By Erik Oostra
I’ve been following the battle between the old dog (GPZ-7000) and young dog (GPX-6000) with keen interest.. From what I can make of it, the young dog’s winning its battles in the USA and the old dog in Australia.. So far it seems the old dog can handle a scruff on heavily mineralized and ‘hot rock’ infested grounds better than the young dog, who prefers milder grounds.. But it’s too early in the day to scorn the young dog, it’s only just finding its feet in the world.. The old dog might’ve fought it out with other GPXs and always come out on top, but this young dog seems to have more sense of geology than its cousins.. Maybe a few more dust-ups in the old dog’s yard might do the young dog some good.. Or maybe the old dog won’t let the young dog anywhere near its yard no more? Maybe they should flog it out on neutral grounds somewhere, another 'Rumble in the Jungle'? Only time will tell who emerges Top Dog of the World , as with most other dog fights.. Hackles come up and fur starts to fly..
Has anyone had any issues with their coil chip failing?
l bought a second hand 19” coil for my GPZ and it worked fine for several months and then out of the blue, it failed.
Minelab suggested that I buy a new coil. After a bit of research I decided to have a dongle made up from my 14” coil and now 12 or so months later the chip in the dongle has failed. Am I doing something wrong? Is there a problem with the detector or am I just very unlucky?
By Rob Allison
I figured we can stir the pot just a little while we wait out the release of the Minelab GPX 6000, right?
That being said, Minelab still claims the GPZ 7000 can get "up to 40% more depth" over previous GPX detectors. We can all question, does the GPX 6000 still fit in this category, as Minelab stated GPX detectors. The upcoming Minelab GPX 6000 is still a GPX series detector, but primarily using GeoSense Technology. I don't see where GeoSense really talks about any more depth ability over the previous GPX 5000, but it does mention about better ground response/clarity, maybe allowing you to hear something in higher mineralized ground over previous GPX series.
I don't claim to be an expert electronic prospector, but my specialty is in detecting for gold nuggets with the best detectors available. We call all talk about how much gold we found, years of experience, regions we hunted and such .....
The bottom line is I still feel the Minelab GPZ 7000 is the KING of detectors when it comes to depth. Many Australian, African and US prospecting friends still feel the same. I personally have found many large gold nuggets and specimens at max depth where I doubt any detector with a similar sized searchcoil would have found. I also know that probably 1% or less of those large gold nuggets/specimens are out there still and the ones at max depth range of the current detector technology.
Does this justify the purchase of a Minelab GPZ 7000 over the upcoming GPX 6000, or should GPZ 7000 owners dump their units now? These are questions I personally can't advise anyone on, but it's something to consider when you make a purchase of a metal detector in the thousands of dollar range.
What I can leave you with is my personal experience over the last 25 years chasing gold nuggets .... If you are in areas where there has been historically large gold nuggets, overburden to bedrock/paylayer/caliche/false bedrock that can be several feet and deeper in depth, you might seriously consider either holding your current GPZ 7000 or consider a purchase of one at some point.
I personally will not be parting with my trusty GPZ 7000, we have a 5+ year personal relationship. We have been through tough times, bad weather, I even yelled at her and dropped her a few times! Like Steve mentioned before, you could actually fall in love with your detector.
Wishing you all much success with whatever detector(s) you swing.
P.S. Below is a recent GPZ 7000 find, max depth, just a break in the threshold (yes the GPZ 7000 has one). Nearly a pound in weight (uncleaned in picture)
By Gerry in Idaho
I've read a few posts from those who have both and their input is pretty much what I expected.
Having fun (especially with others) is the majority of why I enjoy detecting. Only a select few actually do it for a living and do well. The rest of us (me included), enjoy the hunt, adventures, comradery with like minded friends, and getting some gold on occasion. It's looking like the GPX-6000 is getting the majority of gold better than the GPZ-7000. So, is the extra weight worth the rare occasional big nugget? Lets go a step farther. Say the ZED hits a 4 ounce nugget at 34". Will the 6000 hit that same nugget at 30", 32" 33" or 34". Say it's 2" less and only gets the chunk at 32". It's still near 3' deep which is deeper than most folks enjoy digging and or most other detectors out there.
So the reality for most folks, the GPX-6000 at a cost savings of $2000 and over 2 pounds lighter, better ergonomics, no more tethered into a harness, more user friendly, real wireless Bluetooth phones, is the best option for most.
Like I said in another post. There should be a convoy of GPZ users heading down the highway to get the new GPX-6000 and having more fun, more gold more often. I can help make that smile happen.
Anyone have a point I am missing or totally off, please chime in.
Pic of the nugget will probably only be a few inches in depth difference between the 6 and 7. But the majority of us would probably hear if with both machines at 30 or more.