Jump to content

Goldpick

Member
  • Content Count

    83
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

133 Excellent

About Goldpick

  • Rank
    Contributor

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location:
    South Australia
  • Interests:
    Coin & Relic detecting, historic research, geology, electronics, electric guitar, electric anything!
  • Gear Used:
    Detectors: XP Deus x2 (main), Racer 2, Teknetics G2(backups), F75 (not feeling the love), Tejon, SPP, Infinium
    Pinpointers: XP Mi-6, Garrett Carrot, Whites TRX, Minelab Profind, Deteknix X-pointer

Recent Profile Visitors

1,092 profile views
  1. Looks like a 999.9 hallmark which would indicate 24K gold. If there are any other hallmarks they should indicate maker, date etc.
  2. Interesting how XP recommend to carry out a ground balance if the mineralisation meter starts pumping a decent number of bars vs going by the ground phase figures alone, for some reason it seems to contrary to the above info. Have always thought that there is a bit more going on behind the scenes with the Deus on how it handles ground conditions compared to other VLF's, or am I just overthinking things?
  3. Unfortunately some people can't tell the difference between trash talking a detector vs providing useful info for those maybe looking to upgrade from an AT series detector, or even just to see how one detector stacks up against another. How would you ever know if it weren't for such comparisons, the manufacturers certainly aren't going to show any deficiencies in their detectors.
  4. The AT Gold sure drags out the iron tone on that nail. Therein lies the issue with preset recovery speed on a single program, basically a compromise between depth/recovery speed. At least the Nokta/Makros offer the user a choice of fast or deep programs, and obviously the Nox/Deus offering full adjustability for most scenarios. You will probably notice that many of the good targets featured on those videos often come up with a blended iron/non-ferrous tones due to not being able to separate out two distinct targets. Could easily be mistaken for iron wrap-around falsing vs a non-ferrous target coexisting with iron - the result is that they tend to dig all targets just to be sure, which I can't blame them for doing so. Bottom line is that AT Pro series should be considered more as all-rounder detectors vs the more specialised iron hunters like the Deus and Equinox. Depth capability isn't always the be all and end all, no point if you cannot hear targets through the first few inches of ground if laden with iron. Could be a good opening for Garrett to produce a more specialised detector in their lineup for such sites, something to suit the more experienced hunter and offering a bit more adjustability.
  5. Would have been interesting to see if those target responses would have cleaned up a bit more on the Deus using the 11" coil vs the 9" HF (as both the Nox and Tars are running larger coils). The Tarsacci certainly does real well on those deeper targets, very positive responses. A little bit surprised that the Equinox didn't do a bit better on both targets, especially with some moderate mineralisation thrown into the mix.
  6. If the pinpoint mode is anything like that on the Deus, then it should be just fine. Although I tend to pinpoint most of the time using the drawback method till the target is at the tip of the coil vs the actual pinpoint mode. Usually a very quick and accurate method for me when detecting in all types of areas, especially with the smaller 9" coils.
  7. Trying to turn the ORX into a Deus with a wishlist of additional features isn't going to achieve anything, and sort of defeats the purpose of a cheaper and more simplified Deus regardless of how it compares with other detectors on the market . It is what it is and I doubt whether the pricing will change given that they have a huge fan base in Europe. In time if it doesn't achieve sales targets then we may see some movement in price.
  8. Have to agree with using the Raptor, lower profile and less intimidating for locals who are concerned about seeing people wielding shovels in the their local park. The curved blade makes for easy cutting of a flap for extracting targets vs using the serrated sawing action of lesche blades - just a personal preference for me, others may disagree. I tend to carry the Raptor out of sight in my finds pouch (ammo drop bag). I do have a stainless serrated shovel, though only use it on private permissions and areas out of town. Last time I went out with a couple of other guys using shovels in a park, locals reported us to the local council ranger( I was the only one using a hand tool). He had no problem with us using them though it did result in a lot of wasted time for both us and the ranger.
  9. I always enjoy looking at your Civil War era finds, we do get some over here in Australia due to the influx of gold miners from the US - have found just a single Indian Head and an early 1800's Eagle buckle to date (with the Deus of course).
  10. Maybe the use of screen fire assaying would be more suitable if coarse gold is typically found in your samples vs the use of normal fire assaying. I think the charge sample for normal fire assays is quite small, and may not indicate the true amount of coarse gold in the original sample, whereas on a screen fire the coarser material is screened out separately and fire assayed ( including the screen), and the finer portion of the sample is also fire assayed. I know the mine I worked at had coarse visible gold in quartz veining, and results were often quite low from normal fire assays, whereas many of the screen fire assays often came back with some huge numbers. Whilst not professing to understand the absolute technicalities behind the methods, just commenting on what I used to see come across my desk over the years with assay results. Some of the gold/qtz samples we sent off had gold up to thumbnail size, hence those gold bearing sections of drill core in the ore zone were always marked up specifically for screen firing when logged by the geologists.
  11. I guess you are right in some respects, to the layman as long as a detector finds stuff, that's all that matters to them at the end of the day. And for those that regularly frequent forums, we are much more likely to dissect a detector to figure out how things work, and how to apply the various settings/features on offer to suit the ground we detect - and we are also more than likely to be in the minority. The criticism of Nokta/Makro is a bit miss directed, I'm sure if it were a US manufacturer pumping out such detectors in quick succession, it would be a proud achievement and not seen in a negative light. If people are angry or frustrated that their local manufacturers haven't moved with the times or listened to their customers, then maybe you should take that up with them - people asked Nokta/Makro to come up with alternatives and they obliged. XP should actually be flattered that other manufacturers are trying to emulate their success on what is now a 10 year old selectable frequency platform. Minelab were also well aware of XP encroaching on markets outside of Europe, and the Equinox was a direct response to that, albeit with added MF capability for added ability in salt and mineralisation. Funny thing is that it wasn't all that long ago that that Euro made detectors were often dismissed as not being suitable for mineralised ground that is often found in both Oz and the US, and hence spruiked as not a viable options even for general coin/relic duties, netherlone for prospecting. This was often a favourite line to run past customers here in Oz to help bolster their own detectors sales. For me it is this ignorance that has left a few manufacturers behind the eight ball, and it wasn't until some of these Euro detectors were privately imported that they found this wasn't indeed the case - those "unsuitable" detectors worked and they worked well. Fast forward to several years later, and we now have serious alternatives to the traditional offerings, and they are being actively improved upon with input from users. As they say variety is the spice of life, and personally I find it is refreshing to see detectorists out utilising a whole assortment of platforms, and not just sticking to the "safe" option.
  12. This is something that has me a little perplexed, especially when a whole raft of opposition detectors from abroad are offering such an option on their detector platforms. How easy would it be to improve current popular models like the F75, AT Pro, etc with additional frequencies to make some US made detectors a more attractive proposition, or are we talking about the requirement for a completely new platform for this to happen ( too much cost for not enough return)? If just worries me when we see little or no response at all on trying to compete on the selectable frequency front. Some may say the market is already flooded with such detectors, though if you do not offer up an alternative to just single frequency VLF's, then customers may look elsewhere for detector platforms offering more flexibility/features for the money. Some of the selectable frequency detectors made abroad: Minelab Equinox (plus multi) Minelab 705 (coil change for different frequencies) Rutus Alter71 XP Deus/Orx Makro Kruzer Multi Nokta Impact Nokta Anfibio multi ...and many other lesser known Euro manufacturers with at least dual frequencies. It is evident that there are two distinct lines of thinking when it comes to producing a detector, either make one that has the capability of covering all or most fields of detecting (ie. prospecting, relic hunting, coin shooting, beach detecting), or produce several detectors, each with a specific purpose. The obvious downside is the sheer cost of owning a whole raft of detectors for specific purposes, something that used to be common place, though now not such an issue with the advent of very capable multi-use detectors suitable for low conductors right through to sub gram gold. Will be interested to see other views on the subject, have we seen the end of single use or specialist detectors, and whether multi-role/multi or selectable frequency detectors will rule going forward.
  13. Some parts of Findmall are still quite active, mainly for those that are offering new or innovative products or at least improvements to current platforms. The ones that are stagnating are little more than information sources and with next to no technical discussion - not surprising with some current detector platforms pushing towards or beyond a decade old now. Whilst VLF tech seems to have reached a peak, still no excuse not to further refine some detector platforms, especially with regards to offering selectable frequencies on US made detectors.
  14. I don't think Minelab are about to reveal full details of how their tech truly works, though the devil is in the detail - their multifrequency detectors may well transmit a full spectrum of frequencies, though in reality how many are actually utilised in the actual signal processing. Given that some of the programs on the Nox are weighted more towards higher conductors whilst others are weighted more to lower conductors, I doubt whether a full spectrum of frequencies is utilised 100% of the time. Probably a good thing if it results in faster processing and recovery speeds etc.
  15. The Goldbug/G2 are great coin/relic detectors and are extremely easy to use and setup, my partner prefers it for the simplicity and light weight over any of our other detectors - gave her a tryout of the F75 and she quickly handed it back in preference of the G2.😄 She mainly runs the NEL Sharpshooter, NEL Hunter and the Detech Ultimate (pictured), unfortunately the original Teknetics coil died after a dunking in salt water. We both did well on the predecimal coins at the pictured site, the G2 and Deus are a pretty formidable combo on old house sites.
×
×
  • Create New...