Jump to content

VLF Frequencies For Bigger Gold ?


Recommended Posts

From what I can gather, higher frequency VLF detectors are more suited for smaller gold but ground mineralisation may be something to factor in. Would there be a “better” frequency for nuggets 1 gram and above in heavy ground?

I’m not too concerned if I miss sub gram nuggets if there is a better suited frequency.

The old Garrett Groundhog circuitry was legendary in this country…..I think it was around the 15 kHz mark. Is this frequency range a good starting point or do I need to consider other things such as better ground balancing capabilities or Garrett’s extra coil voltage. 
My Minelab PI units will be mainstay detectors but as mentioned in another post, I have ground littered in man made iron junk and the ground mineralisation is severe. There are plenty of nuggets in the 1 gram to 5 gram range (maybe bigger) but the iron signals are as dense as 5 per square metre 🤬

 Thanks for any ideas.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Tony, 

IMHO

Depending on your ground, most 20 kHz and lower frequencies are better at handling the more mineralized ground conditions. That’s why I use the Equinox 800 in heavily mineralized ground as it gives you a single 20 kHz frequency for hot ground or you have the multi-frequency option for less reactive ground when looking for smaller gold. It also has some really good discrimination abilities for trash sites. If any 20 kHz or lower detector doesn’t work in your ground then I would recommend a PI machine at that point. 

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Equinox 800 gets all the vlf glory these days but the Gold Bug Pro (19 kHz) with the 11" DD has been my best gold detector in iron infested trashy mining sites .........still to this day.  Just love the simplicity, depth, ergonomics and very effective discrimination.   

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, NV-OR-ID-CAL-AU said:

Tony, 

IMHO

Depending on your ground, most 20 kHz and lower frequencies are better at handling the more mineralized ground conditions. That’s why I use the Equinox 800 in heavily mineralized ground as it gives you a single 20 kHz frequency for hot ground or you have the multi-frequency option for less reactive ground when looking for smaller gold. It also has some really good discrimination abilities for trash sites. If any 20 kHz or lower detector doesn’t work in your ground then I would recommend a PI machine at that point. 

Thanks for the great information……I might just take out what VLFs I have and see how we go……not dedicated nugget machines by any stretch of the imagination but worth a spin. 6.59khz and 13.8khz here we come.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Chet said:

Tony

When detecting in trashy areas, gullies and desert washes I frequently carry a VLF along with the GPX 5000, GPZ 7000 and now with the GPX 6000. If roaming large areas of desert with only an occasional bullet or boot tack to contend with the VLF is left in the Jeep.

Over many years as VLF detectors improved the models for this purpose were upgraded from the early Goldmaster series to MXT to GMT to Gold Monster to now to a Equinox 800. All equipped with the smallest coil available. 

When a target is detected in a trashy area with the Large PI coil it is quickly pinpointed and discriminated with the VLF. If is too deep to detect with the VLF it gets you pumped up a little thinking that this is something good. As the hole gets bigger and deeper the small coil on the VLF pinpoints the direction to dig. 

Sometimes a dozen plastic knives with bright colored surveyors ribbons tied around them are used as markers. Detect the area with the PI. If a shallow loud target is detected lay a knife over it. If it is a weak low broader signal place the blade into an upright position. 

Lay the PI down and detect each marked target with the VLF. The shallow loud ones are fast and easy. The deeper ones require some aggressive digging to get the VLF close enough to detect, pinpoint and discriminate.

From years of experience with many detectors has led to this determination. The Equinox 800 with the small coil is the best, simplest automatic detector for this work and/or for stand-a-lone gold detecting. It has a build in pinpoint mode that immediately gets you on top of the target. Once on top you punch it back to discriminate mode and one or two sweeps you know whether it is ferrous, nonferrous or a hot rock. The target number read-out is so much better than the Gold Monster bar graph. 

Like most modern highly sensitive VLFs built for gold detecting it will sound off on many hot rocks. But it will have a repeatable number read-out that will correlate to the normal hot rocks produced in that area. 

Have a good day,

Chet
 

Chet…..awesome information as well. I’ll be putting these ideas to the test in coming weeks. I’m pretty handy with a PI but have to admit that I have never nugget hunted with a VLF…..although have heard of those that persevered back in the day when that was all that they had to swing. Small coil and low GAIN……

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you are hunting gram plus nuggets in dense ferrous trash, any detector with a good reputation for relic detecting in trash will do the job. The XP Deus or ORX are top contenders, and offer different frequency options in one machine. Equinox is extremely close but maybe just a hair behind the XP offerings for working in dense ferrous. Once you get past XP and the Equinox there are dozens of good machines that all might serve as well, the key being small coils and lots of patience. I would say I was not impressed with the Gold Monster in dense ferrous, too many weird signals. The 19kHz Gold Bug variants all do better in that type scenario, and for the price are very hard to beat.

You list the MX7 as a detector you own, and it with a small coil would be the first go, before actually buying anything. It’s an excellent detector. You’d be surprised also at how many people use an Excalibur in ferrous. It suffers from masking, but excels at killing ferrous signals.

Out of the machines I currently have on hand I’d probably grab my Equinox for the task. Here is a link to some testing I did a few years ago. Main thing to take away is that most machines are up to the task, and the differences in most cases are rather minor. The real key is a small coil and knowing your machine very well, which is why I’d grab my Equinox. I’ve so many hours on it now it just talks to me in a language I can easily understand. 

 

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tony,  I agree with Steve…….your MX7 with the 6” Detech DD coil or something similar in its prospecting mode or with a 2 tone ferrous/non-ferrous discrimination mode would work fine in iron trash on shallower .5 gram and bigger nuggets if it can handle your mineralization. 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks all……I agree the MX7 is worth a shot. Based on the MXT circuitry might be okay but I have heard that the MXT can struggle in bad ground…..but I’m talking bad ironstone ground. I may have to switch out the 6” Concentric coil to a smaller DD as Jeff suggested. Failing this then it’s time for a 6” coil on my 3500…….so long as the smaller coil/windings don’t get lit up by the hot ground. 👍

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
  • Similar Content

    • By water spider
      speculation please. what does the future hold? what advancements might happen? keith southern are you out there?
       
    • By mh9162013
      I got in a few hours of metal detecting yesteday with my AT Max, which included some time at a park and a few permissions (private homes). Nothing of note was found, although I continued to struggle with trying to find good targets in high-trash soil. Given how I'm using the Garrett AT Max, I know have two primary options for finding good targets (silver coins) in these types of conditions.
      First, get a smaller coil, like the 5x8.
      Second, start digging the trash targets to clear up the ground and reveal possible good targets that are being masked or otherwise "overshadowed" by all the bits of aluminum, nails and other garbage.
      The second approach is not a viable option for most places I hunt (parks and private permissions). Not only do I not have the time to implement that strategy, my body can't readily handle that much digging. Also, I'm pretty sure digging almost everything is bound to lead to the loss of any good graces I have with property owners and park maintenance crews.
      Ok, so that leaves the first option. But before I go that route, I have to concede the possibility of getting an Equinox. Based on my experience with my Vanquish, limited time on the Equinox 600 and experiences with my AT Max and Fisher F2, I'm confident that one of the advantages of getting an Equinox will be more stable VDIs and more accurate VDIs at depth. And right now, I think I can live with that.
      I understand that getting a solid signal (a good, repeatabe signal from both swings and in 2 directions) on a dime or quarter at 6+ inches in my mineralized soil isn't always realistic with the AT Max. But I know the AT Max is at least capable of getting a decent signal (a good, repeatable signal from at least 1 direction and in 1 swing).
      Put another way, I get how the AT Max may not get me the "dig me!" type of signal that an Equinox can, but I at least need it to get me the "take a closer look, please" signal.
      All of that to say that I'm thinking about how my AT Max's target separating ability and recovery speed limitations (using the stock coil) will compare to an Equinox 600 and a stock coil. I came to this realization when running the AT Max with only iron discrimination set at 35 resulted in information overload for me and notching out everything below 70 was likely leading me to completely miss "take a closer look, please" signals that might lead to silver coins, dimes or quarters.
      Therefore, I want to use Monte's Nail Board. I know it's not ideal, and I plan on using Steve's approach of using both the AT Max and Equinox 600 on real-world targets. But I think the Nail Board will offer quantitative data when comparing the AT Max and Equinox.I also plan on using it with my Fisher F2 and Vanquish 340 to help put things into perspective. So how do I go about doing this test? Here's my approach so far:
      Step 1: Create Monte's Nail Board and use it with a modern, clad dime and new nails.
      Step 2: For each of the 4 passes, I will give it a rating: Will Dig, Maybe Dig, Won't Dig.
      Step 3:  I will set the sensitivities at either 50% or the highest possible given EMI
      Step 4: I will run each machine with zero discrimination and with enough notching so that it's only going to sound on dimes and quarters (and maybe copper pennies).
      Step 5: For the AT Max, I will also test it with iron discrimination set to 35.
      Step 6 (maybe): Run the test with the AT Max using both its stock and 5x8 coils.
      So here's my first real question: what changes or additions would you all make to my current approach? 
      My second real question(s): what "base" setting should I use with the Equinox 600. I'm thinking Park 1 with recovery speed set at the highest setting (3?) and a small or moderate amount of iron bias. Should I also run some tests with the Equinox 600 in 4KHz mode?
      My third real question: would it be benefitical to modify Monte's Nail Board so that the nails are replaced by either clumps of aluminum  or maybe pulltabs? A lot of my hunting is in parks and yards that are often littered with more aluminum trash than iron trash.
      Any insight is appreciated. Thanks!
    • By Steve Herschbach
      The whole depth with single frequency VLF detectors thing in my opinion has been nothing but a red herring for decades. I have read a thousand posts from people wanting VLF detectors with "more depth". Yet VLF detectors maxed out for usable depth by at least 1990 if not before. I have not used any single frequency VLF metal detector since 1990 that got more depth on coins than my old Compass Gold Scanner Pro.

      The only real improvement we have seen and are still seeing is in the ability to find and correctly identify items that are masked by the ground itself or adjacent undesirable targets. There are an amazing number of targets in the ground at depths achievable by any decent detector made in the last 25 years, but that are being missed because they are improperly identified and ignored, or just completely masked and invisible. This is an area where the Minelab BBS and FBS detectors have excelled. They do not go deeper. They simply get more accurate discrimination at depths exceeding what most detectors achieve. Machines like the DEUS and a lot of other Euro machines are excelling not for the depth they get, but this ability to acquire and accurately identify targets at shallower depths that are missed by other detectors.

      If we had a detector that could simply see through everything and accurately identify coins to 10" the ground would light up with countless missed finds. I get a chuckle out of all the deep coins I see people talk about on the forums when the best detectors made can't accurately identify a dime past 5-6 inches in my soil. Anything deeper just gets called ferrous. There is huge room for improvement in metal detectors still not by getting more depth, but by simply finding shallower targets that have been missed by other detectors made up until now.
      How To Make Yourself Crazy!
      U.S. Versus Euro Style Detectors
    • By water spider
      maybe we could have a multi frequency coil, that recieves a single frequency or selectable single frequency and effectively distorts and amplifies the single frequency resulting in frequency variants up and down, mimicking or creating smf
    • By Skullgolddiver
      After the good new I realized when tested a few days ago my machine after It drowned and I've succesfully reanimated It....
      Now the horrible gasket Is fighting to stay out of the housing against any kind of attempt😒.
      So I'm in the middle of a headache manutention session with scarce results.
      That's the Mood guys😑
       

    • By Tnsharpshooter
      See NASA-Tom’s comments
      https://www.dankowskidetectors.com/discussions/read.php?2,181189
×
×
  • Create New...