Jump to content

Jonathan Porter

Member
  • Content Count

    477
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    25

Jonathan Porter last won the day on July 8

Jonathan Porter had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,920 Excellent

About Jonathan Porter

  • Rank
    Silver Contributor

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location:
    Clermont, QLD, Australia
  • Gear Used:
    GPZ 7000, SDC 2300, GM 1000, EQX800

Recent Profile Visitors

6,980 profile views
  1. Your very lucky you live in an area where the ground type masks a lot of the issues of the X coils, especially the early ones. I spent time in a non-variable low mineralised location this year and did really well with one of them. Coverage, weight, sensitivity and depth were key and the 17” did that really well indeed. My criticism’s of the early coils was always with a view that they needed to work reasonably well in all terrains not just the easier ground types. But your right, I too have used horrible combinations of coils over the years and have a pretty high pain threshold for bad noisy gear, the original garbage bin lid of the SD 2000 comes to mind here, for perspective the X coils are no where near as bad as they were, not even close.🤣 JP
  2. Moot maybe because of not being in the club anymore, but your opinion still carries weight Steve. I did have a couple of 11” hand built coils early on during development and found them temperamental in variable noisy terrain. Obviously in the quieter soils they would be better behaved plus the ZVT tech art form is much more robust and mature now. I find the concept of anything much smaller than 12” frightening, the GPZ14 finds tiny stuff as it is, not sure if I want to grub around for much smaller with a DOD coil. Tight awkward terrain is another thing altogether of course so I do see your point. JP
  3. Don’t think a coil of those dimensions is practical or possible with current ZVT tech Steve, also IMHO when you start pulling the GPZ down into those coil sizes I think Minelab have pretty much covered the smaller gold you are chasing with current offerings, kind of like a diminishing returns equation I would have thought. I think for a smaller coil for ZVT we will also need to see a much lighter overall platform to keep things in balance and usable this then means the use of larger coils then becomes a problem so maybe two variants of ZVT would be better, a small coil super light optioned version and a larger big nugget hunting version for guys like myself? Believe it or not I find the weight of GPZ to be very useful when chasing edge of detection targets in flatter terrains, the weight gives control. JP
  4. The obvious path would be the adapter option I suppose, no different to what the X coils are doing. Guess we will all have to wait for 2020 and see what they come up with.
  5. I honestly feel a smaller coil should be available for this product and wish and have repeatedly asked for this to be addressed over the years. With GPZ bigger means more salt signal, I feel the Russian 17” has really come close to the sweet spot for a max size general purpose coil for the GPZ in most areas unless specifically chasing deep targets in known locations. Ideally I feel a 12” round, 15 to 17 inch elliptical and 17 to 18 inch round would cover all the bases with a max weight of no more than the GPZ14 coil on the bigger variants. JP
  6. Well first you need to own a GPZ. 😜 There is no ideal size, hence the demand. Smaller for better sensitivity and lighter weight whilst tapping into ZVT tech will probably be the most popular. JP
  7. I’d say the phones will be running hot today...... looks like someone poked the Tiger, wonder what Coiltek are doing? With the demise of the GPX 4500 there is now only one official Minelab MPS machine that all those after market coils can go onto if you want to buy new. Now that a precedent has been set and demand created the resultant vaccume has created a need for a solution that is considered trustworthy, the X coils have had to blaze the way through all the pitfalls around dongles etc something a well known brand would have had to steer well clear of for fear of damaging the name. Beta testing the product via your customers won’t have helped. Just for clarification, I am just as much in the dark as anyone on what is actually happening in this sphere but am not surprised, its a highly competitive market that is shrinking rapidly.
  8. There’s always a price but it’s all relative. The null of the threshold is the key, the main differences between the GPX and the QED is the early sampling of the QED which means the QED should have better sensitivity to small gold.
  9. If you want your GPX to run as quiet as the QED just turn off the threshold, fiddling with the Stabilizer and Gain will bring surprising results. Google Bogene’s settings. JP
  10. I have no inside information about Minelab recognising the X coils or not, but we do live in hope that more coils become officially available for that product. I have to date still not tested the latest X coil sent to me, work commitments and heat waves have prevented that from happening but over coming weeks I will definitely be testing out the coil I have on hand. The GPX detectors have been out for many years as such aftermarket coil manufacturers have a pre-existing situation where no adapter or circuit circumvention is required. Because Minelab continue to make and sell the GPX product does not automatically say they are in agreement with coils being built, in fact with the situation with dongles now being used by them suggests Minelab have had issues with aftermarket coils in the past costing them money in repairs on units that only developed faults when being used with non genuine coils that they had no control over during manufacture. As time has gone by Minelab product has become more complex with much tighter tolerances so things like coils need to be very accurate electronically. I am not trying to defend Minelab here, I too am extremely frustrated with the lack of coils for the GPZ hence my original interested and involvement with the X coils. I’m glad and thankful for the ZVT product, it is unique in the world of metal detecting and as such has improved my prospecting prospects but the lack of available coil choices has been a major frustration for me especially the monstrosity they released in the form of the GPZ19, the weight of that coil kills its potential stone dead!! Right now it’s main use seems to be as a dongle surrogate for the X coils. Reg Wilson will have a good laugh at my comments because he called it a “Dog” right from the start which I felt was unfair as the performance is there in spades, just that it requires the strength of “Thor” and the special uniqueness of those rare few who are worthy to wield it!!!🙉🙈🙊 🤣 JP
  11. I don’t know how many times I have to tell people on this forum that ML were originally approachable. The X coils were/still are highly developmental and constantly going through changes and revisions with big differences between coils over small time spans.
  12. My bad I should have read your bio, quite the list you have there. 🙂 JP
  13. Why would you want a control pod only for the NOX?🤔 They only work with the coils made for it. AFAIK there’s no aftermarket coil option available for the NOX, someone please correct me if I’m wrong. JP
  14. It’s good to hear things have finally come good for you after your trip to OZ. I too have one of those new coils waiting to be tried out on some of our variable ground in Clermont. Good to hear the Ferrite balance is happening properly and that touch sensitivity has reduced (most touch sensitivity on a GPZ on any coil happens in General Difficult BTW not so much in High Yield). Cudo’s to the X coil people for being so generous. JP
×
×
  • Create New...