Steve Herschbach

The GPX 4800 was a non-detector. It was what was supposed to replace the GPX 4500 but the 4500 was selling so well it got delayed. And by then Bruce Candy came up with the now famous Fine Gold timing. This and other changes were added to create the GPX 5000 and the 4800 and 5000 were released at the same time. The price difference was minimal and nobody wanted the "next best" and so few if any dealers even bothered stocking the GPX 4800. The MAP price is currently $4095

It sounds like the definition of hot ground so stick with the stock DD coil. A concentric (the old Longscan) will just make things worse. You have reduced gain but do not mention the V/SAT control. This is the other half of the equation. The Variable Self Adjusting Threshold control smooths audio responses at higher settings but with a trade in that it also tends to smooth target responses. The trick is to find a mix of gain and V/SAT setting that best smooths the hot rock response while still allowing nugget signals to stand out. This is best achieved through some on the spot trial and error with a test target. Gold nugget is best but lead shot a decent substitute. From page 21 in the Owners Manual by Jimmy Sierra: "GAIN and VARIABLE SAT (Self Adjusting Threshold) Speed: The (-) and (+) Ground Balance pads compensate for common ground minerals in the area. The VSAT control compensates for the consistency of that ground mineralization. The greater the degree of inconsistencies, the more SAT is needed to quiet ground noise. If the THRESHOLD becomes too erratic or noisy, it might be necessary to use the VSAT feature and/or reduce the GAIN control. This noisy behavior will make it difficult to recognize a true target (possible nugget) from pieces of mineral, commonly referred to as "hot rocks". It is not wise to keep a high level of GAIN if the detector will not operate smoothly. This is a false sense of security. Recognizing a true target is the most important part of detecting. This is an example of when less GAIN will produce more nuggets. You must be the best judge of just how much noise you can tolerate and still identify nuggets, as well as the combination of V-SAT and GAIN which produces the desired results in your area. Therefore, if you have been operating your GMT at the full level of GAIN (10) and you determine that this is too high because either the threshold is erratic or the detector is giving false signals; always begin by reducing the GAIN toward the Initial Setting triangle of (7 to 8). If this does not correct the problem, start adding some SAT speed by turning the SAT control slowly clockwise. If this does not correct the problem, go back to the GAIN and reduce it a little more and add a bit of SAT. As I mentioned earlier it is sort of like seasoning a pot of soup. Some salt and some pepper. Remember any drop in GAIN below (7-8) will result in some loss of depth. Any increase in SAT speed above the Initial Setting of (3-4) will also reduce overall depth. However, every ground condition has its optimum setting. Overall depth is not the ultimate goal. Finding nuggets is! Unless your threshold is constant and as smooth as possible. and free from false targets which confuse the picture, you will never be able to tell the ground from the gold. We like to use the analogy of driving on a straight road versus a curvy road. The object is to get from point A to point B. 65 mph might get you there on a straight road, but you will have to slow to 35 mph if the road is curvy, or you will end up off the road. The straight road is like low mineralized ground and the curvy road is like heavy mineralization. High Gain and slower SAT will not get you the Gold in heavy mineralization as well as lower GAIN and a bit of faster SAT." A trick that can be used in conjunction with this is to use manual ground balance. Then ground balance to the ground itself and note the ground balance number. Now ground balance to a hot rock and note the ground balance number. Then manually adjust the ground balance to a number more or less midway between these two extremes. This can make the audio responses less pronounced. In other situations just running in tracking does a better just smoothing the responses so you have to experiment. You have chosen the worst place possible to learn the machine. The GMT can compensate very well for high levels of mineralization where the mineralization is consistent. High frequency machines are very sensitive to changes in mineralization and so places like river bars with mixed cobbles of highly variable composition can be difficult if not impossible to deal with depending on your expertise level. I highly recommend you chose to work on normal ground or bedrock and stay off the cobbles until you get more familiar with the machine. Truth also is, some places just call for a PI detector or at least a lower frequency machine to take the edge off. The tuning tips in the GMT manual starting on page 18 are worth reading several times, once after each use of the machine as use makes things it discusses clearer. I do not know if your unit was new or purchased used and so maybe you did not get the excellent operating video. If not, it is available in 6 parts on Youtube. V/SAT is discussed in part four around the 7 minute mark.

I would be willing to do it again but that is a year from now so we can worry about that, well, a year from now! I will post the spreadsheet soon Jason but it will show nothing not in the images above. I have one extra column to the left that contains the member names (to help me eliminate duplicate posts) but thought just going with an ID number worked best to make it at least kinda sorta anonymous. So I will remove that column before uploading. Busy at the moment but will do by tomorrow morning for sure.

Good try klunker, but we all now know you use a TB-135 to find your gold! Different strokes for different folks. Lots of people happy just using a Gold Bug 2. As long as folks are getting out, finding some gold, and most importantly, enjoying themselves, all is good.

I can tell you this from selling detectors for decades. There are as many people who prefer the S rod design as hate it. It has a lot to do with the specific design. I find the Fisher Gold Bug 2 configuration to be very good for me. Yet the S rod on the Makro Racer is uncomfortable after a long day. The angle is different. The post style on my GPZ 7000 suits me well. The one on my ATX really does not. Just subtle differences in the grip design. My all time favorite for comfort is the F75. Perfect balance and perfect grip for me. The point here I am trying to make is this is one of those personal preference things where no one design suits everyone. Big hands or small hands makes a huge difference, and balance is more important than weight. I 100% certainly do vote for coil choice with detectors though!!!!! I have had a lot of detectors I sold used but with a new stock coil I never used at all. The first thing I did in many cases was use an accessory coil as my main coil. Which is of course why they do it that way. Sells more coils. To this day you can't buy a Gold Bug Pro with the coil it should come with, the 5 x 10 DD, unless you get it as part of a dual coil package or spring for the more expensive F19.

OK, here are the details I promised for members of this forum. Here I can name names. Below is my spreadsheet. Sorry about the size. I had to cut it into an upper half and lower half and make the print fairly small to post here. But it is readable. My methodology was start with results from this forum since it had nearly half the responses at http://www.detectorprospector.com/forum/topic/1244-if-you-found-a-gold-nugget-in-the-last-year-what-detectors-did-you-find-it-with/ Responses 1 - 54 are from this forum. I then took the results from the next most responsive forum and excluded duplicates. This was Bill Southerns forum at http://www.nuggetshooter.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=29050 Responses 55 - 81 are from there or 27 total responses from nuggetshooting.com Next up was Rob Allison's nuggethunting.com forum at http://forums.nuggethunting.com/index.php?/topic/11647-if-you-found-a-gold-nugget-in-the-last-year-what-detectors-did-you-find-it-with/ As I moved on more duplicates occurred due to the earlier results so Rob came in with responses 82 - 95 or 14 total responses. Chris Gholson's forum at arizonaoutback.com http://arizonaoutback.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=12271 added an additional seven new responses numbered 96 - 102 TreasureNet at http://www.treasurenet.com/forums/metal-detecting-gold/476779-if-you-found-gold-nugget-last-year-what-detector-s-did-you-find.html also added seven responses numbered 103 - 109 Findmall at Link deleted since Findmall Forum update broke all old links only added two responses 110 and 111 Finally we have the ICMJ forum at http://forum.icmj.com/index.php?/topic/669-if-you-found-a-gold-nugget-in-the-last-year-what-detectors-did-you-find-it-with/ with three responses. A couple things jump out. I early on made my forum a refuge for GPZ owners who were getting lots of negative comments elsewhere. That shows with the many GPZ responses on my forum with only Rob Allison getting similar type results. Guys on these two forums are packing serious horsepower. Bill Southerns forum on the other hand is very GPX and VLF oriented, and nothing wrong with that. A little surprising to me though. The main thing you can see here on the spreadsheet is that many serious hunters are employing multiple machines, and you can now see what they are choosing specifically by studying the spreadsheet. There are lots of variations of GPZ, SDC, GPX, Gold Bug 2, and Gold Bug Pro with people owning three or four of those particular model types. This makes a lot of sense as I have always believed a well outfitted prospector needs at least a good PI and a good VLF. In my opinion a GPX paired with either a Gold Bug 2 or a Gold Bug Pro is a killer high value combination with a GPZ either in addition to or substituting for the GPX depending on the budget. However, that is just my conclusion. You can make the case also that a person can do pretty darn well with just a Gold Bug 2 or a Gold Bug Pro. Or that amazingly popular SDC 2300. Interesting how in one year that went from being the new Minelab to bash on to the Minelab everybody now acknowledges as a real winner. OK, that is about it for this project. Enjoy!

Fisher needs to make a PI prospecting detector. Minelab needs to make a better prospecting VLF. I still think Garrett made a huge mistake with the ATX. Dry land box under 5 lbs and under $2K with decent coils it would have made an impact. As it is they are a non-player.

Thanks everyone for your responses. The results are posted at http://www.detectorprospector.com/forum/topic/1262-results-of-gold-nugget-detector-survey/

A week ago I started an informal survey on seven US metal detecting oriented prospecting forums including this one. The survey here is at http://www.detectorprospector.com/forum/topic/1244-if-you-found-a-gold-nugget-in-the-last-year-what-detectors-did-you-find-it-with/ This is what got posted on all the forums. I have been compiling results all evening and it is after midnight so I am calling it a night. However, I will release additional details on this forum, probably tomorrow morning. I would like to post a screenshot of the entire spreadsheet if I can figure out how to get it all on screen at once. Or I may just post a copy of the spreadsheet in the download area for forum members to access. I am proud to say that fully half the responses were on this forum alone, with the other six making up the remainder. There are a lot of active nugget hunters on this forum. The survey was not meant to prove anything per se. I was basically just curious to see what the detectors were that were employed to actually find gold nuggets in the last year. The survey has many shortcomings. It only polls people who were on the US forums in the last week who cared to respond. The forums have tended as a whole to be Minelab oriented and so it is not surprising results might skew in that direction. Still, I got a large number of responses and so some conclusions can be drawn. I eliminated duplicate and joke responses. I eliminated a couple borrowed units. It was winnowed down to just detectors that found gold for their owners in the last year. Everything else was pretty straight forward. The only thing of note is I put a couple Gold Bug SE responses under the Gold Bug Pro because they are basically the same detector. The SE was just a precursor model. Everything was compiled on a spreadsheet and totaled. 114 people responded as having used 220 detectors to find gold nuggets. That is an average of a couple detectors per person but the reality is a lot of people owned three detectors, and then quite a few just one detector. In general you could say many nugget hunters own a couple PI detectors (or a PI and a GPZ) plus a good VLF detector. If you really want to generalize things your could say people own a couple Minelab PI type detectors and a Fisher VLF. The Gold Bug 2 and the Gold Bug Pro were the runaway favorites in the VLF category. Tesoro is conspicuous in their absence. Only one Lobo ST listed. I was a bit surprised to see not one Garrett AT Gold listed. Except for a few ATX units Garrett is pretty much a no-show. White's does a little bit better but still only just over a dozen units out of 220. The TDI PI models are the most popular alternative to the Minelabs with 8 listed. As I noted Fisher totally dominates the VLF detectors with the Gold Bug 2 and Gold Bug Pro. And I was surprised at the very large numbers for both the SDC2300 and GPZ7000. The GPZ in particular due to it being very expensive and out for only the last 6 months. The adoption rate is phenomenal in my opinion. Here are two sets of results. The first is simplified for easy digestion. I have lumped similar models together and not listed onesies and twosies. The second list is the full per model breakdown. Make of it what you will, and thank you for participating! Simplified Results: 51 GPX5000/4500/4000 33 GPZ7000 33 SDC2300 32 Gold Bug 2 15 Gold Bug Pro 13 GP3500/3000/GPExtreme 8 White's TDI/TDIPro/TDISL/SPP 5 White's GMT/GM3/VSAT 5 Nokta FORS Gold 4 Makro Racer 4 X-Terra 705 3 Garrett ATX 3 XP DEUS Full Results: 33 GPZ7000 33 SDC 2300 32 Gold Bug 2 31 GPX5000 15 Gold Bug Pro 11 GPX4500 9 GPX4000 6 GP3000 5 GPExtreme 5 FORS Gold 4 Makro Racer 4 X-Terra 705 3 Garrett ATX 3 White's GMT 3 White's TDI 3 TDI Pro 3 XP DEUS 2 GP3500 2 Fisher F19 2 CTX3030 1 TDI SL 1 White's SPP 1 Troy X5 1 XT17000 1 SD2200V2 1 SD2100V2 1 Tesoro Lobo ST 1 White's GM3 1 White's V/SAT 1 Minelab F1A4 1 Garrett Scorpion

I had no problem working in alkali ground in Nevada but as the poster says actual salt flats are probably a whole extra level of issues. Especially in Australia. There are in my opinion just some things a GPX does better.

Good book I am sure. I have several of Clive's and they are all very good. Thanks for posting!

This thread was started specifically for owners of the GPZ to pass on thoughts and experiences with the machine. And mind you it was not a request for complaints specifically although it seems to have been taken that way. Since there appears to be a huge desire by others to weigh in I have started a new thread for that purpose at http://www.detectorprospector.com/forum/topic/1259-things-metal-detector-manufacturers-could-do-better/ Any non GPZ owners weighing in here going forward can expect their posts to get moved to that location.

When I started the GPZ 7000 thread at http://www.detectorprospector.com/forum/topic/1230-minelab-gpz-7000-the-controversy-ends/ it was for owners of the detectors who have had time on it to air their opinions. It became apparent lots of other people wanted to weigh in with their opinions. I am therefore starting this thread for everyone else who owns anything else or not to voice whatever opinions they have on the detectors or companies themselves. Say anything you want, no holds barred really, but it would be nice if it was kept constructive. I prefer myself to keep things upbeat and positive. It is just who I am and I have tried to keep the forum as a whole along those lines. But I do not want people to feel like certain opinions or viewpoints are not welcome and so this is the place for whatever opinions you may have about any detector manufacturer or their products. I am not going to get involved as long as people do not get personal. This in no way is my relenting on my overall expectations for the forum as a whole. There is a time and a place for everything however and going forward this is the thread on which to air suggestions, complaints, issues, or just plain gripes. Again, all I ask is keep it civil. Thank you. Just to get you going here are some new metal detector bumper stickers for you.... First Texas - Even we don't know how many we make or what they're for! Garrett - We already made a flagship detector so quit asking for one. Minelab - The most hated name in detecting! Tesoro - Search for the past with detectors from the past. White's - Anything happen while we were sleeping?

Good advice. The GPZ is not the be all and end all of nugget detectors. The GPX may very well suit many people better for a variety of reasons. The GPZ did not replace the GPX which is why Minelab continues to market and sell the GPX 5000 and now also the GPX 4500.

I like his advice.... "When asked about what characteristics make for a good gold prospector, he said - determination, patience, and having low expectations."

Never was an issue for me. The GPX like the GPZ retains its settings when turned off. 90% of the time with either unit I just turn it on and go detecting. The GPZ though I do have to tell it to start recording my path via the GPS each session.

Half my posts this year have been from the field as I continue to rack up the hours and the gold with the GPZ. I have reached that point where the GPZ and I are one and it talks to me in a language I thoroughly understand. I am really enjoying using this machine. All I can say is that I truly am sorry that some of you are having issues.

Hi Jason, I never said Minelab should not be held accountable by those having issues. And I am not making excuses for them. Just stating what is. Thank you for you well considered and stated opinions. You are not going unheard, and you are just going to have to trust me when I say the GPZ is in absolutely no way an abandoned item.

It is all so puzzling since Fisher, Garrett, Tesoro, and White's never make mistakes and communicate with their customers on a near daily basis about what they are doing. Why can't Minelab be more like them? Truth is they are all the same, the only difference is you pay more for a Minelab, and that makes people resentful. The only company that has been breaking the mold on customer communications is Nokta/Makro.

I prefer the design of your Wacko Pick though a little shorter stubbier pick point would suit me better.

Maybe some grayish pyrites with the goldish pyrites? That would be arsenopyrite. Again, very common in gold ores and also very conductive. Arsenopyrite will often signal strongly with a VLF detector.

Would not be surprised if an assay showed some gold values. Looks like a typical mixed sulphides, probably with some copper, gold, and silver values. In Alaska you could also count on some lead and zinc. I used to have a garage full of the stuff but left most of it up north with the local rock club when I moved. But normally it is minimal ounces per ton stuff, nothing to get excited about unless you have a mountain full of it, and in California even that would not matter. But fun nonetheless. Common pyrite is just iron sulphide but there are various other "pyrites" that all have a similar hackly golden appearance. Chalcopyrite is a common copper ore that looks a lot like regular pyrite and with the copper staining that may be some of what you are looking at.

This forum is the correct place for all new threads and posts on all subjects related to prospecting and metal detecting. Only long inactive threads go to the Archive, at which time I file them under the appropriate heading. That is why you really do not need the New Content button. There is never new content in the Archive, only on the main forum.