Jump to content

Coiltek Coils For The GPX 6000 - Confirmed!


Coiltek

Recommended Posts

IMHO

The Mono 9x14 and 6x10 would work well in most of my areas. Also a 6x10 DD would really fit into a need i see here in the localized heavy mineralized ground. Let me explain this better, we have a mix of soil types were I detect, some serpentine and some granite/rhyolites. The Mono coils is preferred and fit most needs here in the granite/rhyolite areas, but the Mono coils do tend to false on the serpentine bedrock here. Maybe the 6x10 DD would be a good match for the GPX6000 as it is already very sensitive with the 11” and the DD could maybe balance this sensitivity out with the 6x10 DD, maybe even match the 11” mono sensitivity for matching gold nuggets sizes and also being able to handle the hottest ground located here. We already have a 14” DD and it looses a little bit of sensitivity in comparison to the 11” Mono, so I probably would not purchase a elliptical DD option for that size if I could just use a 6x10 DD coil instead with better sensitivity. I am also curious on how sensitivity on a 6x10 Mono would handle the ground effects, hopefully it can still handle the ground effects and not be to overly sensitive. Don’t get me wrong as I would love to have a more sensitive coil as long as I do not get an overwhelming amount of annoying ground noise.

Coiltek,

Can you please let me know your thoughts on these assumptions since you are the experts here. Also can the weights of the coils be lowered at all using carbon fiber or other materials?

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


Guys,

I'm going to challenge the coil designers to Up Their Game.

Frankly I think the industry has been stuck on often impractical round coils for far too long, the fact is round or only slightly elliptical coils are a very poor option in general based on coverage and weight, if a long narrow coil can be designed that has anywhere near the depth of a large round coil.

For instance, if a 5 or 6 x 12 or 14 or even 18 inch coil can be designed that has even a little less depth but you can get into far more places than a similar depth round coil, and with the added coverage of a large round coil and likely lighter, why would someone NOT use it.? !                                                                                                           Large round coils are just not practical in all but the most wide open flat areas, in fact a long narrow coil even bigger in length than a round coil would often be usable when a round one is not.  Think a Big Foot Coil, but with pointed ends to fit into the most places, the narrower the better as long as depth is not sacrificed too much.

Sensitivity is no longer the biggest challenge, now we need usability and depth.                                                                                                 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Remember the Big Foot Coil. It covered a wide sweep but shallow depth (larger deeper nuggets not the best) With today nuggets that have not had steroids pumped into them (flysh!t size) this design would give good coverage and could access tight spots.

By the way smaller nuggets spread out a lot more than those above a pennyweight. What is Your's and Coiltek view. I think this add was made by some of the former ML marketing guys. 😜

1176113910_BigFootCoil.jpg.3ef66d35fe1af38673f4488c91a471b7.jpg

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like round coils better due to the physics of how both the Tx signal field is transmitted evenly and the Rx signal response is received evenly, this makes round coils quieter and have better depth.

The only time I use elliptical coils is when chasing small gold and the largest one I use is the 14x9 size, for the reasons above. I don't like or use any of the larger elliptical coils, but the smaller ones are a valuable addition to the gold finding arsenal.

I hope Coiltek dose a 14in and 20in round monos a 20in DD and a 12x6 eliptical mono.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don’t know why mine lab don’t go down that track ...   nothing against coiltek . But with the 3500  I never found shit with there coils but the minelab commanders killed it 🤫

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Lesgold said:

I would expect that Coiltek will be testing a range of coils to suit the 6k. The 14x9 would be my guess for the first release as they have the tooling and equipment already in place for that specific size.

Lets hope the 14x9 is the first cab off rank.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Rob Allison said:

Steve - There is a smaller NF coil, the Z Search 12" Round for the GPZ 7000.  I have been using this coil since the release and I really like it.  They are back in stock again, plus they now have heavy duty skid plates for them.  

The NF coil is a whole 1” narrower Rob - consider me entirely underwhelmed, and why I basically ignore it. It’s too close to the stock coil as far as I’m concerned, to be worth the money. I like coils to be widely different in size and shape. The NF coil was a huge disappointment to me after waiting so long for a small coil, small being 11” round or smaller in my book. The draft Minelab manual for the GPZ 7000, page 39, showed an 11” coil as a future option. That set my expectation, and I'm still grumpy it never happened.

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Steve Herschbach said:

The NF coil is a whole 1” narrower Rob - consider me entirely underwhelmed, and why I basically ignore it. It’s too close to the stock coil as far as I’m concerned, to be worth the money. I like coils to be widely different in size and shape. The NF coil was a huge disappointment to me after waiting so long for a small coil, small being 11” round or smaller in my book. The draft Minelab manual for the GPZ 7000, page 39, showed an 11” coil as a future option. That set my expectation, and I'm still grumpy it never happened.

A 300 gram weight reduction is no small thing on a GPZ, that fact alone is why they’ve sold so well in Australia, then we also need to consider the very obvious improvement in sensitivity and then there’s the EMI and Saturation signal reduction. I suppose if you think of the Zsearch as ’’It’s only an inch smaller”  the GPX11 mono on the 6000 is underwhelming also as it’s only 1 inch smaller than the 12” Zsearch. 🤔 😬 Continuing to be a bit cheeky here it was not that long ago it seemed the GPX17 elliptical was being talked up as the ultimate US combination, now that’s a horse of a coil compared to the 12” Zsearch. 😮  I do not mean to offend or get personal and I truly do understand where the frustration is coming from, so I hope my tongue in cheek but still serious counter argument is seen as me just offering a different perspective on the subject. 😬🥺

The GPX6000 should be a lot easier to make a variety of coils for, retail cost alone is way less than a GPZ so it should not break the bank to own a few different sizes, this will also mean the developers can take the risk of investing in a range of shapes and sizes that do not have to top the charts sales wise to recover their investment. Hopefully this will mean that ‘all of us’ will finally get our wish lists fulfilled.

I’ve had many discussions with Nugget Finder over the past 2 years about what coil sizes to build and what would sell well, clearly there is demand for a smaller more manoeuvrable coil but at the same time there is a lot of pressure for a larger coil (probably even greater than the demand for a smaller one) but overwhelmingly there is/was a huge demand for a lot lighter coil to be developed that would make the GPZ much more user friendly to a lot more people, to that end I think NF nailed it. Now that the GPX6000 has been released I think retrospectively NF made a good call on the 12” size range, that size still has merit for a GPZ user who also owns or is contemplating owing a GPX6000. 

JP

 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Jonathan Porter said:

A 300 gram weight reduction is no small thing on a GPZ, that fact alone is why they’ve sold so well in Australia, then we also need to consider the very obvious improvement in sensitivity and then there’s the EMI and Saturation signal reduction. I suppose if you think of the Zsearch as ’’It’s only an inch smaller”  the GPX11 mono on the 6000 is underwhelming also as it’s only 1 inch smaller than the 12” Zsearch. 🤔 😬 Continuing to be a bit cheeky here it was not that long ago it seemed the GPX17 elliptical was being talked up as the ultimate US combination, now that’s a horse of a coil compared to the 12” Zsearch. 😮  I do not mean to offend or get personal and I truly do understand where the frustration is coming from, so I hope my tongue in cheek but still serious counter argument is seen as me just offering a different perspective on the subject. 😬🥺

JP - I think Steve was coming at it from the perspective of value and cost based on what you have already invested in the machine.  He explicitly stated that.  If you already have a coil of a certain dimension, it is not necessarily a great value to invest in a coil that has only incremental differences in weight, dimensions, or performance than the coil you already have.  If you are starting from scratch with no money invested in any coil and were able to choose one or the other, than that is a whole different situation.  You are looking at the NF coil from a standalone basis or from a comparison basis as if the subject did not already own the reference coil.  I think that was point Steve was trying to make, not that the NF is underwhelming in its own right but compared to what is already owned.  Anyway, that's how I interpreted Steve's response.  I might be off base.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Chase Goldman said:

JP - I think Steve was coming at it from the perspective of value and cost based on what you have already invested in the machine.  He explicitly stated that.  If you already have a coil of a certain dimension, it is not necessarily a great value to invest in a coil that has only incremental differences in weight, dimensions, or performance than the coil you already have.  If you are starting from scratch with no money invested in any coil and were able to choose one or the other, than that is a whole different situation.  You are looking at the NF coil from a standalone basis or from a comparison basis as if the subject did not already own the reference coil.  I think that was point Steve was trying to make, not that the NF is underwhelming in its own right but compared to what is already owned.  Anyway, that's how I interpreted Steve's response.  I might be off base.

Yes I read most of it that way too, I do see his VERY valid points. And I also understand his position and his decision to opt out of the 7000 after waiting so long for ML to deliver the promised 11” coil. I get that a one inch reduction was not enough of an advantage for him to consider the coil for his purposes especially when you consider the entry price. Like I said I do not wish to offend just provide a counter argument to some of what has been written based from a different perspective without devaluing his opinions etc.

As an example the shape of a DOD coil on the outside is pretty much pointless as the interaction between the Tx and Rx windings determines the shape and how far out of shape you can go with the design. DOD coils are not conducive to being pushed too far out of shape so in the end you end up with a semi elliptic design or an obvious elliptical shell that does not have a winding inside that’s reflects the housing (as is the case with the elliptical X coils).  This point alone will always dictate the final shape of a DOD coil, or if you decide to do a housing that is overly elliptical you will have a large amount of forward section of coil with near zero target sensitivity due to the receive points being pushed further back from the front. A catch 22 from a developers POV.

 

 

  • Like 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...