Leaderboard
Popular Content
Showing content with the highest reputation on 01/17/2014 in all areas
-
The disparity between Australia and other places is so extreme it really is as if people are detecting on different planets. It is obvious to me this is where a lot of arguments about detectors arise - people forgetting what is true in one place is not true everywhere, and what works best in one place does not work best in another. I have a long story that perfectly illustrates this but will save it for a new thread.Alaska is very low mineral ground by comparison to Australia. In fact, my old stomping grounds near Anchorage are on one of the largest continuous areas of slate, shale, and graywacke on earth. Extremely low iron content sedimentary or low grade metamorphic rock. A 6" gold dredge run all day will produce about a tablespoon of magnetic black sand. The nuggets average under a gram and the big ones weigh a quarter ounce. Nuggets over an ounce exist but are almost unheard of. I only found one right at an ounce in over 30 years of dredging and metal detecting south of Anchorage. And that was with a dredge. My largest nugget ever found detecting south of Anchorage weighed about 8 pennyweight. With a VLF. I owned one of the largest detector dealerships in the country, selling over 500 metal detectors a year for decades. Over 99% of those detectors were VLFs. It is not because Alaskans lack money or are stupid. The fact is a PI not only offers no advantage it puts one at a disadvantage in many locations in Alaska. The detectors that produce are the Gold Bug 2 and White's Goldmaster series. They can be run at full gain and run well at that. Air test one of those detectors sometime, and that is the depth you generally get south of Anchorage. Time and again visitors from other places would show up with their high priced Minelabs looking to show the locals up and we just ran circles around them. In tailing piles, detectors like the White's MXT or a host of other mid-frequency detectors rule. PI detectors have had almost no impact in Alaska. Now, it is a huge state, and there are areas that warrant a PI. My own Moore Creek mine was one of those. It had a couple nasty hot rocks buried in mild soil that gave VLF detectors fits. The vast majority of the gold found at Moore Creek was found with PI detectors. There are other examples. But those locations are not the rule in Alaska, they are the exception. What I found interesting is people who have never used anything but a Minelab PI in bad ground often get almost religious about it, and refuse to believe what I have just relayed to you. I must be making it up. That said, because of my use of the Minelabs at Moore Creek I have found more gold with a Minelab than any other person in Alaska I know of. Even in low mineral ground, a Minelab with an 18" mono is going to hit a larger nugget deeper than a VLF mainly because VLFs do got get any real bonus from larger coils. These days I target areas in Alaska where large nuggets lurk and tend to rely on my Minelab PI but I honestly must say most of the gold I find I still would have found with a good VLF. In much of Alaska it still really is just a matter of being first over the nugget, not having the deepest machine. Better wrap this up, but in the western US there is a huge variation in ground from stuff to rival Australia to extreme low mineral ground. On average most is far less difficult than Australian ground and so many areas still produce well with VLF detectors but in the southwest in particular PI detectors are the real producers. Overall the western US is in between with Alaska and Australia as the extreme opposites. Jonathan Porter told me once he thought I had an anti-Minelab bias, mostly relating no doubt to my reports from Ganes Creek, Alaska and my advice to people there not to us a PI. I can see how it would appear that way, though in later years the Minelab X-Terra 705 became very popular at Ganes Creek. Not a detector that normally gets raves from nugget hunters but it performs very well at Ganes Creek. Yet when I got to Australia to hunt with JP I think he saw that I love my GPX 5000. I think it is one of the finest pieces of metal detecting technology ever produced, and I feel almost privileged to own one and use it. It was a real joy seeing what it could do in the ground it was made for. But if I was headed south of Anchorage tomorrow I would grab my Gold Bug 2 or GMT.2 points
-
Something to ponder. As far as I know the largest nugget ever found with a metal detector was the Hand of Faith, at 875 ounces of relatively solid gold. With a Garrett ADS VLF in 1980. The nature of desert eluvial deposits is the gold is usually near surface and more depth does not always mean more gold. All the Minelab PI detectors made ever since have yet to find a larger nugget in Australia. And nothing in modern times has come even remotely close to masses of gold found over 100 years ago. There is the idea that another foot of depth will result in a renewed gold rush but I do believe in many places people would be surprised to find the cream of the crop gone forever. Scrapes obviously prove that is not true of all locations but in areas where bedrock is within a foot or two all the depth in the world is not going to put the gold back. Photo from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hand_of_Faith (Wikimedia Commons) Actual Hand of Faith nugget on display at Golden Nugget Las Vegas1 point
-
1 point
-
Hey Kenny.. Sounds like things are starting to click for you!!! one of the things I mentioned earlier was that the AT series is a lot of bang for the buck especially working iron... There is some other unmasking options that are the complete package..DEUS...Gold max Power..Deeptech Vista Gold....those 3 are in their own leauge..Top rung..yet specialized for iron site unlocking on the most advanced level to date..And they offer the iron tone volume that you would like to see...but those machines also offer high resolution iron disc...by this I mean say on your AT a nail takes 1 to 2 points to become from high to low tone...imagine taking that and expanding that spread to say 10 points to remove it completely to the iron tone...thats where extra benefits cab be seen for unmasking..Instead of a nail dropping to low tone from high tone in one number you instead take the nail out piece by piece for simplistic terms.. why is the important? The less disc you can bring to bear on say the nail the better your chance of locating smaller and or lower conductors thst are collated with the nail... Out of all the machines available for intelligent site work the Gold Max Power is the Apex design for that purpose..followed by the Deep Tech Vista Gold.. One thing to note is both that both those machines are built in Europe...they are combating iron unmasking head on ..The American manufacturers are catching up yet not quite on deck ....YET....but that will be changing SOON...Your iron tone Volume Control is closer than you think ..I just hope they decide to expand the iron range to high resolution.. I'm not saying your AT will have iron volume but American Machines will soon.. That's what the company's now know..that there's more lying in iron that can be dug in the supposedly hunted out spots... One 3 inch long nail 2 inches deep will cancel out a silver dollar under it at 7 or 8 inch deep.. Keith1 point
-
The coil connection is my BIGGEST gripe about the AT's!! What kindof minifingered vice grip person came up with that design????1 point
-
I would say that hits the nail on the head. If you just lean one way or the other based on what the primary use of the machine will be it is hard to go wrong. I prefer my Gold Bug Pro to the AT Gold for prospecting simply because it focuses more on that task and I do not like changing coils on the AT Gold. This will tell you how highly I think of the AT Pro and AT Gold however. The only reason I sold my AT Gold is because I have a CTX 3030 and for me they served the same purpose. Waterproof coin and jewelry detector. If I had to trade the CTX for something else it would be the AT Gold. The fact is I believe the AT Gold or AT Pro compare very favorably with the CTX 3030 and that says a lot. They are a couple super bang for the buck detectors. I was using my Gold Bug Pro in wet brush the other day though and water dripping off the brush got a bit of moisture in the box and the display fogged up. The attractions of waterproof are obvious.1 point
-
Ray brings up some valid points. The AT Gold seems like a coin machine turned into a prospector via the addition of the all metal threshold based mode being added to the AT Pro The AT gold in disc mode mirrors the AT Pro.. The gold bug Pro or G2 seems like a Gold machine turned into a dual purpose machine... In other words both do dual duty as prospectors and coin jewelry through I.D. ability and full disc modes but they have different DNA. The G2 acts more like a 18khz machine in the targets it prefers..and the way it behaves..The AT Gold Seems to act more like a lower grew machine in regards to it likes coins..These observations mind you are from the disc mode... I actually noticed the 15 khz At Pro can act like a lower frequency machine...but this is not a bad thing..even though they both are hot on coins the AT Gold has a prospecting mode with added Tools for perfromance..like I.d. In all metal through audio and it's very conservative in its iron I.d so as not to call gold iron....ground window very unique and at times in bad dirt can be godsend if used with knowledge..adjustable threshold again paramount for small gold.. so in the end the both in all metal mode will be good prospectors..user skill for prospecting will be the decider I feel more than the battle between which is better than the other..LOL.. but if both are ran on disc mode G2 Vs AT Gold I personally feel and have noticed the G2 likes smaller thinner targets to a slight degree and on the other end of the spectrum the AT has a edge on coin type targets.. I actually think the G2 is complimented by the Omega when working a site.. I feel the AT Gold is a good standalone unit when working a site.. I lean to specialty detectors myself..Like best unmasked best depth best mineral handling ability..best I.d. and no one machine Does all those things.. but I can say for the money and the performance that is achieved and the ability to do it all quite well with an audio that is conveying the AT series especially the Gold is very adaptive and once understood and learned properly it can be very much a great prospector and a great unmasker .. Yes there better unmasker and there's better prospectors but like anything else in detecting fringe targets require a skilled mindset be they isolated small gold or intermingled non ferrous in ferrous and the edge advantage machines come into play for what I like to call the final pull on sites At first the best machine for the required job may not be overly apparent because you are not yet sure what your trying to do and things of advantage may not be noticable..Right tool for the Job can come to mind.Yet the gaps seem to be closing..multi purpose can really get close to dedicated machines now-a- days.so the edges are not as easily seen unless you are really pushing the boundaries on your hunts.. But yes the Garretts are WORTH THE MONEY.. Keith1 point
-
Good write up snd video Keith. I wish the iron audio was adjustable on the AT. I cant run mine in iron on, Gives me a headache. Steve,not thatthis means much,but I have both and pretty much stick with the GBPro most the time. My son has taken over the AT,he loves it. I do seem to notice the GB seems to find more lead, AT more coin type targets when comparing finds at end of the day. If you hunt sites with an abundance of old rusty tin pieces and bottle caps,its easier to i.d. them with the AT.1 point
-
Hey Kenny glad you enjoy the AT-GOLD.. Fine machine for sure... I must say I have tested out alot fo detectors for unmasking over the years and thye have progressed slowly but surely... in the last few years manufacturers have started to realized theres more in the iron sites to be found and started to offer us the detectorist instrument's to combat the situation head on... What is it we need to go head on in a iron hole type site... 1-Higher freq's(18-25 Khz is the norm now)... 2-Ability to break tone on the most troublemsome iron ...In most cases Nail's the number one site masker in the world... 3-fast shutdown on target's.Greater seperation 4-minimal filtering of target signal's...in other words we need bleedy rejection not clean rejection... 5-Tight superior designed DD coil's 6 Iron Volume audio...this is useful when you are in abundance of iron like nails and you have broken your tone right at nail..So now it break low to high tone at this spot.but with iron volume we can control the low tone output for a less fatiguing hunt... The AT series from Garrett are leading edge...though they lack SOME of the top shelf feautures mentioned above for a true site machine, I can promise you they do VERY VERY well in the iron...especially with the 5x8 DD BT coil installed.... The At series also takes well to a more negative ground balance in disc mode than some machines are able to achieve.Why negative? Well if the dirt is bad enough smaller and or deeper targets can be called iron and at tiems if the dirt issevere enough they dont have to be deep to be signaled as iron... But a bit of a negative ground bal can help you SEE THROUGH the mineral a bit better....And luckily the AT series is able to run a good but begaitve wiht the excellent DD design they have and still have an Intelligent hunt... Next time out wiht your AT try some differnet ground settings than normal and notice how it changes the sensitivity to different conductor's..... I may aslo add once you really get into trying to work a site to its fullest potential that is full of iron you may want make sure you allow the Iron audio to remain on...Why? Well when you allow the iron audio to report instead of null like a regular disc circuit does you are keeping the audio gate open constantly and you are not having to start up and shut down in an iron saturated site....You just get your sweep speed right and allow the full audio report to flow through the headphone's...Also by doing this you can get a clearer picture of the rejected target...in this case iron... Some will say put disc on zero and and let the machine set the tone break but thast really a no-no for any serious unmasking and site unlocking...you need to fine tune the disc/Tone break for the individual site and evn ground setting to achieve the best result's... One thing unique to the AT is that there not the fastest like the XP GMP or DTVG or DEUS or T2/F75 and such but they are able to Blend up target's with a audio that in my opinion is second to none and also uncanny for a digital machine to posses.. I have a video I did of the AT on a dollar gold piece...it shows the need for the iron audio to be ON for the ultimate unlock. Please take a look Keith1 point
-
I started detecting in 1989 until 2001 using a Minelab VLF before I received the SD2000. In answer to Kempf’s question in regards to total time spent swinging each detector then the majority of my detecting has occurred only over one day on a weekend during the cooler months. So here are the results using the 3 detectors on the same goldfields : SD 2000 for 122 days ; GP3000 for 113 days ; GPX5000 for 78 days. In regards to Fred’s question then the answer is nothing spectacular as the total is only 164. Thanks Steve for the welcome and I would expect there are a lot of US and Aussie operators out there with much better figures than mine for the time I’ve been detecting, although the goldfield I have detected on the most is not noted as a good producer compared to others around the country. I agree with you about detecting in that we get better the older we get except for our agility. Also agree in regards to the GPX5000 as it has produced the most gold for me including the largest and deepest while using the Fine Gold timing. Again will agree the ground here is rather nasty.1 point
-
Thanks for the kind words. I've been prospecting since the mid 1970s, and ended up getting a degree in Mine Engineering at the Mackey School of Mines - part of the University of Nevada. Yet even though I got my degree, I kept up panning, dredging and otherwise prospecting out in the field - because I enjoyed it. What you know makes all the difference when you get out in the field, and as I was looking at the books available, I saw that most were written in the 1970s and 80s and did not include a lot of info which I thought they should. So I spent 10 years working off and on to produce a book that had all the info I thought a book on prospecting and gold mining should offer, including all the new info on metal detecting, because the world of technology has changed since 1980. The book has been a big success, in the 4 years since it came out, I've sold more than 6000 copies. Its available at most prospecting stores and through Amazon.1 point