Gold Catcher

As always, it depends on individual perspectives. I kind of see it both ways. Improving what can be found on old patches, including opening up fields that are thus far difficult to detect (i.e. extensive hot rocks), but also trying to find new patches in unexplored areas (where no man has gone before). Re size, I am happy about all, and a 0.1 g nugget can make me as excited as much larger ones. After all, it is about finding gold, and I have not yet yawned about any nugget in my scoop. Gold is gold to me, small or large. But I am also not trying to pay bills with it. And I doubt that many really would be able to do so anyhow, despite of what they are hoping. At least not here in the US and by just doing metal detecting. GC

A better detector won't of course help with trash (assuming disc is out of question). But perhaps identifying gold close to (or attached to) hot rocks is something a better processing algorithm could achieve. The pic below is an example of what I am describing, taking from a hunting trip yesterday. All super iron rich volcanic tuff. Gold is often stuck to them or is in very close proximity. Some guys were up here with me, one with a 6000 and one with a GB2. They were just laughing....

I tend to agree with you Steve, but those areas I was describing also have a lot of trash, meaning not many people are detecting there due to the challenges with the ground. I suspect there is plenty of gold still there that is currently difficult to recover. But for most other areas I agree, and the Motherlode is a great example for that. However, I also think hunting gold where gold was found before remains a winning strategy, perhaps not the only one though. GC

Better ground processing in difficult soil would allow for greater depth, without the gold actually being physically deeper than in normal soil. This is exactly where I believe technology can improve. I get your point that for mild soil this does not matter much, but in other parts of the world this would be a game changer. In many areas I have no choice but to hunt in general/difficult (volcanic tuff). Switching to HY in either normal or difficult would make the detector completely useless, even general/normal would not work. Here is where a lot of improvements can be done, so I completely agree with you. BTW, for those areas I don't even bother to take the 6000 or the SDC. Another reason why a high-end top line gold detector needs settings options (!), and I think the current GPZ strives a good balance by having just the right settings menu to choose from. What would make me not want to buy the GPZ8? A "smart" machine that would do the thinking for me, ala 6000, with only little settings options to choose from. I love the 6000, but it has serious limitations to a point where it is unusable, i.e. in the areas that I was describing, where literally every rock is a screamer (6/14 makes no difference). With all the greatness of the 6000, it kind of sucks to have a $6000 machine, and you can't adjust any settings to make it usable for these specific tough grounds. Half of the Mojave Desert is littered with volcanic hot rocks, and that is right where the gold bearing areas are. And I am not just saying areas with hot rocks here and there that you can kick away, I mean large areas with shallow and deep hot rocks and that's all there is. Go and take a swing with the 6k in these areas, and you know what I mean. Just for that reason, I would be very interested in the Axiom, had I not the GPZ that would come to my rescue (in general/difficult). However, the Axiom could even have an edge over the GPZ in those specific circumstances. I would love to make a head-to-head comparison to see which detector would recover better small gold that is stuck to serious hot rocks. That is how you find most of the gold there. GC

Much reduced weight, perhaps punching a bit deeper, faster ground processing, updated and faster software and better(!) screen would do for me. Asking for acurate discrmination at depth is asking for too much IMO. I am no engineer, but I heard engineers saying accurate discrmination is a pipe dream and not technically feasible, in particular at the detecting edge. If the GPZ8 would come with discrimination I would almost think this would be purely to please relic hunters, and kind of a joke for a high end gold detector. I don't think anybody really believes in accurate discrimination, unless you want to identify a rusty can from a gold watch (perhaps). GC

From the above discussion it would appear that there is not much reason to make any new gold metal detector from here on. The Axiom as a versatile all-round PI, the 6000 as specialized small/medium gold sniffer, the 7000 for depth and advanced settings and best ground processing. So, is this the end? Really? I personally don't think so. But the point is well taken, the advancements in technology need to be striking to justify a true value return for the money in terms of gold finds. And that is also getting harder with less and less gold in the (reachable) ground. But all that being said, I suspect the same people who refuse any thoughts of buying the new "GPZ8" will eventually change their minds, once they see a horde of prospectors are out there with the latest and greatest, while they are missing out. It is the "gold bug" in us and the obsession for metal detecting that keeps us going and that can't tolerate that someone else "might" have an advantage in the field. And that advantage might indeed be real. GC

I noticed the same, Norvic. JP is missing in action on DP. That for sure means the "GPZ8" is coming. If the release date would be 2023 (and not sometime in 2025...) that could mean trouble for the Axiom sales. Considering the high price tag of the GPZ8, advanced prospectors might think hard whether to buy the Axiom now and then the GPZ in addition, or to wait for the GPZ release. Considering that the Axiom would for sure be no match to the new GPZ, this could become an issue. Also considering the high price tag for the Axiom which for sure does not help. I could see that beginner prospectors would buy the Axiom, and the advanced ones the GPZ. All speculations from my end, but assuming Bruce Candy will not disapoint with the new flagship ML detector, the Axiom thunder could be muted. ML for sure knows how critical timing is. GC

I will reserve judgement and first wait what the new GPZ actually has to offer, before making any decisions about a potential purchase. I noticed on other forums that new ML detectors are being bashed without even knowing anything about them, leave alone having seen any pictures, specs, or knowing anything really that would allow good judgment. Seems to be a big and persistent trend. GC

I wonder what would happen to the Coiltek coils under the same squeeze testing conditions GC

I paid the full 6k and I AM worried about shipping the unit off without having reliable insurance for the full value. But paying $100 for insurance isn't that nice neither. But so many packages are being lost or stolen. Having no apropriate coverage when shipping appears risky IMO. GC

I personally like the GPZ with the NF12 and will not buy the 17x13. First of all, the Z/12 is a very nice and "lighter" combination that just strives the right balance between depth and sensitivity to shallow gold. In fact, it comes pretty close to the 6/11 when run hot in HY/normal. I also find the Z is much easier to swing over longer periods of time with the NF12, and for most applications the depth of the NF12 is just fine. I have recovered some fairly deep gold with it, but it does require slow and overlapping swings. In addition, I want to hold my fire for the next gen GPZ which I "think" is just around the corner. Once released, I will review my options and then decide if the 17x13 for the "old" GPZ would really be a wise investment. I suspect the new GPZ will be around $10k or more, so every dollar saved now counts for me. Just my 2c. GC

Hey BMc, good to hear from you again. I enjoyed our chat at RP. Will PM you. GC

Thanks Steve, I will be helping you getting all the nails out of CA's mine pits. Everytime I think I finally got them all I find more...Re booming signals, that reminds me of a deep traget I once had with the Z/19 in Quartzsite . The day light was almost gone and I only dug a foot deep with the target getting louder. Since it was total night time then and I did not bring my headlight, I gave up and drove all the way back home, thinking to myself it would just be rubbish anyhow. Then, it started to hunt me. The next 3 days were pure hell and all I could think of was this target that I left in the ground. It got so bad that I finally had to take 2 additional days off, drove back to Quartzite and kept digging the hole. About 2 1/2 feet down I finally recovered the target, a rusty old tin can. But despite the obvious disappointment, my soul was at peace. And It was worth it! GC

So true, Steve. Are you using discrimination at all with the Axiom for these areas? Just curious. I usually dig everything, with some exceptions where the sound of the target gives me >80% confidence it would be rubbish. But generally, discrimination has never been productive for me, unless at times using the GM for <= 0.5 inch shallow gold targets on bedrock. Just curious if/how you are using discrimination with the Axiom. I always thought the biggest leap forward in the detector world would be a "revolutionary way to do discrimination" with a PI to get to those deeper bigger gold nuggets that you are talking about, and of which there are still plenty of here in CA I am sure. However, masked in tons of miner's junk. I am counting on Bruce's ingenuity, and tend to believe that if something like that would ever exist in the future it would be a ML machine. Best, GC

I still wonder though if there are production batches that were better initially. Mine really isn't bad, with exception of a few ocasions where it was unstable. I was one of the first ones to get one in the US. But yet, I heard from others who also had earlier models that some had issues, others not. Really weired. Perhaps I just had luck with my unit. GC

Never really had any issues with mine, so I won't need a fix. Using headphones and avantree only. GC

Thanks, Simon. This sucks! Just ordered the Goldhawk 9....

The Z/NF in general/difficult (but not normal!), gain 12-15, smoothing off, are my to-go settings for the areas that you are describing. Deals with magnetite, iron rich basalt and serpentine like a champ. Beats the sdc and 6/14 by a huge margin. Sorry if I am repeating myself here, but no other detector that I have ever used comes even close in these grounds. And sensitivity for fast gold remains good. Several times now I have picked up small gold that was stuck on hotrocks that way. In thse cases, once the gold was recovered the Z was silent over the remaining hot rocks, whereas the sdc and 6 kept screaming their lungs out...I did the test several times. You have got to see it to believe it. The Z is just hard to beat when it comes to ground processing, especially when the settings are adjusted to meet the ground challenges. 🤠👍 GC

He kept mxing up 0.07 and 0.7 at the beginning. But that's ok. I have picked up flakes with the sdc that did not register on the scale. Not sure why this nugget was quiet, but I can asure you the SDC will find really tiny stuff, in particular in mineralized matrix. I don't think surface tests with air matrix make much sense, but that's just my view. Re Axiom run at maximum gain, that is telling. The 6000, even when tuned all the way down to 1 click, would scream on a 0.07 nugget. So would my Z/NF12 in HY, even at low gain. That tells you how to position these detectors. All have their place though, depending on the conditions and your objectives. Re hotrocks, I always thought that this would be the real strength of the Axiom. From that comparison, it surely does not appear that way. However, he did not share the Axiom settings used, so perhaps there are better ways for the Axiom to perform. Although the SDC is really good with hot rocks, I have areas where even the sdc is totally unusable. In these places, only the Z/NF in general/difficult works smoothly with only little to moderate loss in sensitivity for small fast gold. Re NF vs stock coil, I want to be fair. I have not really tested the stock coil for bad hot rocks. It's just that ever since I mounted the 12 Zsearch I never took it off again. 😛 GC

Totally agree. And it's not just about the weight, the 12 NF is adding stability and sensitivity. Only 1 inch narrower but worlds apart. GC

I think putting out serial numbers is a good idea. I seem to have more luck with my 6000, as I can't really say it's not performing well. Yes, it can be erratic at times, but nothing I can't usually manage. I always contributed the chatter to the enormous sensitivity, something I am not unfamiliar with being a sdc user. In fact, I found it a very useful machine, although I hardly ever use the internal speaker. For me it is a nice addition to the Z/NF, especially when hiking. The only issue I have is that it is rather hot rock sensitive, something that is not related to the problems described here. Asked if I would buy it again, I would say yes, but only for my particular model of course. I feel sorry about all the other ones having serious issues. This truly sucks! I sincerely hope that the GPZ successor won't be in the same camp! GC

I have been very happy with my NF Z-Search, it made all the difference for the 7000 IMO. So, I don't mind waiting for the NF Xceeds to become available. I know they will be superb coils, and I am in for the long run. And it is not that my 6000 stock coils are not working in the meantime. Without a doubt the Goldhawks are a fantastic addition for the 6000, I just happen to be a NF guy. GC

Hi HNSGP, I would actually consider a used SDC instead, or the Axiom. I know this will be at higher cost, but having a PI rather than a VLF will be the better choice for your purpose, IMO. Sierra Nevada is full of hot rocks and heavy mineralization, and PI, especially MPF, will be a big advantage. Swing any VLF over the motherlode serpentine schist, and you will know what I am saying.🙃 GC

Many thanks, Steve! And yes I am aware of the CA glacial deposits. Although I have not spent much time in the very high up Sierra Nevada regions, I have plans to explore some areas more thoroughly. I will PM you to get you thoughts on a specific location that I have in mind... GC

Fantastic report, Steve. And congrats for finding these beautiful nuggets. Clearly, the Axiom should be called The Beast 😉. Just curious, you mentioned these are glacial deposits. I always thought glacial deposits are mostly fine gold. Is this different up there? Also, I suppose this was a private claim used for commercial operations? GC