is ML’s hard earned R&D dollars that go into developing the actual detector tech in the first place. Show me a metal detector manufacturer that has matched the performance of any of the ML PI machines since 1995? There are a few PI machines that are kind of OK, Garrett Infinium, Garrett ATX, Whites TDI and the QED, yet no-where have I seen any images or regular written comment about people finding regular DEEP gold down to the 3 foot mark.

So if ML are restricting KNOWN technology please show me the detector that is ‘successfully’ using that KNOWN technology other than ML!!! Therefore how is it an unfair fight? They are not stopping any other manufacturer from legally making a PI machine that does not infringe patents as has been shown by Garrett and Whites etc.

Minelab are big boys and I for sure do not need to go into battle for them but these throw away TALL POPPY anti-competitive comments just grate on me when in reality it’s basically a one horse town anyway, unless of course you’re suggesting that ML should stop being anti-competitive and give up their IP to open Source?!!! 🤨 As it stands there has been plenty of opportunity for another manufacturer to develop something reasonable with the current lapsed patents!

ML have every right to prevent others from making coils to ‘maybe’ work with THEIR detectors, it is their patented IP after all!! Considering this is a GPX6000 thread this subject is even more poignant! Would you want to spend millions pushing and innovating the PI tech envelope on developing a new metal detector then millions more in getting it to market and promoting it to then have customer confidence destroyed by potentially an out of spec badly made aftermarket coil that you have absolutely no control over? 

Now if you want to have an argument about how frustrating it is when ML do not, in a timely manner, offer up more coil choices for their detectors/customers or in the case of the GPZ7000 taking a VERY long time to do so (oh thats right ML have finally opened up to another manufacturer🤩) then you will have to change the subject!! 😜

JP

[geof_junk]

The big boys seem to think they can get away with it. By the way the comment was about locks put on coils not detectors with patented PI designs etc. The PI detector was bought and owned not rented from the big boys.

[PhaseTech]

In my experience, and I detect in high EMI locations, the 6000 is slightly more susceptible than the 2300. It is more powerful and has a bigger coil, so that is totally expected. Thankfully the Auto tune is super quick, and also, reducing the sensitivity to 2 or 3 if required usually gives me a stable threshold, and targets are still easily recognized. 

In extreme cases like close to electric fences, I can just strap on the 14". Can't do that on the 2300 or 7000. 

[Gold Catcher]

3 hours ago, PhaseTech said:

In my experience, and I detect in high EMI locations, the 6000 is slightly more susceptible than the 2300. It is more powerful and has a bigger coil, so that is totally expected. Thankfully the Auto tune is super quick, and also, reducing the sensitivity to 2 or 3 if required usually gives me a stable threshold, and targets are still easily recognized. 

In extreme cases like close to electric fences, I can just strap on the 14". Can't do that on the 2300 or 7000

How is depth impacted by reducing sensitivity in your experience? I can still hear shallow targets remarkably well at low gain and enjoy a stable treshold at the same time, but I suspect depth will be significantly impacted.