Jump to content

Jim in Idaho

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

116 Excellent

1 Follower

About Jim in Idaho

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location:
    Blackfoot, Idaho
  • Interests:
    Prospecting, machining, equipment design/build, predator hunting, flyfishing
  • Gear Used:
    Whites GM24K, GMT, TDI-SL, DFX. Homebuilt mineral jigs/with auto-feeder, for gems. Designer & inventor & operator of patented "Sweep Jig' (US10159988 B1), Polaris 4 x4 ATV

Recent Profile Visitors

1,363 profile views
  1. Jim in Idaho

    Gold / Quartz Specific Gravity... Question

    I got 62.39 using this formula: (SG -2.65) x 19.3 / (19.3-2.65) x SG That result is 14.629/56.743, which gives .2578, or 25.78% gold, which equals 62.39 grams SG of the specimen is 3.408 Jim
  2. Jim in Idaho

    Gold / Quartz Specific Gravity... Question

    Yup...it's a good thing to know how to do, especially for a prospector. It was a good refresher for me on calculating the portion that's gold, too. Jim
  3. Jim in Idaho

    Gold / Quartz Specific Gravity... Question

    That's better, though I'm coming up with 88.34 grams of gold....LOL Jim
  4. Jim in Idaho

    Gold / Quartz Specific Gravity... Question

    All the formulas in the world won't help if the specific gravity of the gold/quartz specimen is lower than quartz. If you divide 242 by 171, you get 1.415, which is much lower than quartz. If it was 2.65, it would be 100% quartz, so being 1.415 means either the water weight, as stated, is incorrect, or there is a large portion of lightweight mineral, or air, inside. If it's a gold/quartz specimen it has to have a specific gravity higher than 2.65. Jim
  5. Jim in Idaho

    Gold / Quartz Specific Gravity... Question

    Yeah, as Walker said, must be a void, or large portion of very light rock within it. Maybe you should soak it in plain water overnight, and then do the water weight test again. If there is a void, and it fills with water, the water weight should be correct. If there is a void, and the water can get to it, you should see bubbles rising in the water. Jim
  6. Jim in Idaho

    Gold / Quartz Specific Gravity... Question

    Yup...I get a density of 1.415g/cu.cm. That's lower than pure quartz. Jim
  7. Jim in Idaho

    A Once In A Lifetime Gold Find

    Unreall..what a great find! Jim
  8. I wondered if I'd get a hard copy from the Patent Office, and today I got a nice 15 page booklet, in the mail, of the entire patent. Now I need to order a few more....LOL Jim
  9. These jigs do not work well at recovering gold from black beach sand. It has been tested. If the beach sand is mostly quartz, it will recover gold and black sand as it would in a creek. But that iron beach sand is a whole 'nother game. Where the small unit shines is as a portable prospecting unit, you can take about anywhere, and use it wet, or dry. In larger sizes it will do well as a mining recovery tool. Jim
  10. You can watch the prototype running, in the fall of '16 here: Sweep Jig at Bonanza Bar Personally, I like the aluminum model for it's light weight, and easy portability. I changed to the plastic-bodied units to save build time, and cost. But recently I decided to go back to the aluminum version. It will cost more, but I think it's better, and worth the small increase in cost. I'm still trying different versions. As for marketing, I'm hoping somebody will take it on a royalty basis. I turned 70 the 21st, and don't want to spend all my time in the shop building these. I've got 3 or 4 of the HDPE-bodied units ready to ship, and a bunch of aluminum on hand to build the newer version. There's no difference between them as far as operation. I'm planning on showing it at the Las Vegas gold show this spring. I included a pic of my unit setup at an old gold mine last summer. I was looking for pyrite crystals. Jim
  11. I've been waiting on this for weeks. The patent took effect on the 25th of Dec. Was finally published this week. The patent can be viewed, if interested, here: Link to patent I'm really happy to have this process behind me. It was a tough project. Jim
  12. Jim in Idaho

    Heavy Metal

    LOL....that's a good one! Jim
  13. I decide to take out the cons when I get tired of shoveling...LOL Seriously, I just do it at about 1-2 hours. The diaphragms, if using 6 mil visqueen last about 4 hours, so need to be replaced anyway. Visqueen is readily available at most hardware store, and is cheap, so replacing the diaphragm isn't a big deal. I think it works best with some gravel in the mix...just as you mentioned. 1/2" or 3/4" works great. When running wet, even 1" minus works fine. Running the bigger prototype (22") I just picked out the stuff over 2" and fed it. Still recovered the Snake flour(-200). Part of the patent is that the heavies move in the opposite direction from the tails, which is unlike any other device out there. I think that may be why it recovers really small gold so well. Also, the round shape slows the movement of the material which gives the heavies more time to settle.....another factor that favors fine gold recovery. Jim
  14. Roughly 20 gallon/hour, DD. It depends somewhat on the material. Running wet increases the throughput, as does more granular material. Running dry, with a powdery material, slows the volume. Sandy material increases it. Running that powdery carbonaceous material at the Peg Leg, when I was trying to recover pyrites, I was only running about 12 gallons/hour. This is for the 18" diameter unit. Going to a 24" model almost doubles it. Jim
  15. Jim in Idaho

    What Detector Did You Buy In 2018 And Why?

    Yup...I've seen those videos. Up here, the native Americans believe it's bad karma to dig into an anthill. They also believe if you remove gravel from an anthill you should always put something back. I never dig up anthills...the surface tells me all I need to know. I'm trying to keep karma on my side...LOL Jim