Still Running My Heavy GPZ 7000 And This Is Why

[Rob Allison]

Hey Guys,

   Well its that time of year where most of the US Prospectors are searching for gold, in the Southwest at least.  I managed to get out this weekend with some friends, just roaming around some old stomping grounds in hopes to turn up a few bits missed years prior.  I was toggling between my GPZ 7000 with the NF 12" coil and my GPX 6000 with the 11" coil.  My other two friends were using the GPZ 7000's with the stock 14x13" coils.  

Later in the day I can across some old piles left from prior mining and got a softer sounding signal and decided to investigate.  My friends both had a few dinks now, so I was behind on the gold count.  There's a lot of left behind rubbish in this area due to prior mining, hardrock and placering.  I figured it was just another deep nail or something, but as I got down deeper, the target was actually on bedrock below the pile.  I ended up scratching everything away from the bedrock and pinpointed the target in a crevice or depression (seen in picture below).  Low and behold, it was a nice gold nugget, 4.6 Dwt's, just shy of 1/4 Troy Ounce.  I was pleasantly surprised to say the least, didn't expect it.  

I thought this would be good time to see if my Minelab GPX 6000 would hear this target with the stock 11" coil on it.  I walked back to my truck, got the GPX 6000 and hiked back to the target location.  I figured this would be a crude, but interesting test as there is so much debate on depth and how now many believe the GPX 6000 is better.  I fired the GPX 6000, balanced and make sure the EMI was good, then scanned over the target area with the nugget back in it's original location.  I couldn't hear a peep of a signal, which honestly is what I figured.  I didn't expect to find it, or hear it with the GPX 6000.  I played around with a few settings and even had my buddies come over to check it out.  They both scanned their stock coils (GPZ 7000 with 14x13") over it, both heard the target, but it was still faint (not a super obvious signal).  

This is one reason it's hard for me to put down the GPZ 7000, I have found many nuggets at depth, but deal with the heavy, bulky unit.  I thought about going back and trying the 14" DD to see what it would have done, but for the most part, I never use the 14" DD, so it wouldn't have really proved anything to me, as I don't use it.  It would have been interesting to see what the 17" coil would have done, but I didn't have it with me.  I would think the 17" would have heard it.  

I'm swinging the GPZ 7000 with the NF 12" Round coil 90% of the time, the GPX 6000 about 10% of the time.  There are some bedrock gullies I have revisited in years, so I'm looking forward to spending more time there with the 6000 and 11" Mono coil.  I think I also might be able to pack the GPX 6000 into a few canyons as I wasn't easily able to do that with the GPZ 7000.  

Here are a few pictures below.  I didn't have a tape measure, but Doc's pick is 22" handle length.  I'm thinking between 18-20 inches was the true detection depth, but faint signal for sure. 

 

 

[Gold Catcher]

Congrats, Rob! Very nice. For the same reason you stated I keep my Z/NF12. It for sure punches deeper than any 6k settings/ configuration, no question. I don't think the 17 would have heard it neither. IMO, the 17 is focused on shallow fast gold just as the 11 but covering more ground. Kind of a unique feature for a big coil.  Re usage %, I would say I use the 6k 70% of time and the Z/NF 30%. Haven't use the 14 stock in ages. The 6k is so much more fun overall, but will not reach Z depths. GC.

[Sheppo]

The X6 was never intended to replace the Z, rather than compliment it. If I’m wandering billy goat country and gullies, I have the X6 on, if I’m in wide open spaces where I know there’s deeper gold, I’ve got the Z on. 
 

Nice piece!

[Jonathan Porter]

The GPZ7000 is still king of the mountain for outright depth but it takes commitment and strength to use, this is especially poignant when you’ve had the privilege of using the 6000 for any period of time and discovered the joys of a well balanced lightweight machine. 

I have a picture in my mind for the use of these machines, the 6000 is a fast paced zip zip like machine that can be slowed down but its overall behaviour just loves to be scooted along, even its audio is zippy. It is very talkative and lively, constantly on the go ready for anything, so very capable of instantaneous reaction to the tiniest of nuggets. At the same time it has amazing depth for a detector of its ilk so time spent swinging it isn’t wasted if you do manage to get your coil over a deeper piece. It would have to be the best detector I’ve ever seen for out of the box ease of use, pushing well ahead of the SDC 2300 because of its ergonomics and light weight.

The 7000 on the other hand just loves smooth control, pendulum like smooth control. The better you can control the coils movement the greater the rewards. It’s audio is set up to be slow and methodical, it is cautionary in all it does and likes to think and mull over everything before it speaks. It is oil upon the waters smooth and does not like to rush, as such its behaviour compliments the deeper more subtle edge of detection signal responses. To get the best out of the 7000 requires personal training and setup, in-depth learning and investment in time spent in the field, even after all this time I am still learning the GPZ7000. 

I‘m fortunate I have both detectors, depending on my mood I go easily from one to the other. Sometimes I just want to go have some fun without all the mental focus, my ultra excited super motivated friend the GPX6000 is always primed and ready to find some gold just about anywhere I care to go, it is the ultimate skunk-buster and has never let me down. Other times I just want to go swing a coil and focus on depth with smoothness and control, let my mind drift into the ultra smooth threshold and patiently wait for that one deep signal. I find the 7000 to be calming and soulful an un-flurried methodical order that just ‘feels right’, when in motion it has a grounded presence that suits its personality.

It’s raining in here today and I’m feeling cool and reflective 😂  

JP

Pic of gold I recently found with the GPX6000, found the first piece with the 7000 and worked it with the 6000 as the size of the gold and frequency of digging suited it perfectly. 186 pieces in 4 x half detecting days.

 

Pic of a nice chunky very deep 7 gram piece I got last Saturday found in perfect for the GPZ7000 detecting ground.

 

 

 

 

[beatup]

Well done and good on Rob ,glad hear someone is using the 7k as that is what i will be using when i  head south, just have not made up my mind about a 6k yet .

[Steve Herschbach]

It’s never been disputed (by those that know) that the GPZ 7000 outperforms the 6000 on larger, deeper gold, and running the Super D coils vs 11” mono just reinforces that. It would have been nice to see result with 17” mono also, but that does not change the base performance difference.

 

The GPX 6000 will also clearly hit specimen gold of surprising size that a GPZ might miss. It can cut both ways, and so like all detecting, it just depends on the situation as to which option is “best.”

Great finds, Rob, keep piling that gold up, and thanks for posting. 

[Jonathan Porter]

Agreed Steve and I don't know why there is so much confusion with people feeling the 6000 is an outright 7k beater or replacement. 🧐 

When I swing the 7000 I know that I’m walking over easy gold, I also know I’m most certainly going to pass up on the odd decent gold mass that is just too fast a time-constant for the 7000. Conversely when I swing the 6000 I know that I’m passing up on the solid pieces from a few grams and up, even though the 6000 can do well on deeper pieces it requires a lot more effort to chase this sort of gold so I just focus on what it does really well and then cross back to the 7000 when required.

JP

[Rob Allison]

Hey Guys,

  Thanks for all the comments.  

JP - I agree, I'm still old school like with the SD2000, hunt very methodically - low and slow.  I guess this is why it's hard for me to part completely with the GPZ 7000.  I believe she's a powerhouse if you can handle the weight and really pay attention to what the detector is telling you.  

I also agree with Steve when he originally stated that most of the US prospectors would benefit mostly from the GPX 6000 over the 7000 due to it's features (hyper sensitivity to small gold and specimens, light weight, super easy to operate).  

I will continue to toggle back in forth depending on the ground and type of gold I'm chasing.  There are handfuls of small gullies where I cleaned a bunch of nuggets up, so I'm looking forward to getting back to a few of these locations this season with the GPX 6000.  

P.S.  If I could tell any electronic prospector something I learned over the years - Focus on what you have (detector) and use it to it's best ability.  You can't worry about what you don't have or what you might miss.  I hear way too many prospectors say well I could miss a specimen, I could miss a small nugget, I could miss a deep one.  You can worry yourself to death about a "potential" signal that your detector never heard.  

Rob

[Gold Catcher]

It is only natural that every high end new ML gold detector will be compared with the flagship 7000. Nothing wrong with that. And when you bare in mind the price tags of both machines why should one not ask the question: which one is "better", especially when the budget is only allowing to purchase one. I think we all agree that the 6k is the best all-round high end detector ML has ever made. With the exception of VLF needs and the outright depth advantage of the Z (that is very useful at times but comes at the expense of all the light weight fun the 6k has!), the 6K is the best option for beginners and experts alike and certainly the best value for the money. And, in the 1-6 inch depth range (where most US gold is usually found) the 6k is unbeatable. GC.

[Steve Herschbach]

Minelab has a particular genius for producing detectors that occupy distinct niches. Even if they could make just one detector that did everything the best, it would make little sense from a business perspective. They always make sure each model has its own secret sauce that justifies somebody wanting it. As of late, controlling what coils get produced seems critical to maintaining that product differentiation. 

Despite Equinox, the CTX 3030 still sells because it does some things well an Equinox does not. Similarly, it was never their desire to produce a detector that sells for less than the GPZ 7000 that would replace it. Sheppo nailed it - the models complement each other. One does not replace the other, by full planning and intent on Minelabs part.

That should really surprise nobody. Lots of things make more sense as regards Minelab if you take off your prospector hat, and put your business person/investor hat on instead.