Steve Herschbach

Now there is some solid information - thanks for posting Walker. Can't wait to see the samples!

plus another video with a simple test on a gold nugget..... The Garrett AT Max is now shipping to dealers and customers.

From https://www.whiteselectronics.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/2017_5.pdf, page 3.... "NEW MACHINE ON THE HORIZON? Rumors have been swirling about what machine White’s will release next. Some speculate that it could be a 12kHz “MX Maxxx” sold with a $200 higher price tag. Others imagine White’s going back to its roots, releasing an old-school BFO machine that weighs 8 lbs and runs on 4 C-cell batteries. Inside sources seem to point to some kind of mid-priced, high-performance detector aimed at customers who need a deep-seeking machine at an affordable price point. Only time will tell."

I bought them on a discontinued/closeout sale years ago - best boots I ever had for warm country detecting. I will have to go back and find the receipt to get the model. Good idea though. I will do that and ask 5.11 directly what the closest equivalent is now.

I seem to run my GM differently than most here in the states. Where the ground is fairly even I run manual sensitivity, bumping up or down a notch as required. Place before last 6 - 7 - 8 was good, with 7 most of the time, and up or down a notch as needed. I keep it right where just a hint of ground noise bleeds through. If the ground gets too variable, then it is Auto or Auto+ The last spot was a little hotter, so 5 - 6 - 7 was the magic trio. In worse ground I can imagine 4 - 5 - 6 or even 3 - 4 - 5 as being required. The only targets I skip are ones where the meter bangs hard ferrous over and over. But just one swing to non-ferrous or no meter reading at all - dig it. Preferable of course to dig everything but the trash sometimes disagrees! Anyway, I think some people are having issues because they fear backing off the sensitivity. However, in casual testing on a one gram nugget I found the GM at sensitivity 7 to be roughly equal to the Gold Bug Pro at maxed out gain. I only run sensitivity 9 or 10 if I have a very small area that I am certain contains gold. I wish those setting were marked in red, like on my car RPM gauge. "you are redlining sir - hope she doesn't blow"! Just too hot for covering lots of ground in my opinion without creating too much noise. Great for mini patch and crevice work though. With my Gold Bug 2 the trial was in always being on top of the ground balance. What I am enjoying about the GM is the ground balance is not a worry other than how fast you are moving. That makes just monitoring the "threshold" (faint ground feedback) easy with only a touch of my thumb to bump it up or down as required. Anyway, perfect mate for my Zed. Sometimes that beast just tires me out, and it is fun to grab a light weight detector and go ping some small gold, which for me unfortunately is always easier than finding the big ones. I really appreciate your reporting Paul - good stuff.

As you say Dave not for all pieces, but what a tremendous improvement! The top one in particular I really like the before and after.....

No hand sensitivity issues with the Zed. It's hot but not quite that hot. Only Nenad can answer the pinpointer question for sure - he may drop in to comment. I personally rarely need a pinpointer with the GPZ14 but found a VLF with smaller coil handy to have around when using the GPZ19.

First, if true I apologize. You never mentioned general public so yes, I assumed it was in the context of the on going discussion. It never occurred to me that you might think the general public is all involved in a conspiracy with Minelab. One of the first things I did was test the Impact on our goldfields. This picture was taken at Rye Patch, Nevada last year during testing. I have done more testing this year with it versus the G2 and a White's TDI SL. I have to say I am not very concerned about what the Impact does for you on your ground. All I care about is what it does on our goldfields and where I hunt, and I know very well what that is versus quite a few other detectors. As far as ditching the Impact because it weighs more than I am used to? I swing a 7 lb plus GPZ 7000 day in and day out. My only comment was why would I use an Impact to metal detect for gold nuggets when ON MY GROUND other detectors that weigh less do as well or better. And this? "But Steve is right when he says if Mike likes it that is all that matters.but infers I am easily pleased and the Impact is not all that good." Mike (or is it Rob?), you have one huge chip on your shoulder and it appears to me you are looking to twist any comment I make into a negative. You have also made it quite clear whether you intended to or not that you think you know far more on the subject than I. We clearly are not communicating well with each other. Nothing of value is being said about the Impact at this point, and none of the other commentary interests me. So one last time, and I really do mean this sincerely - good luck and best wishes for your success with the Impact. P.S. Since this is a game of one-upmanship, I got my White's Coinmaster 4 in 1972, which by my count was about 45 years ago.

Following with interest - my very old 5.11 boots are getting more wore out every day. I just saw a spot yesterday where more shoe goo is needed. I am going to have to get new boots this winter.

Welcome to the forum - nice to have another ATX user on board! Excellent advice above. The only way I know to learn a new detectors discrimination capabilities is to play the "guessing game". Use whatever discrimination feature you wish, and prior to digging call it good or bad. Then dig them all and see how you scored with your guesses. I promise this will build genuine confidence better for you than anything else. PI detectors are notoriously poor when it comes to discrimination. My basic method is dig everything if I can. If that seems impossible due to lack of time and too much trash, then I just do the best I can, but I KNOW there is a cost in missed good targets. If nothing else removing trash can reveal hidden good items below the trash that are "masked" by relying on discrimination. The ATX and Minelab GP series both have a iron discrimination feature. The Minelab's blank on ferrous, and the ATX grunts. I have personally seen the Minelab detectors blank on pretty sizable gold specimens and after that never used it. I guess that habit carried over to the ATX as I rarely employ the iron grunt feature, though I do have a bit more faith in it than the Minelab system. There is something more proactive about repeated solid ferrous grunts than the rather vague blanking or breaking of the signal the Minelab's employ. But when in doubt, dig it out!

I think reports like yours are more valuable these days than reports from somebody like myself. Good, dispassionate reports from regular owners of detectors, pro and con, are always welcome and I wish more people would take the time and effort. That being the case I really want to thank you for a well written, concise report!

No worries Jim, I think we ran out out telluride steam anyway. I sympathize truly. One reason I retired early was a nagging feeling I might not have all the miles left in me that I like to think. It has a way of sneaking up on all of us eventually. When I can't roam the hills it will be parks and beaches for me, just another funny old guy with a detector. That is one thing I like about northern Nevada. The generally low, rolling terrain is pretty friendly for older prospectors. I just wish there was more gold!

Check out this link - all gold found by my friend Marko with a V3i and 12" x 10" S.E.F. coil. Marko swore by that coil, and I have never heard of anyone ever doing better finding gold nuggets with the V3i. I was there that trip and he was on a tear finding gold. https://www.whiteselectronics.com/find/v3i-and-ganes-creek-gold/

I honestly did not think I would have much use for the 19" coil and was slow to get one. Glad I did now. It appears there is almost no sensitivity lost on the smaller stuff and yet a gain in depth and ground coverage. But yes, the weight is just another pound on an already too heavy detector. Great pics and gold Dave - thanks for posting!

Like most minerals I am sure most ores containing tellurium are not in pure form, and so some may be detectable for various reasons. I can find diamonds with my metal detector - as long as some gold or platinum jewelry is attached. You would be surprised how many posts I make on this forum are made from the field Jim. Another advantage of my move south. I don't find as much gold these days but I don't have to fight dense brush, bears, mosquitos, and rain on a daily basis either, so I think the trade is worth it. Right now my knee and shoulder are informing me that perhaps I need to to a little less detecting, not more! Best of luck on your further adventures...

Welcome to the forum! That is the way to start out. Nothing like finding gold right away to boost confidence in your chosen detector. Thanks for posting and good luck with your detecting.

Not at the moment but it only takes one thunderstorm to change that.

I was just mentioning some gold and telluride nuggets I had years ago. Long since sold. I totally agree about them being gold with included tellurides. "They are simply a mixture of part gold, part bismuth telluride". I am probably just confusing the issue. My brain was hearing "gold" and "telluride" and not thinking "calaverite". The Crystal Structure and Genesis of the Gold Telluride Minerals

When I said alloy I meant gold/silver alloy. The "gold telluride" nuggets I purchased years ago were from Canada and identical to the photo link I posted at the start of the thread. They are simply a mixture of part gold, part bismuth telluride. They would certainly be detectable. I agree Jim most tellurides would not be. Without knowing the exact nature of the target it really is all just speculation. I spend many a day swinging a detector and finding nothing, but does not hurt to try.... unless I mess up my knee or shoulder! Nice to see you posting again Jim.

From the Garrett Facebook page... "AT MAX UNITS ARE SHIPPING! The first shipment of AT Max detectors departed our Garland, Texas, dock last week. Another shipment went out yesterday. More will follow today and more will continue daily going forward, both U.S. and international models. Please bear with us, as this will take several weeks to fulfill our backlog of orders. But, the good news is that your distributors (and then dealers) will be receiving units as we continue rolling forward. Regarding Z-Lynk products and MS-3 Z-Lynk Wireless Headphones . . . all orders have shipped and Garrett has ample quantities in stock for new orders. We encourage our dealers to stock up on these hot items as the busy fall selling season is upon us. To our loyal customers: THANK YOU for your patience as we opted to improve the AT Max this summer."

It's still external to the rod. When I said wrap I simply meant it as an explanation/clarification of "external". How it is wrapped or routed externally is another issue. Like you, all my cables go straight up with excess at the top bear control box.

Welcome to the forum! Previously discussed at http://www.detectorprospector.com/forum/topic/1062-minelab-pi-coil-on-whites-tdi/ And http://www.detectorprospector.com/forum/topic/3534-minelab-coil-on-whites-tdi/

Just curious. Excepting the Deus, which has no coil cable, what are people's thoughts on cable routing? There is the original "wrap around the rod" method. There are also a few detectors that route the cable up the shaft like the Minelab Explorer/E-TRAC/CTX series, the GPZ, Garrett ATX, and Nokta Impact. I am especially interested to hear what people who have used both systems think - pros and cons. I have a few thoughts but don't want to bias the responses so will weigh in later.

Just a reminder - only a couple weeks away!

Alloys are less conductive than pure metals and so bottom line gold telluride nuggets will be harder to detect than purer gold nuggets.