Gold Catcher

We discussed this before: who does'nt want discrimimation? But is this really possible on a high end gold detector with adequate reliability at the detecting edge? We all know it's not. If the 8000 would come with a discrimimation feature, it would probanly just raise eye browses, knowing that discrimimation paired with high end performance is technically just not possible. It would be a feature that most serious detectorists, who spend 10k or more on a gold detector, would never trust or use anyhow. It would just be viewed as a cheap sales pitch to satisfy beginners in the field who think this would be a valuable tool when searching for gold. I doubt ML would want to loose their reputation for their flag ship detector being at professional grade.

GC

I just wish the NF 12 x 7 would be available somewhere in the US for purchase anytime soon. BTW, I never understood why so many AU shops will not ship to the US.

GC

Super impressive, Steve! I am kind of glad that it's not close to where I live. I would be there every day and spend all my money...! One of those stores where you walk in and think about whatever you see: oh yes I really really need that!

GC

The best detector is the one that finds you the most gold.

GC

Great write up, Gerry. You should print this out and put it in every Z box that you are selling to a newcomer!

GC

Great pictures, Phrunt. Thanks for sharing!

GC

Thanks, Steve. Great reply, always something to learn. I guess the Minelab treasure talk write up mostly reflects on the CA and AZ situations ("In fact, the worse the soil is and the more hot rocks there are, the better the odds of walking over a nugget.")

Cheers,

GC

18 hours ago, Steve Herschbach said:

18 hours ago, Steve Herschbach said:

There is a place here us locals talk about that to this day the best Minelab machines can barely function in, and so only the largest and shallowest nuggets get found. But yeah, it's an iron mine. The bottom line is geology is local, not a national thing, and localized areas anywhere in the world can be extreme

 

I totally concur with that. Mineralization and hot rocks greatly vary by region, and I don't think that general metrics, that describe entire countries, are an accurate reflection. I have not been to OZ yet, but the worst I have ever seen are in some areas of the Mojave Desert that had extensive volcanic activities (I complain about this a lot here on DP....🤬). The serpentine shist in the Motherload is also not for the faint hearted and some areas there are totally off limits for any detector. One thing to remember is that gold is rarely associated with mild soils. So, here is where I see the most advancements in detector technology opportunities: make them work better in highly mineralized soil and in hot rock infested areas (including deep ones that sound like gold and that you can't simply kick away), without losing sensitivity for small(er) gold. The 6000 was not an improvement in this regard! In fact, it is very hot rock sensitive, does'nt really matter much whether with mono or 14DD. The Axiom seems to perform much better here from what I have read, but the sensitivity to small gold in close vicinity to hot rocks might also be reduced. I doubt that the Axiom has solved this issue once and for all, but I would be glad to be corrected here (I never used one). I think it will take some real revolutionary new technology (not just playing with timings) to convincingly make a difference here. And I count on Bruce Candy for this one!

GC

"While hot rocks can be incredibly annoying, they are actually a good indicator that gold may be nearby. As most experienced prospectors know, the yellow metal likes to hang out in highly mineralized ground. In fact, the worse the soil is and the more hot rocks there are, the better the odds of walking over a nugget."

Hot rocks - Part 2 - Treasure Talk (minelab.com)

I use the WM12/SP01 and the Gray Ghost headphones. The Bose QC noise cancelling earbuds are not good due to the shock sensitive cable, which gives alot of noise when it rubbs against anything. Key to me is hearing through treshold variations. Anything repeatable that disturbs the treshold tone I dig.  That's why I seldomly crank up to 20 since the treshold gets too erratic (in particular in HY/N), and I often cant hear those faint variations. The shallow screamers you can hear well through the treshold at max gain, if that is what you are after, but those juicy deep warbles will often get masked. That at least has been my experience, but there are different viewpoints on this.

GC  

The 14DD works well for general mineralization, wet conductive grounds and EMI. But hotrocks remain a problem for both 14DD and the monos, not much difference between the two. At least not for the ones that I encounter frequently. I use the 14DD rarely, it just doesn't feel good to swing with the 6k.

GC

Copper salt for sure, likely Malachite (copper carbonate hydroxide). The brown rock is limonite (iron oxide hydroxides). Copper salt mixed with limonite is a good indicator for gold. Keep digging!

GC

Same here Northeast, 14DD remains mostly in truck (just like the 17 eliptical I sadly have to say...). But that is also because I still use the Z/NF12 quite a bit, and adjusting the settings will deal with EMI and salt just fine. But I have asked before why only monos show up for the 6k and not more DDs. Would be so nice to have a small DD anywhere in the 9-12 inch size range available. Perhaps not so easy due to Geosense?

GC

Not sure if the 6k/7k comparison makes much sense. Both are different detectors and designed for different applications. The video should not reveal anything new to anyone. The 6k was never designed for outright depth. Instead, shallow to medium depth with fast gold is it's main focus. It can punch deeper, however very much dependant on ground conditions and gold type, and with more mixed results. The 7k is consistantly better at depth, also due to its superb ground processing. All of this is shown on the ML star chart. Not much to argue here.

GC

7 hours ago, Norvic said:

ah no your not a Trekkie too?

Ah, you got the hint! 😁Of course I am!  I met Leonard Nimoy (Spock) at a carwash in LA. I have his autograph in a frame right next to my gold collection. "Where no man has gone before" is a good recipe to find gold in CA. You just have to find those places. Literally everywhere you go someone with a beard has been there before...

🖖 GC

Come here Norvic and I take you to my secret spots (where no detector has gone before...) 😜🤠

GC

I would be interested to hear more about gold in mineralized ground, and how well the target id works with small gold and at what depth. I am considering to upgrade my VLF capabilities, currently I only have the GM. But my sole focus is gold, not relics. The iron meter on the GM is pretty much useless, unless the gold is litterally touching the coil, pinpointer style. Would like to know if the Manticore or 900 id works better.

GM

better with just the speaker or also better with BT?

Yes good point 🙂

GC

There must be differences though in production models. Mine is not unusually unstable and runs smooth for the most time when using BT. It's just a sensitive machine. So, I won't bother doing the fix. The 9 in Coiltek does seem to make things a bit smoother though. I never use the internal speaker.

GC

20 minutes ago, Aureous said:

I am hoping that combined, the 2 'fixes' will improve things a lot.

Thanks, looking forward to your report. Please test both the 11 inch stock and the NF. The NF alone could have a positive impact, even without fix when you are using BT. I.e. my GPZ is more stable with the NFZsearch than with the 14 stock.

GC

It would be great to have some real answers about what impact the fix has for BT-only users. I suppose it is hard to convincingly quantify, and the reports of better threshold even without using the speaker could be a placebo effect. I guess we all want to believe that everything always gets better after a fix. The 6000 is a highly sensitive machine per design, and the threshold can be difficult to handle at times, even without any fault in place.

GC

Just did. I just find it odd because he has always been so engaged. I have my theory, namely that it has to do with the new GPZ that he is without a doubt testing, and perhaps he wants to make sure nothing would leak out accidently. But that is pure hand-waving speculation on my part. 99% chance for being wrong, just the best I can come up with. I am sure Steve would know.... 😁

GC

Anybody knows why?

GC

I wonder if Reg would finally call this a nugget...

6 minutes ago, WesD said:

I thought the guys here were saying a noticeable improvement even with headphone connectivity? I know mine is bad, as headphone or speaker goes wonky when the coil is off angle, or if the detector is set on the ground.

Could be a placebo effect. I was told that the fix only addresses the speaker issue