Deus 2, Deus 1, Equinox 800 & GPX 5000 Compared On Various Size Gold Nuggets

[Jeff McClendon]

Not everyone is saying the Deus 1 and the ORX are not very good gold detectors. Deus 1 and ORX with the HF Elliptical coil are excellent small to very small gold prospecting detector IF the ground is not too high iron mineralized. Since they are single frequency, they may lose a lot of depth/sensitivity in really bad ground.

Deus 2 could be an excellent small to very small gold prospecting detector using Gold Field if it had smaller coils available than the 11" and the 9". No one has tested the 9" yet and posted findings like the test Andy did in Western USA hot ground. Maybe the 9" will be a lot more sensitive than the 11" was in Andy's video. Deus 2's FMF simultaneous multi frequency technology may offer some ground handling advantages over the selectable single frequency Deus 1 and ORX.

It is always good to have multiple choices since. These recent "multi tool" detectors like the Equinox, Deus 2 and the soon to be released Legend being SMF and versatile enough to work in almost any ground and on a huge range of targets and target sizes makes it hard to decide. 

All three, Deus 1, Deus 2 and Equinox will hit gold nuggets for sure.

[Calarms]

I'm just saying will the o r x with 9.5 HF coil be able to hit the same gold in that video, as well

[Jeff McClendon]

Yes. The ORX Gold modes are almost identical to Deus 1 Gold Field.

[blackjack]

On 2/10/2022 at 2:38 AM, abenson said:

Here is the video I did comparing various metal detectors on the buried gold nuggets. You can see in this video which ones do better on various size nuggets. Take this test with a grain of salt. Mineralization, nugget shape, target depth and site conditions will all effect detector performance. This is just a test I did in Arizona so your area could be much different and the nuggets were freshly buried.

 

Hey abenson thanks for taking the time to do the test for us, I was particularly interested in the results for the Equinox and the GPX 5000. I have an Equinox 800, for the smaller pieces I was surprised to see the 11" pick them up, I would have thought only the 6" would have targeted that size. Maybe I need to rethink my use of the 6" coil. It did appear that you were using full sensitivity ? I'm thinking of getting a GPX 5000 partly based on budget, but also I'm thinking it may be a bit more versatile than the GPX 6000. I was surprised to see in your test that even with a small coil the 5000 couldn't pick up the smaller targets. How would a 6000 have performed on the smaller bits and how does it compare with the 5000 on gold over say 1 gram ? Your opinion and other peoples would be welcomed on the performance of the 11"vs 6" on the Equinox for gold and their opinions on the 5000 and 6000, Thanks

[geof_junk]

Simple answer for a same design and brand coil .......... Double the coil size, Quarter the response ie at the same depth it will be 4 times loader (up to speaker/earphone volume setting) in the small coil range for the small coil, but the depth for the large coil will get a small increase in depth over the small coil.

[phrunt]

7 hours ago, blackjack said:

Hey abenson thanks for taking the time to do the test for us, I was particularly interested in the results for the Equinox and the GPX 5000. I have an Equinox 800, for the smaller pieces I was surprised to see the 11" pick them up, I would have thought only the 6" would have targeted that size. Maybe I need to rethink my use of the 6" coil. It did appear that you were using full sensitivity ? I'm thinking of getting a GPX 5000 partly based on budget, but also I'm thinking it may be a bit more versatile than the GPX 6000. I was surprised to see in your test that even with a small coil the 5000 couldn't pick up the smaller targets. How would a 6000 have performed on the smaller bits and how does it compare with the 5000 on gold over say 1 gram ? Your opinion and other peoples would be welcomed on the performance of the 11"vs 6" on the Equinox for gold and their opinions on the 5000 and 6000, Thanks

The 6000 will smoke the 5000 on small gold, regardless of coil on either detector, The worst coil on the 6000 will be better than the best coil on the 5000 at finding small gold.  I've found the spiral coils on the 5000 even though slightly larger due to having to fit the windings are more sensitive than the smaller bundle wound coils like that 6", a 14x9" or 12x8" EVO or 10" X-coil would do better than that 6" Coiltek from what I see here.

The problem with the 5000 isn't so much the small gold, it can hit down to very small sizes, well under .1 of a gram as long as the gold is the right composition, even down to .04 of a gram is possible given the right conditions, coil and settings, however that's the problem, all stars have to align.  The 6000 and 7000 on the other hand will hit down to 0.03 of a gram reasonably often, sometimes smaller.

As the gold gets bigger the gap dramatically closes and at some point, the 5000 takes over as deeper than the 6000, especially with the correct coil fitted, but then, if it's the wrong type of gold that the 5000 doesn't like, that performance is hindered dramatically, to the point a decent size picker can sit on the coil of a 5000 and barely respond.

I really like the 5000, but its detection holes have left a lot of the gold behind the people now with 7000 and 6000's are finding, in many cases I don't believe it was the size of the gold or depth being the reason it was missed, but it's composition, there is just so much gold the 5000 should hit based on size/weight that it doesn't.  I've run many of my nuggets over it and it really is surprising what it misses, that it should hit based on performance with the right sort of gold for it, adjusting to different timings on the 5000 improves detection of some gold, but you'd be covering ground in all different timings to try and close the gap.

The 5000 will handle ground the 6000 can't go near, and that's its strongest point, hot rocks that can't be dealt with on the 6000 can be made non-existent with the 5000

My hope was the Axiom is the 5000 with the detection holes fixed, I'm not sure if it is? Someone may know.

The 11" on the Equinox is very good on small gold, extremely good in fact, even the 15x12" is very good on small gold, the 6" will hit smaller gold better but we are talking in the 0.00X of a gram range where it pulls ahead the most, on the higher 0.0X to 0.X of a gram there becomes very little in it between the 11" and 6".

Last but not least, for me at least the Equinox 6" combo is quite a bit better than the Deus 1 HF 10x5" Combo.

I hope all that makes sense, that's my opinions.

[geof_junk]

Although there is helps of 0.1gm (about 310 holes per ounce) and 0.01gm (about 3100 holes per ounce) nuggets specks. I would select the largest coil that will give a good signal on the size of gold you have to dig to keep the  number of holes.

 

[blackjack]

21 minutes ago, phrunt said:

The 6000 will smoke the 5000 on small gold, regardless of coil on either detector, The worst coil on the 6000 will be better than the best coil on the 5000 at finding small gold.  

The problem with the 5000 isn't so much the small gold, it can hit down to very small sizes, well under .1 of a gram as long as the gold is the right composition, even down to .04 of a gram is possible given the right conditions, coil and settings, however that's the problem, all stars have to align.  The 6000 and 7000 on the other hand will hit down to 0.03 of a gram reasonably often, sometimes smaller.

As the gold gets bigger the gap dramatically closes and at some point, the 5000 takes over as deeper than the 6000, especially with the correct coil fitted, but then, if it's the wrong type of gold that the 5000 doesn't like, that performance is hindered dramatically, to the point a decent size picker can sit on the coil of a 5000 and barely respond.

The 5000 will handle ground the 6000 can't go near, and that's its strongest point, hot rocks that can't be dealt with on the 6000 can be made non-existent with the 5000

My hope was the Axiom is the 5000 with the detection holes fixed, I'm not sure if it is? Someone may know.

The 11" on the Equinox is very good on small gold, extremely good in fact, even the 15x12" is very good on small gold, the 6" will hit smaller gold better but we are talking in the 0.00X of a gram range where it pulls ahead the most,

Thanks phrunt an informed and comprehensive reply to my questions. Given the extra depth and coverage for nugget shooting I need to rethink my use of the 11" coil on the nox. At what point [gram wise] do you think the 5000 betters the 6000. Also it was good to have a user confirm that the 5000 can handle hotter ground. Have you or others worked out the 'right' gold composition. You mentioned the Axiom, it's been around for a while, I would like to here from people who run one especially those who have also used the 5 and 6000. Thanks again.

[blackjack]

21 minutes ago, geof_junk said:

Although there is helps of 0.1gm (about 310 holes per ounce) and 0.01gm (about 3100 holes per ounce) nuggets specks. I would select the largest coil that will give a good signal on the size of gold you have to dig to keep the  number of holes.

 

Yes g_j I laughed at you reply but I hear you, I do dislike digging. I's a conundrum that requires some serious thought though. I spoke to my cousin in W.A. he's found more gold than most, he's firm on the 6000. In worked ground on a recent trip to Meekatharra between him and his wife he said they found something over 600 pieces for 138 grams. Yes that's 600 holes at least but it's also $14,500 Au

[phrunt]

23 minutes ago, blackjack said:

Thanks phrunt an informed and comprehensive reply to my questions. Given the extra depth and coverage for nugget shooting I need to rethink my use of the 11" coil on the nox. At what point [gram wise] do you think the 5000 betters the 6000. Also it was good to have a user confirm that the 5000 can handle hotter ground. Have you or others worked out the 'right' gold composition. You mentioned the Axiom, it's been around for a while, I would like to here from people who run one especially those who have also used the 5 and 6000. Thanks again.

@Gerry in Idaho could likely give you an in-detail description of gold types missed as he does classes on it demonstrating it to people, it tends to be porous or prickly gold is worst affected, but it's not only that, there is more even normal looking bits its quite weak on.

I don't really think the 6000 is all that much better than the 5000 on gram stuff, unless it's the type of gold the 5000 is weak on, the right composition piece and I think they would be pretty similar in performance and because the 5000 can benefit from larger coils it will inherently have the depth advantage for the bigger deep gold hunters.

I filmed a video showing the holes in detecting on the 5000 and 4500 a while ago, showing nuggets they should easily pick up that they either didn't at all, or were very weak on, I'll try find the video, it really is surprising the gold the older GPX models can miss.  I also demonstrated in the video how changing timings from for example sensitive extra to fine gold can change the results somewhat, changing timings can close up the holes on some gold to a degree, but then some timings work better than others so you really need to cover ground a few times in different timings.   It's the big improvement made with the 6000 was closing these gaps.

Now I am focused on its flaws here, on a good amount of gold its perfectly fine and handles ground better than anything else there is but the reason I think many are happy with the 6000 after having the 5000 is that these holes are fixed more so than the small gold improvements, yes they are there too, but the holes being fixed is bringing more gold to the surface than the extra small gold capability, the gold most are finding isn't that tiny or deep the 5000 would miss it all.